🚩 Khmelnytsky Uprising was a brutal war that lasted nearly a decade (1648 to 1657). Cossack warriors, under Bohdan Khmelnytsky rose against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, eventually winning their independence. However, this victory gradually led to the incorporation of what is today eastern Ukraine into Russia, as Cossacks swore allegiance to the Tsar in exchange for greater autonomy than they enjoyed under Polish-Lithuanian rule. Ultimately, the war led to the period known as "The Ruin". The Battle of Zhovti Vody was the first major battle of the Khmelnytsky Uprising.
Khmelnytsky and the Cossacks never fought for Ukraine. They fought for their rights as another state in the Republic of Poland. Khmelnytsky was not a Cossack but a Polish nobleman.
@@arturwiktor699 No, they fought to be free from Poland. But yes, his father was polish and his mother was a Cossack woman. His heritage was mixed. And his motives have been somewhat... selfish. He was in a feud with another nobleman who wanted his land and burned his crops. As he received no support from the authorities, he grew discontent and started a uprising with longlasting consequences. Poland-Lithuania never truly recovered from this uprising and Ukraine eventually became russian.
hay man / don't start propaganda here either / ukraine was not, is not and will not be a country / even now it is a shame / and a shame to keep lying about what happened in this area and what has been happening since 2014 /
1.Battle of Trembowla 2. Battle of Chocim Please consider these battles, I would like to see them on your channel, it would be amazing on behalf of Poland and Poles!
To be honest, I have always been an opponent of Bohdan Khmelnyky’s personality. I understand that in Ukraine he is considered a figure of national scale, the great founder of the first more or less modern Ukrainian state (and not a fickle principality that broke away from Kiev), but I always viewed Khmelnytsky as an imperious and brutally opportunist who turned his personal vendetta and revenge into the pursuit of power. He never wanted or thought about the Ukrainian people, instead cleverly using the discontent of the peasants and Cossacks to create a state with himself at the head. And when the Poles almost crushed the Cossack state, then in a desperate attempt to save himself, Khmelnitsky threw himself at the feet of the Moscow Tsar, completely destroying any attempts to create an independent Cossack Ukrainian state.
Not only that, but it also made it impossible to establish a lasting Commonwealth of Three Nations, with the Grand Duchy of Ruthenia as a third and equal part of the Commonwealth, besides the Crown of Poland and Grand Duchy of Lithuania.
Stefan Potock's advisor & military commander, Stefan Czarniecki, was also taken prisoner by the Tatars after the battle, but he escaped after that. Stefan Czarniecki is regarded as a national hero by the Kingdom of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth during the war with the Tatars and today, the Polish national anthem mentions his name due to his military efforts during the Swedish Deluge to prevent the invasion of Poland in 1655 using guerrilla warfare. He's regarded as one of Poland's greatest military commanders.
Hetman is not just Lithuanian name for commander. Apart from Poles us Czechs used it too as Hejtman, like Jan Žižka in 1420. It is in fact, probably derrived from German language: Hauptmann. For the guy in charge.
I'd rather they make a reasonable effort and butcher them with English phonetics than use an AI voiceover. These guys really do a phenomenal job, and they're one of only a few with any interest in central and eastern Europe of this period. If I want high-quality, exceptionally-researched, brilliantly-animated content (and I do), I'm willing to accept a few name butcherings. In their defense, the Polish spellings are damn near unpronounceable anyway. It's almost as bad as French... or Welsh!
Poles always suprised me, just how good they are considering being almost always outnumbered, even after being betrayed by their own cossacks infantry, they stood. Only after violating the treaty they were killed. What a cowardly move from Khmelnytsky
However, you should understand that on these lands, Polish representatives for years treated local people like cheap dirt. The amount of hate towards them was as high as it can be. And many cossacs shared the feeling. I'm not saying that breaking a treaty is good, but Cossacks were not a real army, but rebellions. There was nobody to judge their actions no government behind them, so Poland's army made a big mistake in the first place even to negotiate.
Regiment Cossacks arrived later. This's a perspective written by a polish chronicler : ) i don't deny, Commonwealth was the strongest country\ or one of strongest at a time but would be cool to see Cossacks perspective too.
@@KIVagantbullshit, on that time it was Rus Magnates who were opressing cossacks and peasants. Duke Jarema Wiśniowiecki had Rurikid origins, he 'owned' by 1648 ~400 000 people. Even today, local Ukrainian oligarchs(magnates back then) are opressing Ukraine as a state and Ukrainians as a people.
Yeah b/c independent Ukraine has done so much better for its people. It couldn't even keep the legacy infrastructure and living standards left to it by the Soviet Union going, and instead sold itself to Black Rock and the chosen tribe. The US asks Ukraine to drop her pants and all she says back is, "which hole?". What a pathetic "country". And stop making excuses for lying and cheating, a man's word doesn't need a government contract behind it, if your word isn't worth anything, you better be powerful enough to impose your will on the entire world b/c no one will trust you, and you will make enemies out of everyone you rip off. @@KIVagant
There's a notable role of Ivan Barabas - Cherkassy colonel loyal to the Polish king, he was a Cossack commander loyal to the king, during the rebellion of other Cossacks during this battle, even though he was an old man in his 60's, he rose from his seat on one of the support ships going down the river and started fighting alongside his personal retinue. Despite all his men were slaughtered within first 10 minutes, he was so greatly revered by the traitors due to the tales of his past exploits against the Turks nobody would dare approach him and he killed two that did make initial challenge. Unfortunately he slipped in a puddle of blood on the deck of the ship and once down he was pierced by numerous men. Another notable figure was captain Werner of the German mercenary infantry. Cossacks tried bribing him and promised him mountains of gold for switching sides, but he just said that despite Polish Crown was late with payments and their doom was certain if they refused his contract stipulates they are hired until June that year - an ordered his men to fire at the Tatars and Cossacks during the negotiations. Supposedly the German brigade were the last men standing south of the river from the entirety of Polish Commonwealth's army.
@@MegaHappydead lol wikipedia...really? You have no proof they only used the joke that is wikipedia, you assume things for some reason, probably because of some bias.
Battle of Korsun ,Battle of Batih, Battle of Pyliavtsi, Battle of Zboriv, Battle of Zhvanets , Battle of Bila Tserkva , most if not all were fought with equal numbers. Alot of the history is not entirely true because cossacks for the most part were illiterate and kept little records, thus historians use polish and russians accounts which are biased.
But they did disappoint with this propaganda bs, no 'ukraine' existed in 17th century.... and no, I'm not Russian but this is a blatant revisionism: 'a victory that doomed ukraine'. Same propaganda $ht as Kings and Generals and 99% of Murican Mickey Mouse channels.
This video does not state clearly that the rebellion of Cossacks happened separately from the main field of battle that's why there's a confusion about the numbers. The rebellion in which Ivan Barabas was killed and his second in command took Cossack forces to Chmielnitsky happened some 20/30 kilometers from Potocki's and Polish encampment before they managed to join forces. Indeed the total forces on the Polish side were in the end: - 150 Polish nobles, organized into hussar shock cavalry constituting Potocki's personal retinue and elite - 550 Cossack light riders from private household regiments of Polish aristocrats (they stayed loyal) - 550 Polish and Ruthenian dragoons - 1500 registered Cossacks under 3 Polish officers (they betrayed almost to a man) So in the end I think Polish side couldn't have had more than 1250-1300 fighters that were loyal throughout entire engagement. Source: The composition of Polish forces at Yellow Waters and near Korsun in 1648, "Przegląd Historyczno-Wojskowy", 16 (67)/2 (252), 2015, pp. 39-62
Cossack light cavalry riders, were in fact Polish cossack style cavalry, whichwere recruited from Polish and polonised nobility (though of lower status that those that were in the hussars).
Many factual errors in this video: 1. Territory occupied by Chmielnicki was called Hetmanate not Ukrainian state. Ukraine literally means 'borderland' and it was geographical name; 2. There is no connection between Galicja-Volhynia and Hetmanate. First was Ruthenian principality. Cossacks were a group of fugitives of many nations and social classes from serfdom, organised in military democracy. Plus there is a few hundred kilometers distance between both territories; 3. Most of town names and commanders names butchered but that's detail;
NOPE!!! "Україна" or Ukraine is derived from "рідний край, країна, земля", "рідний край, своя країна, рідна земля; земля, населена своїм народом" meaning "native region, own country, native land; a land inhabited by its people".
@@ЯрославБалицький-ъ6л Nope. It meas borderland even in old Rus' language. The first document with the name ukraine was hypatian codex 1187 AD. And it reffered to borderlands of Rus'. Later on it was the name of borderlands between Poland-Lithuania and the Grand Duchy of Moscow. So ukrainians are in fact borderlanders :)
@WistKal9Zero Even the so called Ukrainian language is like an intermediary between Russian and Polish. But yeah, now the agenda is to claim that this is somehow an ancient nation, although there are so many inconsistencies in any of those claims that it's not even funny. Anyways, you could be excused for doing that in 2022, but at this point it's completely embarrassing to get onto that bandwagon, such a shame.
