Military Review

Shadow of the great Alexander

67
Epirus king and commander Pierre was widely known and extremely popular far beyond the borders of his homeland. The comrade of Philip of Macedon and Alexander the Great, famed in dozens of battles, replied to the question of who he considers the best commander, said: "Pyrrha, if he lives to old age." Many years after the death of our hero, the famous Carthaginian commander Hannibal believed that Pierre surpassed all commanders with experience and talent, giving himself only third place (second to Scipio). According to another version, Hannibal put Pyrrhus in second place after Alexander of Macedon, leaving himself the same third place.


Shadow of the great Alexander

Pierre Epirsky, portrait herm, Naples, National Archaeological Museum


Plutarch wrote about Pierre:
“They talked a lot about him and thought that he resembled Alexander and his quickness of movements, and seeing his strength and onslaught in battle, everyone thought that Alexander’s shadow or similarity was in front of them ... The Epirots gave him the nickname Eagle.”


Pierre responded by saying that weapon warriors - his wings.

But it should be recognized that, being a brilliant tactician, Pierre was a worthless strategist. His character lacked perseverance and firmness, and, easily igniting himself, he cooled off just as quickly, and therefore did not bring to the logical any of his very promising undertakings. Unaware of fear in battle, Pierre invariably succumbed to affairs requiring patience, endurance, and self-denial. Continue to quote Plutarch:
“He lost his exploits for the sake of hopes for the future, and he who hungering for the distant and new, could not keep what he had achieved, if for this he needed to show perseverance. Therefore, Antigonus compared him with a dice player who knows how to make a deft shot, but does not know how to take advantage of his luck. ”


It seemed to contemporaries that if not today, then tomorrow, Pierre will accomplish a feat that will put him on a par with the great Alexander, and descendants are destined to be forever surprised at the insignificance of the actions of this outstanding commander.

Pierre was born in 319 BC in the royal family of a small state Epirus, located in the north-west of Greece between Macedonia and the eastern coast of the Adriatic Sea.


Epirus on the map of Greece


According to ancient legends, the kings of this country were descended from the son of Achilles Neoptolem, who, by the way, in his youth also bore the name of Pierre ("Auburn"). Alexander of Macedon was by his mother a relative of the epyrian kings and was very proud of his origin, as it gave him the right to consider himself an Ellen, not a barbarian, but also a descendant of Achilles. Pierre was born 4 after the death of the great conqueror. The Diadochows (commanders-successors of Alexander of Macedon), blazing in the vast empire of the war, influenced the fate of a two-year-old boy. In 317 BC Kassandr's army (the son of the famous commander and regent of the empire of Antipater) entered Macedonia and surrounded the town of Pydna, where the last members of the family of Alexander the Great — his mother Olympiad, widow Roxana and son Alexander — took refuge.


Olympiad, Alexander's mother, medallion


The former Epirians princess Olympiad appealed to the king of this country, Aakiida, who moved to the aid of a relative, but could not make it through the mountain passes blocked by Cassandra's troops. Moreover, a rebellion broke out in Aakid's army, the king was deposed, many members of his family died, but the son of Pierre was rescued by two courtiers who managed to smuggle him to the court of Illyrian king Glavkiy.


Francois Boucher, Rescue Baby Pierre


After 10 years with the help of his patron, Pierre regained the crown of Epirus, but when he left the country for a short time after 5, a palace coup took place, costing him the throne. Diadokhov wars continued and the out-of-business 17-year-old Pyrr did not find anything better than to take part in one of them. He spoke on the side of Demetrius, the son of Antigone the One-Eyed, already familiar to us.


Demetrius I Poliorket - Paris, Louvre



Golden Stater of Demetria


Demetrius, who received the nickname Poliorket (“besieging the cities”) from his contemporaries, was married to the sister of Pyrrhus, and at that moment he helped his father in the war against the powerful coalition of the old companions of Alexander, which included Seleucus, Ptolemy, Lysimachus and Cassander. The decisive battle of Ips in Asia Minor (301 BC) ended with the death of 80-year-old Antigone and the complete defeat of the army he led. The only detachment that held their positions was commanded by Pierre, and contemporaries drew attention to the promising military talents of this young man. Soon, Demetrius managed to sign a peace treaty with Egypt's ruler Ptolemy, and Pyrrhus volunteered to become a hostage. In Alexandria, he quickly won the respect of Ptolemy, who gave his stepdaughter for him and helped to return the throne of Epirus (296 BC).


Ptolemy I Soter, bust, Louvre



Egyptian Tetradrachm of Ptolemy I


A representative of the older branch of the Pyrrides, Neoptolem, reigned in Epirus at that time. Pyrrhus and Neoptolem reached a compromise, becoming king-co-rulers, but the hatred and distrust between them were too great. It all ended with the murder of Neoptolem during a feast. Having established himself on the throne, Pierre intervened in the war of the sons of Cassander and received from the winner part of the territory of Macedonia.

More details about the events of those years are described in the article. https://topwar.ru/150287-krushenie-imperii-aleksandra-velikogo.html.

According to the testimony of contemporaries, during this period, Pyrrhus was very similar to the young Alexander of Macedon in his behavior and won universal love with unconditional generosity, ease of handling, generosity and care for the soldiers. Unfortunately, he was unable to maintain these qualities over the coming years. Personal courage and courage remained unchanged.


Monument to Pierre in the Greek city of Ioannina


But let's not get ahead. Treacherously killing the son of Cassandra Alexander, Demetrius took possession of Macedonia. But the fortification of the son of the fearsome Antigone was not part of the plans of his rivals: Lysimachus, Ptolemy and Pyrrhus joined the coalition and forced Demetrius to leave Macedonia. But Pyrrhus was cruelly deceived in his expectations, because the rights to this country were declared by Lysimachus, the commander of Alexander the Great, who had aged but not lost his belligerence.


Lysimachus



Lysimachus, tetradrachm


He once killed two lions with his bare hands: one while hunting in Syria, the other in a cage where he was thrown by the orders of an angry Alexander. Now he threw out of Macedonia the lion cub, Pyrrhus, who did not have time to gain strength. But he did not have long to live, as the hero experienced in the battlefields was entangled in the intrigues of the daughters of the omnipresent Ptolemy, one of whom was his wife, and the other - daughter-in-law. As a result, he poisoned his own son and provoked the flight of his wife and her relatives to another veteran of the campaigns of Alexander - commander Selevku. Here it turned out to be too tough for Lysimachus.


Seleucus, tetradrachm


But Seleucus did not reach Macedonia, since he was treacherously murdered by the son of the same Ptolemy, and now the killer of Seleucus Ptolemy Keravn (the fugitive, who was the diadocho commander rashly accepted at his court) claimed the unhappy country, the son of Seleucus Antioch, the son of Demetrius ( who died in captivity at Seleucus) Antigonus and Pierre. Ptolemy paid off five thousand foot soldiers, four thousand horsemen and fifty elephants from Pyrrhus, who at that time received a tempting offer from the citizens of Tarente (in Italy these animals made a real sensation and contributed a lot to the glory of Pyrrhus). After that, Ptolemy defeated Antigone and died in battle with the Galatians (Gauls). As a result, chaos reigned in Macedonia for a long time, and when Antigonus finally managed to take the vacant position of the king and brought some order, Pierre returned from Italy ... But, again, let's not get ahead of ourselves.

