If the community thinks the same, so be it. I’ve started with opinion “this is debatable” and I’ve told my contras.
This is a bit like the Tatar discussion. One giant mass of a single culture right?
Or not. Other than being a frontier force, Sich Cossacks are pretty different to say Yaik Cossacks for example.
The various Cossack Hosts within Russia were genearlly compliant, though there were plenty of uprisings which could give a different Cossack revolution option for Russian - Pugachev’s Rebellion was spearheaded by Yaik Cossacks (funny enough many from this group were derived from Tatars) on by the Ural River (faaaaar away from the Cossack Hetmanate). Among others there was also the Don Cossacks uprisings (Bulavin Rebellion).
Seems odd to try shoehorn the Cossack Hetmanate (i,e Upper and Lower Zaporozhian Ukrainian Cossack groups) into a Russia Civ unless people are looking through that ‘Cossacks = inherently Russian’ stereotype lens. The Hetmanate were well-established (having actually revolted from the PLC) as their own proto-state long before fighting Russian (and Polish, and Swedes, and Tatars/Ottoman, and themselves…). Also on the most basic level, the look of the Cossack Hetmanate (specifically Cossack Daredevils) is Zaporozhian Ukrainian Cossack (bald + forelocks) - no other Cossack cultures looked like them.
When I mentioned the Kazakhs earlier, that is like a bajillion times a better fit for Russia (i.e a civ with a long history that’s absorbed into the Russia Empire then has an uprising and establishes a [short lived] state) - heck, there’s plenty of other options too - Caucasian Imamate and Circassian Confederation for example.
2 Likes
What is odd about it? The exact same Cossacks from the Polish rev fought with Russia and then got subsumed into Russia (which is the exact same basis as the Romanian rev). Even without depicting any additional Cossack groups the rev is fully appropriate for Russia.