Russian squads in battle. Part of 2

35
Russian squads in battle. Part of 2

Russian epics are a very important source for identifying the psychology of Russian knights-knights. The image of a knight warrior - a heavily armed horse warrior, defender of the Fatherland, with his own ideas of honor, duty, with a certain pride (for some heroes, it comes to arrogance), gives rise to an association with Western European knighthood.

However, there is a serious difference, the Western knights are all noble people. Russian epics were the "product" of the common people. Most often the epic begins with the fact that the hero leaves the house, rich, like Dobrynia Nikitich, or a peasant, like Ilya. The reason that makes them leave their homeland is the desire to protect people, or “walk” (a very frequent motive). In the future, the hero boils unspent energy, he is "wild", Gumilev Passionate. Currently, such a person is called a person with an active lifestyle. The potential inherent in a person requires an exit.

In this regard, the difference between the epic heroes and the usual portrait of the Russian people, as he was portrayed by some historians or philosophers, like N. A. Berdyaev, no more passivity, femininity, immediately draws attention to itself. There was even a whole myth about the original passivity of the Slavs, who need the “Varangians”, the Germans, in order to lead and direct them. A sign of heroism is their activity, even rampage. This is one of the socio-psychological traits.

Another important feature of the Russian knight is the clear social orientation of his activities. He lives in the interests of society, the people. Even such an ancient character, endowed with many magical properties, like Volkh Vseslavich, who does not need anyone's care or praise, is no stranger to common interests. He starts his campaign “on the Indian kingdom, on the Tsar Saltyk Stavrulievich” because he “boasts — boasts: He wants to take Kiev-grad behind a shield”. In the Russian epic, the hero is not conceived of living outside popular, state interests. An ancient, full of mythical symbolism, the struggle with the Serpent Gorynych turns into retribution for the burned cities and the liberation of the people who were taken captive.

In the epics, to enter the squad, it is usually required to accomplish two feats. One (or several) bogatyr performs as he wishes on his way to Kiev, the other already has the character of a princely task. Often, the first feat has the character of simple boldness: Dobrynya just like that, with no particular purpose, enters the fight with the Serpent, crushes his cubs; Alyosha kills anyone who does not touch, sometimes a sleeping Neodolishcha happens. Princely assignments are already "socially useful" character. Dobrynya, for the second time, encounters the Serpent, rescuing the prince's niece, Zabava Putyatnu; Alyosha frees the capital city of Kyiv from Tugarin.

Patriotism in the epic epic is present not only in the form of conscious conviction, but also as a deep psychology that determines worldview. Participation in the affairs of the people for the hero is the meaning of life. The interest of the land of the Russian bogatyryu-vityazi is more important than the personal one (this distinguishes the heroes from many heroes of fairy tales who aspire only for their own well-being). So, Ilya overcomes personal dislike for Vladimir and resentment towards him in order to protect Kiev, ordinary people.

Another feature of the psychology of Russian knights is a sense of personal dignity and honor. The warriors are proud and "passionate", do not despise. Insult is not forgiven to anyone. Even such a wise man, in general, a calm hero, like Ilya, is very cool in matters of honor. Offended by the prince, he arranges a feast for the "goal of the erratic." Ilya fights with Dobrynya because of the fame of him as a great master of struggle.

The main features of the psychology of the heroes - activity, social orientation of their actions, deep patriotism and a sense of personal dignity, this is all a legacy of the era of the so-called. "Military democracy". In 10-13 vv. this era has not yet been forgotten, most of the population was free and armed. Before serfdom was still far away. Unfortunately, many spread the concept of the peasants of 18-19 centuries, to an earlier era. Each full member of the community, if necessary, participated in military operations. "Warriors", urban and rural militia neither differed in armament nor combat techniques from warriors. There were no clear social boundaries. In the lower part of the squad often replenished from the common people. Therefore, in warriors, heroes saw "their".

As V. Dolgov and M. Savinov write: “The people in epics remember first of all about themselves. The story of the princely warriors, warriors, knights of Holy Russia, is perceived as information not about the ancestors of the ruling class, but about the roots of the people as a whole. This is ... a socio-psychological portrait of the main part of the Russian society of the Old Russian state - “people”, full-fledged members of the community from whom the squad was formed - the heroic brotherhood. It is preserved by people's memory as a reminder of a free and noble past ”(Vadim Dolgov, Mikhail Savinov. The Brave of Old Russia. M, 2010).

Warrior Education

Warrior training began in childhood. I must say that it was very short then, in 15-16 years, a man was considered an adult, he could marry and begin an independent life. Boyarsky son in these years entered the squad.

The first frontier, which marked the growing up of a boy and his transition from the state of infancy to the state of a child, was in 2-3 of the year. He was honored with tonsure. Some ethnographers believe that this custom existed not only among the nobility, but also in all social strata. Sometimes this ceremony could coincide with another - landing on a horse. These customs go back to deep pagan antiquity and were in the nature of military age initiation (initiation). In a later period, a frankly pagan landing on a horse was ousted from life, and the tonsure rite, which is close to the Christian ritual in form, remained as “decent”. In the West, this ancient custom was transformed into a knightful ritual. In Russia, the boys, therefore, set up for the future, they were to become warriors.

From early childhood, children were taught to arms. Archaeologists often find children's wooden swords. Usually their form corresponded to the form of a real weapon of this era. It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that children's swords, daggers, spears and bows in Russia did not perform an entertaining task, like modern toys. Through the game, the boy got experience handling weapons. Wooden weapons could learn the techniques of battle as real. Children's weapons were necessary for the gradual learning of techniques, gaining skills, developing strength (for example, a blade made of oak, was comparable in weight to the present), dexterity.