In 282 BC the inhabitants of Tarenta (a rich Greek colony in the south of Italy), by their own stupidity, provoked a war with Rome. The reason was the attack on 10 Roman ships that stopped in the city harbor: five of them managed to go to sea, but the rest were captured, their crews were sold into slavery, the commander of the Roman fleet died in battle. Not stopping there, the Tarentians attacked the city of Furies that entered into an alliance with Rome - the trading rival of Tarenta. Then they rejected the just and quite moderate demands of Rome, which requested only the liberation of the allied city, compensation for damage, the return of prisoners and punishment of the perpetrators of this, not authorized by the Tarento authorities, spontaneous attack. For some reason, the Tarentians did not take these demands seriously, the Roman Ambassador Lucius Postumius' speech in Greek caused general laughter due to grammatical errors, and then some idiot completely urinated on his toga - under the approving yoke of the sub-passionate crowd. The Roman calmly said that this spot on his toga would be washed away by the blood of the Tarentians, and left for his homeland. The following year, the troops of the consul Lucius Emilia Barbula defeated the large army of the army of Tarentum, and only then did its inhabitants have some "enlightenment in the mind": they were terribly scared and sent ambassadors to Pyrrhus, inviting him to lead the resistance of the "noble" Hellenes against the "aggressive barbarian people the Romans. " Pyrrhus was promised command of the 338th army and unlimited funding. For the Italian Greeks who lost their passionarity, this is not a new thing: on the battlefield, they have long been accustomed to display mercenaries instead of themselves, the first of which was the king of Sparta, the Archideans, who in 40 BC died in the war with the messapias. Then, for the pampered and careless Greek colonists, the Epirus king Alexander (uncle of Alexander the Great), the Spartan commander Cleonim, and finally the Syracuse tyrant Agathocles fought. Now, for them, the XNUMX-year-old Pyrrhus, who was destined to become famous in Italy and enter the cohort of great commanders, was supposed to fight Rome.

A little ahead, let us say that, during the Italian campaign, Pierre presented Rome with three very unpleasant, but, in the end, turned out to be very useful lessons. The first of these was the use of war elephants, which the Romans faced for the first time. The second is the innovative construction of troops. Polybius reports:
"Pyrrhus used not only weapons, but also the Italic warriors, when in battles with the Romans he put Roman maniples and phalanx units interspersed."


The third, and perhaps most important, lesson the Romans received after the first victory over Pyrrhus - Fontin writes that after the battle of Benevento, in imitation of the epire commander, the Romans began to camp around it, encircling it with a single shaft or hedge:
“In ancient times, the Romans everywhere organized their camps in cohorts in the form of individual huts. Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, was the first to introduce the custom of covering the whole army with one shaft. The Romans, having defeated Pyrrhus in the Aruza fields near Benevento, taking possession of his camp and familiarizing himself with his location, gradually turned to the layout that exists now. ”


But let's not rush and go back to 281 BC.

Still not knowing who he contacted, Pierre was delighted with the prospects that opened before him and headed overseas at the head of a small army. His plans included the conquest of Italy and Sicily, with the subsequent transfer of hostilities to the territory under Carthage. The illusions collapsed immediately upon arrival in Tarent, where Pierre saw the most real subpassional marsh: the local Greeks
“Voluntarily they were not inclined to defend themselves or to defend anyone, but they wanted to send him into battle in order to stay at home and not leave the baths and feasts.”

(Polybius).

Pyrrhus immediately took matters into his own hands, closed the places of entertainment, conducted a total mobilization of the male population of the republic, and prohibited citizens from being idle on the street. As a result, many Tarentians fled from their “savior” ... to Rome (!), Because the subpasionarians have no homeland. The rest of them realized that they themselves had launched a huge pike into their pond, but it was too late to protest.

The plot turned out to be very interesting: on one side, at that time Pyrrhus, who had no equal tactics, had a small army of Epirus (countries on a par with Macedonia experiencing the Akmatic phase of ethnogenesis) and part-time Greeks of rich Italian colonies entering the Obcuracy phase. On the other, the Romans are experiencing a heroic ascent. We can immediately assume that in the upcoming war, Pierre will win until u run out ... No, not money, not soldiers and elephants — the epirota who came with him to Italy. That is exactly what happened.

In the persistent battle of Heraclea (280 BC), the Roman troops of the consul Publius Valeriy Levin one after another repulsed seven attacks by the infantrymen of Pyrrhus and the attack of Thessalian cavalry. And only after Pyrrhus moved his war elephants onto them, the frightened cavalry of the Romans retreated in panic, dragging the infantry units with them.

“With such warriors, I would have conquered the whole world,” said Pierre, seeing after the battle that the dead Romans lay on the battlefield in orderly rows, not retreating a single step under the blow of the famous Macedonian phalanx.

Tarent acquired vast territories in the west and north, many of the Italian allies of Rome went over to the side of the victors. However, the firmness and high fighting qualities of the Roman legions made such an impression on Pyrrhus himself that instead of continuing the successfully launched campaign he preferred to enter into negotiations with the enemy. The winner was so uncertain about the outcome of the war that his ambassadors began their work in Rome with persistent attempts to bribe the senators and their wives. Such a policy has not brought success:
“Let Pierre leave Italy, and then, if he wants, he is talking about friendship, but while he stays with the troops in Italy, the Romans will fight with him until he has enough strength even if he takes another 1,000 Levin to flight.”
,
- such was the response of the Senate.

Ambassador Pyrrha, the famous Ossuary of the Thessalians, Kiney, in his report called the Senate a “gathering of kings”, and compared Rome with the Lerney's hydra, in which two new ones grow instead of a severed head. Pyrrhus and the embassy of Fabrizia Lussina were impressed by the agreement with which the prisoners of the Romans were sent home on the holidays of the Saturnalia, who then all returned without exception.

Not reaching a compromise, Pierre refused to offensive war, preferring to them the defense of the occupied territories. A huge Roman army under the command of the consuls Sulpice of the North and Decius Musa soon entered Apulia and located near the city of Auskul.


Giuseppe Rava. Pyrrhus and his army at the Battle of Auskul


The battle that took place in this city 279 BC was included in history called Pyrrhic victory. Pierre was seriously wounded, one of the Roman consuls (Decius Mousse) was killed, and the military-political situation could be considered a stalemate: Rome refused to negotiate peace and prepared for war until the last warrior, while Pierre did not have enough strength to inflict decisive defeat. He was no longer glad that he had contacted such allies and such an adversary and dreamed only of avoiding for the sake of his honor the further participation in military operations in Italy. Just at that time, the ambassadors from Sicily in civil war arrived. Tired of the strife, the inhabitants of the island offered to enthrone one of the sons of Pyrrhus. Pyrrhus agreed, in Tarente he left the detachment of Milon, in Lochrah the other, under the command of his son Alexander. This adventure was another mistake of our hero. The fact is that the Sicilians proper at that time belonged only to the southern part of the country. In the north-east of Sicily, the Campanian mercenaries, who called themselves mamertin (“the tribe of Mars”), were strengthened, and the north-west was in the hands of Carthage. As payment for the royal crown, the Sicilians expected help from Pyrrhus in the war against the newcomers. He did not disappoint their expectations and acted very successfully, the Carthaginian army was pushed back into the mountains, the Mamertines were blocked in Messana (modern Messina).