Nothing good ever came out of this civil war, neither for the Poles, nor the Ukrainian Cossacs. For the Poles, the Uprising meant horrible losses in regular army and nobility of The Crown, and this was an opportunity which Sweden and Russia seized. The Khmelnytsky Uprising (1648-1657), and following Russo-Polish war (1654-1667) and the Swedish Deluge (1655-1660) will result in near complete occupation of the country, total devastation of the economy, loss of about 1/3 of the Crown's population and horrible losses in the army from which The Commonwealth would never recover. For the Ukrainians, the uprising resulted in Russian Tsar taking control over half of the modern-day Ukraine, and Cossacks servitute to their new master will bring them nothing but less and less freedoms, up to total liquidation of Zaporozhian Sich and abolition of all Cossack privilages, along with total loss of hope for creation of The Commonwealth of Three Nations, with Grand Duchy of Ruthenia as a third and equal part along the Crown of Poland and Grand Duchy of Lithuania. From that time the russification of Ukraine would begin and soon the weakened Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth would become undone in the partitions.
Yeah the way it all did end up for poles and ukrainians is kinda sad. I am polish myself and my family from my father's side were nobles and did have some sort of land in Ukraine. I can totally understand the reasons for Khmelnytsky's uprising, the ukrainians really were getting treated worse and worse as time passed. The amount of cossacks in the polish army was getting reduced so they plundered on their own accord, which often resulted in conflicts against the Ottoman Empire, something which Poland tried to avoid. But sadly for both sides after the uprising the situation deteroriated for both sides - Poland obviously lost land and subjects and was thrown into wars which could all be avoided if only cossacks were treated better. The ukrainians sought to find their freedom, but ironically found themselves under the boot of Russians who subjugated them and mistreated them even more than the polish did, it would take them more than 300 years to get their independence.
Poles were landowners who worked the Ukrainians to death with little compensation, and would would use the regions were cossacks settled as a buffer against Tatars, Russians and Ottomans. The rebellion was a huge success the problem was that Ukraine was surrounded by 3 major superpowers of that time, each having imperial ambitions.
There were never any Ukrainian Cossacks, there were just Cossacks. Writing about Ukrainians in the 17th century is as idiotic as writing about US knights in the Middle Ages. Ukrainians began to form as a nation in the 19th century.
@@pancakes429 Lots of propaganda I see here. First of all, many Ruthenians were also nobles. Some even powerful magnates. Jeremi Wiśniowiecki was an example of such magnate, he was a Ruthenian, who only changed his faith from Orthodox to Catholic one. Many Cossacks were also landowners, while peasantry was treated just as in any other part of the Crown, though there are many post-communist misconceptions about how the peasants were really treated at that time. And while The Wild Fields served in fact as a form of a buffer zone, it was still one protected by the army of the Crown of Poland, which on multiple occasions had to protect today's Ukraine from invasions, ones that were often provoked by Cossack raids into Crimea and Turkey. The problem of the Cossack rebellion was not that it was surrounded by other major powers, but the fact that creation of the independent Ukrainian state was never really the ultimate goal for Khmelnytsky. He started the whole war due to personal reasons, and as it escalated further and further his own power was the only thing that mattered. The Cossacks under Khmelnytsky brought freedom and privilages only to themselves, not anyone else, especially the peasants, which were often sold into Tatar slavery as a form of securing Khan's support.
@@pancakes429 This is exactly what the Polonized Russian nobility did. It was the Russian lord who oppressed Russian and Polish peasants. The largest noble families in the history of the Republic of Poland were the Ruthenian families (e.g. Wiśniowiecki, Sapieha, Chodkiewicz) and the Radziwiłł family from Lithuania.
This victory seems like a fluke. The Cossacks won really because of betrayal. The Poles should have retreated and waited for reinforcements. If their numbers had been equal to the Cossacks they would have made quick work of them.
@@metternich_999 reason is that wikipedia counts all Polish units in the area, namely the Mikolaj Potocki army, that did not take part in battle. If you read "Battle" information you can see that Pole had 2500 soldiers, 1000 after cossacks left. What is more in "Background" you can see the number. If the Polish army was 8000 strong, they would engage and probably crush the rebelion. To conlude someone edited the part where everyone is looking. Some propaganda of low quaility.
Ruthenians to Poles: "Give us your weapons, and we'll have peace. We definitely won't betray you and immediately attack afterwards!" Doesn't this sound kinda... familiar?
But if you watch the history of rebellions before Khmelnitsky's, there were times when Poles executed negotiators and did similar things, cause Cossacks were considered a some kind of terrorists by the Poles, so it's merely same thing as Polish-Lithuanian nobles did. And don't forget that many of these nobles who fought at Polish-Lithuanian side had a Ruthenian roots, like Wishnevetskiy or Ostrozhskiy, so it was kinda civil war between two sides of Ruthenians and Poles and Lithuanians
@@ОлександрЧужа-и8ы nonthense, as if you try to look in documents of that time - a lot of mentions Rusyns( Ruthenians are latinised version of it) there, at that territories To say more - Ruthenian Voivodeship (Województwo ruskie) didn't include Transkarpatia in it, but included nowadays Halychyna and part of Volyn Rusyn(Ruthenian) is ethnonym of people that lived on territories that is Ukraine now, language/culture/religion were common things and these that unified all these people. And language and Religion were known as Rusyn(Rus'ka to be correct) Why Transkarpatians are keep that ethnonym until today - because of Hungarians/Chech who called them so until middle of 20th century While russians and Polish abandoned that name from 18th century and started to call people/language Ukrainian
В ті часи це було нормою. Потрібно відрізняти минуле і сьогоднішнє. Сьогодні існує міжнародне право і такі дії не можуть бути виправдані. Тільки не зрозуміло до чого ви згадали рутен/русин ( сучасних українців) ведучи аналогію до сучасних росіян
@@Mastakilla91 "Commonwealth" took "his land" where? Apparently, his family thought they could hold their private possessions by the power of smekalka alone, never formalizing their ownership. Which was then inevitably contested by a bigger fish who knew how to (mis)use lawyers. "Commonwealth" had never taken "his land", as this entire region _was_ Commonwealth, by, funny enough, democratic decision of _Ruthenian_ nobility in 1569.
Also territories to the east from Poltava and Zaporizgia were not under moscovian/russian rule. Those lands were as wild stepp / similar to American Wild West. There lived free armored peole mostly from Ukraine and Crimia.
It was not a simple "uprising" as the historiography of tsarist and communist Russia would described it, or the nationalist Ukrainian historiography that today copies those Russian theses. Khmelnytsky started a rebellion. This rebellion had the features of a civil war within the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Rebellion started because Ukrainian Cossacs wanted greater rights, and peasants wanted less harsh serfdom within the Polish-Luthuanian Commonwealth. It was not a war for Ukrainian independence.
@@Prosto_Yura Козацька Україна стала незалежною під кінець війни. Але до кінця війни українська шляхта і козаки намагалися змусити корону за допомогою військової поразки польських лоялістів провести реформи і вирівняти українські землі у правах із Литвою і Польщею, які мали більше прав і були більш рівними партнерами в Речі Посполитій. Але Король і польський нобілітет не погодилися на це, і Хмельницькій повів справу до незалежності, тому що під кінець війни населення терпіти не могло польську еліту, і без виконання українських умов військо Хмельницького готово було йти на столицю одразу після захоплення Львову. З самого початку - це була громадянська війна, з української сторони за нове місце України в складі Речі Посполитої. Наратив про "війну за незалежність" належить Москві, яка пізніше хотіла історично довести, що "рускіє" воювали проти поляків, щоб об'єднатися з Москвою в "єдіную русь".
@@valdaniels4078 Я якщо що,не відстоюю наратив про "війну за незалежність" з самого початку. Але факт є фактом,Хмельницький врешті вирішив не бути складовою РП,а створити свою державу,де головувала б його династія,яку він намагався створити,одруживши Тимоша на Розанді Лупул
@@Prosto_Yura це так, просто це не була задумка з самого початку. Хмельницький не знав, до чого призведе повстання. Мало хто думав, що провінція повна селян зможе перемогти основне військо держави в довгостроковій перспективі, фактично знищивши його. Сталося не так, як гадалося. В кінці війни, виявилося, що альтернативи, окрім як оголосити незалежність, просто не залишилося.
How come you made such awesome video, but did map wrong? In XVII century there were no dams on Dnieper, and hence, there were no reservoirs that you displayed :)
The names are the least concerning aspect considering it's a video about a country that didn't even exist. Political bullshit, why can't they just do history.
Yeah, that map is garbage. They've also put Yelisavetgrad there, which was obviously founded later, during the Russian Empire period. I mean, the town is named after a Russian empress (Yelisaveta/Elizabeth), how could a person who is supposed to know the history of the region put it there.
Heres the thing people forget these people never used the term Ukrainian and if you asked them "are you Ukrainian or Cossack?" Theyd always answer Cossack, sure Ukraine recognizes them as ancient heroes but they werent Ukrainian. Like calling modern Italians Romans when the two couldnt be further apart from each other.
Because modern day Western propaganda wants us to believe that such state as Ukraine is ancient and existed some times ago. This, ofc, utter bullshit. There are no such state and nation in history. They are Russians, or, to be more correct, "maloross", crude translate is "small russians".
@@real-history-online yet there were Ukrainians, malorussians, ruthenians whatever they were called they are Ukrainian that spoke Ukrainian language. + your non sense about "state" does really show your incompetence in this question since term state only appeared on the brink of french revolution.
