barbarian kings. Odoacer

69
barbarian kings. Odoacer
Flavius ​​Odoacer


A small introduction


In the last decades before the fall of the Western Roman Empire, the emperors in power had to deal with many tasks, both internal and external. This is the desire to return the territories of Gaul and North Africa, which are very significant for Rome, under the control of the imperial power, and the protection of the Apennine Peninsula from the invasion of Germanic tribes, and maintaining at least some kind of relationship with Byzantium.




The territory of the Roman Empire in the IV century AD. e.

And the most disturbing thing in this situation for the state was that the Roman legions stationed on the borders of the empire were often the very danger from which Italy had to be protected. The fact is that already in the XNUMXth century the “barbarian problem” for Rome was so serious that all Roman military leaders were of barbarian origin.


The barbarians ...

During the time of the power of Rome, the Roman legions serving on the borders of the empire either completely subjugated the local barbarians, or drove them far beyond the state border. Then, gradually starting to weaken, Rome had already stopped expanding its possessions and went on the defensive. Thus began the great migration of peoples, which brought for the Romans a complete loss of control over their borders, and numerous Germanic and Slavic tribes poured into the territory of the Roman Empire in an endless stream.


Barbarian raids on Roman cities

By this time, on the territory of the already weakened Western Roman Empire, the process of crowding out some tribes that had previously settled on its lands by others was taking place. And it was precisely this resettlement that he described in his work “Roman story» Ammianus Marcellinus*, saying that

"The Germans are settling all over the Rhine, occupying the lands of Gaul, Illyria, and right up to the very borders of Italy."


Barbarians in defeated Rome

By the middle of the XNUMXth century, almost the entire territory of the Western Roman Empire was occupied by various Germanic tribes that invaded its territory, who, having gained a foothold there, formed the so-called. "barbarian kingdoms" that continuously felt the growth of their power and influence. But the creation of these "barbarian kingdoms" was legally formalized a little earlier by the Roman authorities themselves, who transferred the German tribal leaders the full right to manage these territories as federates.

After a long period of invasions and peaceful settlement of barbarians, a new period of formation of the “barbarian kingdoms” begins, and it turned out to be not the sheer number of barbarians who settled there, but the capture of new territories, the expansion of the boundaries of their possessions and liberation from imperial guardianship. But the lands occupied by the barbarians who settled on them and created their “kingdoms” on them were not able to replenish the empty treasury of the empire, on the contrary, Rome annually paid certain amounts under agreements concluded earlier with the barbarians in order to prevent the uprising of the federates.


Soldiers of the Roman Empire in the XNUMXth century

Here is what Paul the Deacon, a historian and writer of the Carolingian era, wrote two centuries later:

"Destructive forces were at work everywhere..."

The economy of the empire, which had long and completely depended on the import of food and materials from the provinces, was also not all right. With their loss, the emperors had great difficulty relying on the scarce resources available, but the most unpleasant was the loss of access to the grain that came to Rome from North Africa and had long replenished the Roman stocks.

In the last two decades of the existence of the Western Roman Empire, nine emperors were replaced, and the borders of the state during this time were reduced to the size of the Apennine Peninsula, on the territory of which internal contradictions were increasingly concentrated. It even got to the point that the rebellious citizens of Rome went over to the barbarian army!


The Sack of Rome by the Barbarians

But the most basic task of the policy of all the emperors of the Western Roman Empire was to prevent the strengthening of the barbarian tribes settled on the territory of the empire, because the transition of the barbarians to a settled way of life began to cause a significant increase in population.

The Germans, who had already mastered the fertile lands of the empire, experienced serious pressure from other, even more distant tribes, whose lack of food and clothing became the reasons for new military campaigns and within which various internal processes also took place, pushing them to further resettlement.

The empire was fading, its citizens refused to join the army, and the emperors had to hire barbarians to serve in their legions, which led to the final collapse of the entire Roman army. Mixing with the Germanic tribes, the Romans formed the basis of the future European peoples, and the barbarian leaders, having strengthened themselves on the former lands of the empire and extending their power to the entire Roman population living there, gradually begin to present themselves not as the leaders of a separate people, but as the rulers of a certain territory.


Barbarians in Rome...

And in this difficult time, our hero lived, in 476 he put an end to the main state formation of antiquity - the Western Roman Empire and opened the era of the Middle Ages ...


Barbarian Franks

And in this difficult historical era of pulling the empire into separate pieces, it is necessary to pay close attention to Odoacer. And not only because he formed a new kingdom in the very heart, one might say, in the very cradle of the empire, and not only because he mustered up the courage to dethrone the weakened, but still emperor, but mainly because of the political significance his act, which went down in history as the fall of the Roman Empire.

Flavius ​​Odoacer


Being the son of Idiko (Edekon), who once belonged to the close circle of the legendary leader of the Huns Attila, the future officer of the Roman army Odoacer in 470 left the Danube shores of the province of Norik (the territory of modern Austria and Slovenia) and went to Italy, where he turned out to be one of the many barbarians , whom the emperors of the Western Roman Empire recruited for military service, and rose to a command position, and by 476 he was among the imperial bodyguards!


Odoacer in Rome

There are several versions of Odoacer's early biography in modern historiography. Odoacer's father, as mentioned above, belonged to Attila's entourage and may have died in the battle of the Bolia River.* in 469, fighting Theodimir, leader of the Ostrogoths and father of the future Theoderic the Great (451–526). The death of Odoacer's father could be one of the reasons for the blood rivalry between the two future leaders of the barbarian world.

Note. It is believed that Odoacer belonged to the Germanic tribe of the Rugs, who waged an uncompromising struggle with another Germanic tribe - the Goths, with whom they always flared up enmity wherever they happened to meet (the Baltic, the Danube and Northern Italy). The sources that have come down to us show us a picture of a real blood feud that passed from one generation to another.

When the Roman patrician Flavius ​​Orestes (a former official of Attila, a German), appointed by Nepos as the leader of the German federates of Italy and the commander-in-chief of the Roman troops (master of the army, magister militum), consisting mainly of German mercenaries, in August 475, having the entire strength of the army behind him, overthrew the emperor Julius Nepos* (the penultimate emperor of the Western Roman Empire) and elevated his own son, the young Romulus Augustulus, to emperor (Romulus Augustulus, "small August" or "August").


