Jump to content

Talk:Battle of Khotyn (1621)

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

This was not one of the first Christian victories over the Turks in a ground battle

[edit]

This was not even close to one of the first significant Christian victories over the Turks in a ground battle. Hunyadi's victory over Mehmed the Conquerer at the Siege of Belgrade in 1456 was far more significant, as it decided the fate of pre-Isabella Europe. The Austrian victory at the first Siege of Vienna in 1529 was also more significant.

That is not to say that the Polish-Lithuanian victory at Khotyn was not significant. Along with the related Cossack raids and the fact that constant war on the Hungarian frontier had bled the Ottoman Empire for three quarters of a century, that is from their victory at Mohacs and subsequent defeat at Vienna until the turn of the 16th and 17th Centuries, their defeat at Khotyn is what prevented them from being a direct threat to the West during the Thity Years' War despite their indirect involvement as anti-Hapsburg partisans.

But it was far from the first and most significant land battle they lost to a Christian army. Since the "reference" only directs to a (correct, in this case) claim about the Battle of Lepanto and not to any actual outside source, I am deleting this unsubstantiated and incorrect claim.Shield2 03:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it were a victory for one side, it was a very peculiar one!! It can best be defined as a stalemate. Nevertheless both sides claimed (and evidently some still claim) that it was a victory to their side. I am deleting such claims in the last section, leaving the part on Polish cultural effects and putting in a part on Ottoman cultural effects.Noyder (talk) 06:13, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

[edit]

Ensured that the article is within project scope, tagged for task forces, and assessed for class. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:44, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Result of the battle

[edit]

The reference given at the footnote (Shaw), other historical sources and the text of the first paragraph state very clearly that the Result of this battle was a Stalemate. However, in the infobox Result is stated as Polish Victory. I have changed the infobox misinformation.Noyder (talk) 04:43, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Victory or loss. Did Ottoman get what they wanted? They attacked, did they capture something? No, did Rzeczpospolita get what they wanted? They defended against attacks, and didn't loose ground right? Yes. Who won? The side that succeeded with it goals. It's as simple as that. 94.191.137.58 (talk) 08:48, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How is this a Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth victory? When article itself says and I quote: On 9 October, due to the lateness of the season and having sustained heavy losses in several assaults on fortified Commonwealth lines, the Ottomans abandoned their siege and the battle ended in stalemate, reflected in a treaty that in some sections favored the Ottomans and in others favored the Commonwealth. Liesbeth98 (talk) 06:57, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you basing the result of a battle on an unsourced sentence? There are 8 paragraphs detailing the battle section and only 1 source. The Aftermath section has no sources and a link to Turnbull's book that lists battles fought by the Ottoman Empire. No result is given for the Battle of Chocim. So exactly what sources do you have?
  • Serhii Plokhy, The Cossacks and Religion in Early Modern Ukraine, (Oxford University Press, 2001), 93;"The defeat at Tutora(1620) was now a thing of the past, and the victorious Battle of Khotyn(1621) gave the Commonwealth greater confidence in its confrontation with the Ottoman Empire."
  • Piotr Stolarski, Friars on the Frontier: Catholic Renewal and the Dominican Order in Southeastern Poland 1594-1648, (Ashgate Publishing, 2010), 116;"Accompanying Prince Wladyslaw during the campaign against Muscovy 1617-18, Birkowski also witnessed the battle of Chocim(just inside Turkish Moldavia) in 1621, where Sultan Osman and his army were defeated in a defensive battle. This victory was crucially important and had been preceded by widespread public devotions....".
  • Jerzy Jan Lerski, Historical Dictionary of Poland, 966-1945, (Greenwood Publishing, 1996), 262;"In 1621, he command 40,000 Cossacks in the battle of Chocim(Khotyn) and contributed greatly to the Polish victory over the Turks.". --Kansas Bear (talk) 07:49, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Age of Wars of Religion, 1000-1650: An Encyclopedia of Global Warfare and Civilization, Vol.2, ed. Cathal J. Nolan, (Greenwood Press, 2006), 884;"Sultan Othman(Osman) II invaded Ukraine in 1621 to reclaim rebellious Moldavia and punish Cossack raiders. He was beaten decisively by a Polish-Cossack army at Khotyn (1621)."--Kansas Bear (talk) 16:30, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