In addition to weapons, a kit of a future warrior included a horse, boats, tops, sleds, balls of various sizes. They were necessary not only for entertainment, but also for the development of agility, coordination of movement. In addition, the children of the nobility from early childhood and got a real weapon - swords, daggers.

Did a special school (or several) of weapon and hand-to-hand fighting exist in Russia? This question was attempted by a person who specifically sought the traces of this system in the remaining customs of Russian fist fighters — the creator of the Slavic-Goritsky struggle, Alexander Belov. Here are the conclusions he made: “... with the almost universal involvement of the male population (lower social strata) of pre-revolutionary Russia in one form or another of the national competition, there is no such link as special education, school ... Probably a special training role in the preparation of future wrestlers and Masters of fist gathering played children's fun - folk game. In order to avoid the “Chingalina damask” flying in you, you had to spend all your childhood running from the snowballs rolled up by your friends and swing, standing with your feet on a swing, learning to distribute the movement from the heels to your shoulders, to ride without falling down the mountain on your feet along the icy path, to run in felt boots on the ice, when the legs are moving apart, but to rush into the “tag tag”, dodging a comrade who is trying to get you ... But can you tell me everything? Yard game and sport, in fact, the same thing. Technique of the same battlefield to learn - is simple. Especially if the competition of masters are held since childhood in front of you. And all the rest is practice ”(Belov A.K. The Slavic-Goritsky struggle. First Prim. M., 1993).

In addition, it is necessary to note another “school” for an ordinary resident of Ancient Russia, which was held by almost every Rusich. This is life in the forest or forest-steppe. Hunting was a good quench for a fighter. She taught the ability to read tracks, wait, sit in wait, kill. It must be remembered that Russia was then covered with dense forests full of game. This is now hunting - this is more entertainment than the real threat to human life. The medieval hunter was in very different conditions. To get the "owner of the forest" with the help of a spear, is a serious matter.

Thus, the tradition of combat training encompassed almost the entire male population and existed from the time of the clan system to the beginning of the 20 century. Its basis was folk games, ceremonial actions - from children to adults, when the wall on the wall converged the street into the street, the village to the village.

In the Old Russian state, a warrior, having passed the stage of children's catch-up games, snowballs, knives, the stage of game fights with wooden weapons, learning to shoot from a simple bow, from the very beginning was included in real combat operations. The benefit of opportunities to war was enough. It is clear that the practice took its toll on lives, but the survivors, as such, were usually the majority, learned quickly and well. In no school, with artificial training situations, they will not teach this way.

weaponry

The main supplier of information about ancient weapons is archeology. In addition, some data can be obtained from written and visual sources. Archeology allows you to study weapons themselves, allows you to set their shape, size, weight, material, manufacturing technology. Pictorial sources - icons, frescoes, miniatures, etc., make it possible to see how the weapon was worn, the weapon was used, to see intact those objects that came only in the form of fragments.

The largest number of archaeological finds of Russian weapons originate from burial grounds, ancient cemeteries. In the burials of the pagan period, weapons are an obligatory attribute of warrior soldiers, often even commoners. This tradition has not disappeared and the spread of Christianity, although the total number of graves with weapons has decreased. Interestingly, burials with weapons can be found not only in rural areas (as is well known, Christianity penetrated not very quickly among rural residents and was close to paganism for a long time), but also in the burials of warriors. Weapons are also found during excavations of fortifications, sometimes at battle sites.

Professional warriors belonged to a sword, helmet, chainmail, weapons with decorations. High-quality swords and sabers, whose production required considerable skill, as well as most of the protective weapons (except for relatively uncomplicated wooden shields), primarily belong to the specific weapons of warriors. According to the Arab traveler Ibn Fadlan, who watched the Rus on the Volga, each had an ax, a sword and a knife, and they never parted with a weapon.

Sword. The most honorable and prestigious weapon of a Russian warrior was a sword, chopping and slashing-stabbing double-edged melee weapons. Sword strikes were mainly inflicted with a sword, so until about the 13 of a century the edge did not sharpen, the tip of the sword was rounded. For a long time, this type of weapon was tried to be declared "Scandinavian." Russian swords were similar to them in the form of a blade and the appearance of a handle. However, the Scandinavians were not the inventors of a heavy slashing sword. This type of sword appeared in Central and Western Europe by the 8 century.

Scientists distinguish among the swords found in Russia in 9-11 centuries. about 20 types and subtypes. Basically, they differ in the size and shape of the handle ("cheren"), the blades of the same type. The average length of the blade was about 95 cm. The width of the blade at the handle reached 5-7 cm, towards the end it gradually narrowed. In the middle of the blade was a “dale” - a wide longitudinal groove. It is sometimes called the “runoff for blood”, but in fact it served to relieve the sword somewhat, which weighed about 1,5 kg. The thickness of the blade in the area of ​​the valley was about 2,5 mm, on its sides - up to 6 mm. However, due to the skill of the blacksmiths and the special manufacture of metal, such a difference in thickness did not affect the strength of the sword.

Swords, like other weapons, change significantly over time. At the end of XI - the beginning of the XII century, swords become shorter - up to 86 cm, lighter - up to 1 kg and thinner. In the IX — X centuries. Dol occupied half the width of the blade, in the XI-XII centuries. already third, and XIII century. turned into a narrow groove. In the XII - XIII centuries. the blade is extended - up to 120 cm, and weighted down - up to 2 kg, due to increased protective weapons. The handle also becomes longer, resulting in two-handed swords. Dale gradually disappears to make the sword heavier. In an earlier era, "heroic" swords are an exception. At this time, they are still chopping weapons, but in the annals for 1255, the year is mentioned the first thrust.