Titus Flavius ​​Orestes (Titus Flavius ​​Orestes)

Julius Nepos, who fled to Dalmatia, continued to rule in exile in the East and ordered Odoacer to put down the rebellion. Meanwhile, the troops of the federates informed Orestes that they wanted to settle in their new territory and asked to be granted land. Orestes, although he was a usurper, still remained a Roman patrician and could not distribute land in Italy to the barbarians, so he refused them, then the former Roman federates of the Skira, Heruli and Torcilingi elected Odoacer their new leader, like most of the Italo-Roman army, choosing him king of Italy on August 23, 476. So, instead of putting down the mercenary rebellion, he led it!


Julius Nepot. The last Roman emperor

Odoacer, with his new army, moved on the rebellious Orestes and killed him outside of Placentia (modern Piacenza). Then he moved to the capital of the empire, Ravenna, captured it and forced Romulus Augustus to abdicate. Sources that have come down to us report that Odoacer was so carried away by the young emperor that he not only left him alive, but also sent him to Campania (the area around Rome in the Lazio region) to relatives and assigned a pension of 6 solidi (Roman gold coin ), however, establishing supervision over him.


Odoacer and Romulus Augustus

Here are the words of Edward Gibbon*:

"The son of Orestes adopted and disgraced the names of Romulus and Augustus, but the first of these names was perverted by the Greeks into Romila, and the second was changed by the Latins into a contemptuous diminutive Augustulus."

Taking control of all of Italy, destroying the rebellious Orestes and sending his young son Romulus Augustulus into exile, Odoacer, with the support of the Roman Senate, attempted to somehow legalize his actual position in Italy, for which in 476-477. he organized an embassy to the Eastern Roman emperor Zeno, during negotiations with which the envoys asked the emperor to give Odoacer the title of Roman patrician and give him full power over Italy.


Byzantine Emperor Flavius ​​Zeno

It has not come down to us whether Odoacer received the title of patrician or not, but throughout his reign, Odoacer minted money with a portrait of the legitimate emperor Julius Nepos lost somewhere in Dalmatia and ruled Italy on behalf of Emperor Zeno. And in order to show the barbarians that there were no emperors so hated by them in Italy, Odoacer sent insignia - age-old signs of imperial power in Rome (ivory chair, golden crown and others) to Constantinople - as a sign that the Roman Empire was again united under the rule of one ruler. This gesture itself is considered by historians, not without reason, as a sign of the end of the Western Roman Empire.


Coins depicting Emperor Julius Nepos

Having distributed to his soldiers in Italy the lands they desired so much and renouncing the useless, dangerous and so hated title of emperor by the barbarians, he retained many Roman orders and even revived some to please the Romanesque population.

In 476, having suppressed the rebellion of Orestes and expelled the infant emperor from Rome, Odoacer became the first barbarian king of Italy, thus marking the beginning of a new era. And with the support of a completely tame Roman Senate, Odoacer has since ruled Italy autonomously, lip-synching to the authority of the last Western emperor, Julius Nepos, who was hiding in Dalmatia, and Zeno, the emperor of Eastern Rome.

Although Odoacer ruled on behalf of Emperor Zeno, he ambitiously began to expand his territory. He took control of Sicily from the Vandal king Gaiseric. And when Julius Nepos was killed in Dalmatia*, he pursued the killers and, having caught them, executed them, not forgetting to take control of this territory as well. In 487, Odoacer defeated the Rugians at Noricum, capturing their king, Feletius. Then Prince Fredericus, who led the Rugians, rebelled, and Odoacer sent his brother Onulf (Gunulf)* deal with them. In the end, he had to settle them in Italy, which left the province open, and only later other Germans - the Lombards, invaded and settled there, creating their own barbarian "kingdom".


Kingdom of Odoacer

Noticing the constantly growing and strengthening power of Odoacer, Emperor Flavius ​​Zeno was well aware of how his main rival in the West was strengthening, although Odoacer never took any action to challenge the power of the Eastern Roman emperor. Zeno, who well remembered the ancient rule Divide and conquer - "Divide and conquer", turned to the Ostrogothic "King" Theodoric with a request to defeat Odoacer, promising him power over Italy in return.


Theodoric - King of the Ostrogoths

Although Theodoric did not trust Emperor Zeno, he still had his own reasons for accepting his proposal. Theodoric, who planned to first take Constantinople, nevertheless, on August 28, 489, led his Ostrogoth army to the Isonzo River (modern Slovenia), where he defeated Odoacer, who retreated with the remnants of his soldiers to Verona, where he immediately set up a fortified camp. Theodoric began the pursuit, won again, and Odoacer retreated, locking himself in his last stronghold - Ravenna*. Ravenna, surrounded by swamps and estuaries and easily supplied by small boats from the hinterland, Theodoric proved invulnerable.


Ravenna. Baptistery of the Orthodox, circa 450

Note. Meanwhile, when the armies of Odoacer and Theodoric fought each other, other barbarians, the Burgundians, invaded Italy, capturing Liguria.* in the farthest western part of Italy.

In the summer of 490, the Visigoths, led by their "king" Alaric II, joined forces with Theodoric and together opposed Odoacer, fighting on the Adda River (the left tributary of the Po River), forcing Odoacer to retreat again to Ravenna. Due to its favorable geographical position, Odoacer was able to hold Ravenna until a major clash occurred on the evening of July 9, 491, where Theoderic was victorious, and Odoacer lost many soldiers loyal to him.

Note. A little later, in the same year, the vandals led by Geiseric, taking advantage of the war between Odoacer and Theodoric, did not miss the opportunity and attacked Sicily.


Odoacer and Theodoric

Nevertheless, despite such significant losses, the war dragged on until February 25, 493, when John, Bishop of Ravenna, still managed to conclude a peace treaty between Theoderic and Odoacer, which provided for their joint occupation and joint administration of Ravenna. And after a three-year siege, Theoderic entered the city on March 5th. Here it should be noted that during this siege, Odoacer proclaimed his son emperor!

Fall and death


Ten days later, determined to celebrate the peace, Theoderic invited Odoacer to a conciliatory feast at the former imperial palace. Ad Laurentum ("In the laurel grove") and, having put him in the place of the guest of honor, Theodoric drew his sword and with one blow cut Odoacer from the collarbone to the thigh. In response to Odoacer's dying question:

"Where is God?"

Theodoric exclaimed:

"That's what you did to my friends."

