Talk:History of the Cossacks

Old talk
This article will be increased. The Cossacks as well. But of course in Cossacks could be a short summarise of their history.User:Yeti 20:34, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Maybe this page should also talk about the importance of Cossacks to Ukrainian national identity. Along with their language, their historical memory of the relative self-rule of the Cossacks is an important component of their national construction. So in addition to the as yet unwritten section on Cossacks in Russia today, we should definitely talk about Ukraine. --Iceager 02:39, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The following piece removed from article.

Origin myths
''The Cossacks allegedly began as a non-exclusive ethnic group which grew out of various Hun and Turko-Mongol equestrian pastoralists. From them derives the Kazakh term Cossack meaning "wanderer/adventurer" Though the Kazakhs mostly adopted Islam, Orthodox Christianity soon became the representative religion of the the Cossack "ethnicity". Similarly Slavic replaced Turkic as the necessary communication base. In legend, outlaws from all across Europe made their way to the steppes of the Ukraine to enjoy the freedom of cossack life.''

Truth mixed with guesswork. Mikkalai 02:15, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Merge proposal
Shouldn't this be merged and redirected into Cossack? - Arthur George Carrick 20:34, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * 'Yes!' It also needs sources adding. Ewjw 10:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Forget it. Big articles are being split, not merged. But there is a piece of wisdom, indeed: the contents of both must be carefully reshuffled. mikka (t) 01:45, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

If there's a lot of shuffling to do, it may be easier to merge, mix, and then extract the history article while leaving behind a summary of it. —Michael Z. 2005-12-6 02:06 Z 

I don't think it should be merged. It was obviously split so that the main Cossack article wouldn't be oversized and bloated. Add sources and let it be.--KrossTalk 04:31, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that merge is needed, just more expantion. Even ifwe merge them now, we would had to split them again eventually.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:01, 19 February 2006 (UTC) Cazacii- sunt tyragetii din antichitate, din marea familie a traco-getilor, care traiau pe teritoriul Daciei, pana in nordul Marii Negre. Tyragetii, adica getii de pe Tiras=Nistru. Ei locuiau intre Nistru si Don. Sunt cunoscuti in evul mediu, in vremea voievodatelor si al Moldovei, ca si cazacii- moldoveni, prieteni si ajutor al lui Stefan cel Mare si despre care, Sobieski, regele Poloniei, spunea, in urma unui razboi cu Stefan cel Mare: nu ma lupt cu cazacii, pentruca sunt moldoveni. Asta este originea lor, sunt getii din nordul Marii negre, nume generic de moldoveni, dar care traind aproape de slavi, limba lor s-a slavizat. Au fost vecnic independenti, nu se socotesc rusi, slavi, tatari sau alte etnii. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.80.17.0 (talk) 13:08, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

World War 2
Is this a joke? No sources, no bibliography, apears to be a cut and paste from an article. -- Kuban kazak 17:55, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

This article should not be merged with History of Cossacks, because History of Cossacks puts very little emphasis on Ukrainian Cossacks, who are really the most popular and most refferred to as "cossacks".
 * Well expand the article, and being a cossack I find that quite insulting considerign that a) Ukrainian cossacks don't exist anymore. b) All of the Zaporozhian cossacks migrated to the Kuban c)Being a successor of them, we call ourselves RUSSIAN. And in western press Cossacks are more often portraid as Russian right monarchist groups. -- Kuban kazak 01:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Being the son of a Kuban Cossack that fought with Vlasov during the war I heard a different side to the story. Unfortunately most of the members are gone now including a famous writer of Cossack history in Windsor, Ontario. We need more participation from the inheritors of the Cossack life to fill in the gaps that are missing. alexchem- sept 21, 2006

Origins of Cossacks --- Wasili Glaskow
Who is Wasili Glaskow? Does he work at any university or academic institution? Is he a professional historian. You can find only one pocketbook written by him on the Amazon.com. His "conclusions" about the origins of Cossacks sounds like fiction of Russian and Ukrainian nationalists. Can anybody tell me who is this scholar? --133.41.4.46 19:10, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * His books were published in 60s, so too old to be able to google anything. But they were not self-published but by Robert Speller & Sons, a reputable publishing house. Also, the book is abailable in libraries, including the Library of Congress, see . I found him occastionally cited in modern books. Also note that his theory is purposefully cited as a non-mainstream one but with "Some authors..." preface which presents things properly. Theories exist but they are not universally accepted. If you want people to discuss things with you, log in to your account and use ONE and only one account. --Irpen 19:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