Swords were sheathed, usually wooden, covered in leather, behind their backs or on their belts. Often the sheath was decorated with a cast tip. Warrior riders used the sword less frequently on foot warriors, this was due to the fact that the center of gravity was shifted to the handle, and made it difficult to strike from the top down from the saddle. Usually, swords belonged only to warriors, less often to well-to-do militias. Swords were very expensive due to the fact that the production process of a good blade was long and complicated. In addition, they demanded from the owner of considerable skill, it was a professional weapon. The sword was used in the Russian army before the 16 century. By this time in the cavalry, he was significantly pressed by the saber, more convenient for equestrian combat.

Since ancient times was associated with the sword an extensive set of beliefs and legends. It was not just a weapon, a murder tool. He was part of the culture of the people. The sword is praised in the heroic epic, it is used in religious rituals, it acts as a sacred offering, the most expensive gift. The sword is a symbol of high social status.

The sword often falls on the pages of Russian chronicles and other documents. The Tale of Bygone Years contains a story about the tribute to the Khazars from the side of the field with swords. In her sword stands a symbol of the future victory of the Slavs over the Khazars. During the conclusion of a peace agreement with the Romans, Russian warriors use the sword in the oath ritual. Svyatoslav, when the Byzantines, testing him, sent him rich gifts, gold and pavoloki (expensive silk fabric), showed indifference. He became interested only in the sword and other weapons. The Byzantine ambassadors told their ruler: “This husband will be the Lut, for he neglects wealth and takes the weapon. Pay him a tribute. ”


Sources: M.Gorelik. Warriors of Kievan Rus of the IX-XI centuries. A. Kirpichnikov. Old Russian weapons: Swords and sabers IX - XIII centuries.

To be continued ...
35 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Atlon
    +13
    1 March 2013 10: 34
    Yes ... We also played active games in childhood ... And how many soldiers will grow up now, who, apart from computer shooters, can no longer train?
    1. +6
      2 March 2013 01: 46
      Probably, a special, training role in preparing future fighters and masters of fist gatherings was played by children's fun - a folk game. In order to evade the “damask massif” flying in you, you had to run all your childhood from snowballs rolled up by your friends and sway while standing on your swing, learning to distribute movement from heels to shoulders, to ride, without falling, from the mountain on your feet along the ice path, to run in felt boots on the ice when legs are parted, but to run into “tag nibbles”, dodging your friend trying to get you ... However, do you list everything? Yard play and sport are essentially the same thing

      It seems like I was almost a ready ninja at the time of the call !!! am And me to the construction battalion ... bastards ... recourse
      1. +3
        2 March 2013 09: 47
        Quote: chehywed
        It seems like I was almost a ready ninja at the time of the call !!!

        Well, ninjas are needed in the construction battalion. lol
        1. Atlon
          +4
          2 March 2013 10: 08
          Quote: botur
          Well, ninjas are needed in the construction battalion.


          This is where you need it! After all, as you know: "They don't even give out weapons to animals!" (C) (about the construction battalion)
  2. 0
    1 March 2013 10: 39
    In those days, the army was made up of warriors from the nobility, all the boyars and nobles carried out military service from childhood, and the warriors were far from peasants, they were also taken away from childhood and they did not even touch the plows. So the peasant base of the Russian warriors is far-fetched.
  3. avt
    +3
    1 March 2013 11: 27
    Quote: Nayhas
    In those days, the army was made up of warriors from the nobility, all the boyars and nobles carried out military service from childhood, and the warriors were far from peasants, they were also taken away from childhood and they did not even touch the plows. So the peasant base of the Russian warriors is far-fetched.

    There is a bust, as with the steppe miraculous heroes, everything was all about wars on the occasion of birth. Now let's figure it out. Buy armor, weapons, money is not small. Again, the horse is not needed for plowing and harnessed to a cart. A clockwork for luggage and transportation of the same armor? Moreover, this is characteristic of ALL in the west and in the east. Well, we don’t talk about ownership of all equipment, we will assume that everyone knew how from birth. No, all were not professional wars. And the nobility and the nobility came out and formed just from professional fighters. Well, when there was not enough, they hired Scandinavians, mercenaries, steppes and paid. Well, then the Romanov yoke came up with the yoke, and since the Hessian Gottorp steel finally became a yoke, the yoke turned out to be Mongol, and the Scandinavians became not the yoke before the Mongol, but enlighteners and statesmen according to Miller. It seems like they passed from the Vikings to the Greeks and created a state.
    1. +1
      1 March 2013 11: 42
      Well, the same Mongols, of course, were not "miracle-bogatyrs" from birth, but the type of housekeeping allowed them to have military skills among the entire male population. Participation from childhood in hunting, especially round-up, gave the experience of using a bow, working in a team (which is most important). There is nothing to say about horse riding, by the age of 15 they already merged with the horse. The Mongols could mobilize a maximum of the male population for the war, leaving at least a minimum on the farm. children can graze cattle. I mean, the Mongols could increase their army at the expense of the shepherds, but the Russians at the expense of the peasants do not have farmers. The peasant does not own a bow and a sword, he cannot conduct a team battle, he does not have time for such fun, he has to plow ...
      1. Fox
        +5
        1 March 2013 13: 40
        Quote: Nayhas
        I mean, the Mongols could increase their army at the expense of the shepherds

