Military Review

Russia and the world. Art of standing up for yourself

The Battle of Kulikovo.
Russia and the world. Art of standing up for yourselfOne of the myths that have taken root in historical science and public consciousness is that pre-Petrine Russia was chronically behind the West in the military-technical field. However, the facts refute such ideas.

There is a belief that only Peter I began to pull up to the proper level of armament, training of troops. But the sweeps received from the Swedes taught the Russians to fight.

All this is nothing more than political mythology.

Our country has never known such a lag. Even the ancient Scythians, who smashed all enemies, created the advanced horse army for their time, had magnificent armor and weapon. The Slavs in this respect, too, was all right. The heroes of the Anglo-Saxon epic "Beowulf" are chopped by the best Ants (East Slavic) swords of that era. These swords of the 6th – 7th centuries are well known to archaeologists. In the IX century, the products of the Kiev gunsmiths were praised by both the Khazars and the Arabs.

Gun yard on Neglinnaya. Hood V.A. Vasnetsov.
High-quality Russian chain mail is mentioned in the French epic. And in the XIV century in the "Zadonshchina" among the best types of weapons, along with the "sulitsy German" and "spears fryazhskimi" called "Moscow shields".

The properties of this weapon have experienced the Byzantines, Hungarians, Poles, German crusaders, Swedes. While Russia was not divided and did not fight in strife, no enemy even dreamed of crushing it. But the Tatar-Mongols, who used the rip, rated the Russians much higher than the western knights. In our country, Batu held an army in a single fist until the capture of Vladimir, and before the invasion of Europe he divided into several corps - one crushed the Poles and Germans at Lingitse, the second - the Hungarians and the Croats under Shayo.

Poles and Lithuanians enthusiastically described how they overpowered the Russians. As we covered the fields with thousands of dead, we gathered fabulous booty, as cowardly and stupid Muscovites scattered in panic, completely unable to fight. These assessments fell into Western historical works, appeared in the works of Russian Westernizers of the XIX century. Well, Lithuania really did make a good living after the defeat of Russia by the Tatars. Swallowed up fragmented scraps of whole principalities, the border reached Kaluga and Mozhaisk.

But connoisseurs of Polish-Lithuanian prowess for some reason persistently fail to notice some facts. From the beginning of the 15th century, the border began to move only in one direction - to the west. Gradually, but definitely - to the west. Well, it turns out, won and backed out? No, they just made noises about victories, and the defeats were silent. A hostile attitude towards the Russians was pushing to depict them in a caricature.

Although in this era to talk about any backlog of our country in the military field can not speak. On Kulikovo field of sv. Dmitry Donskoy "gutted" not only the best Tatar cavalry in the world, but also the best Genoa infantry in Europe. At the same time in Russia appeared firearms. At first it came not from the West, but from the East, as evidenced by the name “mattress” (from the Persian “tupang” - the pipe). The mattresses were used in 1382 during the siege of Moscow by Tokhtamysh. When the city fell, the artillery was lost, and in the 1389 year, "Germans were taken from the Germans to Russia and fire shooting." But their production was quickly established in Moscow, Novgorod, Tver. The commendable word to Boris Alexandrovich Tversky mentions how he sent to help Vasily the Dark "a cannon with cannons by the name of Nikul Krechetnikov, and such was the master that he could not be found like him among the Germans."

Tsar Cannon, installed in the Moscow Kremlin.

Under Ivan III, a very large enterprise was built in Moscow, the Cannon Yard. Production of guns and handguns unfolded, squads of pishchniki appeared in the army — they were exhibited by the cities. And in the 1550-ies, under Ivan the Terrible, the first regular infantry, the archers, was created. They already had a single form: colorful caftans, hats, uniform armament with flames, bears, swords. The basis of the cavalry were the regiments of the boyars' children (small landed gentry who received the village or another in the form of a salary for service). And the Russian artillery of that era, researchers believe the best in the world. Basil III took a powerful fortress Smolensk, and Ivan the Terrible Polotsk without assault, only by bombardment.

Western countries could only envy such an army. Their knightly cavalry was becoming obsolete, the nobility was undisciplined, it was constantly changing. Troops were made up of mercenaries. This worked the German and Italian princes, "condottierri." Formed shelves from any rabble, sold to the one who pays. The obedience of such soldiers was supported with sticks and gallows, but they were also allowed to do anything. The mercenaries burned, raped and slaughtered everyone, behind the troops were the ruins of cities with piles of corpses. The soldiers did not have a homeland, they plundered and exterminated everywhere. The assembled army quickly pushed out to the territory of the enemy, let them graze there.