It is said that Theodoric stood over the body of his dead rival and exclaimed:

“There was not a single bone in this unfortunate one!”

The relatives of Odoacer were treated just as cruelly. His brother, the commander Gunulf, was shot with a bow, his son Telu, whom Odoacer proclaimed emperor, was executed, and his wife was thrown into prison, where she died of starvation. Theodoric justified his act as revenge for the execution of his relatives Feletheus and Guizot.


Assassination of Odoacer by Theodoric

Theodoric, who later became the Great, remained king of the Ostrogoths until his death in 526.


Odoaker Street in Wuppertal, Germany. North Rhine-Westphalia

Information


*Ammianus Marcellinus (c. 330 - c. 391/400). A Roman soldier and historian who lived in a crucial era, key to the entire subsequent history of Europe. He wrote a major historical narrative - "Roman History", preserved from Antiquity.

*Battle of Bolia (469). The battle on the banks of the Bolia River in Pannonia (the territory of modern Hungary), in which the Ostrogoths of King Theodemir defeated the tribe of the Danube Suebi. It is considered one of the most important events in the history of the era of the Great Migration of Nations.

*Theodemir (reigned 469-474) - king of the Ostrogoths from the Amal family (Ermanarich was from this family). Father of Theodoric the Great.

*Flavius ​​Orestes (420-476) - German, former secretary of the king of the Huns Attila, Roman patrician, father of the last emperor of the Western Roman Empire, Romulus Augustus, master of the Italian troops (commander-in-chief). On August 28, 475, Flavius ​​Orestes seized power in the imperial capital and elevated his son Romulus to emperor. Executed on August 28, 476.

* Julius Nepot (430-480) - the penultimate emperor of the Western Roman Empire (474-475). A native of Dalmatia. During his short reign, Vandal raids resumed, and in order to avoid them, Julius Nepos acknowledged the Vandal conquests in North Africa, Sicily, and other Mediterranean islands. After the revolt of Flavius ​​Orestes left Italy and returned to Dalmatia. In 480, Nepos was killed by komites (high officials).

*Edward Gibbon (1737-1794) - famous British historian and memoirist. Author of The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire in six volumes.

*Dalmatia. Historical region located in the north-west of the Balkan Peninsula, on the territory of modern Croatia and Montenegro on the Adriatic coast. The name of the region comes from the Illyrian tribe called "Dalmatians", who lived in this area in antiquity. This region later became a Roman province.

*Onulf or Gunulf (430–493). Brother of Odoacer, Roman general, magister militum of Illyria in 477-479 He grew up at the court of Attila. He took part in the war of Odoacer with Theodoric and was killed along with Odoacer in March 493 in Ravenna.

*Liguria. The region of northwestern Italy is located on the coast of the Ligurian Sea (Riviera). The territory was inhabited by an ancient people - the Ligurians - from about the fifth millennium BC.

*Ravenna. It was originally an Etruscan settlement. In the II century BC. e. the Romans came here. In 402, after the raids of the leader of the Visigoths Alaric - the capital of the Western Roman Empire, later the capital of the state of the Ostrogoths and the Lombard "kingdom".
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

69 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    17 March 2023 05: 30
    Then, gradually starting to weaken, Rome had already stopped expanding its possessions and went on the defensive. Thus began the great migration of peoples,
    Those. Do you connect the Great Migration of Nations with the fact that Rome went on the defensive?
    1. +2
      17 March 2023 05: 48
      Quote: parusnik
      Do you connect the Great Migration of Nations with the fact that Rome went on the defensive?

      Rome went on the defensive and, instead of the expansion it had carried out over the centuries, began to build limes. I remember how it was written in a school history textbook: after Rome was weakened, the barbarians began to attack it... and no Huns and no climate change contributed to the Great Migration. Only the weakening of Rome...
      1. +3
        17 March 2023 06: 31
        and no Huns and no climate change contributed to the Great Migration. Only the weakening of Rome...
        An interesting point of view, straight from O'Henry: why does the wind blow because the trees sway?
        Thank you for the article!
        1. +3
          17 March 2023 07: 22
          Quote: 3x3zsave
          because the trees are swaying?

          No, because Rome could no longer hold back the onslaught of the barbarians, so the barbarians sentenced him to death. And he died long and painfully - all these Gezeirikhs, Alarikhs and Odoacres are an example of this ...
          1. 0
            17 March 2023 08: 41
            Sorry, colleague, but I am not ready to consider macrohistorical processes through the prism of the phrase: "bird, fly, there is a lot of delicious food."
            1. +4
              17 March 2023 08: 57
              Quote: 3x3zsave
              "bird, fly, there is a lot of delicious food"

              There's actually a lot of good stuff in there. Have you ever wondered why the vector of migration was directed specifically to Europe? It is on the territory of the Roman Empire? What does it have to do with its richest regions - Italy, Spain and the Balkans?
              Why didn't the barbarians move towards China or India? Why didn't they go to Africa or settle on the territory of our country? If you answer these questions, you will come to exactly the same conclusion as I came to...
              1. +2
                17 March 2023 21: 08
                Good counter question!
                Naturally, they settled, but there really was something to marvel at
            2. +7
              17 March 2023 09: 35
              Hello Anton. smile

              Augurs love birds,
              And they sit on eggs
              And, without guessing, they observe
              The collapse of empires, the collapse of capitals.


              1. +7
                17 March 2023 10: 17
                Quote: Sea Cat



                Fifteen centuries have passed and nothing has changed...
                1. +8
                  17 March 2023 11: 55
                  Fifteen centuries have passed and nothing has changed...


                  And why would they change, people remained people, and cattle remained cattle. request
      2. +6
        17 March 2023 06: 42
        About the weakening of Rome, a moment flashed, as if on the Internet, among the barbarians, and they rushed to collect things for the great resettlement and sharpen their swords.
        1. +5
          17 March 2023 07: 33
          Quote: parusnik
          and they rushed to collect things for the great migration

          If you like, I can give a very recent example from our life.

          Somewhere near the Pamirs two people are sitting. They have no job, no money. If there is a job, they pay little for it. They have large families to feed. One to the other and says: let's go to Russia to work? And they rushed to collect things ...

