Military Review

Military Glory Day: Battle of Kulikovo and unanswered questions

124
One of the most complex sciences of our time, as it turns out, история. The reason is that there are so many historians, political movements, non-profit, non-governmental organizations, so much history and interpretations. Sometimes the same event in the history of a country is interpreted by individual experts and people who consider themselves to be diametrically opposed. Even the events that occurred 20-30 years ago are awarded with ambiguous assessments, mutually exclusive interpretations. If it comes to events of many centuries ago, then this can go as far as the interweaving of myths with reality, when professional historians can already converge at least in verbal battles due to differences of opinion.




The situation is aggravated by the appearance of numerous "alternative" versions of those events that, it would seem, are described quite clearly and clearly. Among the topics that continues to excite the minds of historians is the theme of the Mongol-Tatar invasion of Russia, developments of 600-800 years ago. It must be noted that there is enough speculation on this subject.

Today we are not going to delve into speculative and conspiracy theories, but simply recall that the 21 of September marks the Day of Military Glory in our country. This is the Victory Day of the Russian regiments under the command of Prince Dmitry Donskoy on the Kulikovo field. This is a battle that was included in Soviet and Russian history textbooks and which is actively discussed hundreds of years after that date from the 1380 year.

The battle took place between the regiments of Dmitry Donskoy and the forces of the so-called West Volga Horde - the temnik of the Golden Horde of Mamai. According to the chronicles, the Russian side put up to 70 thousand warriors, the Horde - up to 140 thousand. At the same time, noteworthy are the notes in the annals, where, talking about the Horde army, chroniclers mention such an interesting fact as the participation in the battle on the Kulikovo field of the Genoese infantry. According to some reports, these were Mamaia's European mercenaries, who tried to resist a decrease in their level of influence after a series of defeats of the troops sent to them. One of such defeats, an army controlled by Mamaia (the tumens of Murza Begish) suffered in 1378 on the river Vozha.

It can be stated that the European "partners" in those ancient times did not hesitate to oppose Russia (Russia), seeing this as a benefit, first of all, for themselves. Indeed, despite the decrease in the level of influence of Mamaia, his treasury was by no means empty, and to the same Genoese infantrymen who appeared on the Kulikovo field among the Horde troops, he, according to the chroniclers, paid pretty much.

But Mamaia was not helped by either Genoese foot soldiers, nor trained Circassian warriors, nor cavalry from the Tatar lands. His army on the Kulikovo field was defeated, which led to the beginning, so to speak, of a new stage in the relations between Russia and the Horde.

What questions do specialists still have unambiguous answers?


Sometimes not only unambiguous answers, but also answers in general.

Firstly, this is the complete absence of any artifacts of that battle - arrowheads, spears, armor, etc. Secondly, the problem with the lack of human remains, and in fact on the battlefield tens of thousands of people died. One of the versions is the chronicler’s phrase that the battle took place on the Don at the mouth of Nepryadva does not quite correspond to the real geographical location of the Kulikov field, and therefore the field itself is still not identified exactly. Another version - all the metal objects for hundreds of years have been collected from those places, and human remains (including bone) have been lost due to the high chemical activity of chernozem.

Whether all this is true or not, is a new reason to engage in scientific research using the most modern technologies.

But by and large, the fact remains: the year 1380 became the year in the history of our country, when the independence of the Moscow princes began to grow significantly, which ultimately allowed the unification of Russian lands around the city, which today is the Russian capital.
124 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. 210ox
    210ox 21 September 2019 07: 40
    +16
    A glorious page in the history of our state. Congratulations to my colleagues on the site. And why didn’t you find artifacts? Probably not looking there.
    1. Boris55
      Boris55 21 September 2019 07: 45
      -13
      There are no winners in the civil war.

      1. 210ox
        210ox 21 September 2019 07: 46
        +13
        Are the Genoese our "citizens" too?
        1. Boris55
          Boris55 21 September 2019 07: 49
          -11
          Quote: 210ox
          Are the Genoese our "citizens" too?

          Evak where you brought. laughing There are no unmanaged processes.
          Then let's start from Egypt, it was from there that 22 hierophants left and built the current Western civilization on the model of the sunken Atlantis.
          1. ltc35
            ltc35 21 September 2019 08: 09
            +2
            Mercenaries in the history of Russia have always been. Take a case in point from the great turmoil. At that time they ruled in Moscow undividedly. Only after the accession of Peter was order established. And even after this, the army up to the Great Socialist October Revolution did not do without mercenaries.
            1. RUSS
              RUSS 21 September 2019 10: 29
              -6
              Quote: ltc35
              And even after this, the army up to the Great Socialist October Revolution did not do without mercenaries.

              The Chinese, Hungarians and Latvians fought on the civilian side on the Reds, in fact they were the same mercenaries, punishers.
              1. Serg koma
                Serg koma 23 September 2019 09: 40
                0
                Quote: RUSS
                fought on the side of the Reds

                And on the white side?
            2. seregatara1969
              seregatara1969 21 September 2019 19: 17
              +1
              and in Byzantine how many Russian mercenaries were?
              1. Serg koma
                Serg koma 23 September 2019 10: 10
                0
                The answer to the question is something very reminiscent of.
          2. 210ox
            210ox 21 September 2019 09: 08
            +14
            No, it didn't. And in your opinion that the Second World War was also "civil"? After all, the Russians fought on the side of the Nazis (like Russians)
            1. Boris55
              Boris55 21 September 2019 09: 31
              +1
              Quote: 210ox
              And in your opinion that the Second World War was also "civil"?

              No. WWII were traitors.
              In the three hundred year-old civil war, the war was between supporters of the old faith and the new faith. In World War II, the war went to the destruction of all. Then the war went between the concepts of life organization of society. In that battle the greed of the Magi won, who refused to serve the people and put personal interests above the interests of relatives. In 1917, they lost. As an echo of that confrontation that continues to this day, it is the presence of the ROCOR (http://rpsc.ru/).
              1. Boris55
                Boris55 21 September 2019 19: 42
                -2
                I’ll add another video to the theme of the wonderful historian who left us on September 17 of this year ...:

                How different in their approach to the Tatar-Mongol invasion church chronicles and folk epics. Where, according to the epics, was the "Tatar land", why "Tatars" do not come from the steppe, but from the sea. From where the Serpent Gorynych flew to Russia. What other references to the "Tatars" have been preserved in the epics by the people's memory, why they are rejected and forgotten by modern historical science.

            2. Serg koma
              Serg koma 23 September 2019 10: 07
              +1
              Quote: 210ox
              Russians fought on the side of the fascists (as if Russians)

              Do not invent concepts - "like Russians" wassat SUCH are called all over the world -
              collaborators in the legal interpretation of international law - conscious and voluntary cooperation with the enemy in his interests and to the detriment of his state..
              And there is a Russian word synonymous with COLLABORATION (s) - Traitor / Traitor
              1. 210ox
                210ox 23 September 2019 10: 09
                +1
                I completely agree. Yes, traitors ..
        2. Sergei71
          Sergei71 21 September 2019 08: 13
          0
          Pasta Suppliers. wink
        3. Mountain shooter
          Mountain shooter 21 September 2019 08: 56
          +8
          Quote: 210ox
          Are the Genoese our "citizens" too?