        how many of these Mongols are there? judging by your "extensive" knowledge, you live in nomad camps ... and I, a sucker, did not notice something among the LIVING Mongols that you ascribed to them. about peasants. battle battles were on EVERYONE Shrovetide by ALL the male population holding the formation. and fistfights were quite frequent among young people. My great-grandfather was a noble fighter.
        1. +2
          1 March 2013 19: 02
          Call yourself what you want, just do not need to project the 21st century onto 13. But a warrior warrior and a militia are more than different things, a fist fight against a cavalry with a bow and saber is absolutely useless.
      2. +5
        1 March 2013 13: 55
        Nayhas
        I was 100% sure that it would definitely not be possible without the Mongols or steppes laughing
        Yes, they were soldiers, they were. But there was no conscription there. Nomadic herders possessed the skills of martial art, which they first of all needed for their existence in the steppe. Therefore, it is not always possible to compare the criteria by which one can evaluate the martial art of a nomad steppe or an old Russian warrior (European knight) for the reason that they almost never met head-on, except for individual episodes.
        By the way, you are not quite right about the peasants. Under certain conditions, it was not difficult for the peasant farmers to take up arms and wave their axes with axes against the adversaries. In Spain, during the Reconquista period, peasants following a plow in a field with a sword on their belts were by no means uncommon and made a significant contribution to the victory over the Moors. The Spanish lords were forced to recognize this contribution and as a result, Spain was one of the few countries where serfdom was not available.
        1. +2
          1 March 2013 19: 10
          Yes, I mean, those Russian warriors who made up the main strength of the Russian princes were not peasants plowmen. These were professional warriors from childhood trained in military affairs. Militias from the peasants were attracted more for the masses, their role was modest and it was not they who decided the outcome of the battle. By the way, in the internecine wars, the Russian princes did not attract them, but the Polovtsy.
          PS: And the Mongols had conscription, every man from 13 years old had to have at least two horses, a bow, arrows and a saber, a minimum of armor.
          1. Urrry
            0
            1 March 2013 19: 26
            Polovtsy was attracted from economy, as migrant workers ... :) A peasant can also go on a hike - but he will also require a fee for the hike, and also compensation for the lost crop :)
            1. Marek Rozny
              +1
              5 March 2013 15: 40
              yeah ... and Peter the Great hired German warriors because they were cheaper than Russian peasants. So?
      3. zavesa01
        +1
        1 March 2013 17: 46
        The bow was also used for hunting, so it can. And wall to wall "if you participated" teaches you to cover the person standing next to you. This means that the skill of fighting in the ranks is also available.
    2. BruderV
      0
      1 March 2013 13: 26
      Quote: avt
      Well, then the Romanov yoke came up with

      In America, slavery was never there either, it was invented 4 years ago by the black Negro Obama who came to power. In fact, illegal immigration has always existed and Negroes 300 years ago sailed across the ocean on rafts to America for social benefits. Now they have thoroughly multiplied, seized power, and in order to continue to receive benefits from whites, they invented slavery, which never existed. Over the 4 years of Obama’s presidency, all textbooks around the world have been carefully rewritten, and the FBI has brainwashed humanity through television and the 25 frame effect.
      1. RAMBO
        +1
        1 March 2013 14: 05
        Yes, it’s true, about blacks, goodAnd then I look at this site some romantics are going to be read a comprador fantasy and are in the clouds
        1. BruderV
          -1
          1 March 2013 14: 31
          Quote: RAMBO
          Yes, we noticed, about blacks

          Yes, I don’t know who can believe in this slavery. Now try to catch some stupid man in Harlem or Burkina Faso today and make him plow like Papa Carlo. Nothing will work out, more money will be spent on protection than the benefit of such labor. Or was nobody guarding them before? This whole army is needed. Or were they nowhere to run? And by the way, why do you think all of a sudden, for no reason, the crisis has begun and does not stop? Can you imagine how many books you need to reprint around the world and how much money is needed for this? Remember smog over Russia? How much should the forest burn? In fact, it was not forests that burned, but old books. After all, Russia is the most reading country - so I had to burn so many books that I could stand for a month.
      2. avt
        +2
        1 March 2013 14: 20
        Quote: BruderV
        In America, slavery was never there either, it was invented 4 years ago by the black Negro Obama who came to power.

        For lovers of the yoke, I can only recommend reading the correspondence of the Nogai horde of the Khan with the Moscow sovereign Romanov from the first, forgive the steppe people earlier, the passionarity interfered with literacy, they more and more foreign writing was used to write the yoke, even a truly "Mongol" letter, and then the Uyghur signs were written, but the chronicle In general, the Uyghur disappeared from the last seas, they say yes, the copy in Chinese has disappeared, but there is a problem with dating. , because in the continuation of the letter the khan says that Mirza [I don’t remember his Mongolian name, you’ll read it yourself} unauthorized Cossack went to him without asking. behind a swag on a Russian land but no C why suddenly such softness, conscience for the previous yoke has stuck? a perfect example of a relationship, a complete symbiosis.
        1. BruderV
          +2
          1 March 2013 15: 01
          Quote: avt
          For lovers of yoke

          Misha Romanov? Etozh 17 century. Kazan is taken, Astrakhan is taken. The Nogatians, the Horde infirmities, are subjects of Russia who, by the way, still do not have ailments to this day. At that time, the Kazan Tatars were subjects of the tsar. And what conclusion should be drawn from this letter? Let's still read the correspondence of the Central Committee of the CPSU with the leadership of the Kazakh SSR and on the basis of this we conclude that the symbiosis of the horde and Russia is like that of the RSFSR and Kazakhstan, the former part of the horde. And with the Crimean Khan, do not let me read the correspondence? What do you mean by yoke? What stood over each Rusich by the Mongoloid and made it work with a whip? In general, everything was a little different. The Tatars wandered themselves in the steppes, sent the Baskaks to collect tribute, then the princes themselves collected, handed out labels to the princes, if someone kicked up, they went to burn cities, and judging by the fact that even with the horde, the princes continued to have fun dividing the lands - it’s not such a yoke that was crushing how they paint him, punitive actions with burnt cities were terrible, they really weakened Russia. You see, this is not emperors and subordinates. These are bandos and tributaries. The Tatars were not even particularly interested in the political life of Russia, they pay tribute well, the main thing is not to increase too much, but let them fight with anyone they want. Maybe somewhere I agree on the exaggerated power of the horde, because in the 14th century they fought on equal terms with the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and did not go further to Europe. That is, if Russia managed to consolidate its forces in the 13th century, the yoke might not have existed. And so the Genghisides came to the ashes of the princely feud, they only needed to pick up what was bad.
          1. avt
            +2
            1 March 2013 15: 09
            Quote: BruderV
            Misha Romanov? Etozh 17 century.

