Talk:Polish–Ottoman War (1633–1634)

Untitled

This article has a lot of great information but it is very confusing. I cannot follow the sequence of events. Can someone knowledgeable re-write this article in a more organized way? Thank you. ---Vikiyazar 15:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

as i know there was not a war between ottoman empire and poland it was only a war between abaza pascha and his troops against polish troops has to be correct you can also see this in the german page that this was not a war between ottoman empire and poland —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.181.21.54 (talk) 18:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

1919 article?

Theres a lot of flowery and speculative language perhaps some of this is from a 1919 Britannica entry? It’s likely this article has never been rewritten. I have at least cleaned up the first paragraph but much work is needed. Odin1 (talk) 07:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Abazy/Abaza

Would probably be good if the writing of that name was consistent. The more common version seems to be Abazy. 213.61.225.194 (talk) 10:57, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Changing of results from Inconclusive to Polish Victory

@Setergh You have recently been changing the results to Polish victory whereas the war has always been considered inconclusive. This is because it ended in status quo ante bellum. Neither side gained or lost something. The commander being executed by the Sultan does not render the war a victory for the Poles. Perast (talk) 17:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

The reason I have changed this is because the sources I provided clearly state a defeat for the Ottomans.

"whereas the war has always been considered inconclusive."

And? That doesn't mean it's correct, perhaps this page just never really got any attention.

"This is because it ended in status quo ante bellum. Neither side gained or lost something."

The thing is, the Ottomans were the ones who attacked the Poles. The Poles were there to defend themselves, the Ottomans were there to gain land. The Poles successfully defended themselves, the Ottomans failed to gain land and win any of the battles, as the sources provided do say.

"The commander being executed by the Sultan does not render the war a victory for the Poles."

This isn't my argument for why the war is a Polish–Lithuanian victory, although that did indeed happen as well, yes. Setergh (talk) 18:09, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

I am not sure what exactly the sources you cited state, but I will assume good faith and that they state it was a Polish victory. However, I can quote you a minimum of 5 English sources confirming that the war ended inconclusively. Should I? Perast (talk) 18:27, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Well, if you do have them, then please, do go ahead.

I only saw sources which confirmed Ottoman defeat in the war, none that stated inconclusive. But of course, if you also have sources which state it was inconclusive, we can put the result as "Disputed" and then put a section which shows how some sources call it a Polish victory while others call it Inconclusive. Setergh (talk) 18:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

I will write the sources after this message, I just wanted to ask from the 2 sources you used, can you quote what they say about how Poland won the war (and the page too)? Because a historian disagreeing isn't enough, there must be a reason behind it.

By the way I have access to those sources you cited, so I'm going to compare the quotes. Perast (talk) 18:33, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Alright! Let me go find them real quick, and then I'll get back to you.

1. "In the first of them (1652-1634) he defeated Moscow, in the second the armies of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth managed to quite easily defeat the troops of Abaza Pasha, who in 1633-1634 invaded its borders from the south." (original in Polish)
2. "In February 1634, the Sultan began to consider starting a war with Poland. In March - April, preparations for the expedition and the concentration of the army near Adrianople began. However, the news about the capitulation of Shein's Russian army near Smolensk on February 25 and the conclusion of peace with Russia on May 27 cooled Turkey's war enthusiasm. On August 19, a peace treaty was concluded near Kamianets, and on October 26, it was approved by Sultan Murad IV. Previous arrangements confirmed. The Polish side pledged to refrain from Cossack attacks, and the Turkish side from the Tatars. What was new was that the Tatars were to be expelled from Budziak, but this was not implemented. On August 24, on the orders of Murad IV, Abaz Pasha was executed." I must say, I suppose source 2 isn't a great representation of this, no clue why I had used that at the time, my mistake. Although Source 1 does indeed state it.

Setergh (talk) 18:45, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the quotes. The first source doesn't state how it was a victory for the Polish but only that it was a victory - a source stating that a war is a victory without expanding on the reasons whilst nearly every other source states that the war was inconclusive should not be included. The second source as you admitted does not suggest a Polish victory (thanks for your honesty). Perast (talk) 18:50, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Considering this, I think we should revert back to the Inconclusive result. Unless you can find sources which state how exactly it was a Polish victory (and only then could a separate section where it talks about the war being disputed be justified). @Setergh Perast (talk) 18:53, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

I can go find more sources, once I find them I'll get back to you, when that will be I'm unsure. Setergh (talk) 18:55, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Would you agree to reverting the result back to "Inconclusive" as an action of good faith until you can find sources stating how the war was a Polish victory? Perast (talk) 19:17, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

At this point, I can't find anything that straight up proves a Polish victory, so I think it'd be fine for you to change it back to Inconclusive.

I mean, I found "But having seen with his own eyes that the king had won; he ended the war with Moskalarai with a favorable peace, being an eyewitness that during the phase of the Turkish war, a general massacre was announced at the Sejm, and Hetman Koniecpolski, although he had not many troops, but selected the troops to the Dniester, did not stop reminding Mnrtezy-basha and the sultan through messengers to stop thinking about the war. Anmrat, worried about the new outbreak of the Persian war, returned from Adrianople, and Murteza, slowly moving towards the Danube, apparently showed no desire for war. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth did not want to do this either, recommending from the Koniecpolskie Sejm that the defense forces be maintained only in the camp on the Dniester. When the king himself (in September) went to Lviv and in this way he seemed to personally reach the camp, Murteza-basha managed to finally kill Abaza with his intrigues, whom the sultan ordered to be strangled. Shaliin Aga was dispatched for the second time, received peaceful instructions, and the envoy!" https://archive.org/details/DziejePolskiPodugOstatnichBadaSpisanePrzezJzefaSzujskiego.t2/Dzieje%20Polski%20podług%20ostatnich%20badań%20spisane%20przez%20Józefa%20Szujskiego/Dzieje%20Polski%20podług%20ostatnich%20badań%20spisane%20przez%20Józefa%20Szujskiego.t.3/page/n143/mode/2up?q=1634 (page 144)

The final result seems to be Inconclusive, although just wish a Polish military victory, so I suppose you either just put the inconclusive on all the pages mentioning the war or add the Polish military victory along with it.