B-class review failed

[edit]

For WP:POLAND. Agree with milhist review, citations are insufficient. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 19:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Khotyn (1621). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:44, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Khotyn (1621). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:12, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Battle of Khotyn (1621). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:58, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Result

[edit]

This battle was never a defeat for the Ottomans. A treaty was requested and this treaty was in favor of the Ottomans. The only success of the Poles was to stop the Ottomans. However, the fortress of Khotyn was given to the Ottomans. Both sides declared Victory. The battle is unfinished and inconclusive. The reason for this was the janissaries who disobeyed Osman II and started looting while they where going to be victorious. 78.180.5.146 (talk) 04:54, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So what did Ottomans gain except being defeated? 94.191.137.58 (talk) 08:44, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They gain Khotyn. 2001:1C02:2C1C:AE00:78D8:3BFA:E872:AFDE (talk) 09:06, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There were no territorial changes in conclusion of Khotyn agreement. 195.60.70.213 (talk) 18:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Result of the event

[edit]

Recently, the result was changed from Inconclusive to Polish-Lithuanian victory as one source described it as such. I have gone over some sources and found multiple which describe the battle as inconclusive. They are:

  • 1 and 2) Ukrainian Shield in Defense of European Civilization: Chronology and Periodization (2023) by Yuriy Kotlyar and Marharyta Lymar, p. 266 + The Gates of Europe (2015) by Serhii Plokhy, p. 101. make very similar statements:

Kotlyar & Lymar: "The Battle of Khotyn did not bring a final victory to either side, but that uncertain outcome was seen in Warsaw as a triumph for the Kingdom of Poland."

Plokhy: "The Battle of Khotyn ended with no clear victory for either side, but that uncertain outcome was regarded in Warsaw as a triumph for the Kingdom of Poland."

  • 3) THE Polish-Turkish War of 1620–1621: Myths and Historical Reality (2022) by Valerii and Vitalii Stepankov, pp. 90, 97

p. 90: " Last, perhaps most common, myth about the brilliant victory of the Commonwealth army over the Turkish invaders is as unsubstantiated as the previous ones."

p. 97: (translated from the Ukrainian): "September 2 – October 9 - the time of the Battle of Khotyn, which did not reveal a winner, and the conclusion of a peace treaty."

  • 4) The “Decisive Embassy” of Prince Krzysztof Zbaraski to Constantinople (1622–1623) and European Diplomacy amidst the Thirty Years’ War (2021) by Tetiana Grygorieva, p. 186

"Second, he needed to manifest strength and power of his king after the peace concluded between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Ottoman Empire one year before, in October 1621, near the fortress of Khotyn (Chocim). The siege of Khotyn had ended indecisively and the conditions of the peace, which original copies were lost, could be interpreted differently, so that each party believed to be victorious."

  • 5) History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey Vol. 1 Empire of Ghazis (1976) by Stanford J. Shaw, pp. 191-192

"While the Poles built a new army at Hotin (Khotzim) on the Dniester, Osman prepared to resume the traditions of his ancestors by leading a large force against them. But he marched ahead so slowly that the Poles were able to prepare; hence there was a stalemate, and a new peace agreement was reached (October 6, 1621), restoring the old borders and repeating the old promises, adding Hotin once again to the sultan's domains."