Pyrrhus campaign in Sicily


Further, routine measures to besiege the fortresses, blocking mountain passes, negotiations, and so on — that is, exactly what Pyrrh didn’t like to say, to put it mildly, didn’t follow. Instead, he decided to land troops in Africa and defeat Carthage in his ancestral lands. For these purposes, he needed additional troops, sailors and ships, and Pierre, without hesitation, decided to receive them in the same way as in Taren - by forcible mobilization. The result of these ill-conceived events was a rebellion. Pyrrhus had enough forces to restore order, but the hero had already cooled down to this enterprise and in three years he chose to return to Italy. Sailing from Sicily, Pierre said: "What a battlefield we leave to the Romans and the Carthaginians!"

Meanwhile, Tarenta’s position was critical. Taking advantage of the absence of Pyrrhus, the Romans inflicted a series of defeats on the Greeks and their Italian allies and threatened the very existence of this republic. Former prisoners of Pyrrhus as part of the Roman forces at that time spent the night outside the camp until they could kill two enemy soldiers. Epirotov in the army of Pyrrhus is almost gone, had to rely only on the mercenaries, but the treasury of Tarenta was depleted, and therefore desperately needing money Pyrrhus decided to rob the Proserpina temple in Locra. Unlike Pyrrhus, the Romans did not waste time in vain, they learned how to fight elephants and Pyrrhus's troops in the battle of Benevento (275 BC) were defeated. However, there is evidence of the doubtfulness of the decisive success of the Romans in this battle. So, Justin writes:
"He (Pyrrhus) knew so well the military matter that in wars with Illyrians, Sicilians, Romans and Carthaginians he had never been defeated, but for the most part turned out to be the winner."


And Polybius, speaking of the battles of Pyrrhus with the Romans, states:
"Almost always the outcome of the battle turned out to be questionable for him."


That is, Justin reports that the Romans were never able to defeat Pyrrhus, and Polybius, not very highly appreciating the initial successes of Pyrrhus in Italy, at the same time, did not call him defeated, and the Romans - the winners. The battle was lost, but not the war, but Pierre already understood the futility of the further campaign and was eager to return to his homeland.

After an 6-year absence, he returned to Epirus to immediately start a war in Macedonia he left. He was very popular in this country, whose residents remembered his justice, generosity and simplicity in circulation. The troops of Antigone sent to the border joined the army of Pyrrhus. In the decisive battle, the famous Macedonian phalanx also went over to its side, only a few coastal cities remained under the rule of Antigone. But to finish the business, so well begun in Macedonia, our hero was not too busy again: the younger brother of one of the Spartan kings called Pyrrha to march to his hometown, and he gladly went in search of a new glory.

Pausanias writes:
“Having defeated Antigone’s own troops, and the mercenary troops of the Galatians, he (Pyrrhus) pursued him to the coastal cities and captured himself in upper Macedonia and Thessaly. Feast is generally very inclined to seize everything that came into his hands - and he was already not far from capturing all of Macedonia, - prevented Cleonim. This Cleonim convinced Pyrrhus, having left the Macedonians, to go to Peloponnese to obtain the imperial throne for Cleonim ... Cleonim brought Pyrrhus to Sparta with twenty-five thousand infantrymen, two thousand horsemen and twenty-four elephants. Already the large number of troops showed that Pierre wanted to acquire Sparta for Cleonim, and the Peloponnese for themselves. "


The Italian campaign did not teach him anything, with stubbornness worthy of a better use, Pierre was going to meet his death. When the three-day storming of the city did not bring success, he again, for the umpteenth time, lost interest in the goal of his journey and headed for Argos, where another fan of his talents dreamed of gaining power with the help of the army of the famous adventurer. To the surprise of Pierre, the Spartans followed him, continuously attacking his rearguard. In one of these battles, the son of Pyrrhus Ptolemy died.

"Already he heard about the death of his son and shocked by grief, Pierre (at the head of the Molossian cavalry) first broke into the ranks of the Spartans, trying to kill with a thirst for revenge, and although in battle he always seemed terrible and invincible, but this time his audacity and force eclipsed everything what happened in previous battles ... Jumping off the saddle, on foot, he put his entire selective squad next to Evalk. After the end of the war, excessive ambition of its rulers led Sparta to such senseless losses. ”

(Pausanias).

The city of Argos, in which there was a fierce struggle between the two parties, closed its gates, saw the troops of its enemy Antigone on the hill near the town of Pyrrhus, he stationed his own army on the plain, and detachments from Sparta settled to the side. Embarrassed by failures, Pierre decided to take a risky step. When one of his supporters opened the gates one night, he ordered his army to enter the city. Residents of Argos on time raised the alarm and sent messengers to Antigone. The Spartans also considered it their duty to intervene. As a result, on the streets of the city, an eerie night battle began in which the soldiers fought with the first opponents to meet them, and the townspeople shot bows from the windows of the houses or threw stones at those and others.
“It was impossible to understand this night battle neither in the actions of the troops, nor in the orders of the commanders. Separate squads wandered through narrow streets, in the dark, in cramped quarters, among the screams coming from everywhere; there was no opportunity to lead the troops, everyone was slow and waited for the morning "

(Pausanias).

Restoring command and control, Pierre decided to withdraw his soldiers from Argos. Fearing an ambush, he sent his son Gehlen, who remained outside the city, an order to break part of the wall and await his return. Gehlen misunderstood his father: deciding that he needed military help, he did not stop his troops at the wall, but led them to storm. As a result, in a narrow street, the retreating army of Pyrrhus faced the advancing army of Gehlen. There was a huge traffic jam, in which many soldiers died. The greatest damage the army of Pyrrha suffered from its own elephants. At this time, many residents of Argos were standing on the roof, throwing down tiles. One of these debris, abandoned by an old woman, interrupted Pyrrhus's cervical vertebrae. The first to his body were the soldiers of Antigonus, who cut off his head. The army without Pierre surrendered to Antigone.