            Well, yes, just before that, such a maaalenky problem was called the Time of Troubles, when there was no Moscow kingdom at all. And that is characteristic, a lot of steppes came to Pozharsky and Minin from the old memory. Do not believe it, they helped the state revive. What, anasha got smoked? Or maybe they still thought with their heads?
            1. BruderV
              +1
              1 March 2013 16: 01
              Quote: avt
              Pozharsky and Minin came a lot from the old memory of the steppes

              How many? Do you know how many Tatar cavalry the Poles had? There whole tribes moved to Lithuania. Did ON, and then Poland, have a symbiosis with the Horde?
              1. avt
                +6
                1 March 2013 17: 07
                Quote: BruderV
                How many? Do you know how many Tatar cavalry the Poles had? There whole tribes moved to Lithuania. Did ON, and then Poland, have a symbiosis with the Horde?

                And in request than a contradiction, on the contrary, confirmation NOBODY shied away from involving "outside" formations, moreover, well-known ones with which they previously fought and lost request Well, exactly what I’m talking about. laughing Thanks for the example. good By the way, when the tsars ended in Russia, why recently, by historical standards, the Tatars did not turn the return line on? Are the Poles afraid or the passionary factory is over, the Sun did not shine over Kazan? I’m somehow of a better opinion of the Tatars. Normally, they took False Dmitry 3rd near Astrakhan, but when the news came {well there was no Internet} that the normal king was different, they hung up. Well, Volga, and Crimean didn’t fit in on the big one? Again opossionariy, sorry, passionate? laughing Well, since Petrushin’s reforms and the further divergence of the elite becoming more Germanized and enslavement of the common people had to be justified by something, they threw in an idea about the backwardness of the Russians and their slavish consciousness brought up by the yoke. Well, in confirmation of my words, read the correspondence of Catherine II with Voltaire.
                1. BruderV
                  +3
                  1 March 2013 17: 49
                  Well, why wasn’t the yoke? The Mongolian (Khalkha, not Khalkha is not important) was the invasion, the horde was, paid tribute. Was there no yoke? Do you seriously think that Russian tsars, with the help of German historians, rewrote the chronicles in order to instill a slave psychology in the people? How if even by the end of the 19th century in the Russian Empire 13% of the population were literate? How should a Russian peasant get acquainted with the works of German historians? The church instilled much more submission to the tsarist government than some Germans somewhere in St. Petersburg, because it had direct contact with the people, and indeed was the largest feudal lord in the country. So maybe the ROC is to blame? They wrote chronicles in their monasteries under the trick of the kings.
                  Quote: avt
                  why recently, by historical standards, the Tatars did not turn on the return line?

                  Tatars and ask what they think about this. Maybe there was no leader, maybe there was no normal firearms, maybe then only Russians lived in Kazan, so the Tatars did not have a political center, maybe they just took Russian power.
                  Quote: avt
                  Well, Volga, and then Crimean, why didn’t it fit in large?

                  Because there was no fool. Did he need the Polish tsar to rule in Moscow? Then, instead of Russia, Poland would have only one natural enemy and one direction of expansion together with Russia - this is the Ottoman Empire and its vassal Crimean Khanate.
                  1. avt
                    +5
                    1 March 2013 19: 26
                    Quote: BruderV
                    The church instilled much more submission to the tsarist government than some Germans somewhere in St. Petersburg, because it had direct contact with the people, and indeed was the largest feudal lord in the country. So maybe the ROC is to blame? They wrote chronicles in their monasteries under the trick of the kings.

                    Well, why don't you read to the end, but pull out only what you like? After Petrushin's reforms, what is called the elite rushed to join European values ​​and history, including the yoke was written by the GERMANS and Miller in particular, well, after all, the fact is known when he got in the nose from Lomonosov, and Nartov, Petrusha's companion, for the fact that he intervened in the dispute at all prison rotted. Yes, they cleaned up the chronicles, a well-known fact, the fact of the loss of historical records of Tatishchev, who wrote on their basis, is also known. Moreover, he collected information about Kazan monasteries and temples and documents were taken to St. Petersburg and no one hid it. After all, even Lomonosov's works on history gone. But there was such an idea about a Russian slave brought up in a yoke, and this slavery is still offered to be crushed. Well, what about the fact that in Crimea, when they took in an Orthodox monosty, untouched by the Tatars, they beat down all the frescoes and sent the monks to distant monasteries, at least you know? Or are you studying history according to Akunin and Yan? Well, at least re-read the comments, it’s more and more useful, where about the Tatars in Poland and Lithuania. And talk about the fact that the Tatars lacked a leader, they say there are few real violent ones, and there are no leaders, well, dear people are even reluctant to comment. Then you'd better go to a fun farm or something ..... if you don't want to analyze well-known, available facts. And by the way about the Russian Orthodox Church, in general, are you aware that Petya abolished the post of the Patriarch and established the Ober Synod, a civil ministry? Or are you in virgin ignorance of the state reformation in the Anglican manner of the Russian Orthodox Church Peter I, believing that it is in an unshakable state since the time of Andrew the First-Called Balaam, who visited Balaam? This is about the preservation and census of chronicles. And papa Petya-Alexei church reform with the assault on Solovki, the destruction of category lists and the "self-immolation" of mass Old Believers, we did not have the Inquisition, they themselves set fire to the slaves of the yoke, is it known?
                    1. BruderV
                      +1
                      1 March 2013 20: 44
                      Quote: avt
                      history, including the yoke, was written by the GERMANS and Miller