  • 6) Bu Mülkün Sultanları (1999) by Necdet Sakaoğlu, p. 214

(translated from the Turkish): "When Khotyn on the Dniester was reached only on September 1, the Polish army was already in position. The battle, which began with rifle fire on September 3, was joined by artillery on the second day. The clashes, which turned into positional warfare in the following days, lasted for a month. The conflict ended without any result despite all the losses, leading to the signing of an armistice on October 6, 1621"

  • 7) Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire (2008) by Gábor Ágoston and Bruce A. Masters, p. 446

"The Ottoman campaign began in May 1621, and Osman II became the youngest sultan to lead his armies in a military campaign. The confrontation between Ottoman and Polish forces at Hotin, in present-day Ukraine, was inconclusive. It brought only modest success to the Ottomans, including the recapture of Hotin, which had belonged to the principality of Moldavia, an Ottoman vassal state."

SOLUTION: In the aftermath section of the article, add a paragraph about historians disputing the result, and write Disputed in the result section of the infobox OR simply revert the result in the infobox back to Inconclusive. Would like your inputs. @Kansas Bear @عبدالرحمن4132 @[ 

Perast (talk) 08:41, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would say, write "Disputed" in the result section with a link to the "Aftermath" section where all results from reliable sources are presented. There are sources concerning a Polish Commonwealth victory in a section above from 2013. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:57, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. Would you like to make the edit or should I? Also, integrating all these sources into a cite book/journal alone would take a while, do you have the time to turn the sources that mention a Polish victory (with quotes) into a cite book/journal etc. template? Perast (talk) 16:05, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, you should ping user:User:Historyk.ok, so this consensus can be inclusive. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:02, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done, though it was probably unneeded as we have more than enough information on our hand that show the result is disputed. Perast (talk) 16:08, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to hear from user:عبدالرحمن4132 and we need to rewrite the Aftermath section before making any change to the infobox. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:11, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. I've also finished compiling the citations which refer to the battle as inconclusive: [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] Perast (talk) 16:44, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I have more sources that say that the battle was a Polish victory Historyk.ok (talk) 16:59, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, we can compile all the sources and as discussed with @Kansas Bear, overhaul the Aftermath section of the article (specifically by stating how historians are divided on the result of the war), and changing the result in the infobox to "Disputed". Feel free to post all the sources you have here with quotes. Perast (talk) 17:03, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, we shouldn't change anything just yet in the Aftermath section of the article without first consulting here for approval to avoid disputes over edits. Perast (talk) 17:21, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Simple statements like: "Some historians consider the battle a Polish Commonwealth victory"(ref)(ref)(ref), "Other historians say the battle was inconclusive"(ref)(ref)(ref). This should be sufficient, in my opinion. Thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:29, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no issue with this. Should it be a requirement to include quotes within the source? Perast (talk) 17:31, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, if we provide quotes with the sources then it will be easier to verify when the information is vandalized/changed/removed/altered. Do you think each statement should have 3 sources or more than that? Maybe 5 sources per statement?--Kansas Bear (talk) 19:01, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
5 seems good, I suggest you use the first 5 references I posted for the Inconclusive part. The quotes associated with the sources are already above, though I can add them into the references if that would be a hassle for you. Perast (talk) 19:06, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. But I'd like input from user:عبدالرحمن4132. So we can wait. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:10, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, no problem. In the meantime I already added the quotes to 5 sources: [8][9][10][11][12] Perast (talk) 19:16, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Ágoston, Gábor; Masters, Bruce A. (2009). Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire. New York City: Infobase. p. 446. ISBN 9781438110257.