          It was exactly the same in the barbarian world, only they did not go to work, but to rob territories. And they robbed Rome for a long time - almost three centuries, because there was something to rob there. And if Rome were weak, it would have been crushed long ago by other barbarians, for example, the Gauls, especially since such a precedent already existed in 390 BC. e when the leader of the Gauls Brenn robbed Rome ... Something like this

          PS I can also recall the mass migration to Europe and the United States from third world countries. Only in these countries the weakness is not military, but political, called democracy ...
          1. +2
            17 March 2023 14: 43
            Your examples are not correct, from the word at all. Even if, even based on your examples, the following picture is obtained, the barbarians ran out of territories for robbery and they leaned towards the Roman Empire. In 390 BC. e there was no Roman Empire and the Great Migration of Nations, something like that.
            1. +4
              17 March 2023 17: 00
              Quote: parusnik
              In 390 BC. e there was no Roman Empire and the Great Migration of Nations, something like that.

              There was a Republic, which was attacked by other tribes, for example, the Gauls. Remember woe to the vanquished - it's just from there. But when Rome became strong, no Gauls, and indeed, no one else approached the borders of Rome ...
      3. +4
        17 March 2023 09: 24
        Quote: Luminman
        no Huns and no climate change contributed to the Great Migration. Only the weakening of Rome...

        That is, you deny the demographic pressure in the direction "east-west" at this time and argue that the main reason for the beginning of the movement to the west of the barbarian tribes was the ability of the Roman lands to accommodate a bunch of people and the inability of the authorities to protect this land from outside invasion?
        The concept of a bathtub that had the cork pulled out (and thereby set the water in motion) instead of the concept of a toilet that someone pushed the flush button? laughing
        Funny.
        But, I'm afraid, nothing more. I don't see a rational grain in this hypothesis at all.
        According to your logic, it turns out that the pressure of Rome on its neighbors during the period of expansion should have provoked the movement of the barbarians in the direction to the east in the same volume as later, when Rome was weakened, they went to the west, but this did not happen. There are a couple more arguments in favor of the "toilet concept", but there is no time to properly formulate and describe them. Maybe later.
        1. +6
          17 March 2023 09: 49
          And who pressed the drain button? Huns?)
          In general, Vpl is a global process and there is no simple explanation for it.
          1. +5
            17 March 2023 10: 04
            Quote: Engineer
            And who pressed the drain button? Huns?)

            And who "leaked" the Huns? Chinese?

            Quote: Engineer
            Vpl is a global process and it has no simple explanation

            There is no explanation from the fact that we do not quite understand what actually happened beyond the Ural Mountains. And even a little closer...
            1. +5
              17 March 2023 10: 16
              There is no explanation because the process is complex and varied. History does not fit into the Procrustean bed of schemes. We can recall the end of the Roman climatic optimum. A good candidate for a drain, but I'm not familiar with any work where the reconstruction of climate change was given and linked to the political events of those years.
              But the movement remains, for example ready, it does not fit into any concept.
              No concept is universal.
              1. +3
                17 March 2023 10: 27
                Quote: Engineer
                No concept is universal

                Once again I will give an explanation from school textbooks - strong Rome held back the barbarians, and weakened Rome caved in before them. This concept, although not entirely universal, still explains something, for example, the movement of the Goths from the north, where there were no Huns (and indeed all Germans). Anyway, no other explanation comes to my mind...
                1. +4
                  17 March 2023 10: 31
                  The Goths for the first two hundred years migrated away from the Roman Empire, to the banks of the Dnieper in their own oyum. There is migration, there is no factor of the Roman Empire. That's all.
                  1. +2
                    17 March 2023 11: 49
                    Quote: Engineer
                    The Goths migrated away from the Roman Empire for the first two hundred years

                    It's like that. But the Vandals with the Marcomanni and others also migrated, but migrated just the same towards the Empire. If you believe all kinds of Chronicles, then the Goths with the Vandals and Burgundians had some kind of "graters" even at the time when they were on the shores of the Baltic. I can assume that other Germans are ready simply "driven away" to the east. Or maybe the Goths did not want to participate in the Marcomon wars - they did not drip over them. In a word, in the absence of information, you can assume anything ...
                    1. +3
                      17 March 2023 12: 45
                      It is much easier to recognize the factor of the Roman Empire on the Goths of the period of stay in the south of the Baltic does not stretch in any way. The outcome is ready from Sweden, all the more so
          2. +1
            17 March 2023 14: 45
            In general, Vpl is a global process and there is no simple explanation for it.
            Naturally. The wind, "understand", also blows, not because the trees are swaying. smile
        2. +3
          17 March 2023 09: 57
          Quote: Trilobite Master

          1. That is, you deny demographic pressure in the direction "east-west"
          2. and claim that the main reason for the start of the movement to the west of the barbarian tribes was the ability of the Roman lands to accommodate a bunch of people
          3. and the inability of the authorities to protect this land from outside invasion?

          1. Demographic pressure, of course, was, but it was very reminiscent of the lines for vodka during Prohibition - everyone wanted to be the first
          2. The main reason for the beginning of the movement to the west of the barbarian tribes was, rather, the inability of Rome to defend its lands.
          3. The answer can be found in point 2...

          Quote: Trilobite Master
          The concept of a bathtub that had the cork pulled out (and thereby set the water in motion) instead of the concept of a toilet that someone pushed the flush button?
          Amusingly