1)I have only one account. No relation to Oleksiy or whatever. Do not offense.
 * If you have "only one account". Care to use it. You don't even now. --Irpen 05:52, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

2) Library of Congress has many non-academic books. Its not an arguement. I just want to know is Wasili Glaskow an academic scholar or not? Did he have any other publications (even in Russian), presentations and so on.
 * I don't know. He was writing in 60s. However, there are references to him even in modern academic publications. --Irpen 05:52, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

3) Never heard about "Robert Speller & Sons, a reputable publishing house". Do you have any idea where I can get the information about it.
 * If you google around a little, you will see plenty of books, often cited too, published by RS&S but all of them in mid-century. Probably they are not around anymore. But from the books published at its time, this seems a pretty reputable publisher.

4)"Some authors" tells nothing. It is beter to call the thing by proper name: "non-mainstream author".
 * With this I agree. If this theory is indeed out of the mainstream, we can present it as such. I will check how exactly is he cited in other works.

5)I think the best way is to present theories about the Cossacks' origins by dividing them into two passeges: the mainstream (traditional Soviet and Western) and non-mainstream (stuff like "all steppe people were Cossacks' ancectors" etc.).

Any suggestions? 133.41.4.46 18:57, 21 September 2006 (UTC)--Alex Kov 04:06, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * See above, --Irpen 05:52, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Cossacks and Jews?
Rather than writing an entirely new note, I (Cgingold) will simply re-post the comments on this subject from Talk:Cossack:

As a Jew (by birth rather than religion, of which I have none) I was astounded to see so little (only one fleeting reference) about the Cossack brutality toward Jews. I have a great deal of respect for the democratic aspects of Cossack society, but their role, under various regimes, in suppressing the democratic aspirations of other groups (including Jews) should have been described in more detail. I might add that, in the past, one of the most insulting things that a Jew could say about a person would be to call him a Cossack. Too Old 22:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * In the context of the 15th-18th centuries, the Jews often served as middlemen between the oppressive landlords and the peasants, often working as tax collectors or some such jobs. This was not their choice, the laws forbade them from owning property and the Jews certainly did not create this system, they just survived in it.  But when peasants and cossacks revolted, this frequently made the Jews a target of assault and they suffered significant casualties.  You are correct that a heading belongs on this subject. Faustian 22:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I too was astonished to find only a single fleeting reference to this subject in both this article and Cossack. I haven't gone through the edit history, but I would not be surprised if there was material dealing with this subject that was removed at some point. In any event, the article is seriously defective without a section devoted to this issue. I hope it will be rectified sooner rather than later. Cgingold 12:52, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Statements and Citations
It seems that most of the "Early History" section was written by one author and one or two references. I have put citation tags for at least a month on many paragraphs, and none have been added. I tried to find some, but could not, probably because the citations are the only sources that state the given information. If there are no objections, I will re-write the early sections, with more in-line citations. Thanks, Horlo (talk) 09:29, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

"Cossacs" (Kozaki) were Slavs
Kozaki were and are Slavs. Stop with occultism. The term derives from the "goat-ers". Why are "historians" and "Linguists" always stealing slavic elements, cultural, mythological characters and proclaiming them as "non slavic"? Even Perun was proclaimed as "non Slavic"

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of the 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081120011225/http://www.kozatstvo.org.ua/statut_e.php to http://www.kozatstvo.org.ua/statut_e.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040410045158/http://www.cossacks.kiev.ua/ to http://www.cossacks.kiev.ua/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:50, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Gothic origins
is attempting to add information on the gothic background of the cossacks. He is, I believe, attempting to use "" as his reference. I opened this section so we could discuss it here.---- Work permit (talk) 17:18, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I believe you are correct as to the paper the user is referencing. I also agree that you are correct in reverting the additions: the content contended to be there simply isn't there. Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:34, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I even offered to help on the user talk page User_talk:Trevoorijk. I filled out a citation and asked for the page numbers to complete it.  The editor was never been heard from again, never made another contribution.---- Work permit (talk) 01:40, 11 September 2019 (UTC)