@@rmajor3424 the "language" they spoke is a mix between polish and Russian, regardless their "language" still doesn't make ukraine a state until the 20th century ;)
@HistoryMarche 10:54 The "550 Cossacks in cavalry" were in actuality Polish cossack style cavalry (which unlike the hussars fought in "cossack" style, which means that they fought without a lance and with a light armour), recruited mostly from mid-lower nobility and also had peasantry (which were the servants of their lords (pan)) in the lowest ranks.
Love your videos. They are a great way of encouraging wider audience to study the subject on their own. Also ignore people whining about pronouncing names correctly. I for example take unhealthy amount of pride in that my language can be considered a torture method😊
Lol. I remembered the Chinese would say thus about the Xiongnu 2000 years ago: "The nomads are not bound by honoring the trust, and are prone to break pacts."
This video send me shivers down my spine. This is one of my favourite subjects of European history. Knowing how Khmelnitsky revolt started enlightened me even more on the subject. I fell in love with it through Sienkiewich. I have read The trilogy and they are one of the greatest books I have read. Figures like prince Wiesniowicki, Szkretuski, Wolodyjowski, Podbipieta, Bohun, Hmelnytski, Tuhai Bei and above anyone else pan Zagloba have strenghtened me, gave courage to me and helped me in a way. I remember from Through fire and sword the siege of Zbaraz...Some time passed since I've read it, but I still feel goosebumps remembering that magnificent piece of literature. Oh, the might and wisdom of Jarema Wisniowicki, the military prowess and courage of Szkreruski, the perfection in sword wielding: Wolodyjowski, the sheer power and warmness in the same time of Podbipieda, the menace and incredible power of the Hatman of the Cossacks, the military prowess and menace of Tuhai Bei and Bohun and the incredible wisdom and wit of this new Uysses, Zagloba. History Marche, thanks for covering this. Sienkiewich made these wars immortal. You guys bring it to us from a historical, accurate point of view so this is good.
@@uberneanderthal Well in that time religion came first and then nationality. Given that today Ukrainian and Russian language are similar, back then i presume that the language barrier was even slimmer.
Better study history))) after Khmelnytskyi, his successor was Ivan Vyhovskyi who defeated the Muscovites near Konotop. Then Ivan Mazepa tried together with the Swedish king to defeat the army of Peter 1 near Poltava. Ukraine-Rus was trapped by the enemies of the Ottomans, Poland, and Muscovites.
@@jak00bspyr72 the Pereyasli Rada was an alliance from Russia with the Muscovites. But as you know, the Muscovites are a very treacherous people, they took advantage of this alliance for their own benefit, this did not happen to the Rusyn Cossacks, and they crushed their army under the sword.
I'd just mention for the context. In Polish forces at that time the term "Cossack" reffered to any type of light cavalry, so not necessary cossacks from Ukraine/Russia
This is probably my favorite "lesser known" war in Europe. Amazing how the Poles managed to come back after the disastrous defeats against the Cossacks. Also, and this might be an exaggeration on my part 😅, I swear the Russians never forgot the Times of Troubles and wanted to destroy Poland in particular just as much as they wanted to expand their influence. And I think they kept this grudge until the third partition, almost 200 years
Cossacks and Tatars destroyed Ukraine and Russia The Swedish invasion destroyed the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland. The Muscovite invasion destroyed Lithuania The elites betrayed, the weak king found himself in exile outside the country. There was even a plan to partition the ruined Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. But it was the Polish nation which changes it (in the political and cultural sense Polish, because ethnically the nobility had Polish, Lithuanian and Ruthenian origins) Polish Nobility and its sacrifice saved the Polish-Lithuanian Republic... or rather postponed its destruction, as the country never recovered from the devastation. Because it was their country, their freedoms, their way of life, which they defended devotedly.
Not exactly. Moscow tried to retaliate and, after reforming its army reached for Smolensk in 1632, but Moscow suffered a spectacular defeat and the ruling elites in Russia decided to change their policy and cooperate with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In 1648 a plan to conquer the Crimean Khanate began to be implemented, in which Poland and Russia were equally interested. When the Khmeilnytsky Rebellion broke out, the Tsar seriously considered helping the Poles. However, the Salt Riot in Moscow, the influence of Orthodox priests and various agents changed the mind of the Tsar. Above all, Moscow's attitude was changed by the unprecedented, disastrous and humiliating defeats of the Polish army. New political opportunities have opened up for Moscow when Khmeilnytsky gave Ukraine to Tsar, but the northern direction was still a priority for Moscow. Tsar Alexius and Patriarch Nikon announced an Orthodox 'crusade' against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. They attacked the Grand Duchy of Lithuania - finally sizing Smolensk and destroyed Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania, turning the city into desolate ruins. Only the occupation of the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland by the Swedes, the flight of the Polish king from the country and the apparent destruction of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth changed Moscow's plans for fear of a sudden increase in Swedish power. Game of Thrones, considering what was happening in the european 17th century, is a children's fantasy fairy tale.
I wouldn't call it a disastrous defeat. We have started this war with very small forces. Yes, they were lost, but a much bigger army eventually came to end the war.
@@HistoryOnMarch yes but who referred it as Ukraine.. what Ukraine means in translation?? It means margin.. or vicinity.. to whom Ukraine was margin. Or vicinity??.. to the Polish Lithuanian commonwealth?? Or to Russia??
Not only this is shown incorrectly. Note that the course of the Dnieper River also looked different. They show what the Dnieper looks like today, with dams built on the river not in the times of Khmelnytsky of course, but in the times of the USSR. The stylized maps are apparently based on today's terrain. That is why, for example, in the material about the Battle of Kircholm, is showed the dam on the Dvina River, which was built in the 20th century. History Marche is channel that popularizes history. It's content is not created by experts, historians, archaeologists or researchers, but by some history buffs. They often make mistakes or oversimplify what they talk about, but that doesn't stop me from watching their materials with interest. You just need to be aware that to acquire historical knowledge you reach for books, museums, etc. not on TH-cam. This is still just entertainment, not real knowledge.
Truly a proud victory, they could not defeat 1,000 Polish troops, while having 12,000 of their own, so the became oath-breakers... I can see how Korsuń 1648, Piławce 1648 or Batoh 1652 can be considered respected victories, but this battle does not shine positively on Chmilnicki's cossacks fighting ability or their honour.
There's a notable role of Ivan Barabas - Cherkassy colonel loyal to the Polish king, he was a Cossack commander loyal to the king, during the rebellion of other Cossacks during this battle, even though he was an old man in his 60's, he rose from his seat on one of the support ships going down the river and started fighting alongside his personal retinue. Despite all his men were slaughtered within first 10 minutes, he was so greatly revered by the traitors due to the tales of his past exploits against the Turks nobody would dare approach him and he killed two that did make initial challenge. Unfortunately he slipped in a puddle of blood on the deck of the ship and once down he was pierced by numerous men. Another notable figure was captain Werner of the German mercenary infantry. Cossacks tried bribing him and promised him mountains of gold for switching sides, but he just said that despite Polish Crown was late with payments and their doom was certain if they refused his contract stipulates they are hired until June that year - an ordered his men to fire at the Tatars and Cossacks during the negotiations. Supposedly the German brigade were the last men standing south of the river from the entirety of Polish Commonwealth's army.
Commonwealth army usually coped well with the Zaporozhian Cossacks, however, the problem appeared when large forces of Tatars appeared on the battlefield as a cossacks ally, this was a fundamental change, because the tactically flexible Polish cavalry lost its combat value due to the mobility and tactics of the Tatar cavalry, which attacked fast and violently the flanks and rear of the enemy army. In those times, the Tatars were really very much feared, the commanders who were able to force the Tatars into battle on an open field were considered masters of strategy.
There is a good polish book and movie based on the book about this war, called "with fire and sword", or "Ogniem i Mieczem". Also a Mount and blade game as well.
The Polish nobles were probably fighting amongst themselves about prioritizing farm upgrades, especially heavy plow, and not putting any farms next to TC, but only around folwarks
Poles mistreated Ukrainians by not giving them equal rights, but if it wasn't for Khmielnitksy, I'm sure it would work itself out eventually. The reasoning of the polish nobility was that Commonwealth was as the name suggests - 'our common wealth'. In order to become part of an organization, you have to be loyal to its values. Cossacks never did that and treated it as a cashcow. The registered Cossacks institution was seen as defining Ukrainians as second class citizens, but in reality it was an initiation phase, trial period for a new member with limited rights in the organization. Cause a newbie can fuck it all up easily. Like for example by going to tatars or russians and starting a war for a minor land dispute. 😮 Im sure after max 30 years Ukrainians would have been given full equal rights as Poles and Lithuanians had, but only after proving loyalty and when they would start to see Commonwealth as their Commonwealth.