          If you give me a specific name of who exactly pressed the toilet button to set in motion such powerful migratory forces, then I will abandon your funny concept of "bath plugs." Bath plug is the most rational explanation...
          1. +7
            17 March 2023 15: 01
            The beginning of the Great Migration is considered to be the middle of the XNUMXth century, namely the appearance of the Huns on the borders of Europe. That is, they "pressed the button". What happened to them before they came to Europe, I think, is not so important. We analyze the affairs of Europe and fix the fact - we came, although we didn’t reach the borders of Rome itself right away. What has changed with their arrival?
            First you need to decide what happened. There was relative calm. On the borders of the empire, sporadic skirmishes with barbarians, which did not particularly disturb its interior, the biggest problems were delivered by internal unrest. Here - yes, life was in full swing. The Romans slaughtered each other with passion and honed skill, while they even managed to periodically arrange conquest campaigns. The last such campaign was probably the campaign of Julian the Apostate, but here I am not very sure. The fact is that the expansion still continued.
            So, at the time of the appearance of the Huns in Europe (not yet on the borders with Rome), we see stable, solid, insurmountable borders and constant internal squabbles in the empire itself.
            And so the 350s begin. The Huns came and started a showdown between them and the Ostrogoths, the Huns win and are mistaken for the Visigoths and Alans. The shield of Rome from the east collapsed and dances with tambourines begin.
            By the beginning of the XNUMXth c. breaks the border along the Rhine in its lower reaches. The Franks, followed by the Vandals with the Alans (hello to the Huns), behind them the Visigoths (again, hello to the Huns) begin to break to the west, pass through Gaul (the Franks settle there), Iberia and even reach Africa, where the vandals are forced out by those following them along on the heels of the Visigoths, followed by the Huns.
            At the same time, Alaric breaks the border, invades Italy from the north and plunders Rome itself. In fact, for 50 years, the borders of Rome fell along their entire length and the process of finishing off the defeated monster began. There is no state as such, no one can do anything, although talented people have not died out, let us recall, for example, Flavius ​​Aetius.
            The next half century is the expansion of the Huns themselves to the west, ending with the battle on the Catalunian fields. In fact, this is already a showdown between the barbarians on the territory of the empire. That is, for the most part of the territory of the Western Empire, the barbarians walked as they wanted. Well, the cherry on the cake is Odoacer. Cream roses have already been prepared by vandals who have captured everything they can in the Mediterranean.
            Total what we see.
            Calm on the borders and internal disassembly before the arrival of the Huns. With their arrival, in fifty years, only firebrands remained from the Western Roman Empire. Don't you think that the process took place too hurricane pace? And if we take into account that twenty-five of these fifty years were spent on a showdown between the Huns and Ostrogoths, and the next ten years - on a showdown between the Huns and the Alans and Visigoths, and not directly with Rome, then the pace of the destruction of Rome becomes generally unthinkable-cosmic. Well, it does not look like a gradual withering or exhaustion of strength in a hard struggle.
            And I am by no means ready to believe that the Huns came to the west, having heard about the weakness of Rome, because before them no one heard about this weakness on the borders of the empire itself - neither the Goths, nor the Vandals, nor the other Rugs, Alans and Suebi. They stood quietly near the borders, occasionally organizing festivals in the sense of attacking, plundering and quickly getting back to their penates - nothing more. And then suddenly once again - and kapets.
            So yes - the Huns pressed the button and very quickly merged the Western Roman Empire into the annals of history.
            1. +2
              17 March 2023 16: 13
              In principle, the "traditional" explanation, you can find fault with the type
              The Huns came and started a showdown between them and the Ostrogoths, the Huns win and are mistaken for the Visigoths and Alans

              Alans fell under the hand before anyone else.

              The Hun theory explains a lot. But not all
              The Vandals before the Huns advanced from the upper Vistula to Dacia and further into Pannonia.
              Goths before the Huns migrated to the middle Dnieper at least
              The Heruli ended up in the Black Sea region.
              The Franks broke through the limes several times before the Huns. On the eve of the appearance of the Huns, some of the Franks were already trying to settle in the province of Germania Inferior
              Later, the Angles moved to Britain without any external impulse.
              Neither the Hunnic, nor the climatic, nor the version of the Roman extinction can explain the whole variety of facts.
              1. +1
                17 March 2023 16: 53
                Quote: Engineer
                Neither the Hunnic, nor the climatic, nor the version of the Roman extinction explain the whole variety of facts

                And how do you like Gumilyov with his theory of passionarity?
                1. +3
                  17 March 2023 20: 41
                  Approximately like the Strugatskys with "Picnic".
              2. +3
                17 March 2023 17: 50
                Quote: Engineer
                The Hun theory explains a lot. But not all

                And it never happens that "everything". smile
                There are no rules without exceptions, I think we have already talked about this.
                The Great Migration is too global, complex and multi-level process, which you, in fact, have already noted today.
                Quote: Engineer
                There is no explanation because the process is complex and varied. History does not fit into the Procrustean bed of schemes.

                smile
                The more global the process, the more nuances must be taken into account when analyzing and analyzing it, and we will never be able to take into account all these nuances - and we will have to put up with this willy-nilly. Therefore, we divide the whole into parts, studying each separately and then trying to put the whole back together.
                Why the Goths got off the ground and how they chose the direction for their movement is one question. How the Huns got off the ground is another. Was there a connection between these processes, well, there, common causes or something else - the third question, just as important and interesting as the first two, and all the others.
                I am not ready to delve into such jungle right now. I just tried to prove to the author that his hypothesis about the weakness of Rome as a decisive factor in the beginning of the Great Migration does not hold water.
            2. +1
              17 March 2023 16: 49
              Quote: Trilobite Master
              What happened to them before they came to Europe, I think, is not so important

              How it doesn't matter! What happened to them before they came to Europe - this is what you call it release buttonabout which we know nothing...

              Quote: Trilobite Master
              So, at the time of the appearance of the Huns in Europe (not yet on the borders with Rome), we see stable, solid, insurmountable borders and constant internal squabbles in the empire itself

              There was no stability there for a long time. 200 years before the Huns there were Marcomannic wars, where the Germans reached the north of Italy. And even earlier, BC, there was an invasion of the Cimbri and Teutons, who also reached Italy. There were also skirmishes between the Germans and Caesar, small, but skirmishes - if you rewind a little further. I completely forgot about the battle in the Teutoburg Forest - it is far from the borders of Italy, but still a significant event ...

              Quote: Trilobite Master
              And so the 350s begin

              In the 350s, the barbarians were already "ruling" the Empire with might and main - they were in command positions in the army and occupied high bureaucratic positions.

              Quote: Trilobite Master
              Well, the cherry on the cake - Odoacer

              The icing on the cake, perhaps, will be Clovis - he will complete this saga of the barbarians. Then the rudiments of civilization begin and reach their apogee already under Charlemagne...

              Quote: Trilobite Master
              And I am by no means prepared to believe that the Huns came west hearing about the weakness of Rome.

              Why do you think they came there? If Rome had been at the zenith of its power, then it would not have let them in on a cannon shot to its borders ...

              Quote: Trilobite Master
              So yes - the Huns pressed the button and very quickly merged the Western Roman Empire into the annals of history

              By that time, the empire was already ready to "merge" itself. The barbarians simply carried out the sentence...