There was no form in sight, the army looked like a bunch of ragged, behind it dragged a huge train of dealers of the loot, Tickers, prostitutes. Parts like archers appeared in western countries only half a century later. In France, these were musketeers, but there were only 2 companies, they were the personal guard of kings. And in Russia, Ivan the Terrible established 6 regiments of Moscow archers, then the regiments began to be created in other major cities, their number reached 10 – 15 thousand.

Streletsky build. XVII century.
As before, the products of Russian armorers were famous. Their armor was much lighter and more comfortable than European armor - chain mail from 50 thousand rings weighed only 6 – 10 kg. There were also excellent quality sabers — a good one was considered such that it was possible to cut a gas kerchief on the fly. For their manufacture used a special steel- "way", apparently, akin to the eastern damask. Pole Maskevich wrote that Russian sabers "will not yield to the real Turkish." Venetian Tjapolo reported that "in Moscow make guns in large quantities." Pole Nemoevsky also noted "good food and muskets." In the era of Grozny, Russians began to export firearms. Large batches of guns and shotguns were bought by Persia.

Fulvio Ruggieri admired the art of fortification. He described how, during the war with Poland, Russian “engineers” (!) Inspect the site of future fortifications, then they cut logs somewhere far in the forest, then they adjust and mark them, raft them along the river, and then using signs made on logs “in one moment they join ”, they cover earth with a rye and put up a garrison. The enemy does not have time to react, as he has a fortress under his nose.

True, they didn’t allow Livonia to seize the Baltic Sea and get to the Terrible. But the reason was not at all in the backwardness of the Russians, but in the fact that all of Europe rallied against them: Poland, Lithuania, Sweden, the Livonian Order, Prussia, Hungary, they were fully supported by the Pope and the German emperor, Stefan Batory was flooded with generous funding, allowing recruit masses of mercenaries. Western diplomacy has connected Turkey, the Crimean Khanate to the union, and the goal of the formed coalition was to proclaim not the defense, but the offensive, the destruction of Russia. But it did not work! After several victories, the hordes of the enemy got bogged down near Pskov and suffered such losses that they had to give up global plans. To press Russia, to take away from her even a piece of its original, pre-war land, Batory failed.

Smolensk Kremlin.
And in the future Russian military art and technology continued to develop. The defensive structures created by Fyodor Kone - Smolensk Fortress, White City in Moscow, were considered a miracle of fortification. Pavel Aleppsky reports about the wall of the White City that it was “amazing buildings, because it is made from the ground to the middle of the height of the slope, and with a rise to the top there is a ledge, and therefore guns do not act on it”. Loopholes were oblique, allowing you to shoot through the "dead space" against the walls. "We have not seen such loopholes either in Antioch, Constantinople, or Aleppo." The gates covered the towers, and the aisles through them were not straight, but “with twists and turns and iron bars”. It was impossible to knock them out with guns or a ram, and those who wanted to break through the gates found themselves in “twists and turns” under the fire of defenders. Smolensk fortress had underground chambers “hearsay” with special acoustics. The person on duty could detect where the besiegers were digging mines.

The Tsar Cannon, cast by Andrei Chokhov in 1605, did not exist in the singular. There were four such giants - there were two guns on each side of Red Square. True, they have never been used - it is long and difficult to charge, the cores must be lifted with the help of special devices. Rather, they played the role of psychological weapons. For example, the ambassadors of the Crimean Khan will arrive, they will admire - and they will think about whether to climb Moscow? But produced and operating huge tools. The siege of the Unicorn weighed 450 pounds (more than 7 tons), and its core was 1 pounds of 30 grivenok. Poodle cores were fired at the Pasenok and Wolf guns (each with 350 pounds), slightly smaller were the Krechet, Achilles, Faceted, Peacock, Basilisk, Vepr and others.

Foreigners who visited Russia were amazed by the "huge amount of artillery." They described tools “in which a person can sit down” or “shooting hundreds of bullets from a goose egg”. The only time the Poles and the Swedes were able to defeat Russia, tear off vast areas from it - but not in a fair fight, but with the help of political sabotage, throwing False Dmitriys and fomenting the Troubles. But even in complete devastation, the occupiers failed to finish off and enslave our country. By the way, when the Poles seized the Kremlin by deception, it was precisely the Russian numerous artillery that fell into their hands that made it possible to withstand the siege for so long and repel storms.