Death of Pierre, engraving



Argos, a monument to Pierre at the site of his intended demise


Thus, the great commander, who failed to learn how to properly dispose of his abilities, perished ingloriously.
Author:
Articles from this series:
The collapse of the empire of Alexander the Great
67 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Xazarin
    Xazarin 3 December 2018 06: 23
    +1
    Sorry for the criticism, but as much as I was delighted with your article “ethnogenesis and passionarity”, this one didn’t like it. “Sub passionarity” in every second paragraph hurts the eye very much. A lot of semi-mythical facts. The text has mastered the moral will.
    1. VLR
      3 December 2018 07: 10
      +4
      The word "subpassionarity" is used 4 times in different variants, and practically in one place - the characterization of the Greeks of Tarentum (in my opinion - quite fair - compare the behavior of the citizens of Tarentum and Rome). This clearly does not attract "every second paragraph". And the information of which of the cited ancient authors (on the basis of whose works the article was written) should be recognized as "semi-legendary"?
      1. Xazarin
        Xazarin 3 December 2018 07: 54
        +1
        So the information of ALL ancient authors can be considered semi-legendary), and so, excuse me, he got excited was wrong, the article is wonderful, documented, reliable. Sincerely.
      2. nickname7
        nickname7 3 December 2018 16: 54
        0
        subpassivity
        The Greeks are best characterized by the word - anarchy.
  2. XII Legion
    XII Legion 3 December 2018 07: 02
    +7
    Pyrrhic victory became a household name
    As they say the crown - the end of the matter. Maybe that's why the commander seems to be great, but ...
    1. heavy division
      heavy division 3 December 2018 07: 08
      +9
      But the personality is extraordinary and colorful
      Interestingly
    2. Nehist
      Nehist 3 December 2018 09: 15
      +3
      Well, at the beginning of the article, Tactics said !!! That is, he could win a specific battle but not the war itself! There is already a strategy needed
      1. Brutan
        Brutan 3 December 2018 10: 51
        +5
        So the operator is not bad, not only tactics hi
    3. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 4 December 2018 10: 40
      0
      Peer said: "One more such victory and I will be left without an army."
      "Pyrrhic victory" means "a victory with its own large losses, comparable to those of the enemy."
  3. Tarhan
    Tarhan 3 December 2018 08: 55
    +1
    This Gumilyov’s theory of passionarity does not correspond to the scientific definition of the term itself - theory.

    The most significant functions of the theory:
    1. Theory provides using its conceptual structures;
    2. In theory, the development of terminology;
    3. Theory allows you to understand, explain or predict the various manifestations of the object of the theory.
    4. The theory predicts the appearance of certain factors.

    "Figuratively speaking, the essence of the theory is to tie together 'circumstantial evidence', to pass a verdict on past events and to indicate what will happen in the future if certain conditions are met."

    In Gumilyov’s theory there are no signs of impending passionarity, that is, it is impossible to predict that some people will become passionary. Successful peoples, in the past history, are simply taken and called them passionate.
    And now, who can name future passionaries? None. Since there are no theoretical calculations indicating future passionarity.

    That is, functions 3 and 4 in Gumilyov’s theory do not work, which means that this is not SCIENCE, but its own, private worldview.
    1. bayard
      bayard 3 December 2018 21: 23
      +2
      Donetsk.
      Don't confuse warm with soft. The theory of passionarity of L.N. Gumilev is disclosed in his works quite thoroughly. Signs of passionarity - activity, perseverance, resourcefulness, sacrifice. The prefix "sub" means the above qualities in the opposite meaning. The article is interesting and informative, and the terms passionarity / subpassionarity are not overloaded, they are simply collected in one place and can cut the eyes of a person who is not familiar with this terminology.
      And the fact that the theory does not provide a method for determining where and which people will be marked by a passionate surge, LN Gumilyov described it as "a certain ray from space launching a process (based on secondary signs), unable to talk about it under the conditions of communist ideology" Providence of God. ”Who (what nation) will become the chosen one is not decided by people and is not calculated by a formula.
      So in the gata about Khvarno (Grace - "Avesta") it is said about the coming incarnation of the future Savior, his birth from the Virgin and the fact that the Star will announce his birth ... But neither name, nor place, nor people in which is indicated. And until the time no one could calculate - not the hour, not the place. And then the Star appeared ... and the SAGES went ... and they found that very baby in provincial Bethlehem. It is a pity that it was in that people, but it was decided from above. After all, he came to crush the "Gates of Hell" - the advice of the wicked ... about world domination ... And he succeeded in that. Otherwise, what the world has come close to, would have happened much earlier ...
      Divine Providence - not a bus schedule, you won’t read at the bus stop ... But there are signs ... and signs ...
      1. Trilobite Master
        Trilobite Master 3 December 2018 21: 50
        +1
        Quote: bayard
        God's Providence is not a bus schedule

        Are we now about science or religion?
        Gumilyov's theory, in its essence, is nothing more than a witty impromptu, an intelligent, erudite and observant person. And if here, instead of the "cosmic ray", "providence of God", oh, excuse me, "God", add, then it (theory) generally turns into a complete laughing stock. Do not dishonor the works of a respected person who has merits before real science.
        If at least one tiny, incomprehensible thing is explained by God's providence and this explanation is taken seriously, all science can be thrown away, because other explanations are no longer needed, "the ways of the Lord are inscrutable," which means you shouldn't even try. negative
        1. bayard
          bayard 4 December 2018 12: 33
          0
          Donetsk.
          If you are familiar with the works of Lev Nikolaevich, you should remember that he paid a lot of attention to the history of religions, their influence on historical processes, their influence on the psychostroy of the masses and revealed them quite deeply. Without this, honest analysis is impossible - our (and not only ours) ancestors were religious people, in the most ordinary life they were guided by a certain code ... Without taking into account this factor and its comprehensive study, no serious analysis is possible.
          Here is what, for example, became a motivating factor in the three-stage mobilization of all of Eurasia during the Alano-Gothic wars (the "Great Migration of Nations", which ended with the destruction of two Empires - the Empire of Germanarech and the Roman)), what character these wars were, which made the Siberians FRANKS from the Ob , SAKOV from modern Xinjiang Uygur and KANGLOV from the Trans-Caspian steppes to break from their homes into the crucible of an unprecedented war? Was it the inviting songs of "young Bayan" that inspired them so much, or was there something deeper - sacred? ... who made this war sacred to them?

          And your mockery about the "providence of God" ... so I suggested an alternative term to understand the process. In Zoroastrianism, this phenomenon is called HVARNO (in an approximate translation - GRACE), which is poured out on the ARYAN (pious - direct translation from the Avestan) peoples and gives them vitality, wisdom, courage, perseverance, foresight and help in every good deed ... Lev Nikolayevich represented this in the form of a certain ray ...

          And on the non-Aryan peoples (wicked - direct translation) something else is poured out - from the SNAKE.
      2. Mikhail Matyugin
        Mikhail Matyugin 4 December 2018 00: 04
        0
        Quote: bayard
        So in the gata about Khvarno (Grace - "Avesta") it is said about the coming incarnation of the future Savior, his birth from the Virgin and the fact that the Star will announce his birth ... But neither name, nor place, nor people in which is indicated. And until the time no one could calculate - not the hour, not the place. And then the Star appeared ... and the SAGES went ... and they found that very baby in provincial Bethlehem.
        Perhaps they were also familiar with the texts of Isaiah and other prophets, since many ancient Israelites and Jews were in Assyrian-Babylonian captivity.

        Quote: bayard
        God's providence is not a bus schedule, you cannot read at the bus stop ... But there are signs.
        Good, right words!
        1. bayard
          bayard 4 December 2018 12: 05
          0
          Donetsk.
          For the Avestan Magi, to read Isaiah is the same as the elders Seraphim of Sarov or Sergius of Radonezh to read the opuses of modern Adventists or Pentecostals. The oldest monotheistic religion on Earth, with the memory and experience of thousands of generations, the range of which will spread throughout Eurasia and at least northern Africa ... and ... notes of runaway slaves. The Jewish tradition is a heresy with many twists and falsifications from the mother Mazdo-Yasni tradition. The Jews got it in a refracted form from the wise men brought by Akhenaten after the northern campaign and the battle of Kadesh (Akhenaten were overthrown and killed by the priests of Egypt, his new capital, dedicated to Amon Ra - the One God, was destroyed, and the magi of the true God were given to withdraw the excess of slaves to conquer the northern land for Egypt). What was there in Sinai and who led them later - the third question, but Yasna’s simple and clear teaching turned out to be unrecognizable - it became only a tool for managing the brainless herd in conquering living space for overpopulated Egypt.
          In the Avesta and the Book of Kings (Shah-Name) it is said about a certain demon king with snake heads (trunk thick in wood) Zahake - SNAKE-LIKE (!!!) And which of the kings of the earth represented the SNAKE? Did you get wisdom from the SNAKE? ... Seeking salvation from the SNAKE (copper in the Sinai desert)? ...
          ........ We remember and look at the image of the pharaohs - the kings of Egypt ... Which our ancestors called "black magic".