Ukrainians/Kievan Rus were part of the Lithuanian Grand Duchy until the Commonwealth happened O .o Why 'newbie'? They weren't newbies. The Commonwealth oppressed Ukrainians and the Orthodox religion; that's why a rebellion happened. How it would have turned out if the rebellion didn't happen, we would never know O .o Cossacks fought for their identity... Commonwealth discriminated Ukrainians and their religion
Nope, local Rus magnates were opressing local Rus peasants. Just as today local Ukrainian oligarchs are opressing local Ukrainians. How things never change in this land :)
Khmelnytskyi, who said that: "Mother Ukraine gave birth to us", and also: "Remember the exploits of the previous Ukrainian (Rus') soldiers, and also: "There are branches of the same tree and brave soldiers, son, show courage."
The polish forces, during this time have a lot of this moments, fought well as underdog until they were betrayed. Today i have learnt that the early "Ukrainian " "state" is based on huge dick moves.
@@randomname-cc9hc My dude, it was not Poland that was forced to kneel in front of the Muscoviet/Russian diplomatic delegation at the end of this war...
@@randomname-cc9hc Poland was independent (and gave up the least economically viable parts of its realm, which it no longer controlled), Cossacks were Russian vassals (forced to literally kneel in front of the Russian diplomatic delegation).
I just noticed the thumbnail to this video. The battle you covered in this video was the story of Islamic invasion which utilized deception and traitor infiltration, not Russian aggression or conquest.
Khmelnytskyi, who said that: "Mother Ukraine gave birth to us", and also: "Remember the exploits of the previous Ukrainian (Rus') soldiers, and also: "There are branches of the same tree and brave soldiers, son, show courage."
Khmelnytskyi, who said that: "Mother Ukraine gave birth to us", and also: "Remember the exploits of the previous Ukrainian (Rus') soldiers, and also: "There are branches of the same tree and brave soldiers, son, show courage."
Khmelnytskyi, who said that: "Mother Ukraine gave birth to us", and also: "Remember the exploits of the previous Ukrainian (Rus') soldiers, and also: "There are branches of the same tree and brave soldiers, son, show courage." Як шкода, що знову невігласний поляк обісрався :(
@@owoc8260 sure but there's a context that can't be ignored, it was a denomination of areas around the Kievan Rus, as Kiev was the capital, therefore not part of the borderlands, if memory doesn't fail me. There's a curious case here in Portugal, about the name of Portugal and its etymology, which I would draw a parallel. Portugal's name is officially said to come from the city of Porto, and the old people who lived in that region, the Gauls, therefore, basically, Portus Cale, or Port of the Gauls. But that isn't true, the country isn't named after the city of Porto because when the name was coined for the region, Porto was an irrelevant village, even at the foundation of Portugal, Porto was still a village. My point is, using a generic term to refer to an area, and then attributing it to something that only comes much later is historical rewriting, both in this case of Ukraine and in the case of Portugal.
They did not have to. That was a privilege. Registered Cossacks were profesional soldiers paid by the state. What is more, cossacks always wanted its number to increase but Poland did not have money to make it so. Low number of registered cossacks was one of the reasons of the uprising and one of the condittions of the peace was its number to increase from 6,000 to 20,000-40,000. It is kinda funny, how PLC always was outnumbered. It had the manpower, but the state did not have money due to the nobles paying almost zero taxes. In addition some nobles had bigger armies than king himself.
Khmelnytskyi, who said that: "Mother Ukraine gave birth to us", and also: "Remember the exploits of the previous Ukrainian (Rus') soldiers, and also: "There are branches of the same tree and brave soldiers, son, show courage."
@@Kwerd Божиею Милостию Великий Государь Царь и Великий Князь, Алексей Михайлович, всея Великия и Малыя России Самодержец, и многих Государств Государю и Обладателю, Твоему Царскому Величеству. Мы, Богдан Хмельницкий, Гетман Войска Запорожского, и все Войско Запорожское, и весь мир Христианский Российский до лица земли челом бъем. Обрадовася вельми с пожалования великого и милости неисчетной Твоего Царского Величества, которую нам изволил Твое Царское Величество показать, много челом бьем Тебе, Государю нашему, Твоему Царскому Величеству, служити прямо и верно во всяких делах и повелениях Царских Твоему Царскому Величеству будем вовеки. Только просим вельми, яко и в грамоте просили есьмы, изволь нам, Твое Царское Величество, в том во всем пожалование и милость свою Царскую указати, о чем посланники наши от нас Твоему Царскому Величеству будут челом бить..... и ещё много чего он говорил, но не в твою пользу, жалкая мерзкая хохлина
🚩 Khmelnytsky Uprising was a brutal war that lasted nearly a decade (1648 to 1657). Cossack warriors, under Bohdan Khmelnytsky rose against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, eventually winning their independence. However, this victory gradually led to the incorporation of what is today eastern Ukraine into Russia, as Cossacks swore allegiance to the Tsar in exchange for greater autonomy than they enjoyed under Polish-Lithuanian rule. Ultimately, the war led to the period known as "The Ruin". The Battle of Zhovti Vody was the first major battle of the Khmelnytsky Uprising.
Love these facts and videos! You're amazing man 😊😊😊🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
Love your videos!💚
Khmelnytsky and the Cossacks never fought for Ukraine. They fought for their rights as another state in the Republic of Poland. Khmelnytsky was not a Cossack but a Polish nobleman.
@@arturwiktor699 No, they fought to be free from Poland. But yes, his father was polish and his mother was a Cossack woman. His heritage was mixed. And his motives have been somewhat... selfish. He was in a feud with another nobleman who wanted his land and burned his crops. As he received no support from the authorities, he grew discontent and started a uprising with longlasting consequences. Poland-Lithuania never truly recovered from this uprising and Ukraine eventually became russian.
hay man / don't start propaganda here either / ukraine was not, is not and will not be a country / even now it is a shame / and a shame to keep lying about what happened in this area and what has been happening since 2014 /
1.Battle of Trembowla
2. Battle of Chocim Please consider these battles, I would like to see them on your channel, it would be amazing on behalf of Poland and Poles!
Thanks so much for the support! Very kind of you.
polska górą
@@anktus5292 now at the bottom.
@@ComboMuster ?
@@anktus5292 chodzi mu o to, że w omawianej bitwie Polacy dostali wpierdol, że głowa mała
To be honest, I have always been an opponent of Bohdan Khmelnyky’s personality. I understand that in Ukraine he is considered a figure of national scale, the great founder of the first more or less modern Ukrainian state (and not a fickle principality that broke away from Kiev), but I always viewed Khmelnytsky as an imperious and brutally opportunist who turned his personal vendetta and revenge into the pursuit of power. He never wanted or thought about the Ukrainian people, instead cleverly using the discontent of the peasants and Cossacks to create a state with himself at the head. And when the Poles almost crushed the Cossack state, then in a desperate attempt to save himself, Khmelnitsky threw himself at the feet of the Moscow Tsar, completely destroying any attempts to create an independent Cossack Ukrainian state.
I appreciated this, thank you.
Not only that, but it also made it impossible to establish a lasting Commonwealth of Three Nations, with the Grand Duchy of Ruthenia as a third and equal part of the Commonwealth, besides the Crown of Poland and Grand Duchy of Lithuania.
You just have a warped perception of what the world was like before nationalism. You can’t expect Garibaldi behavior from 17th century warlord
@@kiriankador782exactly!
@@kiriankador782Nah
Stefan Potock's advisor & military commander, Stefan Czarniecki, was also taken prisoner by the Tatars after the battle, but he escaped after that. Stefan Czarniecki is regarded as a national hero by the Kingdom of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth during the war with the Tatars and today, the Polish national anthem mentions his name due to his military efforts during the Swedish Deluge to prevent the invasion of Poland in 1655 using guerrilla warfare. He's regarded as one of Poland's greatest military commanders.
Yes and he also was portrayed in the great epic Potop by Sienkiewicz.
Hetman in country like Poland was kinda field marshal
Hetman is not just Lithuanian name for commander. Apart from Poles us Czechs used it too as Hejtman, like Jan Žižka in 1420. It is in fact, probably derrived from German language: Hauptmann. For the guy in charge.
Yes Hauptman is Captain a man in charge of Company at least (roughly 100 men). Natural size of unit under direct command.
literally translated: Head man
Yeah, but the word still just meant a military commander.
Rada from "der Rat".
He was a rebeliant, not hetman...
History: how many names of people/places in Eastern Europe can you butcher?
HistoryMarche: YES
Not gonna lie, that was funny 🤣
I'd rather they make a reasonable effort and butcher them with English phonetics than use an AI voiceover. These guys really do a phenomenal job, and they're one of only a few with any interest in central and eastern Europe of this period. If I want high-quality, exceptionally-researched, brilliantly-animated content (and I do), I'm willing to accept a few name butcherings. In their defense, the Polish spellings are damn near unpronounceable anyway. It's almost as bad as French... or Welsh!
Despite this narrator being English, he butchers the hell out of English names too.
It's a phenomenon.
Frenchmen: "First time?"
I found 2 correct ones! Potocki and Sapieha :D
Ačiū!
Thank you for supporting my work. Much appreciated!
Poles always suprised me, just how good they are considering being almost always outnumbered, even after being betrayed by their own cossacks infantry, they stood. Only after violating the treaty they were killed. What a cowardly move from Khmelnytsky
However, you should understand that on these lands, Polish representatives for years treated local people like cheap dirt. The amount of hate towards them was as high as it can be. And many cossacs shared the feeling. I'm not saying that breaking a treaty is good, but Cossacks were not a real army, but rebellions. There was nobody to judge their actions no government behind them, so Poland's army made a big mistake in the first place even to negotiate.