                      The Germans wrote the Zadonshchina and the Legend of Mamaev’s massacre? The only thing the Germans made up and received from Lomonosov, who justified the name of their ancestors, was Norman theory, nothing more. That is, without the Rurik and the Scandinavians, the Eastern Slavs would not have a state. Even this they could not advance, many sent them on a long geographical journey and an anti-Norman theory appeared. And to fake the yoke ... Here's how ?? The country lived for itself, there were literate people, the same monks, nobles, there were annals, legends, folklore like an uninvited guest worse than a Tatar, they could not help but remember the history of 200-300 years ago. And then several Germans gather the whole country, I don’t know how they declare that they wrote a new story, and that 500 years ago Russia was conquered by the Mongols. And all the gathered scratched their turnips and agreed with the European pundits and went to invent folk art about the evil Tatars. And how did you edit the Polish, Belarusian and Ukrainian sources? All these lands were then in Poland. And the arab?
                  2. Marek Rozny
                    +1
                    5 March 2013 15: 49
                    Lyakhistan was the sworn enemy of the Crimean yurt and the Ottoman Empire. At the same time, the Poles willingly invited the Turkic oppositionists, preserving all their Chingizid privileges and automatically registering the Turkic clans in the military class. So they lured away even in the times of ON. And if earlier the Crimean exiles lived with the Poles and Litvin temporarily, and then returned home at an opportunity, then later they were no longer at home - Crimea was conquered by Russia. The Turks stayed in Poland. By the way, the writer Heinrich Sienkiewicz and the Hollywood actor Charles Bronson are direct descendants of these "Tatars".
                    And the main part of the Crimean steppes after the Russian occupation of Crimea went into the Ottoman Empire. Only left settled Crimeans (which are not really Türks, but a localized compote).
          2. +3
            1 March 2013 16: 27
            Quote: BruderV
            handed out labels to the princes,

            The question of labels by the way is interesting. For some reason there are no Horde labels in the archives, there are labels of Russian princes, there are labels of Crimean khans written in Russian, Arabic and Italian. There are some strange labels written in Tatar, attributed to the horde, found for some reason. then in the Polish private archive in the 19th century. Scientists doubt their authenticity.
  4. +2
    1 March 2013 11: 28
    Ants
    From the community stands a layer of professional warriors (“warriors”), who in the summer engaged in military raids on Byzantium and other territories. Warriors united in small detachments of several hundred people ("squads"), which, when combined, could form armies up to 1-2 thousand people. The detachments were headed by leaders (princes and “governors”), who had special authority (“glory”), whose death during the battle plunged the soldiers into panic. There are practically no finds of burials of the military nobility, but there are finds of treasures with coins, gold and silver utensils, looted during the campaigns. The armament of the warriors was light: a shield with a leather belt for carrying and a spear, as well as arrows with poison and throwing streets. Armor is mentioned only once. especially characteristic for antes were long swords of high quality. In archeology, they gave the name to a whole class of similar products, "Antsky type swords." And even in the Anglo-Saxon poem Beowulf, heroes fight with Antian swords. Tribal militias could reach considerable sizes and were used to protect against raids and when moving to new territories, as well as during the 626 campaign on Constantinople, when women were also found among the dead. Ants were considered the strongest Slavic tribe. Antskie soldiers served in the Byzantine army, participated in sea trips on boat odnoderevki.

    Living among the warlike peoples of the Anta steppes, they themselves got used to military life, went into robber raids along with the Huns and their fellow countrymen Bulgarians (a Turkic horde, who later settled in the Balkans among the Slavs, mixed with them and transferred their name to them). Weaning from peaceful occupations, they became more and more accustomed to war, like later Cossacks. They abandoned agriculture, lived in miserable huts, in need and poverty, did not have iron armor, like the Greeks; their weapons were the most miserable - a couple of copies; to speak openly, in the ranks they did not like; but suddenly to seize, attack and again scatter, luring the enemy - were the masters; agile, hardy, they knew how to set up an ambush, lurk - even in the water, and this stamina surprised the Greeks. They went for prey to the Byzantine lands; sometimes Byzantium paid them to turn their weapons against its enemies. So, in the 530's, the Ants had a war with their neighbors from Transnistrian Slovenia, probably by agreement with the Byzantine government, which suffered greatly from the Slovenian attack; later, in the 580's, Greek historians say very definitely that Byzantium then set the Ants on Sloven.
  5. Urrry
    +1
    1 March 2013 18: 55
    "until the 13th century, the tip of the sword was rounded, since not stabbing, but chopping blows were applied" (c).
    I read that the success of the Roman legions at one time was founded incl. and on the specific tactics of using swords, which were mainly used not for cutting but for stabbing, which were more effective under tight formation and close proximity of the enemy ... until the 13th century, it didn’t occur to anyone in Russia that it was possible not only to chop with a sword (for this and the ax will fit) - and also prick? :)
  6. Urrry
    +3
    1 March 2013 19: 15
    And yes: for some reason I do not agree when they sharply oppose the combat skills of "warriors" (professional) and peasants - like the latter did not have such skills at all ... I remember in the 70s, after the films "Crusaders", the crowd of boys with wooden with swords fencing for hours on end? Why is such entertainment denied to "peasant" children? And who watched the fighting skills not from the artistic film - but from the fights of the fighters who actually fought and imitated their possession of weapons? Well, after such a "game from 5 to 15 years old - muscle memory will remember this for a very long time. In childhood, I was like fencing (epee) for six months - I assure you that still" hands remember "... no, of course the epee fencer I won't win - because I haven't practiced for 25 years, but according to my own feelings - medieval peasants COULD own weapons! And in a real battle and in a dump, there may be enough of them - this is only in films about kung fu, the master is always right (by the way, nomadic pastoralists, those the peasants defeated China with all its kung fu)
    1. +1
      2 March 2013 13: 56
      Quote: UrRRy
      Why is such entertainment denied to "peasant" children? Moreover, those who watched the fighting skills not from the artistic film - but from the fights of the fighters who actually fought