          Of course not. And the invasion of Batu occurred in 1238 (Ryazan). And the Battle of Kulikovo 1380. Out of 300 years, the yoke I see 142 laughing Standing on the Ugra is not the end of Iga. But rather, a statement of the power of Muscovy, when the Tatars left WITHOUT attempting to attack, recognizing the strength of the Russian army. And of course, it was not a civil war, although there were Russian regiments there. Especially with the Lithuanians. Who did not have time to battle, and having learned the results, they left quietly. wassat
          1. PalBor
            PalBor 21 September 2019 11: 17
            +1
            Pitsilistov history divorced ...
            The Batu invasion began in the fall of 1237, Ryazan - December 1237;
            - The Battle of Kulikovo is by no means the end of the "yoke", even many opponents of the official history admit that it was 143 years old?
            -About the intra-imperial showdown between the two governors - Putin is right;
            -The distance on the Ugra represents a whole series of skirmishes, battles, several attempts to cross the river with large forces, a campaign of the Russian-Nogai army along the enemy's rear ... a full-fledged war. "Without trying to attack," funny.
            When you criticize, at least don't make faces, not seriously.
            1. Mountain shooter
              Mountain shooter 21 September 2019 11: 38
              0
              Quote: PalBor
              -The distance on the Ugra represents a whole series of skirmishes, battles, several attempts to cross the river with large forces, a campaign of the Russian-Nogai army along the enemy's rear ... a full-fledged war. "Without trying to attack", funny

              All these skirmishes and raids on the rear are not a general battle. There is nothing to educate me. I know history no worse than you. A full-fledged war without a general battle?
              Himself is not funny?
              Well, in Ryazan - the battle with Kolovrat - the last episode of the battle in the Ryazan principality. When?
          2. den3080
            den3080 21 September 2019 11: 21
            +3
            Quote: Mountain Shooter
            Quote: 210ox
            Are the Genoese our "citizens" too?

            Of course not. And the invasion of Batu occurred in 1238 (Ryazan). And the Battle of Kulikovo 1380. Out of 300 years, the yoke I see 142 laughing Standing on the Ugra is not the end of Iga. But rather, a statement of the power of Muscovy, when the Tatars left WITHOUT attempting to attack, recognizing the strength of the Russian army. And of course, it was not a civil war, although there were Russian regiments there. Especially with the Lithuanians. Who did not have time to battle, and having learned the results, they left quietly. wassat

            I also can not count the 300 years of the Mongol-Tatar yoke.
            Well, let it begin with 1238. Good, plus 300 years. This is the year 1538.
            For 5 years, as Ivan IV, who later received the nickname Grozny, he ruled.
            No yoke was already in sight. The Russians at that time successfully fought with various "hordes" and a little later (1555) defeated the Kazan Khanate, and a year later the Astrakhan.
            Where is the yoke 300 years old? It is completely incomprehensible.
            1. Serg koma
              Serg koma 23 September 2019 10: 50
              0
              Quote: den3080
              Where is the yoke 300 years old? It is completely incomprehensible.

              1. From the exam
              Assignment 23 No. 8744
              In 1480, Khan Akhmat moved to Moscow, wanting to punish Grand Duke Ivan III for refusing to pay tribute. However, he failed to defeat the Moscow army, and Russia was freed from the power of the Horde.

              2. Tatars (but Crimean)
              In May 1571, another Crimean khan Devlet I Gerai, led by an army of 40 thousand horsemen, the khan burned Moscow, for which he received the nickname Takht Algan ("taking the throne"). During the raid on the Moscow state, several historians believe that several hundred thousand people died and 50 were taken prisoner. Ivan IV undertook to pay a tribute to Crimea annually


              Quote: den3080
              This is 1538 year

              According to all sources, the Mongol - Tatar yoke dates from 1243 to 1480, probably the Krymchaks were added here (in 300 years). in 1515, the Crimean Khan Mehmed I Gerai, the son of Mengli Gerai, took the title "padish of all Moguls (Mongols)." Those. formally Tatar-Mongol.
              By the way, the Crimean Tatars were paid until 1685, Peter I stopped the "payments", which were called not "tribute", but "commemoration" (irregular payment a la "gift")
      2. tlauicol
        tlauicol 21 September 2019 08: 07
        +7
        mdya, Volodya blurted out then blurted out about the Battle of Kulikovo ... still probably regrets
        1. ltc35
          ltc35 21 September 2019 08: 28
          +5
          Yes, he never regrets what has been said and does not take his words back with an apology. Well, said and said.
          1. RUSS
            RUSS 21 September 2019 10: 31
            +2
            Quote: ltc35
            Yes, he never regrets what has been said and does not take his words back with an apology. Well, said and said.

            He will say simply, "please treat this with understanding"
        2. dvina71
          dvina71 21 September 2019 08: 52
          +5
          Quote: Tlauicol
          mdya, Volodya blurted out then blurted out about the Battle of Kulikovo

          Well, you will deal with this issue in more detail and understand that GDP is not so far from the truth. The Russian principalities of that time were included, on vassal rights, into the Genghisids Empire. What do you think ... The Russian Prince goes to the capital of the Empire, to the Council where the issue of succession is being decided ... is that what? No matter how it sounds, but the Battle of the Kulikovo Field ... is an internal imperial affair. The vizier did not have enough money and he decided to demand more money from Moscow, although the way out was already paid. So Dm.Donskoy led the troops, primarily out of economic interests .., and then they supplied the victory with politics and religion. So that..
          1. Rakovor
            Rakovor 21 September 2019 09: 03
            +2
            So, it seemed like our By that time the Exits had not been paid for several years, and only after Tokhtamysh they resumed.
            1. dvina71
              dvina71 21 September 2019 09: 04
              -1
              Quote: Rakovor
              so it’s like they didn’t pay by that time the Exits for several years

              They paid regularly and even a few years after the Ugra ..
            2. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 21 September 2019 10: 45
              +4
              They did not pay, because there was a split in the Horde. They did not know who to pay.
              Mom was not a khan at all, but a viceroy. Khans from Caravanserai
              he was not recognized. But it was Mamai who gave Prince Dmitry a shortcut to reign.
              When Dmitry realized that Mamai Khan was "not real", he stopped paying.
              And rebelled. He defeated Mamaia on the Kulikovo field. (about the Genoese - the truth).
              But then the real chosen khans came, burned Moscow, and a tribute
              resumed.
              1. dvina71
                dvina71 21 September 2019 11: 48
                0
                Quote: voyaka uh
                Horde was split

                There was no split. Chingizid at that time fought in the east, and Mamai decided to sit him up .. he had the seventh water on jelly by blood to Chingizids .. He didn’t have enough resources for that and he decided to shake Moscow again .. Moscow The output paid regularly ..
                For the defeat, the troops of Mamaia burned Moscow in winter ... but only Moscow .. for edification.
                1. Kenxnumx
                  Kenxnumx 21 September 2019 12: 05
                  -2
                  Dmitry, as a representative of the Horde, defeated the usurper Mamaia, but did not agree with the leadership on the amount of tribute. For which they actually burned Moscow. There was no struggle for liberation. There was no such thing. And there was a cash flow issue.
                  1. Beringovsky
                    Beringovsky 21 September 2019 14: 28
                    +2
                    There was no struggle for liberation. There was no such thing. And there was a cash flow issue.