          ...... And you about the books of their slaves ...
          1. Xazarin
            Xazarin 6 December 2018 17: 52
            0
            Interesting things you say, there is no desire to write an article? I hear a lot for the first time, advise the source.
            1. bayard
              bayard 6 December 2018 20: 41
              0
              Donetsk.
              "Avesta" (these are liturgical texts, canons and types of liturgical, but very informative), "Shah-Name" (the book of Kings) - a later poetic presentation of history ... sometimes even "fabulous", but Shah-Name was read in chant by storytellers during the period of extermination of both the faith and the books of Zoroastrianism by the invaders, the horde of Muhammad, at the turn of the 10-11th centuries. Ferdowsi - it was the work of his whole life - to present the entire sacred history in verse. It echoes the "Rig Veda").
              These are the primary sources, read easily, are available on the Internet.
              And the article ... I’ve been beaten up for a book for a long time, but ... until it’s possible it’s not matured yet ... and I have to choose the time.
              1. bayard
                bayard 6 December 2018 20: 45
                0
                Donetsk.
                I can also advise Y. Petukhov "Russia in the Middle Ages 800-1400." - this is a historical treatise, very informative and vividly written. Most recently I got caught, but I got pleasure.
                1. Xazarin
                  Xazarin 6 December 2018 21: 44
                  0
                  Thank you, I probably won’t master the primary sources, over time it’s tight, but I’ll try Petukhov.
                  1. bayard
                    bayard 7 December 2018 02: 58
                    0
                    Believe me, there will be no problems with the primary sources, because they are in poetic form and the translation is good ... and the plot captures.
                    1. Xazarin
                      Xazarin 12 December 2018 00: 17
                      0
                      And indeed, there were no problems with the primary sources. I read Shahnameh, very exciting. As for Petukhov ... how would it be softer? Very odious person, categorically do not recommend reading.
                      1. bayard
                        bayard 12 December 2018 02: 31
                        0
                        Donetsk.
                        In the early 90s, I read several of his fantastic stories ... a kind of social fantasy with a gnashing of teeth inside ... Then I came across (in the 90s) a historical novel / novel (I don’t remember) about Svyatoslav’s Danube campaign - lively, fascinating, informative in terms of the history of the 5 thousandth corps, which did not have time to break through to the mountain passes to Dorostol - readings for a business traveler - that’s it ...

                        I learned about his serious studies of fundamental history much later, and positively, but I didn’t read it until this spring. For a person well acquainted with archeology, the history of the ethnic groups of Eurasia and North Africa, history, and so on. the heritage of the Avramic religions, Zoroastrianism, cultures and history of the peoples of northern India, Iran, Central Asia and East Turkestan ... this work of Petukhov was very interesting ... In short, I was recommended ... very competent friends in this matter .. And I work did not disappoint. The events described there are real and documented by several sources each, the analysis is very interesting ... I think after reading the Shah Name and the Avesta you will better understand this.
  4. KVU-NSVD
    KVU-NSVD 3 December 2018 10: 24
    +5
    Shadow of Alexander is a very accurate expression. Alexander had a clearly understood goal, and therefore, having lived a flash of life, he did great things, remaining Great for all time. Pyrrhus, successfully fighting his whole life, in my opinion put the process itself at the forefront, and therefore did not leave anything other than a winged expression. In other words, Alexander served the Idea, and Pyrrhus Luck - with the same conditions in the abilities, the result is obvious.
    1. Mikhail Matyugin
      Mikhail Matyugin 4 December 2018 00: 07
      +2
      Quote: KVU-NSVD
      Pyrrhus, successfully fighting his whole life, in my opinion put the process itself at the forefront

      Well, I would say, on the basis of texts about Sashka of Macedon, that in general he probably put the process itself at the forefront more than Pyrrhus. And most of his warriors understood this after Gavgamell and the occupation of Babylon and Pasaragd.

      Well, there are also different starting positions - Pyrrhus did not even have the limited Macedonian resources that AM had, and there were opponents - the Persian Empire was not loose and almost incapable, but others, including Rome, which entered into force.
  5. Trilobite Master
    Trilobite Master 3 December 2018 10: 42
    +7
    I think that most of the regular visitors to the "History" column have already understood and remembered that the author is an ardent supporter of the theory of passionarity, however, the author should also remember that this theory has been rejected by the scientific community for a number of reasons, which we have already tried to analyze in his last article. dedicated to the collapse of the empire of Alexander the Great. Therefore, it seems to me that when using such terms as "passionarity", "subpassionarity" it would be appropriate to make reservations like: "if we use the terminology of L. Gumilyov," etc., since such concepts do not exist in academic science.
    I liked the article itself, although, again, the author for the sake of bringing liveliness to the narrative, somewhat abuses the use of, say, legendary plots, citing them as reliable historical facts. For example:
    Sailing away from Sicily, Pyrrhus said: "What a battlefield we leave to the Romans and the Carthaginians!"

    It seems to me that it would be more correct to write "According to legend, sailing from Sicily ..."
    In general, the article is interesting and deserves a purely positive assessment. Thanks to the author. hi
  6. Operator
    Operator 3 December 2018 11: 31
    +1
    Quote: Tarkhan
    private worldview

    More correct - opinion.
  7. Seal
    Seal 3 December 2018 13: 00
    +2
    How beautiful and how unproven. Particularly impressive is the interspersing of such links not just links, but pseudo-links, such as:
    Thessalian Kineas, in its report called the Senate "the assembly of kings

    Well, did he ever see this Report in his eyes?
    Is there at least one person who ever wrote with his own hand or at least dictated to a scribe that: "I, such and such, in such and such a year in such and such a place read (option - I held in my hands, but did not read ) Report of the Thessalian Kineas "??? hi
    1. VLR
      3 December 2018 13: 59
      0
      Quote: Seal
      Is there at least one person who ever wrote with his own hand or at least dictated to a scribe that: "I, such and such, in such and such a year in such and such a place read (option - I held it in my hands, but did not read ) Report of the Thessalian Kineas "?

      You know, there is such a person: Plutarch.
    2. Oleg Kolsky 051
      Oleg Kolsky 051 3 December 2018 15: 03
      0
      Even if Kineas, upon his arrival from the negotiations, would have said to Pyrrhus that the Roman Senate is a gathering of cloven-hoofed and old marasmats, the exhaust would still be a "gathering of kings". The winners write history.
      1. Oleg Kolsky 051
        Oleg Kolsky 051 3 December 2018 15: 10
        +1
        If you are interested, there is such a book "Wars of the Ancient World, the campaigns of Pyrrhus" R. Svetlov.
  8. Seal
    Seal 3 December 2018 13: 04
    +2
    Quote: Xazarin
    A lot of semi-mythical facts.