              P.S. in this way, yours is closer to me bath plug theorythan the buttons from the drain tank wink
              1. +2
                17 March 2023 18: 17
                Quote: Luminman
                this is what you call a trigger button

                In the context of the issue under discussion, the topic of the Huns before they came to Europe is secondary, I would say - optional.
                Quote: Luminman
                200 years before the Huns there were Marcomannic wars

                Quite right. For two hundred years. Stability came, probably, from the time of Diocletian. But it was real stability.
                Quote: Luminman
                In the 350s, the barbarians were already "ruling" the Empire with might and main

                It means that they taxied well if they were able to protect its borders for such a long time.
                Quote: Luminman
                If Rome were at the zenith of her power,

                And when was he "at the zenith"?
                During the time of August - during the Teutoburg defeat?
                During the time of Marcus Aurelius during the Marcomannic Wars?
                Maybe during the time of Caracala with his Parthian campaigns?
                Rome and by 350 was still far from being an old maid, ready to give herself to the first who asks, in those conditions he could well stand up for himself for a long time. However, the conditions have changed (and they changed precisely with the advent of the Huns), and in the most radical way. Whatever the full list of reasons that led to such mass migrations of people as we see during the Great Migration, it was these migrations, and nothing else, that put an end to the Western Roman Empire, because it could not oppose anything to the movements of matter on such a scale .
        3. 0
          17 March 2023 21: 13
          Hello, Misha!
          But I do not agree. The Romans had an idea, and the barbarians - rob the loot.
      4. +1
        17 March 2023 14: 32
        and no Huns and no climate change contributed to the Great Migration. Only the weakening of Rome...
        Oh how! Only this way and not otherwise. "Believe me, Shura. Only theft" (c). in the sense of only the weakening of Rome ... And how did the barbarians come to this conclusion without exception? That's it! Rome, weakened, it was our turn to touch it by the udder. they say so and so "it's time, brother, it's time"? If so, the documents must have been preserved? Or was the protocol not kept? "The complete secrecy of deposits .. that is, the organization" (c)? Your hypothesis is based on afterthought, you know that Rome has weakened and build your hypothesis on this, moreover, categorical, and whoever disagrees with you is not an idiot.
        1. +4
          17 March 2023 16: 56
          Quote: parusnik
          whoever disagrees with you is not an idiot

          Agree with everything, disagree only with not crazy - it's spelled together like this - idiot...
          1. +1
            18 March 2023 12: 07
            it is written together, like this - a half-wit ...
            Weighty argument laughing Beats, to the ground. laughing All arguments crossed out. laughing The Great Migration of Nations is associated with the weakening of Rome. laughing "Trust me, Shura. Only theft" (c) laughing
  2. +5
    17 March 2023 08: 09
    Ten days later, having decided to celebrate the concluded peace, Theoderic invited Odoacer to a conciliatory feast in the former imperial palace Ad Laurentum ("In the laurel grove") and, having seated him in the place of the guest of honor, Theoderic drew his sword and with one blow cut Odoacer from the collarbone to the thigh .
    So the war between Theodoric and Odoacer ended with an agreement on their joint rule of Italy. But Theodoric didn’t take it by washing it. It was all or nothing. He slaughtered grandfather. In the best traditions, at the feast.
    1. +3
      17 March 2023 08: 52
      Quote: kor1vet1974
      In the best traditions, at the feast

      You can't do anything - barbarians, sir ... wink
      1. Fat
        +8
        17 March 2023 09: 32
        hi
        Quote: Luminman
        Quote: kor1vet1974
        In the best traditions, at the feast

        You can't do anything - barbarians, sir ... wink

        Come on. A common thing in an intelligent ancient Roman company "et vivis non ad deponendam audaciam, sed ad confirmandam audaciam" ("word by word, opinion on the table") - look, and fresh VIXI laughing
        Thanks for the interesting article.
  3. +3
    17 March 2023 10: 43
    Just the slave system has exhausted itself. This is the main reason for the fall of Rome and the death of ancient civilization. Could not rebuild and go to feudalism. The barbarians did it for them.
    1. +5
      17 March 2023 10: 52
      An old dilemma, one might say political economist's trap. The Eastern Roman Empire somehow rebuilt itself. No barbarians. You could say it's evolutionary.
      1. +3
        17 March 2023 12: 56
        Exactly. And it lasted another thousand years.
    2. +2
      17 March 2023 12: 01
      Quote: hermit
      Just the slave system has exhausted itself

      Rather, the Empire has exhausted itself. Almost a thousand years is a long time... wink
  4. +3
    17 March 2023 11: 31
    IMHO. I read that some kind of feast for the wedding of his son, rolled up by a senator of late Rome, cost 6 months of maintenance for the entire army, which all the time did not have enough money, salary debts, etc .....

    Many historians wrote from a complete gap between the plebs and the nobility (the Nobility, who grabbed everything, did not believe the people, and the poor people hated the nobility), and Rome fell. And later Constantinople.
    In the first, already well-developed barbarians were hired into the army, not trusting their people, they settled on the lands,
    In the second, not trusting their own, they gave away a lot to Italian mercenaries: customs, fleet, troops, trade, diplomacy, etc.

    How it ended, everyone remembers.
    1. +4
      17 March 2023 12: 05
      Quote: Max1995
      poor people

      Yes, he is not particularly poor. No one in Rome wanted to fight, work and engage in state affairs. Everything slowly passed into the hands of the barbarians, and the corrupted Romans lived according to the rule of "bread and circuses"...
  5. +3
    17 March 2023 11: 46
    overthrew Emperor Julius Nepos * (beforelast emperor of the Western Roman Empire)

    Julius Nepot. The last Roman emperor

    feel
    1. +2
      17 March 2023 11: 59
      Julius Nepos - penultimate emperor. The last one is Romulus Augustus. What's wrong?
      1. +8
        17 March 2023 12: 23
        Last - Romulus Augustus

        To write correctly - Flavius Romulus August (lat. Flavius ​​Romulus Augustus),
        Romulus Augustus - this is his then Roman nickname Romulus later distorted by Jordanes Augustulus (lat. Romulus Augustulus literally - Romulus "small August")
        1. +4
          17 March 2023 12: 29
          Quote: Richard
          Correct - Flavius ​​Romulus Augustus

          Flavius ​​is a genus. They were almost all Flavia there, including the barbarians ...