                    It’s just that it wasn’t belay
                    and the Russian soldiers went to battle because they did not know to whom to give money, yes.
                    You measure everything by "cash flows" ...
                    and already
                    Kenxnumx
                    Dmitry, as a representative of the Horde

                    just have fun laughing
                    What, Dmitry’s mandate is still preserved? So with the seal?
                    1. Kenxnumx
                      Kenxnumx 21 September 2019 18: 44
                      +3
                      Russian soldiers went to battle because their employer and breadwinner said so. For the same reason, the Tatars marched into battle, which made up almost the entire watch regiment and served Dmitry. I measure not all cash flows, but only what is measured in this case by them. The tribute is called - which Dmitry collected for the Tatars, as the head of the administrative unit of the Golden Horde. Only he sometimes forgot to forward it to the federal center. Because Mamai was considered a little usurper. As a result, the legal representative of the Golden Horde, Dmitry, fought with the usurper Mamai. And Dmitry had a document. The label was called. I'm not sure about printing, but maybe it was
                      1. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 21 September 2019 22: 40
                        +2
                        Quote: Ken71
                        It is called tribute

                        Only he did not collect a tribute, but an "exit" - that is, a tax ...
                        And the background of Mamai’s campaign there was somewhat different. than tax evasion
                      2. Kenxnumx
                        Kenxnumx 21 September 2019 22: 48
                        +3
                        Well, let the way out, the Basque tax all that. But Mamai was in a serious minus and in case of luck could prettyly rise. And Dmitry really refused to pay. That is, a conflict of interest was inevitable and the reason was money. And all sorts of petty political pranks with labels and even the robbery of motherly possessions is secondary. IMHO
                      3. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 22 September 2019 16: 04
                        0
                        Quote: Ken71
                        . That is, a conflict of interest was inevitable and the reason was money.

                        So, of course, the root cause of everything in our history is the economy!
                      4. Beringovsky
                        Beringovsky 22 September 2019 22: 56
                        -1
                        For general development, the ruler was not Mamai, but Muhammad Bulak, the real Indian Chingizid, Muslim, etc., i.e. quite a "legitimate" ruler.
                        Chingizid is not some kind of "wrong" label holder, Dimitri, to whom this label was given ... Mohammed Bulak himself (suddenly belay )
                        So your "version" is no good.
                        And yes, there was no federal center in the Horde, because She was not a federation.
                        Also, there were no "administrations", and so on. nonsense you invented.
                      5. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 23 September 2019 20: 39
                        0
                        Quote: Beringovsky
                        For general development, the ruler was not Mamai, but Mohammed Bulak, a real Chingizid Indian, a Muslim, etc. quite a "legitimate" ruler.

                        Nonetheless. in the hands of the non-Genghiside and temporary Mamaia was all the real power in the Horde, and the Horde themselves then had to get rid of it for a very long time ...

                        Quote: Beringovsky
                        And yes, there was no federal center in the Horde, because She was not a federation.
                        Also, there were no "administrations", and so on. nonsense you invented.

                        This is just an analogy ...
                      6. Beringovsky
                        Beringovsky 24 September 2019 17: 56
                        -1
                        Nonetheless. in the hands of the non-Genghiside and temporary Mamaia was all the real power in the Horde, and the Horde themselves then had to get rid of it for a very long time ...

                        Again, some fantasies ... one might think that simple shepherds understood the intricacies of the Horde "Court". There was no Internet then laughing
                        Tens of thousands of warriors followed this temporary worker until luck turned away from him. Nobody prevented them from going over to the side of the "legal authority", as you called it. After all, they did so in the end?
                        By the way, one of Mamaia’s opponents, Cherkesskhan, was also not a Genghisid.
                        This is just an analogy ...

                        This is the point. There were no such "analogies" then. In general, it is necessary to use analogies more carefully, or even not far from the next Fomenkovism.
              2. Albert1988
                Albert1988 21 September 2019 22: 42
                0
                Quote: voyaka uh
                They did not pay, because there was a split in the Horde. They did not know who to pay.

                There the problem was not in the recipient of the payment, but because after the split ours bargained to reduce the "output" from 4% to 2%, and Mamayka decided to raise it back to 4% ...
      3. demo
        demo 21 September 2019 08: 19
        +8
        Yes.
        Without a prepared text, Volodya "floated".
        I especially liked it - "to look at the realities that took place then."
        And more.
        "There were Russian people on both sides."
        Ну и что?
        Some were carriers of some ideas.
        Others are others.
        But this is not a civil war.
        This is an invasion.
        So you can get to the point that the Great Patriotic War was also civil.
        Vlasov and his followers were Russian.
      4. figwam
        figwam 21 September 2019 08: 56
        +2
        Quote: Boris55
        There are no winners in the civil war.

        That's right ...
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Tersky
      Tersky 21 September 2019 11: 58
      +4
      Quote: 210ox
      And the fact that they did not find artifacts?

      Everything is there, the author would not hurt to search and get acquainted with the “Relics of the Don Battle. The catalog of finds on the Kulikovo field ”, the catalog, which contains material evidence of the reality of the battle on the Kulikovo field, published back in 2009. and only then voice the version (?) about the complete absence of any artifacts of that battle.
    4. poquello
      poquello 21 September 2019 19: 43
      +1
      Quote: 210ox
      And why didn’t they find artifacts? Probably not looking there.

      the author probably thinks that after the battle everyone around died, or the Russians are such a Basurman that they left everything in the open field as is
    5. Albert1988
      Albert1988 21 September 2019 22: 39
      +1
      Quote: 210ox
      A glorious page in the history of our state. Congratulations to my colleagues on the site. And why didn’t you find artifacts? Probably not looking there.

      Look at the YouTube interview of archaeologist Oleg Viktorovich Dvurechensky - he regularly traveled to this field for about 10 years and found there just a bunch of artifacts of that particular battle ...
    6. nafanal
      nafanal 23 September 2019 14: 50
      0
      Yes, clearly not there ... After all, at that time any river was called Don ... If you carefully re-read the Zadonshchina with a pencil, you can conclude that the Battle of Kulikovo took place near Moscow in 1384. to the south of the Donskoy Monastery .. Yes, and if you carefully re-read fragments of different lists, for example, Undolsky's list, then there is the cry of the wives of the dead, such as the wives of Kolomna, and says "Moscow is Moscow, a fast river, which nursed our husbands from us to the land of Polovets." And Kulikovo field not far from Moscow was - Kulishki is now Zamoskvorechye .... From this and went .. in the distance ... The date can be calculated "And from the Kalka battle to the Mamaev massacre 160 years" 1224 + 160 = 1384 ..
  2. maidan.izrailovich
    maidan.izrailovich 21 September 2019 07: 52
    +1
    But by and large, the fact remains: the year 1380 was the year in the history of our country when ....

    Of course, the Kulikovo battle is a great military feat of our ancestors.
    But the problem of the Golden Horde has not been resolved.
    The solution to this problem occurred exactly 100 years later.
    Standing on the Ugra River. In the year 1480. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugre_Region_State_## Results
    If we draw an analogy with the Great Patriotic War, then the Battle of Kulikovo is the Battle of Moscow (1941).
    But we are celebrating May 9th. So Standing on the Ugra River is the end of the yoke. But actually a 300 year war.
    1. Semurg
      Semurg 21 September 2019 08: 03
      +10
      Quote: maidan.izrailovich
      . So Standing on the Ugra River is the end of the yoke. But actually a 300 year war.