    And what kind of beast is this "semi-mythical fact"? Is a "semi-mythical fact" a "fact" or "not a fact"? Or is it a semi-fact? hi
    1. Xazarin
      Xazarin 3 December 2018 13: 39
      +1
      I used such a term, possibly incorrectly, for events that most likely actually occurred, but were surrounded by mythical details. For example, three hundred thousandth army, lying in the ranks of the dead legionnaires, old women throwing bricks, etc.
      1. Mikhail Matyugin
        Mikhail Matyugin 4 December 2018 00: 09
        +3
        Quote: Xazarin
        old women throwing bricks, etc.

        This is not a legend, it is a historical fact. And yet - the tile that fell on Pyrrhus, it’s not a brick at all, take an interest, it’s a huge chunk of hardened clay, the weight is decent.

        Dear author, thanks for the material!
        1. Xazarin
          Xazarin 4 December 2018 01: 48
          +1
          Chapter 5. (1) Pyrrhus, recaptured by the Spartans, attacked Argos. Here, when he tried to capture Antigone, who was locked up in the city, he, fighting in the thick of the battle, fell, struck by a stone thrown from the wall.

          Pompey Trog Justin

          As you can see, not a word about an old woman with a piece of tile.

          And who to believe, Plutarch or Pompey? Despite the fact that both used the same Greek sources. And why are you so sure that Plutarch did not allow himself to say so, small artistic liberties in describing the events of which he personally was not a witness?
    2. VLR
      3 December 2018 14: 07
      +2
      On the strange term "semi-mythical fact": The article is based on the works of ancient historians. There are two options here: consider them historians and believe their works, or consider them storytellers and treat their works as the ancient "Lord of the Rings". Serious researchers still consider Plutarch, Polybius, Pausanias and others to be historians. Therefore, as Comrade Stalin once said to one party functionary: "I have no other writers for Comrade Polikarpov, but we will find another Polikarpov for writers."
      1. Xazarin
        Xazarin 4 December 2018 02: 21
        0
        I completely agree with you about Polybius. But serious researchers noticed Plutarch's uncritical attitude to sources, and the use of historical jokes in his works. Still, the task of Plutarch’s works is rather a moral and ethical assessment of personality than a scrupulous historically reliable study.
  9. Oleg Kolsky 051
    Oleg Kolsky 051 3 December 2018 13: 37
    0
    Well, Neoptolemus-Pyrrhus does not pull on the shadow of Alexander the Great. The great commander is distinguished by the ability to prioritize and perseverance in achieving the assigned tasks. You can remember the first independent campaign of Alexander - everything is subordinated to the main goal, the war with Persia! Alexander reconciled with the "bloodline" Sirm, the leader of the tribals and with the rebellious Hellenes, having taught the truth of Thebes a lesson. Sieges of Halicarnassus and Tire with Gaza. And when it took two years he spent on the war with Spitamen and the Bactrians, and in addition, the Scythians pulled themselves together. Well, and Pyrrhus is just an ancient adventurer - he fought there without a goal, there he fought without result. Not having finished with Rome, he got involved in a war with Carthage, the sense that he drove them under Lilybey. It turns out in Pyrrhus, a war without a goal, a battle without result. Contotier of antiquity.
    And the article is so-so, without analysis of the battles (again this is the hackneyed "Pyrrhic victory"), the Romans let the story go, and everyone rushed to repeat. In general, not ochem.
    1. VLR
      3 December 2018 14: 02
      0
      Quote: Oleg Kolsky 051
      Well, Neoptolem-Pierre does not pull on the shadow of Alexander the Great

      "A shadow or likeness of Alexander the Great" are the words of Plutarch, who cites them as the general opinion. But then, in the next quote, he disputes in his usual manner. You would have noticed this if you had read the article carefully.
  10. Stirbjorn
    Stirbjorn 3 December 2018 13: 47
    +3
    I liked the article, Pyrrhus was somewhat similar to the Swedish Carl XXII, who was an outstanding tactician, personally participated in the battles, did not lose a single one (he commanded Renschild near Poltava as a result of Karl’s wound on the eve), but all his victories were fruitless. He finally could not finish off any of his opponents, as a result, the Swedes forever lost their hegemony in the Baltic
  11. Ptolemy Lag
    Ptolemy Lag 3 December 2018 14: 17
    +1
    The article is wonderful, but is it possible to read more about the battles of Hercules, Ausculus, Benevente?
  12. Cartalon
    Cartalon 3 December 2018 15: 37
    +1
    In vain the author is trying to apply the terminology of Gumilev, he is clearly poorly versed in his theory.
    1. VLR
      3 December 2018 15: 55
      0
      Write an alternative article "Ethnogenesis and passionarity-2", show off your knowledge, we will all evaluate it here, discuss and determine the level of your knowledge of this issue.
    2. Xazarin
      Xazarin 4 December 2018 03: 36
      +1
      But in this matter I’ll take the side of the Author on a mountain. A brilliant knowledge of Gumilyov’s terminology, ideas and works, which was recently proved in the wonderful article “Ethnoginesis and Passionarity”. By the way, the only article in my bookmarks.
  13. nickname7
    nickname7 3 December 2018 16: 30
    0
    The Greeks were not able to create an empire, largely due to the fact that each subsequent ruler of city-states pursued a policy as urine hit him in the head, crossing out the efforts of previous rulers. The Greeks are anarchist people, and their kings are tyrants. But the Romans, however, were able to create law and law, curbed tyranny and anarchy and successively capturing cities, built an empire.
    1. Tutejszy
      Tutejszy 4 December 2018 11: 13
      +1
      Quote: nickname7
      The Greeks are anarchist people, and their kings are tyrants. But the Romans, however, were able to create law and law, curbed tyranny and anarchy and successively capturing cities, built an empire.

      It is obvious that the Spaniards outnumbered ours not only in numbers, but also in bodily strength. We have never been equal to Africans in cunning or wealth. No one will dispute that in military art and theoretical knowledge we were inferior to the Greeks. But we always won by the fact that we knew how to skillfully choose new recruits, to teach them, so to speak, the laws of weapons, to temper with daily exercises, to pre-anticipate during exercises all that could happen in the ranks and during the battle, and, finally, severely punish the loafers . (Flavius ​​Vegetius Renatus, "Summary of Military Affairs")
  14. AK1972
    AK1972 3 December 2018 16: 39
    +2
    Pyrrhus was promised command of the XNUMXth army and unlimited funding.

    Valery, thanks for the interesting article as always, however, is 300 thousand too much for the army of that time?
    1. Tutejszy
      Tutejszy 4 December 2018 11: 10
      +1
      Quote: AK1972
      however, is 300 thousand too much for the army of that time?

      keywords: "was promised". laughing
      “You promised to marry me!”
      - You never know what I promised on you!
  15. Tutejszy
    Tutejszy 3 December 2018 17: 23
    +4
    According to another version, Hannibal put Pyrrhus in second place after Alexander the Great, leaving himself the same third place.

    Plutarch has this version. And to the question of Scipio: "And where do you put me - taking into account the fact that I defeated you?" - Hannibal modestly answered: "If you had not defeated me, I would have put myself in first place!"