          Quote: Richard
          Romulus Augustulus literally - Romulus "petty August"

          If we take into account his age and inability to manage state affairs, then he is more like August...
      2. +4
        17 March 2023 13: 16
        Quote: Luminman
        Julius Nepos - penultimate emperor

        That's it.
        And in the caption according to the illustration it is written - just "last" without "prev".
        1. +2
          17 March 2023 16: 25
          Quote: Senior Sailor
          And in the caption according to the illustration it is written - just "last" without "prev"

          Alas, my "jamb" ...
  6. +5
    17 March 2023 15: 19
    I read the article - extremely atmospheric!
    It was as if the wind swept through and swept away the remnants of Western Rome. Just now - the Colosseum, gladiators, thumbs down, distribution of circuses, bread, important governors of the provinces, ancient aristocratic families, togas, 25 private libraries ... And now the impulse, and there is nothing! And the still formless Middle Ages creeps in on the sly, crawls into the cracks ...
    Thank you, Kuntsev! love )))
    1. +4
      17 March 2023 16: 24
      Quote: depressant
      And here is the impulse, and there is nothing!

      And the dispute of descendants, why did Rome collapse? wink
      1. +5
        17 March 2023 17: 32
        By the way, yes )))
        Was the Roman Empire too urbanized?
        Imagine, for those who do not know, the population density of the city of Rome in those recent times exceeded the population density of present-day New York by 6 (six!) times! The townspeople were not very inclined to fight. Urban comfort - yes, to fight for it outside the city - no.
        It is so now.
        1. +1
          17 March 2023 19: 00
          I think that the number of 50 million is somewhat exaggerated.
          1. +1
            17 March 2023 19: 29
            Quote: 3x3zsave
            the number of 50 million is somewhat exaggerated.

            Probably, here they meant population density - the number of thinking and walking protoplasm per square kilometer ... wink
            1. +1
              17 March 2023 19: 44
              Here it meant a hastily snatched number in Wikipedia. But only.
  7. +5
    17 March 2023 19: 46
    The author, I can not understand what sources you rely on. For example, where is this from?
    On a note. It is believed that Odoacer belonged to the Germanic tribe of the Rugs, who waged an uncompromising struggle with another Germanic tribe - the Goths, with whom they always flared up enmity wherever they happened to meet (the Baltic, the Danube and Northern Italy). The sources that have come down to us show us a picture of a real blood feud that passed from one generation to another.

    Roogs and Goths really lived in the neighborhood for a long time, but what does the endless hostility have to do with it, and even with blood feuds? Tacitus only writes that they are neighboring tribes. Jordan reports that the Rugs joined the coalition of tribes that opposed the Ostrogoths and were defeated on the river. Bolia. But these tribes had reason to fight the Ostrogoths, who "nightmare" all their neighbors, including the Romans. Further, Eugippius reports that the Rugs, although they feared the neighborhood of the Goths, nevertheless lived in peace with them and even intermarried with the ruling Amal dynasty. The Ostrogothic princess Gizo became queen of the Rugs. When the Rugs were defeated by Odoacer, the son of King Feletey and Gizo, Prince Friederich, fled with the remnants of the army to the Ostrogoths. Theodoric the Great accepted them and, waging war against Odoacer, declared himself an avenger for offended relatives. The Rugs, together with the Goths, conquered Italy, and were not at all resettled there by Odoacer, as it is in your text. They lived there until the Gothic War and fought against the Byzantines side by side with the Goths, and one of the Rug leaders, Erarich, even became the Gothic king.
    giving up the useless, dangerous and so hated title of emperor by the barbarians

    Why did the barbarians hate the title of emperor? They revered him very much and even tried to imitate him in everything. The barbarian kings minted coins with images of emperors and were glad to receive the title of patricians, the Visigothic kings called themselves Flavius ​​and even introduced the corresponding ceremonial, etc.
    And again, as in the article about Gaiseric, you have a big gap in events. Describing the victories of Theoderic in 489, you do not write that Odoacer at the beginning of 490, although with the help of betrayal, went on the offensive and drove Theodoric with an army to Ticinus, where he laid siege. Only the help of the Visigoths arrived in time to save the Ostrogoths from defeat. By the way, the Visigothic king Alaric himself did not go to Italy.
    Well, not a word about the internal policy of Odoacer at all ... Although a few proposals about the position of the Roman population under the rule of the barbarian king would not hurt at all.
    1. +2
      17 March 2023 21: 03
      Quote: fuxila
      I don't understand what sources you rely on. For example, where is this from?
      It is believed that Odoacer belonged to the Germanic tribe of the Rugs, who waged an uncompromising struggle with another Germanic tribe - the Goths, with whom they always flared up enmity wherever they happened to meet (the Baltic, the Danube and Northern Italy). The sources that have come down to us show us a picture of a real blood feud that passed from one generation to another.

      There is a whole dissertation devoted to the enmity of the Goths with Rugs since the time when they lived in the Baltic region. From there I took...

      Quote: fuxila
      and one of the Rug leaders, Erarich, even became the Gothic king

      May I inquire about the source? wink

      Quote: fuxila
      Why did the barbarians hate the title of emperor?

      They always felt hostility towards the emperor and the empire, it is enough to recall the Danubian Goths, who sold their children in order to eat. Other barbarians were treated no better by the Empire. Why did they love her?

      Quote: fuxila
      hated the title of emperor...
      ... they revered him very much and even tried to imitate him in everything

      Good reverence and imitation, when all the insignia of the emperor’s power were sent to Constantinople - take yours back, we don’t need it ...

      Quote: fuxila
      By the way, the Visigothic king Alaric himself did not go to Italy

      You are joking? wink

      Quote: fuxila
      Well, not a word about the internal policy of Odoacer at all ... Although a few proposals about the situation of the Roman population

      Here is the real question. I missed this. In a nutshell, I will say that Odoacer was wise (or barbarically cunning) and he laid down a policy of peaceful coexistence with the Gallo-Roman population. And Theodoric, who replaced him, continued to merge the Germans with the Gallo-Romans to the fullest. Yes, and in terms of the economic part, Theodoric was a good administrator, it was not for nothing that he was nicknamed Great...
      1. +3
        18 March 2023 03: 52
        There is a whole dissertation devoted to the enmity of the Goths with Rugs since the time when they lived in the Baltic region. From there I took...

        What dissertation can be written on the topic of enmity between Goths and Rugs with such a small number of sources? Who is the author and what is the title of the topic? Today I will download and study.

        May I inquire about the source?