      Do not mislead people, there was no 300 year war, and there was a collapse of the Golden Horde empire, like all previous and future empires, in a dozen states. Then a new Russian empire arose, which conquered the lands of the former Golden Horde. For me, the Battle of Poltava is more suitable as a day of military glory.
      1. Sergei71
        Sergei71 21 September 2019 08: 11
        -12
        Well, of course, where those with slightly wet panties were fenced in with fortifications and .... waited. Good luck.
        1. Semurg
          Semurg 21 September 2019 09: 08
          +6
          For me, Karl was lucky that he managed to rush to the border before the chase. By the way, near Narva, the same in defense were basically like those near Poltava, but the result is diametrically different. So lucky for those who are lucky. IMHO.
          1. LiSiCyn
            LiSiCyn 21 September 2019 09: 32
            +2
            Quote: Semurg
            By the way, near Narva, the same in defense were mainly

            Under siege. Narva, besieged. Karl was lucky, ours did not expect him to pull up so quickly. Weather accompanied at the time of the attack. And of course, at that moment, the coherence and training of the troops.
            1. Semurg
              Semurg 21 September 2019 11: 04
              +1
              Quote: LiSiCyn
              Quote: Semurg
              By the way, near Narva, the same in defense were mainly

              Under siege. Narva, besieged. Karl was lucky, ours did not expect him to pull up so quickly. Weather accompanied at the time of the attack. And of course, at that moment, the coherence and training of the troops.

              Narva was besieged by this clearly, I write in relation to the troops of Karl both near Narva and near Poltava the Russian army fought mainly a defensive battle, which led to different results.
          2. Sergei71
            Sergei71 21 September 2019 10: 47
            +1
            The same Narva, on the defensive, mostly stood as near Poltava, but the result is diametrically different

            The weather let us down a bit + logistics + useless troops (excluding 3, in my opinion, divisions). This is about Narva. Time has passed. Weather +++, logistics back and forth. Well, but about the third above.
        2. bukhach
          bukhach 22 September 2019 00: 10
          +1
          They didn’t wait, at first they gave it to Forest Swede notably, and then they piled it near Poltava. So, before the general battle, a preemptive strike was dealt. They were amused about pants, go Ukrainian, they like to mock Russia’s victories in different ways, they’re suffering their dumb ones . And what, one wonders, Russia has enough defeats, and enjoy them.
    2. Albert1988
      Albert1988 22 September 2019 16: 06
      0
      Quote: maidan.izrailovich
      But we are celebrating May 9th. So Standing on the Ugra River is the end of the yoke. But actually a 300 year war.

      It wasn’t just a war, there were skirmishes, yes, only most of this time Russia was quite such a normal vassal of the Horde ... And 4% paid to join the horde ...
  3. Obliterator
    Obliterator 21 September 2019 07: 55
    +8
    It can be stated that the European "partners" in those ancient times did not hesitate to oppose Russia (Russia), seeing this as a benefit, first of all, for themselves. Indeed, despite the decrease in the level of influence of Mamaia, his treasury was by no means empty, and to the same Genoese infantrymen who appeared on the Kulikovo field among the Horde troops, he, according to the chroniclers, paid pretty much.
    What intrigues of "Western partners" can we talk about in the case when a bunch of mercenaries just decided to "cut the dough" on someone else's arrow?
    1. maidan.izrailovich
      maidan.izrailovich 21 September 2019 08: 11
      0
      What intrigues of "Western partners" can we talk about in the case when a bunch of mercenaries just decided to "cut the dough" on someone else's arrow?

      Yes indeed they were mercenaries. Yes, they only did not serve Mamaia. And it was not Mamai who paid them.
      They served the interests of the Genoese republic and received payment there.
      There were several reasons for the presence of Genoese mercenaries in this battle.
      The main ones are the business interests of the Genoese merchants and the interests of the Vatican. The interests of the Vatican are still the same. Crush Orthodoxy. By the way, at different periods the Vatican sent generous gifts to the rulers of the Golden Horde. And that time, the mercenaries received a blessing from the Pope himself ..
      1. Kenxnumx
        Kenxnumx 21 September 2019 12: 11
        +1
        Not certainly in that way. There were Genoese colonies in Crimea, the existence of which rested on the goodwill and interests of Mamai, so the troops gave him, but not for free. Mamai paid the Genoa mercenaries, borrowed money from the banker Pereira (like that was called). The Vatican was deeply spit on Dmitry, because even in the peak case for the Russians, this hitting Mamaia from a religious point of view could have no effect.
  4. Provincial_71
    Provincial_71 21 September 2019 08: 02
    +2
    In my opinion, there are very convincing arguments that the Battle of Kulikovo did not take place in the Tula region, but in the Lipetsk region, near Lebedyan, where the Beautiful Sword flows into the Don. In ancient times, there was Nepryadva, and other toponymy and relief coincide with the annals. But then many names changed. Local art historians find many artifacts of the battle there ...
    Read, for example, here: https://moe-lipetsk.ru/news/people/324208
    There are other researchers who came to a similar conclusion, regardless of the local historian Skuratov ..
  5. Lipchanin
    Lipchanin 21 September 2019 08: 04
    0
    Whether all this is true or not, is a new reason to engage in scientific research using the most modern technologies.

    It is high time. And then the "historians" divorced like cockroaches in the kitchen of a bad housewife and each of them utters his "truth"
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 22 September 2019 16: 09
      0
      Quote: Lipchanin
      It is high time. And then the "historians" divorced like cockroaches in the kitchen of a bad housewife and each of them utters his "truth"

      Here is Comrade Dvurechensky and is engaged, using both proven old and new technologies, and his results speak in favor of the fact that the battle was on this field ...
  6. Vadim T.
    Vadim T. 21 September 2019 08: 04
    +8
    There is a version that the Battle of Kulikovo took place almost at the walls of the Kremlin, and the remains of the dead Russian soldiers were buried near the Donskoy Monastery. Logically, going to the Don and fighting at a great distance from supply bases is pure suicide. And subsequent events show that the invaders needed exactly Moscow - a control and decision-making center (standing on the Ugra River, for example). But in any case, the search for a place of battle is the destiny of historians. And to the soldiers who defended their native land at the cost of their lives - eternal glory.
    1. Hagalaz
      Hagalaz 21 September 2019 09: 05
      0
      Well, as a version, the rules will go, no better and no worse than many others. A plus laughing .
      Although it has something in common with subsequent events. To "lure" under the walls of the Kremlin and there is very much our way to screw it up. True, it is risky that behind the wall and they can burn wink .
    2. sergo1914
      sergo1914 21 September 2019 10: 10
      0
      Quote: Vadim T.
      There is a version that the Battle of Kulikovo took place almost at the walls of the Kremlin, and the remains of the dead Russian soldiers were buried near the Donskoy Monastery. Logically, going to the Don and fighting at a great distance from supply bases is pure suicide. And subsequent events show that the invaders needed exactly Moscow - a control and decision-making center (standing on the Ugra River, for example). But in any case, the search for a place of battle is the destiny of historians. And to the soldiers who defended their native land at the cost of their lives - eternal glory.


      Version, Fomenko, by the way. It sounds very beautiful and sound. Down to the smallest detail. And burial places were found.
      1. Albert1988
        Albert1988 22 September 2019 16: 10
        0
        Quote: sergo1914
        Version, Fomenko, by the way. It sounds very beautiful and sound. Down to the smallest detail. And burial places were found.

        And that is why it is a heresy, like EVERYTHING that Fomenko and Nosovsky wrote about ...
        1. sergo1914
          sergo1914 22 September 2019 19: 20
          0
          Quote: Albert1988
          Quote: sergo1914
          Version, Fomenko, by the way. It sounds very beautiful and sound. Down to the smallest detail. And burial places were found.

