安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
Your argument might apply to Peter I, under whom the Don Cossacks actively fought and support him, such as in the Great Northern War. However, Catherine the Great’s relationship with the Cossacks was entirely different and far more adversarial.
In 1792, Catherine forcibly relocated many Don Cossacks to the Kuban region, a calculated move to erode their independence and place them under tighter imperial control. Additionally, she exiled many Cossacks to Siberia, where they faced harsh conditions and high mortality rates. These actions demonstrate her efforts to dismantle their autonomy and suppress their cultural identity.
The Don, Zaporozhian, and later Kuban territories were frontier buffer zones, not core Russian lands from time immemorial. Claims that the Cossacks "lived on Russian lands" is misleading—they lived on their own lands, which they fought to defend and governed independently. The Zaporozhian Cossacks declared their autonomy in numerous agreements, such as the 1710 Constitution of Pylyp Orlyk, asserting their rights to self-rule. Similarly, the Don Cossacks maintained their independence through charters granted by the Tsars, but only as long as it suited their mutual interests. Both groups saw themselves as free people, not subjects of Russia, and consistently resisted attempts to strip away their autonomy.
The claim that "Cossacks are Russian people" is a false argument. The word "Cossack" originates from the Turkic word "qazaq," which means "free man," "adventurer," or "wanderer". Highlighting their independence and self-governance. Over centuries, Cossacks came from diverse ethnic backgrounds (Ukrainian, Russian, Tatar, Moldavian, Polish, etc.). They often lived in the borderlands—not the historical core of Muscovy/Russia—and had their own military-administrative systems (the Sich for the Zaporozhians, the Host for the Don Cossacks, etc.). Their identity was rooted in freedom and resistance over their domination, not allegiance to a specific nation.
Far from embracing the Cossacks as "Russian people," Catherine treated them as obstacles to her centralized rule, making them an entirely unsuitable representation of her leadership.
It is true that Odessa was part of the Russian Empire (and later the USSR). However, if by “Russia” we refer to the modern-day Russian Federation, then Odessa—today in Ukraine—is not part of Russia in that contemporary sense
Secondly, cossacks never identified themseves as russians or whatever, they were free people of the lands of modern Ukraine and later tied themselves with Ukraine: firstly as soldiers for Kyivan Rus, later fighting against moscovia and russian empire as well. Moreover, first cossacks were there long before (948 year) any moscovia was even formed, not saying about russian empire.
Thirdly, moscovia itself was a colonial external part of Kyivan Rus, but never its center or capital. Meaning that manupulating that some cities were "a part" of smth at some point make no sense.
It means that the main thing that ties cossack to russian empire was that they were fighting against it.
No need to manipulate facts here, when the history is clear.
This isn't about Catherine, she's just a leader you can play, this is about the civ, which anyone can pair with anyone else and the civ is historical Russia which was eastern Poland, Ukraine, Russia, parts of Siberia and the Steppe and the Caucuses and the Baltics/Finland.
Also they have the katyusha as a unique too, which further emphasises that this is supposed to be a representation of early imperial Russia up to ww2 and then stops
Equating "Ukraine and Russia" as historically the same erases Ukraine's unique cultural, political, and linguistic identity—languages like Ukrainian and Russian are distinct, and many Russians cannot understand Ukrainian. Because for them, it is "a tongue" as in a part of the body, whereas for Ukrainians, it is "a language".
Read previous answers Catherine the Great’s deliberate destruction of the Zaporozhian Sich and her suppression of Don Cossack autonomy directly contradict the idea that they were emblematic of "historical Russia."
Your argument lacks structure and logic, creating a jumble of inaccuracies and contradictions. Claiming "historical Russia" includes regions like eastern Poland and Finland ignores the fact that these areas were never inherently Russian—Poland was partitioned but maintained its distinct identity, and Finland was an autonomous grand duchy. You also mix unrelated timelines, jumping from early imperial Russia to WWII, combining Katyushas from the Soviet era with Cossacks from the 16th–18th centuries, which makes no sense. This attempt to lump together disparate regions and eras erases the unique cultural, political, and historical realities of each, resulting in a poorly constructed sentences.