  2. ^ Shaw, Stanford J.; Shaw, Ezel K. (1976). History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey. Vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 191–192. ISBN 9780521291637.
  3. ^ Sakaoğlu, Necdet [in Turkish] (1999). Bu Mülkün Sultanları: 36 Osmanlı Padişahı [The Sultans of this Realm: 36 Ottoman Sultans] (in Turkish). Istanbul: Oğlak Yayıncılık. p. 214. ISBN 9789753292993.
  4. ^ Plokhy, Serhii (2015). The Gates of Europe: A History of Ukraine. Penguin Random House. p. 101. ISBN 9780241188101.
  5. ^ Kotlyar, Yuriy; Lymar, Marharyta (2023). "Ukrainian Shield in Defense of European Civilization: Chronology and Periodization". Eminak. 3 (43). Mykolaiv: Scientific Research Center Lukomorie: 266. doi:10.33782/eminak2023.3(43).669.
  6. ^ Grygorieva, Tetiana (2021). "The "Decisive Embassy" of Prince Krzysztof Zbaraski to Constantinople (1622–1623) and European Diplomacy amidst the Thirty Years' War". Eastern European History Review (4). Kyiv: National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy: 186.
  7. ^ Stepankov, Valerii; Stepankov, Vitalii (2022). "The Polish-Turkish War of 1620–1621: Myths and Historical Reality". History Journal of Yuriу Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University. Chernivtsi: Chernivtsi University: 90, 97. doi:10.31861/hj2022.55.89-107.
  8. ^ Ágoston, Gábor; Masters, Bruce A. (2009). Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire. New York City: Infobase. p. 446. ISBN 9781438110257. The Ottoman campaign began in May 1621, and Osman II became the youngest sultan to lead his armies in a military campaign. The confrontation between Ottoman and Polish forces at Hotin, in present-day Ukraine, was inconclusive. It brought only modest success to the Ottomans, including the recapture of Hotin, which had belonged to the principality of Moldavia, an Ottoman vassal state.
  9. ^ Shaw, Stanford J.; Shaw, Ezel K. (1976). History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey. Vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 191–192. ISBN 9780521291637. While the Poles built a new army at Hotin (Khotzim) on the Dniester, Osman prepared to resume the traditions of his ancestors by leading a large force against them. But he marched ahead so slowly that the Poles were able to prepare; hence there was a stalemate, and a new peace agreement was reached (October 6, 1621), restoring the old borders and repeating the old promises, adding Hotin once again to the sultan's domains.
  10. ^ Sakaoğlu, Necdet [in Turkish] (1999). Bu Mülkün Sultanları: 36 Osmanlı Padişahı [The Sultans of this Realm: 36 Ottoman Sultans] (in Turkish). Istanbul: Oğlak Yayıncılık. p. 214. ISBN 9789753292993. Dinyester kıyısındaki Hotin'e ancak 1 Eylülde ulaşıldığında, Leh ordusu mevzilenmiş bulunuyordu. 3 Eylülde tüfek atışlarıyla başlayan savaşa ikinci gün topçular da girdi. Sonraki günlerde mevzi muharebesine dönüşen çarpışmalar bir ay sürdü. Onca kayıplara karşın bir sonuç alınamadan 6 Ekim 1621'de ateşkes imzalandı." Trans.: "When Khotyn on the Dniester was reached only on September 1, the Polish army was already in position. The battle, which began with rifle fire on September 3, was joined by artillery on the second day. The clashes, which turned into positional warfare in the following days, lasted for a month. The conflict ended without any result despite all the losses, leading to the signing of an armistice on October 6, 1621.
  11. ^ Plokhy, Serhii (2015). The Gates of Europe: A History of Ukraine. Penguin Random House. p. 101. ISBN 9780241188101. The Battle of Khotyn ended with no clear victory for either side, but that uncertain outcome was regarded in Warsaw as a triumph for the Kingdom of Poland.
  12. ^ Grygorieva, Tetiana (2021). "The "Decisive Embassy" of Prince Krzysztof Zbaraski to Constantinople (1622–1623) and European Diplomacy amidst the Thirty Years' War". Eastern European History Review (4). Kyiv: National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy: 186. Second, he needed to manifest strength and power of his king after the peace concluded between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Ottoman Empire one year before, in October 1621, near the fortress of Khotyn (Chocim). The siege of Khotyn had ended indecisively and the conditions of the peace, which original copies were lost, could be interpreted differently, so that each party believed to be victorious.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Battle_of_Khotyn_(1621)&oldid=1254167769"