Overall, set it to Inconclusive, perhaps with the mention of a Polish military victory. Setergh (talk) 19:28, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion, Polish military victory/Ottoman strategic victory is unnecessary, so if it is okay with you I will only write Inconclusive. By the way, there are admittedly some, dare I say it, crazy users on Wikipedia who are drowning in their bad faith. I just wanted to thank you for not acting like them; I didn't expect that to be honest. Perast (talk) 19:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for cooperating with me as well!

Just wondering though, Ottoman strategic victory how? Is this based on the destruction (or whatever it was) of some towns on Polish land? Setergh (talk) 19:37, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

I would say it's more so that although Abaza Pasha lost the battles, the treaty enforced the status quo instead of the Ottomans losing something (be it land or giving money to Poland to end the war). However, what you wrote could be another reason. Perast (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Eh, I don't see the Ottoman strategic victory personally.

Either way, just set it to Inconclusive and let's leave it at that. I'd recommend putting your two sources next to it too. Setergh (talk) 19:44, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Huh?

It doesn't have to state the exact reasons on how it was a victory for it to confirm it was a victory, it's a source, it's something we use to see what the result of a war was. Setergh (talk) 18:54, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

In this case, of course it would have to state why it was a victory. I already explained why but I will do so again. It is necessary because all other sources (at least the ones we have discussed here) state that it was inconclusive (and provided their reasons), so the sources would have to make an argument as to why it was a Polish victory. Also, without an explanation, you couldn't possibly create a section disputing the results as there is no argument to be made by the historian you cited, the source merely writes the war off as a victory and leaves it there. Perast (talk) 18:58, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

So far I have found these and will send more if necessary:

Source 1: The Habsburg and Transylvanian Aims Related to the Campaign of the Ottomans against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (1634) by János Szabados. pages 740-741

"The Ottomans finally did not move on with their attack, Pasha Abaza Mehmed was executed, the Empire entered into peace with Poland and the next year Murad IV led the Ottoman troops against the Safavids. As for the aims of the three above- mentioned states, the following can be established. 1) According to the peace treaty, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth did not have to pay tax to the Ottoman Empire hereafter, as has been the case earlier, but they were obliged to keep the Cossacks in check, so in the case of the Polish-Ottoman relations this treaty can be called a no-win situation."

Source 2: Sultan Murad IV's Polish Campaign (1634) by Mahmut Halef Cevrioğlu. pages 214-215

"The orders of cancellation from the Porte were either too late to arrive at Abaza Mehmed Pasha’s camp or disregarded by the pasha: Hetman Koniecpolski’s and Abaza Mehmed’s forces clashed near Kamieniec on 22 October 1633, where Abaza Pasha’s superior troops (some 24,000 men) failed to break the stalemate since Koniecpolski’s men, numbering around 11,000, commanded better firepower and pushed back the attacking Ottoman units. Even though the pasha could not achieve the victory he had hoped for, he still had enough troops at his disposal to besiege and loot the nearby wooden fort of Studzienica, enslaving a good number of its inhabitants before withdrawing to safety at Jassy. As Romanian chronicler Miron Costin informs us, the pasha sent the enslaved notables to Istanbul, projecting his indecisive operation against the Polish hetman as a glorious victory." Perast (talk) 18:46, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough. I think the two sources from both sides are enough (I don't think there's any point in finding more cause that'll just result in using way too many sources).

Perhaps we should now make a dedicated section to this now to show how the result is disputed? Setergh (talk) 18:49, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh and also, could I please have the link to the two sources just to confirm for myself? Setergh (talk) 19:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Source 1: https://ejournals.eu/en/journal_article_files/full_text/018ecedf-ca0a-71d7-8fe9-8c1c1e47ddb9/download

Source 2: https://rcin.org.pl/Content/159923/WA303_193900_A296-APH-R-122_Cevrioglu.pdf Perast (talk) 19:48, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thank you so much!

Although, from what I can see, the second source seems to be talking about a specific battle, not the war. Perhaps I'm wrong though, but could you please double check this yourself? Setergh (talk) 19:51, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, I was making the agreed changes to the article. It is talking about the pasha's operation as a whole, not only the battle mentioned before the statement as it's talking about the pasha sending envoys to the Sultan to tell him that he supposedly succeeded in his operation against the hetman. If I can find a few more sources, I will add them. Perast (talk) 20:12, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

I'd recommend just changing the second source.

Sure it's talking about his operation as a whole, but only right after that battle happened. It's not his entire operation in the war, it's his operation a few months into the war. Setergh (talk) 20:14, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

I read a few pages and you are correct in that it's talking about multiple events (the Pasha's razing of Polish towns) but not the outcome of the war itself. I will try to find another source to replace it soon. Otherwise, I'll just remove it. Perast (talk) 20:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Alright, seems fine to me.

And once again, thank you for being respectful and engaging in a genuine discussion! Setergh (talk) 20:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)