          And that is why it is a heresy, like EVERYTHING that Fomenko and Nosovsky wrote about ...



          Heresy is to the church. I advise you to read, and then speak out.
          1. Albert1988
            Albert1988 23 September 2019 20: 43
            0
            Quote: sergo1914
            Heresy is to the church. I advise you to read, and then speak out.

            Heresy - means "choice of faith" if literally, in the modern colloquial meaning "heresy" means absurd, impossible, far-fetched, frankly delusional ideas ...
            But, if you don’t like this name of graphomania of Fin, I’ll give a simple and understandable wording - EVERYTHING that Fomenko-Nosovsky writes is just BAD, which can only be bought by a person who believes in conspiracy theories or has not become familiar with a selection of historical sources and analysis of these very sources.
            This nonsense has grown from a scientific joke common since Soviet times, which a cunning academician began to sell very profitably ...
            hi
  7. Thrifty
    Thrifty 21 September 2019 08: 05
    +1
    The main thing is not to forget ourselves, not to grow up "Ivan, not remembering kinship"!
  8. Sergei71
    Sergei71 21 September 2019 08: 06
    -3
    chroniclers mention such an interesting fact as participation in the battle on the Kulikovo field of the Genoese infantry

    What nonsense. There were not enough of these one and a half to two thousand for the whole of Kirim, still FLY somewhere. It is to fly, it's infantry.
  9. Nycomed
    Nycomed 21 September 2019 08: 15
    0
    There are more questions than answers ... request
    1. dik
      dik 21 September 2019 09: 17
      +1
      If I were at the site of the site administration, I would quickly delete this "questionnaire" so as not to discredit the resource
      1. Nycomed
        Nycomed 21 September 2019 09: 25
        -2
        I agree with you 100%. This is a task for historians. Let them work. And why do not we discuss what we have no idea about.
  10. certero
    certero 21 September 2019 08: 31
    +4
    It is somehow indecent now for the 21st century to again talk about the hundred thousandth hordes on the Kulikovo field.
    1. dik
      dik 21 September 2019 09: 01
      +12
      Yes, it's generally some kind of tin. I used to think that VO is a more or less serious resource, but here it is .... Actually, the Kulikovo battle is unique in that it is one of the few medieval battles where the battlefield location is EXACTLY established. Several archaeological expeditions were made there in the early 2000s, a sufficient number of artifacts were found. Well, how can you write articles on a topic that you don’t understand from a word at all?

      To mention the hundred-thousandth hordes and "tens of thousands of killed", as you rightly noted, is at least indecent. A MAXIMUM of 15 thousand people from both sides met on the Kulikovo field.

      Horror. I have been reading VO for 5 years already. I was always too lazy to write, but it was already impossible to restrain myself.
      1. dvina71
        dvina71 21 September 2019 09: 07
        +3
        Quote: dik
        On Kulikovo field, MAXIMUM 15 thousand people came together on both sides.


        At that time it is a lot ..
        1. dik
          dik 21 September 2019 09: 14
          +4
          I do not argue with that. The Kulikovo battle is undoubtedly a grand battle for its time
      2. Mordvin 3
        Mordvin 3 21 September 2019 10: 27
        0
        Quote: dik
        enough artifacts found.

        To me, it's not enough, to be honest. I was in the museum on the Kulikovo Field for a year like that in the 85, there was practically nothing to see.
        1. dvina71
          dvina71 21 September 2019 11: 49
          +2
          Quote: Mordvin 3
          To me, it's not enough, to be honest.

          Recently found a piece of chain mail and several arrowheads .. And this is a lot both in terms of time and the price factor of weapons at that time .. We collected everything that lay on the ground ..
          1. Terenin
            Terenin 21 September 2019 20: 46
            +1
            Quote: dvina71
            Quote: Mordvin 3
            To me, it's not enough, to be honest.

            Recently found a piece of chain mail and several arrowheads .. And this is a lot both in terms of time and the price factor of weapons at that time .. We collected everything that lay on the ground ..

            Well I do not know request Is it a lot? Here are three people who got rid of tips from one field in two days (in 2018, the Middle Volga region) fellow . Not a description of the battle (11-13 centuries in this place - no). I heard about other similar finds.
            1. Sergei71
              Sergei71 22 September 2019 09: 32
              +1
              One hundred archers per minute will fire (very modestly assess if) 400-500 arrows. Local mess, of which then .... This is if we are talking about the middle of about the 14th century and later.
              1. Terenin
                Terenin 22 September 2019 12: 03
                +1
                Quote: Sergei71
                .This is if we are talking about the middle of about the 14th century and later.

                Pictured is 11 max 12 century
  11. midshipman
    midshipman 21 September 2019 08: 33
    0
    Congratulations to the Russians on such a Victory Day at Kulikovo Field.
    I want to share my vision of this great holiday. I had one plant in this region subordinate. He produced for the Air Force and Navy of the USSR station RSDN. Therefore, I sometimes traveled with representatives of the MO Command there from Moscow by car. We stopped at the Kulikovo field and how the military tried to imagine the battle process.
    Firstly, the role of Bobrock in the participation of our troops in the battle is missing in the article. And his role was not one of the last.
    Secondly, the khan sent fogs several times (this is a hundred archers) to attack our troops. But none of the Tatars returned after the attacks. I think that Dmitry and Bobrok used catapults of logs in this battle and completely packed these hundreds, and our troops sent them six times. After this, the Tatars dismounted and went to our troops. Here the result has already been described well.
    1. dik
      dik 21 September 2019 09: 04
      +8
      There is no source of information about the course of the battle itself. Therefore, your words about "six waves of archers of which no one returned" looks very strange. This is not even touching on the fact that, in principle, then there was no weapon capable of COMPLETELY destroying a military unit.
    2. Meliodous
      Meliodous 21 September 2019 09: 09
      +6
      Seem the time has come for fucking stories!
      Catapults? In field? Do you even imagine their rate of fire? Well, the striking ability at the same time?
    3. Captain45
      Captain45 22 September 2019 12: 13
      +1
      Quote: midshipman
      Secondly, the khan sent fogs several times (this is a hundred archers) to attack our troops.

      As far as I remember from the course of school Soviet history - Tumen (fog) is hundreds of i.e. unit of 10000 warriors. Although now everything can be, won Fomenko claims that the Battle of Kulikovo was only 200 years ago.
  12. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 21 September 2019 09: 35
    +3
    Provocative article. Yes, and anonymous. Maybe Fomenko wrote? Back in 2006, on November 29 in Komsomolskaya Pravda, there was an article entitled "Strange anomalies of the Kulikov field." It was about the fact that an archaeological expedition together with the staff of IZMIRAN (Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism) discovered anomalies that fully correspond to the size of the burials of the fallen. The burials were made in a layer of black soil, which completely processed the bones due to its biological activity. Other artifacts (spearheads and arrowheads, horse harness) were regularly found on the field in the XNUMXth - XNUMXth centuries, and the spearhead was donated by a local landowner to Nicholas I. The Kulikovo field itself has been a place of intensive economic activity for several centuries.
  13. Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 21 September 2019 09: 41
    +6
    I believe that the most complete and realistic during the Kulikovo battle was told by Klim of the beetles in an intelligence survey with beam
    1. dik
      dik 21 September 2019 10: 35
      +1
      Yes, I advise everyone to get acquainted. Everything falls into place immediately
  14. Rwmos
    Rwmos 21 September 2019 10: 04
    -1
    As far as I remember, there is also confusion with dates.
    Ah, for sure:
    http://www.hrono.info/statii/2003/kulikovo.html
  15. Operator
    Operator 21 September 2019 10: 05
    -2
    the battle took place on the Don at the mouth of Nepryadva - in the 14th century the word "mouth" (mouth) denoted the source of the river, stupid Jewish historians still cannot recognize this fact.