        There was such a Byzantine writer - Procopius of Caesarea - he was a participant in the wars against the vandals and is ready and described them in his writings. I assure you that when you read it, you will discover a new world of barbarian kings, useful for continuing the topic. In general, it is a shame to take up such a topic and not read Procopius. So he writes: “In the army, there was a certain Erarich, a native of the Rug tribe, who used great power among these barbarians ... When, after the murder of Ildibad, the state of affairs among the Goths became vague, the Rugs suddenly proclaim Erarich the king.”

        They always felt hostility towards the emperor and the empire, it is enough to recall the Danubian Goths, who sold their children in order to eat. Other barbarians were treated no better by the Empire. Why did they love her?

        And they are not a woman to love. There were quite pragmatic relations: there was an opportunity to rob, then the barbarians robbed, and if there was an opportunity to go to the service, then they did. You can put the question differently, but why should the Romans love barbarians? The same vandals?

        Good reverence and imitation, when all the insignia of the emperor’s power were sent to Constantinople - take yours back, we don’t need it ...

        That is why they sent that Odoacer did not dare to appropriate this title for himself. I understood that a hat was not for Senka.

        You are joking?

        What's the joke? Where is it written that Alaric went to Italy?

        In a nutshell, I will say that Odoacer was wise (or barbarically cunning) and he laid down a policy of peaceful coexistence with the Gallo-Roman population. And Theodoric, who replaced him, continued to merge the Germans with the Gallo-Romans to the fullest. Yes, and in terms of the economic part, Theodoric was a good administrator, it was not for nothing that they called him the Great ...

        Odoacer did not control Gaul at all, so he could not pursue any policy towards the Gallo-Roman population from the word at all. The last remnants of the Roman possessions in Provence were captured by the Visigothic king Eirich, his army even broke through into Italy and Odoacer had no choice but to admit the loss of these territories around 477. And Theodoric never intended to pursue a policy of merging the Goths with the Romans, especially with the Gallo- the Romans, of whom he had few and acquired them only after 508. Theodoric sought only peaceful coexistence, in which the Romans performed civil service, and the Goths military. "Splicing" in general was impossible with the religious antagonism of the Goths and the Romans.
        1. +1
          18 March 2023 16: 35
          Quote: fuxila
          What dissertation can be written on the topic of enmity between Goths and Rugs with such a small number of sources?

          For starters, you can start with Jordan. He calls them ulmerugami (ulmerugi) or insular rugs. Next, heat up the oil in your head if it's not consistent...

          Quote: fuxila
          Who is the author and what is the title of the topic?

          I understand correctly that the next question will be what kind of morning stool did Odoacer have and what tooth did he have a hole in?

          Quote: fuxila
          Today I will download and study

          Would you have a wish, all this long could be found, downloaded and studied...
          1. 0
            18 March 2023 17: 11
            Next, heat up the oil in your head if it's not consistent...

            And then all science ended and a certain substance climbed. belay
            And it turns out that Jordan wrote his dissertations ... How! fellow
            1. +1
              18 March 2023 18: 16
              Quote: fuxila
              And then all science ended and a certain substance climbed.
              And it turns out that Jordan wrote his dissertations ... How!

              I'll quote myself again:

              Quote: fuxila
              For starters, you can start with Jordan

              Quote: Luminman
              If you had a desire, all this could have been found, downloaded and studied for a long time
              1. -1
                19 March 2023 06: 45
                If you had a desire, all this could have been found, downloaded and studied for a long time ...

                Unlike you, I carefully study the sources, and listening to advice from a person who sat down on the topic of barbarian kings and at the same time did not even master Procopius of Caesarea is ridiculous. From this I conclude that the dissertation about the wars of the Rugs and the Goths in the Baltic is nothing more than a figment of your imagination, otherwise they would have given a link to it.
                In general, when, instead of scientific arguments, a person begins to be rude in response, such as the fact that you have not brains in your head, but oil, this only speaks of the bullish nature of the individual.
                1. +1
                  19 March 2023 09: 29
                  Quote: fuxila
                  it only speaks of the bullish nature of the individual

                  Yours knowledge in history is as poor as in other areas, so I advise you do not make diagnoses, because they cannot cause anything but laughter ...
                  1. -1
                    19 March 2023 15: 50
                    Your knowledge of history is as poor as in other areas, so I advise you not to make diagnoses, because they can cause nothing but laughter ...

                    And in what other areas, besides history, does my knowledge make you laugh? You can at least substantiate something from your statements, otherwise you resemble a stupid old woman at the entrance - you sit mumbling something with your toothless mouth, and only God knows what you are dissatisfied with.
                    Your knowledge of history is definitely ridiculous ... I could parse each of your articles in paragraphs, but initially I didn’t dig too much, because. I saw what an amateur writes. Your articles are just a stupid compilation, pulled from various sources. For example, let's take:

                    In 487, Odoacer defeated the Rugians at Noricum, capturing their king, Feletius.


                    And then you write:
                    Theodoric justified his act as revenge for the execution of his relatives Feletheus and Guizot.

                    Why didn’t the simple thought that Feletheus and Feletheus are one and the same person not enter your confusion? I tore it out of some English-language text, ran it through the program and inserted it into the text, since the Anglo-Saxons really write it like Feleteus. And the fact that domestic historians did not have enough brains Feletei, so Feleteus and Feleteus turned out in one text. In the same place, by the way, is Friederikus, whom our historians everywhere write ka Friederich. But if in the head the brain is the size of a walnut, then it is difficult to understand. I have the same students who are not burdened with intellect, they bring their work, pulled from various sources, and to subtract what was written and comprehend - this is not enough intelligence. You are probably one of these generations of the Unified State Examination.
                    1. 0
                      19 March 2023 17: 58
                      Quote: fuxila
                      I have the same students

                      Interesting. what do you teach them, with such and such a level of development?
                      You'd better go and eat a hamburger, maybe it will boost your mental activity...
                      1. -1
                        19 March 2023 18: 06
                        Better go and eat a hamburger, maybe it will spur your mental activity.

                        Poor guy, I'm from the generation that doesn't eat your stinky American hamburgers, that's your lot, that's why your brains are so liquefied.
  8. 0
    18 March 2023 21: 29
    In general, I wonder ... but who was the odoacr after all? Rug, skyr???
  9. 0
    23 August 2023 21: 43
    There, judging by the names, the Slavs participated.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"