      Fair.
  7. Urrry
    +1
    1 March 2013 19: 37
    And in defense of the possession of the weapons of the peasants: the Cossacks in the 19-20 century successfully combined farming with quite high combat skills, and this was already a period when skills in possession of firearms were required! In short, in the Middle Ages (with the constant threat of raiding, gangs of robbers, etc.) - the peasants could not be such bastards as they are represented by works of art and films dedicated to that time ... it was they who later moved east expanding the empire, Yes, and the former peasants stopped in the Cossacks!
  8. +1
    1 March 2013 21: 01
    I liked the material, I look forward to continuing
  9. +2
    1 March 2013 21: 09
    I want to draw attention to several points from the life of the Russian farmer.
    1. Before the Romanovs, slash-and-burn farming flourished in Russia, that is, at least such a farmer owned an ax well (Vikings immediately come to mind, Scandinavian fishermen had nowhere to take such skills)
    2. From 30 to 70% of food was obtained by hunting, at least such a "peasant" owns a bow and rogarine (spear)
    3. Significant physical strength develops when slash-fired agriculture.
  10. Avenger711
    +5
    2 March 2013 02: 20
    In addition to weapons, a kit of a future warrior included a horse, boats, tops, sleds, balls of various sizes. They were necessary not only for entertainment, but also for the development of agility, coordination of movement. In addition, the children of the nobility from early childhood and got a real weapon - swords, daggers.


    Now we have a sword, armor, etc., seem to be taken for granted and elementary, but about any universal armament of the people there was nothing more complicated then a club. The sword is generally quite complicated with a long production cycle. I wonder what kind of weapon consumption was then, the sword is very easy to break.

    In Russia, even in the era of Peter the steelmaking did not exceed 3 kg per person per year. Iron things were inherited. And the formation of mass mobilization armies with the erosion of the former military class occurs in a later period. And in the Middle Ages, the composition of any army was approximately as follows: the feudal lord and his professional soldiers, militia armed with clubs. Even the codes of conduct for them are different; there is little demand from the peasant. And in the 20th century the difference between staff officers. which are a separate caste and huge soldiers.

    So to expect from the boys complete military training is at least naive. The actions connected with the prey of the beast, or the tud on the ground \ in the forest are not associated with combat skills, otherwise everyone would be like Rocky practicing cutting the logs with an ax.

    And the fact that weapons are being pulled out of the graves is the graves of the nobility, the common people did not have such equipment. Actually, the author himself notes this, that the sword is an overvalued thing, accessible to the elite and right there from somewhere universal weapons with swords according to the Arab testimony. It seems to me that the Arab is brechet, or faced only with elite wars.
  11. Jogan-xnumx
    +2
    2 March 2013 10: 28
    Informative material, especially for young people, who are now stuffed with anything from any kind of pseudo-history ...
  12. +1
    2 March 2013 18: 48
    From the epic "Fight of Ivan Khazarin with Zhidovin"
    ... Together with Ivan Khazarin at the outpost there are two free-sweepers, and each of them is thirteen years old. The eldest is Svyatoslav Igorevich, Prince of Kiev. Orphaned he was Prince Igor, as his father listened to old Pretich, and with the blessing of his mother, he went to the Wild Field with Ivan Khazarin.
    The youngest is Volga Ivanovich, the son of Ivan Khazarin, a twin of the young prince, a friend in games and training.
    And he taught them the boyar to throw a sulitsa, to beat with a sword, to twist an aptly, to grind the enemy with a club and throw a spear off the saddle with a spear. They were taught to fight back with errands, to beat the shell with a knob, knee pad, to send red-hot arrows to the target, to find traces of horse and foot, to learn everything that is needed from the captives. And many more all sorts of tricks that were taught to the free-switcher in his youth, were taught by Pretić of severe scumbags, turning into falcons before his eyes.