Regiment Cossacks arrived later. This's a perspective written by a polish chronicler : ) i don't deny, Commonwealth was the strongest country\ or one of strongest at a time but would be cool to see Cossacks perspective too.
@@KIVagantbullshit, on that time it was Rus Magnates who were opressing cossacks and peasants. Duke Jarema Wiśniowiecki had Rurikid origins, he 'owned' by 1648 ~400 000 people. Even today, local Ukrainian oligarchs(magnates back then) are opressing Ukraine as a state and Ukrainians as a people.
Yeah b/c independent Ukraine has done so much better for its people. It couldn't even keep the legacy infrastructure and living standards left to it by the Soviet Union going, and instead sold itself to Black Rock and the chosen tribe. The US asks Ukraine to drop her pants and all she says back is, "which hole?". What a pathetic "country".
And stop making excuses for lying and cheating, a man's word doesn't need a government contract behind it, if your word isn't worth anything, you better be powerful enough to impose your will on the entire world b/c no one will trust you, and you will make enemies out of everyone you rip off. @@KIVagant
@@kosa9662
He was with the poles was he not?
Ethnicity is not the concern. The kingdom is
Its amazing that Cossaks and tatars needed such huge numerical advantage, deceit, betrayal and oath breaking to defeat that army.
There's a notable role of Ivan Barabas - Cherkassy colonel loyal to the Polish king, he was a Cossack commander loyal to the king, during the rebellion of other Cossacks during this battle, even though he was an old man in his 60's, he rose from his seat on one of the support ships going down the river and started fighting alongside his personal retinue. Despite all his men were slaughtered within first 10 minutes, he was so greatly revered by the traitors due to the tales of his past exploits against the Turks nobody would dare approach him and he killed two that did make initial challenge. Unfortunately he slipped in a puddle of blood on the deck of the ship and once down he was pierced by numerous men.
Another notable figure was captain Werner of the German mercenary infantry. Cossacks tried bribing him and promised him mountains of gold for switching sides, but he just said that despite Polish Crown was late with payments and their doom was certain if they refused his contract stipulates they are hired until June that year - an ordered his men to fire at the Tatars and Cossacks during the negotiations. Supposedly the German brigade were the last men standing south of the river from the entirety of Polish Commonwealth's army.
It's Polish perspective
@@MegaHappydead Based on what? He didnt mention whos account he used, and as far as i know they look at different accounts.
@@MegaHappydead lol wikipedia...really? You have no proof they only used the joke that is wikipedia, you assume things for some reason, probably because of some bias.
Battle of Korsun ,Battle of Batih, Battle of Pyliavtsi, Battle of Zboriv, Battle of Zhvanets , Battle of Bila Tserkva , most if not all were fought with equal numbers. Alot of the history is not entirely true because cossacks for the most part were illiterate and kept little records, thus historians use polish and russians accounts which are biased.
There were no lakes on the Dnipr back then I think. The corresponding dams hadn´t been built yet.
The same thing bothers me on every single history video :)
Respect to colonel Barabasz, Commonwealth never forgets you!
Historymarche never dissapoints us
But they did disappoint with this propaganda bs, no 'ukraine' existed in 17th century.... and no, I'm not Russian but this is a blatant revisionism: 'a victory that doomed ukraine'.
Same propaganda $ht as Kings and Generals and 99% of Murican Mickey Mouse channels.
i am /
Thanks for posting this vid
Thanks for a great video! ⚔🔥✊
EXCELLENT AS ALWAYS
Thank you! Cheers!
And thank you very much for this:)
This video does not state clearly that the rebellion of Cossacks happened separately from the main field of battle that's why there's a confusion about the numbers. The rebellion in which Ivan Barabas was killed and his second in command took Cossack forces to Chmielnitsky happened some 20/30 kilometers from Potocki's and Polish encampment before they managed to join forces.
Indeed the total forces on the Polish side were in the end:
- 150 Polish nobles, organized into hussar shock cavalry constituting Potocki's personal retinue and elite
- 550 Cossack light riders from private household regiments of Polish aristocrats (they stayed loyal)
- 550 Polish and Ruthenian dragoons
- 1500 registered Cossacks under 3 Polish officers (they betrayed almost to a man)
So in the end I think Polish side couldn't have had more than 1250-1300 fighters that were loyal throughout entire engagement.
Source: The composition of Polish forces at Yellow Waters and near Korsun in 1648, "Przegląd Historyczno-Wojskowy", 16 (67)/2 (252), 2015, pp. 39-62
Cossack light cavalry riders, were in fact Polish cossack style cavalry, whichwere recruited from Polish and polonised nobility (though of lower status that those that were in the hussars).
Comment for the algorithm great channel thank you.
Informative AND entertaining documentary.
AND blatantly propagandist....
"Colonel Crook-nose" is a literally translation of colonel`s family name Kryvonis. Please, make a note about that )
Many factual errors in this video:
1. Territory occupied by Chmielnicki was called Hetmanate not Ukrainian state. Ukraine literally means 'borderland' and it was geographical name;
2. There is no connection between Galicja-Volhynia and Hetmanate. First was Ruthenian principality. Cossacks were a group of fugitives of many nations and social classes from serfdom, organised in military democracy. Plus there is a few hundred kilometers distance between both territories;
3. Most of town names and commanders names butchered but that's detail;
Поляк ніби-то знає історію момент:
NOPE!!! "Україна" or Ukraine is derived from "рідний край, країна, земля", "рідний край, своя країна, рідна земля; земля, населена своїм народом" meaning "native region, own country, native land; a land inhabited by its people".
@@ЯрославБалицький-ъ6л Nope. It meas borderland even in old Rus' language. The first document with the name ukraine was hypatian codex 1187 AD. And it reffered to borderlands of Rus'. Later on it was the name of borderlands between Poland-Lithuania and the Grand Duchy of Moscow. So ukrainians are in fact borderlanders :)
@WistKal9Zero Even the so called Ukrainian language is like an intermediary between Russian and Polish.
But yeah, now the agenda is to claim that this is somehow an ancient nation, although there are so many inconsistencies in any of those claims that it's not even funny.
Anyways, you could be excused for doing that in 2022, but at this point it's completely embarrassing to get onto that bandwagon, such a shame.
Shhhh this history channel is not a place for facts!!
I am polish and I am so happy to see this topic covered (I want more)
Even the deluge would be a cool topic
Nothing good ever came out of this civil war, neither for the Poles, nor the Ukrainian Cossacs. For the Poles, the Uprising meant horrible losses in regular army and nobility of The Crown, and this was an opportunity which Sweden and Russia seized. The Khmelnytsky Uprising (1648-1657), and following Russo-Polish war (1654-1667) and the Swedish Deluge (1655-1660) will result in near complete occupation of the country, total devastation of the economy, loss of about 1/3 of the Crown's population and horrible losses in the army from which The Commonwealth would never recover.
For the Ukrainians, the uprising resulted in Russian Tsar taking control over half of the modern-day Ukraine, and Cossacks servitute to their new master will bring them nothing but less and less freedoms, up to total liquidation of Zaporozhian Sich and abolition of all Cossack privilages, along with total loss of hope for creation of The Commonwealth of Three Nations, with Grand Duchy of Ruthenia as a third and equal part along the Crown of Poland and Grand Duchy of Lithuania. From that time the russification of Ukraine would begin and soon the weakened Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth would become undone in the partitions.
Yeah the way it all did end up for poles and ukrainians is kinda sad. I am polish myself and my family from my father's side were nobles and did have some sort of land in Ukraine.
I can totally understand the reasons for Khmelnytsky's uprising, the ukrainians really were getting treated worse and worse as time passed. The amount of cossacks in the polish army was getting reduced so they plundered on their own accord, which often resulted in conflicts against the Ottoman Empire, something which Poland tried to avoid. But sadly for both sides after the uprising the situation deteroriated for both sides - Poland obviously lost land and subjects and was thrown into wars which could all be avoided if only cossacks were treated better.
The ukrainians sought to find their freedom, but ironically found themselves under the boot of Russians who subjugated them and mistreated them even more than the polish did, it would take them more than 300 years to get their independence.
Poles were landowners who worked the Ukrainians to death with little compensation, and would would use the regions were cossacks settled as a buffer against Tatars, Russians and Ottomans. The rebellion was a huge success the problem was that Ukraine was surrounded by 3 major superpowers of that time, each having imperial ambitions.
There were never any Ukrainian Cossacks, there were just Cossacks. Writing about Ukrainians in the 17th century is as idiotic as writing about US knights in the Middle Ages. Ukrainians began to form as a nation in the 19th century.
@@pancakes429 Lots of propaganda I see here. First of all, many Ruthenians were also nobles. Some even powerful magnates. Jeremi Wiśniowiecki was an example of such magnate, he was a Ruthenian, who only changed his faith from Orthodox to Catholic one. Many Cossacks were also landowners, while peasantry was treated just as in any other part of the Crown, though there are many post-communist misconceptions about how the peasants were really treated at that time.
And while The Wild Fields served in fact as a form of a buffer zone, it was still one protected by the army of the Crown of Poland, which on multiple occasions had to protect today's Ukraine from invasions, ones that were often provoked by Cossack raids into Crimea and Turkey.