    To date, in the area of ​​the source of Nepryadva, enough artifacts of the Battle of Kulikovo have been found and a museum has been created on a voluntary basis.
  16. mavrus
    mavrus 21 September 2019 10: 13
    0
    Quote: Rakovor
    So, it seemed like our By that time the Exits had not been paid for several years, and only after Tokhtamysh they resumed.

    Quote: Boris55
    There are no winners in the civil war.


    Stupidity, in any war there are winners ... Even if it is "nobody's", and everyone stayed with their own. And even in a large, significant for history, battle even more so. It happens that there are no “losers”, and both warring parties consider themselves to be winners (Borodino). But even the Battle of Auskula has a winner. Even if this battle went down in history as "Pyrrhic victory".
  17. dik
    dik 21 September 2019 10: 46
    +1
    Quote: mordvin xnumx
    Quote: dik
    enough artifacts found.

    To me, it's not enough, to be honest. I was in the museum on the Kulikovo Field for a year like that in the 85, there was practically nothing to see.


    You do not read what you comment? I wrote in white Russian that the expedition was in the 2000s.
    1. Andrey VOV
      Andrey VOV 21 September 2019 11: 07
      +1
      There were expeditions much earlier, students of the Tula Pedagogical Institute constantly went there for archaeological practice. Plus the constantly operating Tula archaeological expedition, and in order to reduce the number of "blank spots" among VO readers in this matter, do not be lazy, if you live nearby, go to Tulu, there are museums and very close and the Kulikovo field itself is not far ..
  18. Gennady Fomkin
    Gennady Fomkin 21 September 2019 11: 26
    +1
    Quote: 210ox
    A glorious page in the history of our state. Congratulations to my colleagues on the site. And why didn’t you find artifacts? Probably not looking there.
    Found a long time ago.
    1. alexmach
      alexmach 21 September 2019 11: 46
      +1
      The pseudo-historical is written by incompetent people.
      1. The Battle of Kulikovo was found
      2. no hundreds of thousands of people were there simply because they could not be there. These are not the fronts of world wars of the 20th century.
      3.
      But by and large, the fact remains: the year 1380 became the year in the history of our country when the independence of Moscow princes began to grow significantly

      Bullshit ravings. The independence of these princes grew the previous 100 years. The battle of Kulikovo became the epogee of this growth.
      4. About the treasury of Mamai ... After all, he came to the treasury, calved to take a tribute, which Dmitry had occupied for a long time.
      5 Genoese foot soldiers must have stood on the battlefield to the right of the Japanese samurai and to the left of the Massai tribe.
      1. certero
        certero 22 September 2019 08: 31
        +2
        In fairness, it should be noted that financial documents on the employment of military personnel by Mom have just been found in Genoa
        1. alexmach
          alexmach 22 September 2019 11: 07
          0
          Interesting. But why only now? Genoese sources must be accessible and well known throughout the past centuries.
          1. certero
            certero 22 September 2019 11: 09
            0
            There documents horseradish mountain. Imagine yourself a financial report of a bank since that time. It goes on documents of a financial nature which describe the costs of paying mercenaries
      2. Sergei71
        Sergei71 22 September 2019 09: 11
        +1
        Genoese foot soldiers must have stood on the battlefield to the right of the Japanese samurai and to the left of the Massai tribe.

        No, there were no Masai, on the right flank there were fighting Eskimos from Peru. lol It was at the expense of them that Dmitry managed to bring the army to 150k. wink
  19. Zeev Zeev
    Zeev Zeev 21 September 2019 11: 29
    +2
    During the Thirty Years War Zaporizhzhya Cossacks and Foxes fought in Western Europe. This clearly shows that the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was already actively interfering in the politics of Western European states.
    1. Gennady Fomkin
      Gennady Fomkin 21 September 2019 13: 44
      0
      laughing wassat fool Think with your head before carrying bullshit. With Ataman Sirco, a miracle from the French Baron de Siro in the rich national-patriotic imagination arising laughing laughing
      1. Zeev Zeev
        Zeev Zeev 21 September 2019 17: 58
        +1
        I don’t know who Sirko is, but the Cossacks with foxes in Europe were ordinary mercenaries, like the Genoese infantry in the army of Mamaia. No geopolitics, stupid for grandmas.
  20. mavrus
    mavrus 21 September 2019 12: 29
    -1
    Quote: dik
    Yes, it's generally some kind of tin. I used to think that VO is a more or less serious resource, but here it is .... Actually, the Kulikovo battle is unique in that it is one of the few medieval battles where the battlefield location is EXACTLY established. Several archaeological expeditions were made there in the early 2000s, a sufficient number of artifacts were found. Well, how can you write articles on a topic that you don’t understand from a word at all?

    To mention the hundred-thousandth hordes and "tens of thousands of killed", as you rightly noted, is at least indecent. A MAXIMUM of 15 thousand people from both sides met on the Kulikovo field.

    Horror. I have been reading VO for 5 years already. I was always too lazy to write, but it was already impossible to restrain myself.

    Well, there was a lot of "afftorof history" ... I would not be surprised that soon they will write that in general thirty people participated from each side. A sort of "Battle of thirty 2.0." after 29 years.
    The historical significance of the Battle of Kulikovo is that "... Moscow, Kolomna, Zvenigorod, Mozhaisk, Volok, Serpukhov, Borovsk, Dmitrov, Pereslavl, Vladimir, Kostroma, Uglich, Galician, Bezhetsk, Torzhkovsk, Belozersk, Yaroslavl Rostov, Starodub, Molozhsky, Kashinsky, Vyazma, Dorogobuzh, Taru, Obolensk, Bryansk regiments, and the RUSSIAN VOYSKO returned from the battle ... ". Only one listing of the "princely regiments" speaks of the importance Dmitry Ivanovich attached to this confrontation with the "non-Chengizid Mamai" who united the Horde. So the mobilization was "general". Yes, and Mamai, pressed by Tokhtamysh, put everything on this campaign. Therefore, to underestimate the number of troops to 30, 20, and even 5 thousand, based only on the fact that in the countless battles of that era between the appanage princes (with complete indifference of the population and the church), 500-1000 people participated, as something stupid. And here is Sergius of Radonezh, and Peresvet with Ostlyabey, and the "great cry" who stood in Moscow after the Oka army crossed ...
    1. dik
      dik 21 September 2019 12: 41
      +2
      Quote: mavrus
      [So the mobilization was "general". Yes, and Mamai, pressed by Tokhtamysh, put everything on this campaign. Therefore, underestimate the number of troops to 30, 20, and even 5 thousand, ...


      Underestimate ??? 20 thousand Russian troops, this is at least a double overestimation. There was no mobilization then, in those days only service people went to war. Moreover, it is well known that the troops were assembled very quickly, and they also advanced quickly on the campaign. At that time, there was simply no infantry in the Russian army - all were mounted.

