By Brian Glyn Williams - The Jamestown Foundation

During the Long War in Hungary, Sinan Pasha used the Tatars as scapegoats to explain his poor
performance on at least one occasion. 187 Barker mentions that Kara Mustafa also went to extraordinary
lengths to put the blame for his failure at Vienna on his enemy the Crimean Khan. 188
Kurat claims that it was actually the Grand Vezir's poor planning that enabled the Christians to overcome
the Ottoman army in 1683. 189 Had the Vezir listened to the Khan's advice and sent the Janissaries against the
Poles, the outcome of this battle might have been different. Howorth actually gives the Tatars special credit
in the battle at Vienna claiming that it was the Khan's forces that retrieved the standard of the prophet
during the Ottoman retreat. 190
On occasion, even the Tatars' own sources are not exactly flattering about their battle skills. A frustrated
Crimean Khan once wrote of his warriors:
The Tatars, the wretched fellows, are incapable of carrying out distant or difficult campaigns,
and the equipping of a detachment of select brave men, in relation to its numbers, would
cost the Sultan very dearly and would amount to useless expenditure. 191
As for Western sources, they too are frequently untrustworthy on account of their bias against the Tatars. Eton's
claim that "The whole reign of the Tatars has been an insult to mankind, and a disgrace to human
nature, not inferior to the Ottoman sultans," is typical of Western accounts. 192
The Tatars' tactics were, without a doubt, frequently barbaric by Western standards but it should be
noted that clemency to enemy of the faith was not common among the Tatars' crusading opponents either.
Leaders on both sides encouraged raids on the enemy whose right to live was often nullified by his
religious beliefs.
The following quote from an Ottoman war manual clearly demonstrates the attitude of the Muslim gazis
who served on the borders of the infidel from Shiite Persia to Catholic Austria. The manual gives advice on
what a Muslim general should do when confronted by a weaker enemy:
Under these circumstances, opposing the enemy, being prepared for him, and raiding
him in his own country are necessary. God had commanded His Prophet to fight
the unbelievers and treat them roughly, when He said, exalted be His power,
Struggle with the unbelievers and hypocrites, and be thou harsh with them. [9:73] And
He ordained engaging those of the unbelievers who were near neighbors of the
Muslims when He said, exalted be the Sayer,'Find the unbelievers who are near you;
let them find in you a harshness' [9:123]. 193
Although historians admit that Christian slaves were often treated relatively well in the Crimea, few
can deny that the Tatars' military operations were carried out with an extreme brutality. The Tatars had few
qualms in following the kind of advice given in the previously quoted manual by attacking and
plundering the lands of the infidel.
Having analyzed several of the misconceptions concerning the Tatars and their role in the Ottoman military,
the Tatars' faults should also be examined. Perhaps the Crimean Tatars' greatest fault on all fronts was their
penchant for plunder. Adil Giray's comment that "for the Tatars, raiding was as necessary as worldly goods
42