The problem of the Cossack rebellion was not that it was surrounded by other major powers, but the fact that creation of the independent Ukrainian state was never really the ultimate goal for Khmelnytsky. He started the whole war due to personal reasons, and as it escalated further and further his own power was the only thing that mattered. The Cossacks under Khmelnytsky brought freedom and privilages only to themselves, not anyone else, especially the peasants, which were often sold into Tatar slavery as a form of securing Khan's support.
@@pancakes429 This is exactly what the Polonized Russian nobility did. It was the Russian lord who oppressed Russian and Polish peasants. The largest noble families in the history of the Republic of Poland were the Ruthenian families (e.g. Wiśniowiecki, Sapieha, Chodkiewicz) and the Radziwiłł family from Lithuania.
LOVE your videos!! BY FAR the best of your "kind", puts K&G *to shame* !!!!!!
Pretty good pronunciation of Polish names and surnames. Respect
Great video
The best history channel in the world
This victory seems like a fluke. The Cossacks won really because of betrayal. The Poles should have retreated and waited for reinforcements. If their numbers had been equal to the Cossacks they would have made quick work of them.
even in much smaller numbers Commonwealth armies usualy beat Cossacs
@@kowalskii The numbers looks very different in Wikipedia.
@@metternich_999 That's because anyone can update Wikipedia
@@metternich_999 reason is that wikipedia counts all Polish units in the area, namely the Mikolaj Potocki army, that did not take part in battle. If you read "Battle" information you can see that Pole had 2500 soldiers, 1000 after cossacks left. What is more in "Background" you can see the number. If the Polish army was 8000 strong, they would engage and probably crush the rebelion.
To conlude someone edited the part where everyone is looking. Some propaganda of low quaility.
@@rg20322 Not anyone can update Wikipedia. You need to cite a source...
this is a sacrifice for the algorithm
Please make series about Khmelnytsky Uprising (for instance Defense of Zbaraż or battle of Berestreczko)
Ogniem i mieczem ;)
Ruthenians to Poles: "Give us your weapons, and we'll have peace. We definitely won't betray you and immediately attack afterwards!"
Doesn't this sound kinda... familiar?
But if you watch the history of rebellions before Khmelnitsky's, there were times when Poles executed negotiators and did similar things, cause Cossacks were considered a some kind of terrorists by the Poles, so it's merely same thing as Polish-Lithuanian nobles did.
And don't forget that many of these nobles who fought at Polish-Lithuanian side had a Ruthenian roots, like Wishnevetskiy or Ostrozhskiy, so it was kinda civil war between two sides of Ruthenians and Poles and Lithuanians
@@ОлександрЧужа-и8ы that's true
@@ОлександрЧужа-и8ы nonthense, as if you try to look in documents of that time - a lot of mentions Rusyns( Ruthenians are latinised version of it) there, at that territories
To say more - Ruthenian Voivodeship (Województwo ruskie) didn't include Transkarpatia in it, but included nowadays Halychyna and part of Volyn
Rusyn(Ruthenian) is ethnonym of people that lived on territories that is Ukraine now, language/culture/religion were common things and these that unified all these people.
And language and Religion were known as Rusyn(Rus'ka to be correct)
Why Transkarpatians are keep that ethnonym until today - because of Hungarians/Chech who called them so until middle of 20th century
While russians and Polish abandoned that name from 18th century and started to call people/language Ukrainian
Da Romans
В ті часи це було нормою. Потрібно відрізняти минуле і сьогоднішнє. Сьогодні існує міжнародне право і такі дії не можуть бути виправдані. Тільки не зрозуміло до чого ви згадали рутен/русин ( сучасних українців) ведучи аналогію до сучасних росіян
The Cossacks and Tatars made a good team.
Most Tatars are modem day Russians 🇷🇺😎
So good, that Chmielnicki allowed them to take slaves and loot the local Ruthenian population.
@JDDC-tq7qmMany of them were deported to Siberia by Russians.
Another great video HM! as always!
Sweden: "I'm gonna do what's called a pro gamer move."
Very nice! Leserknown history, thanks1 Hope to see battle of Korsun next time!
History repeating itself.
Violated the treaty by taking their cannons and not provided a safe passage. Cowards, that's what they are.
Correct, but so did the Commonwealth by taking his land.
@lemonacidrounds7293 Couldn’t agree more
@@Mastakilla91xDDDDD
@@Mastakilla91
"Commonwealth" took "his land" where?
Apparently, his family thought they could hold their private possessions by the power of smekalka alone, never formalizing their ownership.
Which was then inevitably contested by a bigger fish who knew how to (mis)use lawyers.
"Commonwealth" had never taken "his land", as this entire region _was_ Commonwealth, by, funny enough, democratic decision of _Ruthenian_ nobility in 1569.
True
Interesting video. Nice work!
Love your content man! You're the best at what You do 😊😊😊❤❤❤❤
Thank you so much 😀
@@HistoryMarche Always Huge fan
Your animations and music add so much to these videos. Very engaging, thank you!
Thank you very much!
Love this era and especially Eastern theater related history. Keep it coming!!!
Please can you do more 1600's battles and the battle of svenskuld from 1790
Outnumbered 11 to 1 and still they stood tall, survived betrayal and mutiny, loosing only due to cowardly move from Khmelnytsky
Still lost.
@@PenastaThat is such a non-statement.
@@PenastaIn fact, the Ukrainian rabble lost the chance to be part of European civilization.
@@polishgigachad7097so true, Poland is so better without those Ukrainian/Rus' corruption and oligarchs.
@@polishgigachad7097 Yes it marks Polands decline.
Please more videos about Polish Cossacks war
As always, thank you for the great content.
Thanks
A good film.
Hey Legalna, great to see you
Also territories to the east from Poltava and Zaporizgia were not under moscovian/russian rule. Those lands were as wild stepp / similar to American Wild West. There lived free armored peole mostly from Ukraine and Crimia.
Боблан писав що якраз таки були
It was not a simple "uprising" as the historiography of tsarist and communist Russia would described it, or the nationalist Ukrainian historiography that today copies those Russian theses. Khmelnytsky started a rebellion. This rebellion had the features of a civil war within the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Rebellion started because Ukrainian Cossacs wanted greater rights, and peasants wanted less harsh serfdom within the Polish-Luthuanian Commonwealth. It was not a war for Ukrainian independence.
@@valdaniels4078Але за Зборівським договором Річ Посполита визнавала гетьманщину незалежною,але в урізаних кордонах
@@Prosto_Yura Козацька Україна стала незалежною під кінець війни. Але до кінця війни українська шляхта і козаки намагалися змусити корону за допомогою військової поразки польських лоялістів провести реформи і вирівняти українські землі у правах із Литвою і Польщею, які мали більше прав і були більш рівними партнерами в Речі Посполитій. Але Король і польський нобілітет не погодилися на це, і Хмельницькій повів справу до незалежності, тому що під кінець війни населення терпіти не могло польську еліту, і без виконання українських умов військо Хмельницького готово було йти на столицю одразу після захоплення Львову.
З самого початку - це була громадянська війна, з української сторони за нове місце України в складі Речі Посполитої. Наратив про "війну за незалежність" належить Москві, яка пізніше хотіла історично довести, що "рускіє" воювали проти поляків, щоб об'єднатися з Москвою в "єдіную русь".
@@valdaniels4078 Я якщо що,не відстоюю наратив про "війну за незалежність" з самого початку. Але факт є фактом,Хмельницький врешті вирішив не бути складовою РП,а створити свою державу,де головувала б його династія,яку він намагався створити,одруживши Тимоша на Розанді Лупул
@@Prosto_Yura це так, просто це не була задумка з самого початку. Хмельницький не знав, до чого призведе повстання. Мало хто думав, що провінція повна селян зможе перемогти основне військо держави в довгостроковій перспективі, фактично знищивши його. Сталося не так, як гадалося. В кінці війни, виявилося, що альтернативи, окрім як оголосити незалежність, просто не залишилося.
How come you made such awesome video, but did map wrong? In XVII century there were no dams on Dnieper, and hence, there were no reservoirs that you displayed :)
Yeah that struck me as odd. I'm like this can't be right.
Everything is wrong with this video it's pushing Polish propaganda.
The names are the least concerning aspect considering it's a video about a country that didn't even exist. Political bullshit, why can't they just do history.
Yeah, that map is garbage. They've also put Yelisavetgrad there, which was obviously founded later, during the Russian Empire period. I mean, the town is named after a Russian empress (Yelisaveta/Elizabeth), how could a person who is supposed to know the history of the region put it there.
Dude, Russia and USSR build nothing, it was made by anciet Ukrainians Jesus Christenko and Abraham Lincolnenko.😂
Heres the thing people forget these people never used the term Ukrainian and if you asked them "are you Ukrainian or Cossack?" Theyd always answer Cossack, sure Ukraine recognizes them as ancient heroes but they werent Ukrainian. Like calling modern Italians Romans when the two couldnt be further apart from each other.
Because modern day Western propaganda wants us to believe that such state as Ukraine is ancient and existed some times ago. This, ofc, utter bullshit. There are no such state and nation in history. They are Russians, or, to be more correct, "maloross", crude translate is "small russians".
