Losses of the Crimean Khanate in military campaigns of the 15th–16th centuries: misinterpretations of sources

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/1728-2640.2025.161.4

Abstract

Introduction. In recent years, there has been interest in both the military art of the Crimean Tatars and the history of the people as a whole, since many topics have not been covered, there are many myths and stereotypes (partly based on misinterpretations of contemporary chronicles and annals). Having limited human resources, the Crimean Khanate inflicted great material damage on its neighbors during the 15th–16th centuries, which is evidence of the effective tactics and military art of the Crimeans.

The purpose of the study is to analyze the losses of the Crimean Khanate army in the fighting of the 15th–16th centuries. The objectives of the study: to determine the size of the Crimean Tatar army, to determine the influence of the tactics of the Kirymly on the level of losses, to consider the largest battles and campaigns involving the Crimeans and the level of losses of their army, through the prism of a comprehensive analysis of contemporary narratives.

Methods. General scientific methods, historical-comparative and historical-systemic methods were applied.

Results. A significant part of scientists overestimates the losses of the Crimeans, without resorting to a systematic analysis of the size of their troops in individual military campaigns, taking into account the distorted data of contemporary chroniclers and annals regarding individual battles. Researchers do not take into account the fact that even if the enemies of the Crimean Khanate retained the battlefield, this did not mean the defeat of the Kirymly troops and their defeat. The military power of the Crimeans was not in spectacular victories, but in preserving forces during a long confrontation, inflicting significant losses on the enemies. It should also be remembered that almost all information about the results of battles involving the Crimean Tatars is known from sources on the opposing side, which often assessed the Crimeans biasedly. The human resources of the Khanate were limited and the rulers of the state were well aware of this. The Crimean Khanate was inferior to the neighboring states with which it was in conflict, primarily Muscovy, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Poland (the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth), both in terms of mobilization potential and technological level. It is because of this that the Crimean Khans were forced to adhere to such strategies and tactics that made it possible to avoid large losses, preserve the backbone of the troops and carry out lightning attacks. It has been proven that the Crimean army had high combat capability and special tactical techniques (deceptive retreat, etc.), which is associated with many unfounded stereotypes.

Conclusions. Given that there is almost no documented statistics on the losses of the Crimean Tatars in hostilities, the question of calculating the human losses of the Kirymly remains open. At the same time, the active actions of the Kirymly during not only the 15th–16th, but also the 17th centuries. indicate that the losses of the Crimean Tatars were not very significant and did not threaten the existence of the state. This also indicates that the Crimeans could restore their troops through mobilization, attracting allies, and other actions. Therefore, the data on the losses of the Crimean Khanate army given by the contemporary authors of chronicles and annals require further research, since they are in most cases unreliable, exaggerated, or misinterpreted.

Keywords: Crimean Khanate, Crimean Tatars, sources, military history, Late Middle Ages, cavalry, tactics, losses, battles, retreat, raids, army.