      Therefore, more than 8 thousand there was simply nowhere to take. And it’s really a lot for those times
      1. Sergei71
        Sergei71 22 September 2019 09: 14
        0
        Therefore, more than 8 thousand there was simply nowhere to take. And it’s really a lot for those times

        Most likely, even less. let's say 3-4 thousand somewhere.
        1. dik
          dik 26 September 2019 13: 32
          0
          It is likely that this is so.
  21. Gennady Fomkin
    Gennady Fomkin 21 September 2019 12: 42
    0
    Quote: alexmach
    The pseudo-historical is written by incompetent people.
    1. The Battle of Kulikovo was found
    2. no hundreds of thousands of people were there simply because they could not be there. These are not the fronts of world wars of the 20th century.
    3.
    But by and large, the fact remains: the year 1380 became the year in the history of our country when the independence of Moscow princes began to grow significantly

    Bullshit ravings. The independence of these princes grew the previous 100 years. The battle of Kulikovo became the epogee of this growth.
    4. About the treasury of Mamai ... After all, he came to the treasury, calved to take a tribute, which Dmitry had occupied for a long time.
    5 Genoese foot soldiers must have stood on the battlefield to the right of the Japanese samurai and to the left of the Massai tribe.

    laughing You are healthy? laughing
  22. dik
    dik 21 September 2019 12: 45
    0
    Quote: Gennady Fomkin
    [
    laughing You are healthy? laughing


    Well, if you compare, then no doubt. At least the text is written clearly by a mentally healthy and educated person
  23. Gennady Fomkin
    Gennady Fomkin 21 September 2019 12: 46
    0
    laughing It’s interesting that the Poles probably found a bunch of scrap metal at the site of the Battle of Grunwald laughing laughing lol
    1. dik
      dik 21 September 2019 12: 50
      0
      But where did he get from? In those days, everything was collected, since everything made by hand was of value.
  24. Gennady Fomkin
    Gennady Fomkin 21 September 2019 13: 08
    0
    https://youtu.be/gmd5F3_Q1A8
  25. Gennady Fomkin
    Gennady Fomkin 21 September 2019 13: 27
    +1
    Quote: Zeev Zeev
    During the Thirty Years War Zaporizhzhya Cossacks and Foxes fought in Western Europe. This clearly shows that the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was already actively interfering in the politics of Western European states.

    laughing laughing When people begin to invent history and historical heroes for themselves, and even so clumsily, this means that this "people" has no history. And this "people" itself is not a people, but an "ethnic chimera". There is no special news yet, so I decided to amuse you this evening laughing

    Check out this great research by the blogger amp-amp on how the Cossacks, led by chieftain Sirko, "took Dunkirk"

    By the way, this amazing story is really in the history textbook of modern Ukraine for grade 8

    In general, have fun from and to - I quote:

    "Let us recall the events of 370 years ago. Then, in 1645, France asked the Cossacks for help in storming the Dunkirk fortress, which at that time was captured by the Spaniards, who controlled the adjacent territory, both on land and at sea. All this happened during During the Thirty Years War, the French could not take possession of the city of Dunkirk for about ten years, and they could not dislodge the enemy even with the help of blockade by England and the Netherlands.

    The French military engineer Beauplan in 1644 invited the French ambassador to the Commonwealth to invite the Cossacks to fight against the Spanish troops, who were one of the best soldiers in Europe and often took part in European wars as mercenaries ... "" France asked ... "! This phrase is included , in my opinion, in all versions of this wonderful story. According to history ... um, I'll get better ... According to Ukrainian history, everyone around constantly asked Ukraine for something. Apparently, this is why now Ukraine has to ask itself. Although, according to the Ukrainian version of events, Surely, they exclusively demand what is due, because everyone around them is in an irredeemable debt to Ukraine.

    Another obligatory phrase is that the Cossacks were considered "one of the best warriors in Europe." Little has changed over the centuries. Ukrainians are still considered "one of the best warriors", but already of the whole world. It is believed, however, exclusively within Ukraine itself. It should be noted that the French, led by Prince de Condé, tried to storm Dunkirk for several years in a row, but did not even manage to get close to the fortress. The Cossacks dealt with the enemy in a matter of hours. " laughing This story also entered school history books. True, in a more scanty version.
  26. Gennady Fomkin
    Gennady Fomkin 21 September 2019 13: 32
    0
    I translate: “The author commanded 2400 Polish infantry during the first siege of Dunkirk.” Some well-known patriots for some reason believe that Chevalier by these “2400 Polish infantry” meant precisely the Cossacks. But what a strange thing, in all his other memoirs, he does not confuse them, but clearly distinguishes them. His book itself is entitled "The History of the Cossack War", and not "The History of the War of the Polish Infantry against Poland." So, no, Chevalier did not confuse the Cossacks with the Poles.

    And in the biography of Bogdan Khmelnitsky, which Chevalier cites in his book, the fact of the participation of Bogdan and his Cossacks in the war in France is completely absent, although the rest of the information is described in detail. Forgot? What are you! Even the intention of King Vladislav to appoint Khmelnitsky as commander in chief of the troops in the war with the Crimean Tatars is described. Moreover, in the same year 1646, in which Khmelnitsky allegedly took Dunkirk. I doubt that Khmelnitsky, despite all his talents, was able to command two fronts at the same time, the French and the Crimean. Are there any other historical documents that can shed light on this story. Yes there is. There is, for example, the correspondence of Cardinal Mazarin with the French Ambassador de Breguy, where de Bregui advises hiring Cossacks to participate in the war. But, as you know, advice and intention does not at all mean that the intended thing has happened. Just the facts of what happened are not at all. But the facts confirming the participation of the Poles are available.

    The same Cardinal Mazarin, in correspondence with the Duke of Engiem (Conde), wrote on August 6, 1646, about the arrival of the "chief colonel of the Poles," Przyemsky. Another letter dated September 1 indicates that the Polish army “was accompanied by the secretary of Mr. de Breguy”, i.e. the same Pierre Chevalier.

    September 4, 1646 Mazarin decides on the payment of mercenaries: "I agreed on everything with Colonel Prziemsky so that you can use the Poles throughout the campaign in the army and in the garrisons ... The Colonel is completely satisfied and promises that their people will do the same like other soldiers more experienced in warfare. But I believe that you shouldn’t trust his words strongly, and you should trust the Poles only when you are sure that it is in their power. ”
  27. Gennady Fomkin
    Gennady Fomkin 21 September 2019 13: 34
    0
    Are there any other historical documents that can shed light on this story. Yes there is. There is, for example, the correspondence of Cardinal Mazarin with the French Ambassador de Breguy, where de Bregui advises hiring Cossacks to participate in the war. But, as you know, advice and intention does not at all mean that the intended thing has happened. Just the facts of what happened are not at all. But the facts confirming the participation of the Poles are available.

    The same Cardinal Mazarin, in correspondence with the Duke of Engiem (Conde), wrote on August 6, 1646, about the arrival of the "chief colonel of the Poles," Przyemsky. Another letter dated September 1 indicates that the Polish army “was accompanied by the secretary of Mr. de Breguy”, i.e. the same Pierre Chevalier.

    September 4, 1646 Mazarin decides on the payment of mercenaries: "I agreed on everything with Colonel Prziemsky so that you can use the Poles throughout the campaign in the army and in the garrisons ... The Colonel is completely satisfied and promises that their people will do the same like other soldiers more experienced in warfare. But I believe that you should not trust his words strongly, and you should trust the Poles only when you are sure that it is in their power. ”It is possible that the“ Baron de Siro ”is translated from French into Ukrainian exactly as“ Cossack chieftain ” Serko ”, but his official pedigree, alas, does not show any links with the titular European nation. Some French, Italian and German nobles. Roots in Naples, Hanover, Paris, but not in Zhmerynka, Kiev or Brovary.