Show proof, document, memory or a letter proving that bro😂. Anything beyond "trust me bro its a youtube comment section" would be nice
@@rmajor3424the concept of a Ukrainian state literally didn't exist until the 2pth century.
@@real-history-online yet there were Ukrainians, malorussians, ruthenians whatever they were called they are Ukrainian that spoke Ukrainian language. + your non sense about "state" does really show your incompetence in this question since term state only appeared on the brink of french revolution.
@@rmajor3424 the "language" they spoke is a mix between polish and Russian, regardless their "language" still doesn't make ukraine a state until the 20th century ;)
@HistoryMarche 10:54 The "550 Cossacks in cavalry" were in actuality Polish cossack style cavalry (which unlike the hussars fought in "cossack" style, which means that they fought without a lance and with a light armour), recruited mostly from mid-lower nobility and also had peasantry (which were the servants of their lords (pan)) in the lowest ranks.
Never heard about Ukrainian state at that time. Where did you get such information.
Ukrainian revisionist propaganda 😂😂😂
It exist only in the Soviet union but only a part of it. Ukran state founded in 24 of august. 1991. Fact.
i think this happened shortly before the Ukrainians dug out the black sea by hand to have access to the oceans.
Do you know at this time there was no Russia either? There was Moscow duchy.
@@kebabitas there were no French Republic, Great Britain and etc. as well.
Please can you do the Battle of Berestechko?
Great job ! Btw Polish ( or more accurately Russ ) magnat name was Jeremi Wiśniowiecki - you can spell it something like Vishniovecky :)
Holy cow that name lol. My narrator had such a hard time with Polish names haha
@@HistoryMarche easier and more correctly as Vish-neo-vets-ky it is not hard just a bit to get used to 🙂
Він був українським шляхтичем
Yes, indeed 😃
He wasnt Polish, he was catholic Rus, his family traced their lineage back from Rurikids.
not sure how long ago you fixed the knife in dead generals being skewed during animation, but glad to see it!
Love your videos. They are a great way of encouraging wider audience to study the subject on their own.
Also ignore people whining about pronouncing names correctly. I for example take unhealthy amount of pride in that my language can be considered a torture method😊
Great
Lol. I remembered the Chinese would say thus about the Xiongnu 2000 years ago: "The nomads are not bound by honoring the trust, and are prone to break pacts."
Just like the Chinese broke numerous pacts with the nomads. People in general are like that
Orkhon inscriptions literally calls Chinese liars and deceits from the 7th century.
Quite common thing in that time :)
And in addition - quite common among rebels
Please make now Battle of Berestechko, great polish victory against the cossacks what was not used well bc of King and nobility
This video send me shivers down my spine. This is one of my favourite subjects of European history.
Knowing how Khmelnitsky revolt started enlightened me even more on the subject. I fell in love with it through Sienkiewich. I have read The trilogy and they are one of the greatest books I have read.
Figures like prince Wiesniowicki, Szkretuski, Wolodyjowski, Podbipieta, Bohun, Hmelnytski, Tuhai Bei and above anyone else pan Zagloba have strenghtened me, gave courage to me and helped me in a way.
I remember from Through fire and sword the siege of Zbaraz...Some time passed since I've read it, but I still feel goosebumps remembering that magnificent piece of literature.
Oh, the might and wisdom of Jarema Wisniowicki, the military prowess and courage of Szkreruski, the perfection in sword wielding: Wolodyjowski, the sheer power and warmness in the same time of Podbipieda, the menace and incredible power of the Hatman of the Cossacks, the military prowess and menace of Tuhai Bei and Bohun and the incredible wisdom and wit of this new Uysses, Zagloba.
History Marche, thanks for covering this. Sienkiewich made these wars immortal. You guys bring it to us from a historical, accurate point of view so this is good.
dziękuję
Well they didn't surrender to Russia but joined on their free will
Not all of the Cossacs supported bending the knee to Russian Tsar.
almost like they want to be Russian 🤔
@@uberneanderthal Well in that time religion came first and then nationality. Given that today Ukrainian and Russian language are similar, back then i presume that the language barrier was even slimmer.
Better study history))) after Khmelnytskyi, his successor was Ivan Vyhovskyi who defeated the Muscovites near Konotop. Then Ivan Mazepa tried together with the Swedish king to defeat the army of Peter 1 near Poltava. Ukraine-Rus was trapped by the enemies of the Ottomans, Poland, and Muscovites.
@@jak00bspyr72 the Pereyasli Rada was an alliance from Russia with the Muscovites. But as you know, the Muscovites are a very treacherous people, they took advantage of this alliance for their own benefit, this did not happen to the Rusyn Cossacks, and they crushed their army under the sword.
I'd just mention for the context.
In Polish forces at that time the term "Cossack" reffered to any type of light cavalry, so not necessary cossacks from Ukraine/Russia
More PLC history :)
This is probably my favorite "lesser known" war in Europe. Amazing how the Poles managed to come back after the disastrous defeats against the Cossacks. Also, and this might be an exaggeration on my part 😅, I swear the Russians never forgot the Times of Troubles and wanted to destroy Poland in particular just as much as they wanted to expand their influence. And I think they kept this grudge until the third partition, almost 200 years
More like 400+ years :D
Они до сих пор мечтают дойти до Варшавы,но дошли до Авдеевки!
Cossacks and Tatars destroyed Ukraine and Russia
The Swedish invasion destroyed the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland.
The Muscovite invasion destroyed Lithuania
The elites betrayed, the weak king found himself in exile outside the country. There was even a plan to partition the ruined Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. But it was the Polish nation which changes it (in the political and cultural sense Polish, because ethnically the nobility had Polish, Lithuanian and Ruthenian origins) Polish Nobility and its sacrifice saved the Polish-Lithuanian Republic... or rather postponed its destruction, as the country never recovered from the devastation. Because it was their country, their freedoms, their way of life, which they defended devotedly.
Not exactly. Moscow tried to retaliate and, after reforming its army reached for Smolensk in 1632, but Moscow suffered a spectacular defeat and the ruling elites in Russia decided to change their policy and cooperate with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In 1648 a plan to conquer the Crimean Khanate began to be implemented, in which Poland and Russia were equally interested. When the Khmeilnytsky Rebellion broke out, the Tsar seriously considered helping the Poles. However, the Salt Riot in Moscow, the influence of Orthodox priests and various agents changed the mind of the Tsar. Above all, Moscow's attitude was changed by the unprecedented, disastrous and humiliating defeats of the Polish army. New political opportunities have opened up for Moscow when Khmeilnytsky gave Ukraine to Tsar, but the northern direction was still a priority for Moscow. Tsar Alexius and Patriarch Nikon announced an Orthodox 'crusade' against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. They attacked the Grand Duchy of Lithuania - finally sizing Smolensk and destroyed Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania, turning the city into desolate ruins. Only the occupation of the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland by the Swedes, the flight of the Polish king from the country and the apparent destruction of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth changed Moscow's plans for fear of a sudden increase in Swedish power. Game of Thrones, considering what was happening in the european 17th century, is a children's fantasy fairy tale.
I wouldn't call it a disastrous defeat. We have started this war with very small forces. Yes, they were lost, but a much bigger army eventually came to end the war.
Love your videos! Consider doing video about Žalgirio mūšis.
They already did a video on Grunwald 1410, about two years ago.
Was ukrain name used in year 1600?
Srussian vania: "poshel na hyi"
No. It's attempt to rewrite history.
Yes in 17-18 centuries word "Ukraine" was referring to central regions of modern day Ukraine
@@HistoryOnMarch yes but who referred it as Ukraine.. what Ukraine means in translation?? It means margin.. or vicinity.. to whom Ukraine was margin. Or vicinity??.. to the Polish Lithuanian commonwealth?? Or to Russia??
Let's sacrifice the Algorithm!!!
explain what are you talking about
On the map you showing Nikolaev city, but it was founded in 1789.
Not only this is shown incorrectly. Note that the course of the Dnieper River also looked different. They show what the Dnieper looks like today, with dams built on the river not in the times of Khmelnytsky of course, but in the times of the USSR. The stylized maps are apparently based on today's terrain. That is why, for example, in the material about the Battle of Kircholm, is showed the dam on the Dvina River, which was built in the 20th century.
History Marche is channel that popularizes history. It's content is not created by experts, historians, archaeologists or researchers, but by some history buffs. They often make mistakes or oversimplify what they talk about, but that doesn't stop me from watching their materials with interest. You just need to be aware that to acquire historical knowledge you reach for books, museums, etc. not on TH-cam. This is still just entertainment, not real knowledge.
Love the channel. However if you want to support HM, just directly do so. There's a few videos breaking down the quality of the knives advertised.
Can you please do a video on when the famous Ukrainian general Zelensky defeated the Roman/Russian army at Cannae next please?
Lmao.😅
Have you stoped showing your sources?
i only see polish or tatars but noone ukrainian
Then itmeans that your'e blind
Truly a proud victory, they could not defeat 1,000 Polish troops, while having 12,000 of their own, so the became oath-breakers... I can see how Korsuń 1648, Piławce 1648 or Batoh 1652 can be considered respected victories, but this battle does not shine positively on Chmilnicki's cossacks fighting ability or their honour.