    Pyrrhus was born 4 years after the death of the great conqueror.

    And many seriously considered him the reincarnation of Alexander.

    “With such warriors, I would have conquered the whole world,” said Pierre, seeing after the battle that the dead Romans lay on the battlefield in orderly rows, not retreating a single step under the blow of the famous Macedonian phalanx.

    And even before the start of the battle, he said: "The formation of these barbarians does not seem barbaric to me!"

    “Let Pyrrhus leave Italy, and if he wants, he will talk about friendship, and while he stays with the troops in Italy, the Romans will fight with him until he has the strength, even if he takes another thousand Levin to flight” - that was Senate response.

    Actually, the Senate was ready to merge. But Senator Appius Claudius Tsek, already blinded by old age, ordered the slaves to take themselves to the Forum. Sons and sons-in-law introduced the blind man to the curia, and he addressed the senators with a speech:
    Until now, the Romans, I could not reconcile myself with a loss of vision, but now, hearing your meetings and decisions that make the Romans famous, I regret that I have not lost my sight and hearing!
  16. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 4 December 2018 10: 42
    +1
    The article is detailed and informative.
    Thanks to the author.
    I knew little about Greek-Roman wars.
  17. Seal
    Seal 4 December 2018 16: 52
    0
    Quote: VlR
    You know, there is such a person: Plutarch

    Firstly, that Plutarch is not a real person.
    And secondly, the character "Plutarch" does not say anywhere that he held in his hands the Report of the Thessalian Kineas. As far as I remember, the book, the authorship of which is attributed to a certain "Plouarch", only says something like "as noted by Kineas" (or something like that). That is, the phrase that has been written by millions of students, candidates and doctors of sciences for centuries has been written, rewriting something from each other and never reading the actual sources.
    By the way, have you seen at least one genuine line from the Arch of the Rogue, oh, of course from "Plutarch"?
    1. VLR
      4 December 2018 17: 21
      0
      We'll have to repeat: "as Comrade Stalin once said to one party functionary:" I have no other writers for Comrade Polikarpov, but we will find another Polikarpov for writers. "
    2. Mikhail Matyugin
      Mikhail Matyugin 4 December 2018 19: 41
      +1
      Quote: Seal
      That is, the phrase is written absolutely that millions of students, candidates and doctors of sciences have written for centuries, rewriting something each other and never reading the original sources.

      Comrade, are you familiar with istric science either? or another refutation of basic truths based on FomeniKo?
    3. Bashibuzuk
      Bashibuzuk 11 December 2018 11: 00
      +1
      Dear Seal (Sea Cat, huh?) Sergey Petrovich!
      Be prepared for the fact that for your expressed doubts, dogs have been hanging on you for all millennia of CERTAINLY stated, legally confirmed and notarized (Roman notaries, respectively) history of the Ancient and Ancient worlds.
      Comrade hangers do not take the criticism of an established story spiritually, they seriously believe that for two and a half thousand years the chroniclers were only concerned about one thing - tell us the life story of Pyrrhus, in this case, or the rest of the characters (born, married, divorced, baptized , fasted, died) - and, for example, about the life of Shakespeare, or Burns, or Pushkin - literary scholars still tear each other's throats, ambiguities, you know, are present in their lives.
      But, this same comrade Gumilyov, a historian - we note this fact, is also ostracized. He came up with the theory of passionarity, so that under the Bolsheviks he would not talk about the providence of God. But, it turns out, he came up with the wrong thing again. But at least he does not refer to the legends and fables of ancient fantasy authors, he directly and accurately says - I think that could be SO.
      .
      And what’s the most significant - but passing by everywhere and always - clearly was a character, whose image was later realized in Pierre. Collective even, probably. No wonder they drew an analogy here with Charles XII.
      Only with a clarification - who, when, where, why - no one wants to understand. It is not interesting, and even dangerous - there are NO primary sources (in the form that normal science sees), there are some incomprehensible arrangements, expositions, additions with explanations, because "... the original manuscript was lost ..." at unknown when the furry years ...
      And of all the critics of TI, the "hangmen" only know Fomenko and Nosovsky, unfortunately. They never heard of Postnikov and Morozov.
      And to the site geschihte-chronology.DE or, for example geschihte-chronology.RU they don’t have to go, and NEVER - they don’t have time to read the current fantasy library.
      German authors, Wilhelm Kamayer, or Uwe Topper - simply and unequivocally say - LIPA, all waste paper of "antiquity" - LIPA, in its purest form. At least, it is legally null and void (conclusion of V. Kamayer).
      .
      You will now be surprised how they will try to smear me in down and feathers. Well, "hangers", what to take from them.
  18. Seal
    Seal 4 December 2018 16: 58
    0
    Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
    And yet - the tile that fell on Pyrrhus, it’s not a brick at all, take an interest, it’s a huge chunk of hardened clay, the weight is decent.

    Well, first you need to prove that there were at least three-story houses in that city. For throwing a piece of tile at a rider (a man sitting on a horse) so as to kill him from a second-floor window is problematic. Or, in your opinion, the "old woman" was so combative that she crawled out onto the tiled roof and threw pieces of "hardened clay" from there? And what, the roofs were already tiled? And what kind of bias did they have that the old woman did not fall?
    By the way, were there any windows then ??? And if there were (what needs to be proved), then did they go out into the street, and not into the yard?
    1. VLR
      4 December 2018 17: 35
      +2
      Look at the reports of trauma centers and ambulance hospitals: full of descriptions of the most serious injuries received out of the blue and funny cases, also with serious injuries, in situations where it seems that even a small bruise cannot be earned. From which we can conclude: a brick or a piece of roofing "who needs" will surely find, and will fall "correctly" - "the only possible" way to cause maximum damage. In thousands of other cases, no one will notice this fall of a brick from the roof, but they will write about the 1001st fall in historical chronicles and monographs.
      1. Seal
        Seal 6 December 2018 10: 51
        0
        Quote: VlR
        Look at the reports of trauma centers and ambulance hospitals: full of descriptions of the most severe injuries received out of the blue and funny cases,

        I agree. But nevertheless, if it is said that "a certain old woman from somewhere above threw a piece of tile, hit in the neck and killed," then it is logical to have confirmation of the following list:
        - roof tiles in Argos at that time used shingles;
        - the tile was not particularly fixed and it could be easily removed even to an old woman;
        - from the houses to the roof there was a fairly easy exit or tiles from the roof could be reached by hand (where? from the balcony or from the window ??);
        - At home, at least some, in Argos were houses taller than a man on a horse (otherwise it would not turn out to be thrown from above);
        - the streets were narrow, and houses more than the height of the rider stood close to the "roadway", so to speak, and did not have a front garden in front of them.
        And if we are all so curious, we will turn into the Matyugins.
  19. Sergey-8848
    Sergey-8848 4 December 2018 17: 11
    +1
    At the same time, the same passions raged in the Yangtze Valley.
  20. Seal
    Seal 6 December 2018 10: 52
    +1
    Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
    or another refutation of basic truths based on FomeniKo?

