The siege of the Kumar prison (1655)

In early November 1654, a detachment of Yakut service Cossacks and “hunting people” operating on the Amur River, led by Onufry Stepanov after the removal of Yerofey Khabarov , together with Pyotr Beketov’s detachment and other Russian groups — about 500 people in all — were founded on a river island at the confluence of the river. Kumara (Humaerhe) fortified wintry - Ust-Kumarsky (or Ust-Komarsky) prison, where tribute was collected from the local population. Since it was known about the presence near the Qing army, with which Stepanov’s detachment in June 1654 had a battle on the river. Sungari , the prison was built with the expectation of a siege by a well-trained army with artillery weapons.

Unlike the traditional Siberian prison, protected by a picket fence or log walls, the Kumarsky prison was a complex fortification system of wooden-earthen fortifications. The fortress was surrounded by a moat of 2 meters deep and 4 meters wide, cut down by Cossacks with great difficulty in frozen ground, and an earthen ramp piled behind it, on which stood a double tyn with ground driven between it and a small stone - the cannonballs no longer pierced such a wall. In the back there were loopholes for "under and over battle." Instead of towers at the corners of the fortress, “bulls” advanced — the prototypes of the bastions — were erected. The cannons (large and two small) were located on the “peal” - an elevation poured in the center of the prison, and could fire in all directions. Also, a well was dug in the center of the prison, from which gutters were put out to extinguish fires from incendiary arrows. Behind a ditch, "garlic" - wooden pegs were driven into the ground, "and the circle of that garlic is woody bit of garlic with an iron-clad arrow." The construction of the fortifications of the Kumarsky fortress, innovative for Siberia, is usually associated with Peter Beketov, an experienced explorer who set up fortifications in Yakutsk , Bratsk , Nerchinsk and other places. However, Beketov used to build ordinary log fortifications that protected the Siberian prison from attacks by natives armed only with knives. Therefore, it is also possible that the idea of ​​constructing a wooden and earthen fortress was introduced by the Khabarovsk Cossacks from Stepanov’s detachment, who already had experience in clashes with the Manchus and their “cannon battle”.

The authorities of Ninguta , a Qing stronghold in the Amur basin, systematically prepared for hostilities against the Russians. However, the Dutong Min'andali, sent from Beijing with a detachment of banner troops , received information at the beginning of 1655 about the presence of Stepanov’s detachment in the Kumarsky prison, decided to immediately go on a hike along the winter path without significant food supplies. The battle core of the Qing army was about 1 thousand Manchu warriors, armed, including hand wickers and 15 cannons, as well as a variety of siege devices: assault ladders, incendiary rockets, iron hooks, wooden shields and special protected wagons. About 9 thousand warriors from different tribes of the Amur region - Daurs , duchers , etc., armed only with knives, joined the Manchu. One of these native units was commanded by Prince Togudai, nicknamed Yezher. The trip to the Amur from southern Manchuria was supposed to take two to three months.

On the morning of March 13, 1655, an enemy army appeared near the Kumarsky fortress, moving in formation under a multitude of military flags. At that time, 20 Cossacks, who were captured, were cut down in the neighboring forest for the ship. A sortie was immediately organized from the prison to recapture the captives, but they had already been executed, the Russians had returned only the bodies of their comrades. Soon, the Kumar prison was taken into dense siege. First of all, the Manchus cut off the defenders of the fortress from the Amur, chopping off the Russian plows standing on the coast. Only thanks to the well dug in the prison in advance, did the Russians not lack water.

The Manchus and their allies set up their camping camp beyond the river channel 450 fathoms (950 m) from the prison. On March 20, a bombardment of the Kumar prison was carried out. He was fired from cannons with batteries located at a distance of 150 fathoms (320 m) from the fortress. One of the batteries fired from a cliff towering above the prison. However, the shelling did not bring any result. Then that night, the Manchus “secretly” brought their guns up to 70 fathoms (150 m), but even in this case their nuclei could not destroy the Russian fortifications. The Kumar prison was also fired at with rockets (“I will light fire charges on arrows”), but there were no fires. The shelling continued in the following days.

On March 24, the Qing troops moved from four sides to a general assault - a “bulk attack”, carrying siege-laden wagons with various military equipment (“attack wisdom”) lined with leather. On approaching the prison, the Manchus covered well-visible wooden pegs with special shields, but the iron "garlic" hurt their legs to many: "On that iron garlic, many Bogdan people pricked and could not go to the prison." The Russians fired on assault rifles and guns, and then made a sortie, “they beat many Bogdan people under the walls and on the outskirts under the walls,” several prisoners were captured. The Manchus and their allies burned their dead at the stake. Accurate information about the losses of the Qing troops was not preserved, apparently, they were still much more than the Russians.

Mingandali continued the siege for some time, firing cannons at the Kumar prison, but soon his troops began to approach the end of food supplies. On April 4, the Manchus were flooded in the river or burned supplies and equipment that they were no longer able to carry back with them, after which they hastily left the Kumara prison. In the abandoned Qing camp, the Russians found powder charges, cannonballs (1.5-pound, that is, for relatively small cannons) and missiles that the Manchus did not manage to destroy.

In June 1655, the Russians also left, destroying their Kumarsky prison, because “there were no grain reserves”. The Cossacks did not want to start their own arable land, and it was already impossible to take food from the local population - daurs and duchers left these lands. Having no longer a well-fortified strong point, Stepanov’s detachment was in a difficult position. For some time, the Russians continued to sail along the Amur River and its tributaries, extracting valuable furs and stopping only for temporary wintering in different places, but in a new battle with the Qing troops, the Khabarovsk Cossacks suffered a heavy defeat and were forced to leave the Amur Region. Later, when the Russians returned to Amur, the experience of building wooden-earthen fortifications, as in the Kumarsky prison, was forgotten, which determined the rapid destruction of the log Albazin prison during its first siege by the Qing troops. On the contrary, in Qing China, when preparing the campaign for Albazin, they took into account the unsuccessful experience of Min'andali 30 years before and took care of organizing the supply of his army in a remote and sparsely populated country.

The siege of the Kumar prison was reflected in Russian folklore. In the middle of the XVIII century. in Siberia, Kirsha Danilov recorded the song “In the Siberian in Ukraine, in the Daurian side” with a poetic description of the battle ^[1]

• Unsubscribed clerk of Onufry Stepanov to the Yakutsk governor M.S. Ladyzhensky about the siege of the Kumarsky fortress by the Manchu troops // Russo-Chinese relations in the 17th century M., 1972.V. 1
• Aleksandrov V.A. Russia at the Far Eastern Frontiers (second half of the 17th century). Khabarovsk 1984. Pp. 120-154
• Artemyev A.R. On the whereabouts of the Kumarsky fortress // Problems of local history: [Abstract. doc. Conf.] / Arseniev. reading. - Ussuriysk, 1989.S. 5-6.
• Artemyev A.R. Experience of defining the defenses of the Kumarsky fortress as described // Archaeological and historical research in the Far East of the USSR. Vladivostok, 1989.S. 17-21.
• Uninvited E. L. Priamurye in the system of Russian-Chinese relations. M., 1983. S. 26-29
• Leont'ev G.A., the Pathfinder Erofei Pavlovich Khabarov. M., 1991. S. 107-112