There's a notable role of Ivan Barabas - Cherkassy colonel loyal to the Polish king, he was a Cossack commander loyal to the king, during the rebellion of other Cossacks during this battle, even though he was an old man in his 60's, he rose from his seat on one of the support ships going down the river and started fighting alongside his personal retinue. Despite all his men were slaughtered within first 10 minutes, he was so greatly revered by the traitors due to the tales of his past exploits against the Turks nobody would dare approach him and he killed two that did make initial challenge. Unfortunately he slipped in a puddle of blood on the deck of the ship and once down he was pierced by numerous men.
Another notable figure was captain Werner of the German mercenary infantry. Cossacks tried bribing him and promised him mountains of gold for switching sides, but he just said that despite Polish Crown was late with payments and their doom was certain if they refused his contract stipulates they are hired until June that year - an ordered his men to fire at the Tatars and Cossacks during the negotiations. Supposedly the German brigade were the last men standing south of the river from the entirety of Polish Commonwealth's army.
Cherkasy, NOT "Cherkassy"!
Commonwealth army usually coped well with the Zaporozhian Cossacks, however, the problem appeared when large forces of Tatars appeared on the battlefield as a cossacks ally, this was a fundamental change, because the tactically flexible Polish cavalry lost its combat value due to the mobility and tactics of the Tatar cavalry, which attacked fast and violently the flanks and rear of the enemy army. In those times, the Tatars were really very much feared, the commanders who were able to force the Tatars into battle on an open field were considered masters of strategy.
There is a good polish book and movie based on the book about this war, called "with fire and sword", or "Ogniem i Mieczem".
Also a Mount and blade game as well.
The Polish nobles were probably fighting amongst themselves about prioritizing farm upgrades, especially heavy plow, and not putting any farms next to TC, but only around folwarks
Poles mistreated Ukrainians by not giving them equal rights, but if it wasn't for Khmielnitksy, I'm sure it would work itself out eventually. The reasoning of the polish nobility was that Commonwealth was as the name suggests - 'our common wealth'.
In order to become part of an organization, you have to be loyal to its values. Cossacks never did that and treated it as a cashcow. The registered Cossacks institution was seen as defining Ukrainians as second class citizens, but in reality it was an initiation phase, trial period for a new member with limited rights in the organization. Cause a newbie can fuck it all up easily. Like for example by going to tatars or russians and starting a war for a minor land dispute. 😮 Im sure after max 30 years Ukrainians would have been given full equal rights as Poles and Lithuanians had, but only after proving loyalty and when they would start to see Commonwealth as their Commonwealth.
Ukrainians/Kievan Rus were part of the Lithuanian Grand Duchy until the Commonwealth happened O .o Why 'newbie'? They weren't newbies. The Commonwealth oppressed Ukrainians and the Orthodox religion; that's why a rebellion happened. How it would have turned out if the rebellion didn't happen, we would never know O .o Cossacks fought for their identity... Commonwealth discriminated Ukrainians and their religion
Who knows
Nope, local Rus magnates were opressing local Rus peasants. Just as today local Ukrainian oligarchs are opressing local Ukrainians.
How things never change in this land :)
@@MegaHappydeadthere was no orthodox oppresion. As it was said confederation of Warsaw 1573 prevented that.
Yup
Can you pls do some polynesian wars? Battle of gate pa?
Shame see this chanel the history rewrite too…. No Ukrain state in that time!!!
Khmelnytskyi, who said that: "Mother Ukraine gave birth to us", and also: "Remember the exploits of the previous Ukrainian (Rus') soldiers, and also: "There are branches of the same tree and brave soldiers, son, show courage."
There is no such country, as Tsardom of "Russia" in 1635-1669. On that place there was Moscowia Tsardom at that time.
Victory without the honor
The polish forces, during this time have a lot of this moments, fought well as underdog until they were betrayed. Today i have learnt that the early "Ukrainian " "state" is based on huge dick moves.
cry more
@@randomname-cc9hc My dude, it was not Poland that was forced to kneel in front of the Muscoviet/Russian diplomatic delegation at the end of this war...
@@aleksandersokal5279 yep, Poland just agreed to give up good chunk of it's territory to those, who kneeled to Russians
@@randomname-cc9hc Poland was independent (and gave up the least economically viable parts of its realm, which it no longer controlled), Cossacks were Russian vassals (forced to literally kneel in front of the Russian diplomatic delegation).
Historical mistake with Elisavetgrad which didn't exist by this name in 17th century
Wrong name of russia in that period. It`s name was moskovia at that time.
you play too much videogames.
it was Rus
@@charlemagne9449you read too little
I just noticed the thumbnail to this video. The battle you covered in this video was the story of Islamic invasion which utilized deception and traitor infiltration, not Russian aggression or conquest.
Ukraine? It didnt exist in that period.... the map actually spells out the name of the country, your welcome!
Khmelnytskyi, who said that: "Mother Ukraine gave birth to us", and also: "Remember the exploits of the previous Ukrainian (Rus') soldiers, and also: "There are branches of the same tree and brave soldiers, son, show courage."
Good video
great
Mel Gibson would call Ruthenia Ukraine as well
Where Ukraine? There was no such thing at the time
Khmelnytskyi, who said that: "Mother Ukraine gave birth to us", and also: "Remember the exploits of the previous Ukrainian (Rus') soldiers, and also: "There are branches of the same tree and brave soldiers, son, show courage."
+15 rubles
Russian minions: Ukraine didn't exist until 1991
also Russian minions: Ukrainians murdered Poles in Volhynia!!11!1
Very informative!!!€
Any similarty with current events is not pure coincidence. Its what happens when people dont learn history.
Yes, until the Tatars betrayed the Cossacks😏
❤❤❤❤❤
Ukraine!?
There was no Ukraine nor there was any concept of it in the XVII century...
Stop this nonsensical historical rewriting...
Khmelnytskyi, who said that: "Mother Ukraine gave birth to us", and also: "Remember the exploits of the previous Ukrainian (Rus') soldiers, and also: "There are branches of the same tree and brave soldiers, son, show courage."
Як шкода, що знову невігласний поляк обісрався :(
there was no Ukrainian nationality, but Ukraine was called Ukraine even before the Lithuanians conquered these lands
@@owoc8260 nationality in the modern sense arose as a concept at the end of the 18th century, that is understandable
@@owoc8260 sure but there's a context that can't be ignored, it was a denomination of areas around the Kievan Rus, as Kiev was the capital, therefore not part of the borderlands, if memory doesn't fail me.
There's a curious case here in Portugal, about the name of Portugal and its etymology, which I would draw a parallel. Portugal's name is officially said to come from the city of Porto, and the old people who lived in that region, the Gauls, therefore, basically, Portus Cale, or Port of the Gauls. But that isn't true, the country isn't named after the city of Porto because when the name was coined for the region, Porto was an irrelevant village, even at the foundation of Portugal, Porto was still a village.
My point is, using a generic term to refer to an area, and then attributing it to something that only comes much later is historical rewriting, both in this case of Ukraine and in the case of Portugal.
@@Kwerd yes, but I also mean the ethnic group because at that time there were Ruthenians and Zaporozhian Cossacks, not Ukrainians
Can't wait to see the battle of korsun (probably spelt that wrong)
I seriously don't like where this channel is going anymore...
explain
@@wac7101 emoji use + font and format change
why did cossacks have to get registered?
They did not have to. That was a privilege. Registered Cossacks were profesional soldiers paid by the state. What is more, cossacks always wanted its number to increase but Poland did not have money to make it so. Low number of registered cossacks was one of the reasons of the uprising and one of the condittions of the peace was its number to increase from 6,000 to 20,000-40,000.
It is kinda funny, how PLC always was outnumbered. It had the manpower, but the state did not have money due to the nobles paying almost zero taxes. In addition some nobles had bigger armies than king himself.
Ukraine didn't exist at that time
Khmelnytskyi, who said that: "Mother Ukraine gave birth to us", and also: "Remember the exploits of the previous Ukrainian (Rus') soldiers, and also: "There are branches of the same tree and brave soldiers, son, show courage."
@@KwerdYour mother "Ukraine" is ordinary wh*re 🤣
@@Kwerd Божиею Милостию Великий Государь Царь и Великий Князь, Алексей Михайлович, всея Великия и Малыя России Самодержец, и многих Государств Государю и Обладателю, Твоему Царскому Величеству.
Мы, Богдан Хмельницкий, Гетман Войска Запорожского, и все Войско Запорожское, и весь мир Христианский Российский до лица земли челом бъем.
Обрадовася вельми с пожалования великого и милости неисчетной Твоего Царского Величества, которую нам изволил Твое Царское Величество показать, много челом бьем Тебе, Государю нашему, Твоему Царскому Величеству, служити прямо и верно во всяких делах и повелениях Царских Твоему Царскому Величеству будем вовеки. Только просим вельми, яко и в грамоте просили есьмы, изволь нам, Твое Царское Величество, в том во всем пожалование и милость свою Царскую указати, о чем посланники наши от нас Твоему Царскому Величеству будут челом бить.....
и ещё много чего он говорил, но не в твою пользу, жалкая мерзкая хохлина
There was Kievan rus before moscovit ruzzianz.
Brainwashed