    In essence, there will be something or you, besides the standard already annoying hysteria: "Oh, Fomenko, oh Fomenko," as usual, have nothing?
    1. Mikhail Matyugin
      Mikhail Matyugin 7 December 2018 14: 15
      0
      Quote: Seal
      In essence, you will either have something besides the standard already annoying hysteria: "Oh, Fomenko, oh Fomenko"

      While you are hysterical here. The answers to all your questions are contained in archaeological reports on the excavations of ancient Argos - if you want to really understand the problem, I advise you to turn to them. Everything there is about the tiles, and about the number of storeys of houses, etc. will be.
      1. Seal
        Seal 17 December 2018 16: 36
        0
        So far, what you hysteria.
        or another refutation of basic truths based on FomeniKo?

        Next.
        Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
        While you are hysterical here. The answers to all your questions are contained in archaeological reports on the excavations of ancient Argos - if you want to really understand the problem, I advise you to turn to them. Everything there is about the tiles, and about the number of storeys of houses, etc. will be.

        To your misfortune, the same person has been excavating in Argos for decades. Either French, or Dutchman W. Vollgraff. In Greek transcription, Βίλχελμ Φόλγκραφ.
        Be so kind, deign to poke your finger in the place of his "report" where supposedly everything is
        about the tiles, and about the number of storeys of houses, etc.
        hi
        Just in case, I’m showing you newspaper notes about his activities.
        Yes, when quoting your answers, I leave your spelling, sorry, unchanged. hi



        Waiting, sir !!
        bully
        1. Mikhail Matyugin
          Mikhail Matyugin 21 December 2018 14: 16
          0
          Quote: Seal
          To your misfortune, the same person has been excavating in Argos for decades.
          yah ? Are you serious ? and you think that over the past almost a century, only one single archaeologist has been digging there?

          And waiting for what? It is interesting to you - you are both looking and digging! Analyze the architecture of houses, consider the shape of tiles, etc.

          PS I sincerely feel sorry for you because you do not understand the difference between a normal archaeological report and a newspaper article almost a century ago. And after that, you still talk about some kind of involvement in scientific activity ...
    2. Bashibuzuk
      Bashibuzuk 11 December 2018 11: 03
      +1
      They won’t have anything, Sergey Petrovich.
      Excuses will be, as usual - you, they say, doubt the TI, ask questions - well, and Prove the correctness of your QUESTIONS in the framework of traditional history.
      Good answer. Hammered. IMHO, as they say - I know, FIG disputed.
  21. Seal
    Seal 17 December 2018 15: 38
    0
    Quote: Bashibuzuk
    Be prepared for what your doubts are

    Yes, more than 20 years ready. Once I myself did not doubt. But even while serving in the army, I began to wonder if everything that they tell us about the ancient armies was messy. If a part of the soldiers in the company consists of Kyrgyz or Tajiks, then they have to be trained to walk in formation for half a year, then how were the "ancient", and even more "antique" co-organized?
    Well, I started to think.
    Previously, about 15 years ago, it was much worse. Blind believers were much more. Now there are fewer of them, but, unfortunately, another bias has formed. Many of those who doubted were carried away by some equally ridiculous fantasies about 300-hundred-thousand-year-old Russia and the like.
    1. Mikhail Matyugin
      Mikhail Matyugin 21 December 2018 14: 18
      0
      Quote: Seal
      If a part of the soldiers in the company consists of Kyrgyz or Tajiks, then they have to be trained to walk in formation for half a year, then how were the "ancient", and even more "antique" co-organized?

      Do you know about participation in the Roman legions or the ancient Greek and ancient Macedonian phalanges of the ancestors of the Kirghiz or Tajiks, who, according to you, had to be trained to walk in formation for half a year? Where do these "discoveries" come from?
  22. Seal
    Seal 27 December 2018 13: 28
    0
    Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
    Are you serious ? and you think that over the past almost a century, only one single archaeologist has been digging there?

    Does it seem impossible to you? And you also don’t believe that the so-called "Troy" was excavated by the only Schliemann?
    And the fact that the one and only archaeologist Atur Evans first (in 1899) acquired Knossos Hill, and then during 30 years, from 1900 to 1930, conducted excavations - do not believe it either?
    Well, well, your right. You who are like Fomenko are amazing people.
    And waiting for what? It is interesting to you - you are both looking and digging! Analyze the architecture of houses, consider the shape of tiles, etc.

    Excuse me, but it was you who said that you read the reports of archaeologists, in which everything is, right? So why so far have you shared the secret in which archaeological report did you find all this?
    PS I sincerely feel sorry for you because you do not understand the difference between a normal archaeological report and a newspaper article almost a century ago. And after that, you still talk about some kind of involvement in scientific activity ...

    Oh really ? Understanding that you, pouting your cheeks and stating that you supposedly in some archaeological reports that you supposedly read (in fact, of course you did not read anything) found the answers to all my questions, I made it easier for you by telling whose exactly archaeological records you need to study. What if I missed something there.
    But since you really didn’t read anything, you decided to take a different path - to strike into demagoguery, they say, not only W. Vollgraff excavated there (oh, as if you generally read at least one archaeological report on Argos ... I believe that you in life in general, they have not read a single archaeological report and do not suspect what they contain), and for a very long period. In confirmation of which he brought you old Greek newspapers, telling about his archaeological activity for decades.
    But you started with that (see item 1), and ended with the trivial "I'm sorry for you" - see Lookmore
    I feel sorry for you (as an option, I sincerely feel sorry for you, you don’t understand, I deeply sympathize with you) - a saving phrase that is extremely loved by participants in all kinds of disciplines of the Special Olympiad, pronounced when the arguments are over ...
  23. Seal
    Seal 27 December 2018 14: 28
    0
    Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
    Where do these "discoveries" come from?

    You? To educate? If you educate on the good, then this is pointless. And if you think - then you think you yourself will enlighten anyone hi
    I gave a good example of the fact that people who are at a certain level of development (for example, Tajiks) are not able to act like people living at a higher level of development (for example, Germans). You can teach a German to march in formation ... yes, he probably doesn’t need to be taught, a German knows how to walk in order from diapers.
    But there are a huge number of people who teach history from Hollywood films. And if in the film it is shown that a certain phalanx is marching in a formation 50 rows deep, stretching along the front for 5 kilometers, then it means that you can walk like that. Such legions march especially well in the movie "The Lord of the Rings".
    About Tajiks and Kirghiz in the so-called "ancient Greek phalanxes" and "ancient Roman legions".
    Firstly, even within the framework of the traditional, that is, the official version of history, there are many contenders for the role of Tajiks and Kyrgyz in these so-called "formations" in the form of "barbarians" and "semi-barbarians". Though the same Celts, Germans, Thracians, Dacians, Scythians, Negroes, Arabs ... etc.
    And secondly ... you can't prove that there were no Tajiks or Kyrgyz in the so-called "ancient Greek phalanxes" and "ancient Roman legions" either. For no one has ever seen the lists of personnel of either the phalanxes or the legions. But nevertheless, you are firmly convinced that all this is ... Only, as always, you yourself cannot provide anything and therefore send it to some non-existent archives .. hi
  24. serge serge
    serge serge 11 February 2019 19: 30
    0
    Not a bad article, only this crap:
    (countries along with Macedonia, which is experiencing the Akmatical phase of ethnogenesis) and the subpassionary Greeks entering the phase of the Obscuration ...
    why and why?