    Sent them in patrols with detours, to catch in the field of the Khazar superintendents. Every day they brought the boyar for reprisal against the Khazarin. The captured prisoners were released, they were not allowed to withdraw from Kiev ...
  13. 0
    3 March 2013 19: 35
    1111 - the year of the so-called "Russian united crusade" against the Polovtsians. If my memory serves me, Vladimir Monomakh proposed to carry out this campaign in the spring, to which they objected to him: how to carry out the campaign in the spring, because the peasants will not be able to sow (they will be part of the militia). To which he replied: and if the Polovtsians come to us, then they will kill the peasants and there will definitely not be a harvest, and in the spring the Polovtsians have tired horses, not yet fed on the grass, having not gained strength ... as a result, the Polovtsians got rid of them. And if we consider that the most powerful princes could not put more than 2000 vigilantes under their spears, then the militia was victorious ... after that, the large raids of the Polovtsy stopped and were resumed only after the unsuccessful campaign described in "The Lay of Igor's Regiment" (and that did not last long - the Mangolo-Tatars came)
  14. Bars90
    0
    5 March 2013 20: 02
    All Russia was built by the hands of the people! ... Some want to see some special fate in the history and future of the Russian people. There is no Russian people, but there is one Russia where dew, Rusich, Great Russians, Roskolans, etc. live. We are one! And one whole is impossible to win.
  15. 0
    27 October 2017 00: 31
    So I read the article. And comments too. Smile Let's turn on the brain and talk professionally on history. What do we know? First. The three brothers were tired of in Veliky Novgorod, and they decided to swim south and come up with something for themselves. And the brothers sailed along the READY draws from the river to the river and on the Dnieper to the rapids and found a place where you can live and establish the VILLAGE with the Polyans. And they called this village Kiev. Then heirs appeared, scattered ON THE SIDES, and on those sides founded all sorts of other villages. By the way, Alexander Nevsky was the Yaroslavl prince, and for some time in Kiev at the same time he "put things in order." And there was one flaw. According to ancient customs, the Kiev throne was a kind for the princes an indicator ONLY that they do not forget their ancestors. Therefore, sometimes some princes were driven out of Kiev with the help of the troops of Veliky Novgorod. Thus, let's immediately agree that the concept of "Kievan Rus" is the nonsense of historians. You can talk about Ancient Russia, Before Mongolian Russia, etc. But the Chicken has long been. And controlled the eggs. And this chicken is Veliky Novgorod. Point. Now about the wars. Good swords, armor, bows were a HUGE property, both in price and respect. Imagine a son who says, going to war with his offspring: "This is the sword with which your grandfather fought with the Lithuanians (for example) then this and that." And hangs the sword over his shoulder. Therefore, weapons were always collected from the battlefield. And here is the reason that some are looking for, but where was the Battle of the Ice - there is nothing. Neither under water nor on the shores. By the way. He writes about dales, but this is not at all important. The main thing is different. Russian blacksmiths were able to weld steel of different grades almost not noticeably. But in fact, the battle ax had soft iron, and the blade was extremely hard. And they made such swords. Now a few examples. The annals of Novgorod specifically described a lot of things. They took by storm the knights of the Novgorod fortress Koporye. Alexander came and surrounded. Then the fortress took back. He released several knights to the Livonian Order alive. Let's pay attention to this. And the warriors of prisoners from the Chud tribe executed publicly ALL. Who does not know, this tribe lived numerous along the shores of Lake Peipsi. Therefore, this Pskov lake is still called. Now about the Neva battle. Firstly, why did they already know in Veliky Novgorod that the Swedish Korolevich with German, Danish and all sorts of mercenaries took to rest on Izhora? We turn on the brain: unequivocally, they already knew about Veliky Novgorod about preparations for the campaign, about going out to sea, and ONLY the ships entered the mouth of the Neva, a messenger-scout was sent immediately with a report. Now imagine those ships. It just seems like they are small. In fact, they were awesomely heavy, if only because the whole set of logs was made with an AX. Therefore, the sides are 10 cm thick, which is even good. Secondly, in the ships there was everything and Fighting horses too. I must say right away that any ship will accelerate under the sail and even go well. But the Neva River with a strong current. And you have to row against. That is why in Novgorod they knew for sure that the Swedes-rowers would breathe out and stand on the Neva. So it happened. Now we read the chronicle: "Alexander gathered both the squad and the Novgorodians on the square near Hagia Sophia and said:" Brothers! Not in the power of God, but in truth! Let us recall the words of the psalmist: these are in arms, and these are on the horse, but in the name of the Lord our God, we will call ... We will not be afraid of many warriors, for God is with us. " He gave an hour to the training camp for Novgorodians and EVERYTHING on horseback rode along Volkhov to Lake Ladoga. Veliky Novgorod continued to gather troops. Alexander - only with all the warriors and Novgorodians who managed to get together. At the end of the Volkhov current, they were joined by a squad from Ladoga and then they rode along the coast to the source of the Neva and along the coast further. Thus, just in case, they went to the Swedes UNIQUENLY for a meeting along the shore. Alexander had boats. But in order not to frighten the Swedes, the boats were delayed. Now briefly about the battle itself. Data. Alexander deliberately caught the Swedes in the camp by surprise, but allowed Korolevich to put on his clothes and mount a war horse for the sake of a duel. Knight's duel on spears. From the first collision, Alexander hits like a spear in the visor of a helmet. But not easy. And into the slot for the eye. Result: the prince is knocked out of the saddle and knocked out and Alexander can chop him down or take him prisoner. Alexander lets go - it gives the squire the opportunity to pick up a body that is bleeding from his face and drag him to the ship. At this time, his wars terrify the Swedes. Gavrilo Oleksich, “having seen the prince pulled under his arms, drove to the very ship by the gangplanks by which they ran with the prince”, got on board, was thrown down with his horse, but then again joined the battle. Sbyslav Yakunovich, armed with only one ax, rushed to the very center of the enemy army, and after him Alexander's hunter, Yakov Polochanin, brandished his long sword. The young man Savva penetrated the center of the Swedish camp, "burst into the large royal golden-domed tent and hooked the tent pillar." Having lost support, the tent fell to the ground. Novgorodian Misha and his squad fought on foot and sunk three enemy ships. The sixth warrior mentioned - the servant of Alexander Yaroslavich Ratmir - fought on foot against several Swedes, was wounded and died. Heroes Here is who needs to put MONUMENTS.
    The battle lasted until evening. Opponents dispersed by night. The Swedes were defeated and crossed to the other side. Alexander allowed. And by morning they retreated to Sweden on the surviving ships. Further, the annals report that the Russians were watching all this and when the last ship went downstream, they crossed to the opposite bank to see. And they found a night camp, abandoned things, and MANY POWs - those wounded, who were allowed to be loaded onto ships the night before. All. Were the Russians able to fight? And how. And with a spear and a sword and an ax. Once again the chronicle: "... Novgorodian Misha and his squad fought on foot and sunk three enemy ships." That is, the squads were not only the princes. Questions?