    But this is not so bad. And the main problem for Svidomo historians is that "Mr. Shiro" also wrote his memoirs. laughing laughing
  28. Gennady Fomkin
    Gennady Fomkin 21 September 2019 13: 35
    0
    And, yes, Polish infantrymen, and not Zaporozhye Cossacks, participated in the siege of Dunkirk. And they did not show anything outstanding. Mercenaries, like mercenaries. And D'Artagnan did not take off his hat to the Cossacks. Monsieur Charles de Beatz Senor D'Artagnan did participate in the siege of Dunkirk, but for some reason did not mention the Cossacks in his memoirs. And there were no government awards to Khmelnitsky and Serko. And instead of the monument to Ivan Serko "erected by grateful Frenchmen on the English Channel", we only have a memorial plaque erected by the intrusive Ukrainians who are actively distributing their historical comics around the world. laughing laughing laughing
  29. Gennady Fomkin
    Gennady Fomkin 21 September 2019 13: 37
    0
    And by the way, one more interesting fact in the end. The Polish colonel Przyemsky, a real, and not mythical participant in the siege of Dunkirk, was captured by Khmelnitsky during the notorious Battle of Batogy. And the Zaporizhzhya Cossacks, acting solely within the framework of their "knackiness", "kindness" and "chuinisty", cut off his head. Apparently, all the same, Khmelnitsky did not recognize a Dunkirk ally in Przyemsky laughing laughing laughing
  30. Gennady Fomkin
    Gennady Fomkin 21 September 2019 13: 50
    0
    Quote: dik
    Quote: Gennady Fomkin
    [
    laughing You are healthy? laughing


    Well, if you compare, then no doubt. At least the text is written clearly by a mentally healthy and educated person

    Judging by your nickname, practical psychology has acquired a patient.
  31. dik
    dik 21 September 2019 14: 59
    0
    Quote: Gennady Fomkin
    [
    Judging by your nickname, practical psychology has acquired a patient.


    I wonder what you have problems with my nickname?
  32. faterdom
    faterdom 21 September 2019 15: 27
    -1
    And now the descendants of Jagailo, the ally of the temnik Mamai, call us either the Finno-Ugrians or the "horde".
    Look in the mirror - gentlemen from the former Commonwealth: Lithuanians, Ukrainians and other Poles!
    When the power was in the hands of the Mongols, "we are all Mongols, too." Now full of joy pants: "America is with us!"
  33. faterdom
    faterdom 21 September 2019 15: 32
    -1
    Quote: Gennady Fomkin
    But this is not so bad. And the main problem for Svidomo historians is that "Mr. Shiro" also wrote his memoirs

    And the great Ukrainian writer Dumas Sr. described the role in the history of the French kingdom played by a Ukrainian of Armenian origin D "Artanyan. His illegitimate descendants Arsen Avakyan and Yulia Grigyan still play a crucial role in the history of modern Ukraine.
  34. mamont5
    mamont5 21 September 2019 16: 51
    +1
    "According to the chronicles, the Russian side fielded up to 70 thousand warriors, the Horde - up to 140 thousand." Even if we take our chronicles, they are not chronicles. Well, the chroniclers of that time did not set themselves the task of conveying to us "how it was." And all the "details" about the Don massacre (the Battle of Kulikovo (field) is the name of a later time), the historians of the 19th century (and the modern ones have repeated) were taken from the Zadonshchina and the Legend of the Mamaev Massacre - LITERARY works. It is like writing the history of the war of 1812 based on the poem Borodino by Y. Lermontov. The annals set out briefly - the fact itself, the place, the reason, and some names are mentioned.
    What are 70 thousand warriors? It is not a fact that there were so many residents in the cities that had deployed their troops. The capitals of the principalities - 20-30 thousand inhabitants, and ordinary cities - 500-2000 people. The mobilization potential of that time, and these are only the "best people" suitable for campaigns, 1% of the population, i.e. warriors who could fight in a mounted formation (there was no infantry then). We will never know exactly how many troops Dmitry had, but we can make an approximate calculation. In terms of the amount of paid output (tribute), which is directly tied to the size of the population and, therefore, to the number of soldiers that this population can support. According to the number of warriors (children of the boyars) who were called up from the same lands during the reign of Ivan the Terrible (records of "category books" have been preserved). And the lands that took part in the battle are known. These are members of the "Moscow coalition" who have spoken together more than once, incl. and against the Horde, except for the people of Nizhny Novgorod (who dropped out after the battle on Pian) and the Ryazan people, who entered into an alliance with Mamai after the next devastation of Ryazan. And it turns out that Dmitry had 4-6 thousand horsemen. These are his squads (yard) and squads of allied princes and city regiments (the same equestrian squads, which are maintained by the city).
    Naturally, the army of Mamai was approximately the same in number (140 thousand and Batu did not have, and the forces of the entire Mongol "empire" took part in that campaign). What are the Genoese? Their cities in the Crimea had forces to maintain order, well if there were only 200 of them. And there was no infantry in that army.
    "the complete absence of any artifacts from that battle - arrowheads, spears, armor" - yes, of course. And what did people find back in the century before last? And the expedition of the then head of the military-historical detachment of the State Historical Museum O. Dvurechensky. (see his videos on YouTube about the number of medieval armies, about the search and finding of the battlefield, etc.).
    And for that time - it was a grand battle, especially against the backdrop of inter-princely skirmishes in which 50, 150, 300 people take part, and 500 - this is a lot.
  35. Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 21 September 2019 18: 38
    0
    look at the pictures in the annals: the soldiers are dressed alike, the banners are the same, the weapons are the same. So who was fighting with whom?
  36. Ratmir_Ryazan
    Ratmir_Ryazan 21 September 2019 19: 04
    +1
    Today was at the festival on the Kulikovo field, all a happy holiday !!!
  37. SASHA OLD
    SASHA OLD 22 September 2019 04: 57
    +2

    Klim Sanych talks well
  38. Captain45
    Captain45 22 September 2019 11: 59
    0
    Another version - all the metal objects for hundreds of years have been collected from those places, and human remains (including bone) have been lost due to the high chemical activity of chernozem.(C)
    Yes, elementary, I do not think that Russia during the Battle of Kulikovo was so rich in iron that it allowed itself to be buried in the ground, well, how many thousand 10-12 were killed, so 10-12 thousand swords, chain mail, helmets. Surely even broken spears and broken shields were assembled because the shaft of the spear can be made new, like the wooden parts of the shield. So the arrowheads in the bodies most likely remained on the battlefield, and the bodies themselves, most likely, were taken home to be buried in the family cemetery, hence the absence of a large amount of weapon remains at the battlefield.
  39. geologist
    geologist 23 September 2019 07: 38
    0
    How boring, all because of the money. Here is Homer offering a more popular version; Troy was taken because of the beautiful Lenka. The woman was blamed, as always, and the Battle of Kulikovo, they say, was due to vodka. True, the name itself was invented by the Poles after 200 years, but the preparation of the product was recorded by Aristotle. In general, there is a version that the headquarters of the Crimean warriors from the village of MamA (Kurortnoye) together with the horse Genoese from Sudak (the walls of their fortress are still preserved there) intercepted a convoy with wine and chacha for Moscow, for which our heroes gave them beans and repelled the convoy with strong and other drinks.