One of the rifle regiments is preparing for battles. Late 16th century
The consequences of hard times were overcome under the leadership of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich and Patriarch Philaret. At the same time, the Cannon Yard was not only restored, but also modernized. Olearius describes him as “a foundry behind the Pohankin ford, where many cannons and bells are poured”. 2 stone workshops were erected here instead of the former wooden ones, a “forge mill” was built to “forge iron with water”. When the plant had its own ground for testing guns. Two “powder mills” (factories) were built.

At this time in the European armies began important reforms. The Dutch commander Moritz of Orange, fighting with the Spaniards, eased the cavalry armor, armed it with pistols. And the infantry was divided into musketeers and pikemen. Some fire, others cover them with long peaks from cavalry attacks. The Swedish king Gustav II Adolf developed and deepened these reforms. He established permanent shelves, introduced lightweight muskets, gave light infantry to infantry. The Swedish army was the best in Europe, in the Thirty Years War, walking around in different states, crushing all opponents.
Well, the Russians never considered it shameful to adopt useful things. And they were not cut off from Europe at all. The regiments of the “new” or “foreign” system began to be formed not at all by Peter I, but by his grandfather Michael and great-grandfather Philaret.

A decree establishing the first two regiments was issued in April 1627. The Swedish army was taken as a model, foreign commanders were hired. Each regiment consisted of 8 companies, 200 soldiers, 120 musketeers and 80 pikemen. Since 1632, Reiter regiments have been created - from 2 thousands of horsemen, protected by cuirass, armed with carabiners, 2 pistols and a sword. Then came the dragoons, light cavalry with carbines.

True, Russia is still not strong enough after the Troubles. She won the war with Poland in 1632 – 1634, but with very little result. It was possible to select only one city, Serpeysk with the county. But the military continued to improve. And the novelties of military science in Moscow were tracing very clearly. So, back in 1606, clerks M. Yuriev and I. Fomin transferred L. Fronsperger's German “Military Book” from German. In 1621, the clerk O. Mikhailov compiled the “Charter of military, cannon and other matters related to military science”, which compiled the advanced experience of European states, valuable information on fortification, ballistics, artillery.

In 1647, the book “The Doctrine and Cunning of the Military Formation of Infantry People”, a complete translation of the textbook of I. Volgauzen’s “The Military Art of the Infantry”, was published in Moscow in 1200, a huge edition of that time. B1650 was translated from the Dutch statutes for teaching to the reiter structure. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich established the first officer school for the training of command personnel. A Swedish resident in Moscow, de Rodes, reported to Stockholm about two training regiments of a thousand people, “for the most part all of the noble nobles,” whom Colonel Buchgofen prepared for the command service - “he now taught them so much that there are few among them would not have been able to replace the colonel. "

These steps coincided with a period of rapid economic growth; large manufacturing enterprises, including steel mills, multiplied throughout Russia. K1646, our country even supplied artillery for export to Europe! "Over the Sea at Heavenly Price" was sold to 800 guns per year! The production of lightweight muskets, loaded with a paper cartridge, modeled after the Swedish ones, was also mastered. By the way, it can be mentioned for comparison that in France in the same years there was not something like factories, but even gun workshops. Everything from noblemen swords to cannons was purchased in Belgium, Holland, Germany. Or in Russia - through the Dutch.

When Ukraine rebelled against Polish oppression and Catholic oppression, and Bohdan Khmelnytsky turned for help, to become a king, Russia was ready for a decisive battle. The Pushkarsky order reported to the sovereign: “The cast guns must be made exactly as needed,” the cannons on the carriages were now attached to all the regiments. In February, the Barred Order 1654 reported that the 31 464 musket, 5 317 carbines, 4 279 pairs of pistols were sent to the troops, and the order still had 10 thousand guns and 13 thousand guns to them. All this is domestic production!

For some reason, in the history books, the chapter on the reunification of Ukraine with Russia ends with the Pereyaslav Rada in 1654. In fact, the war was just beginning and lasted another 27 years, and again with a whole coalition of enemy powers. Advanced Russian technology played a significant role in the battles. And it is curious to note that the capital's Cannon Yard was not only a manufacturing enterprise, but played the role of the first design bureau of our “defense industry”.

In 1659, the ambassadors of the Allied Denmark visited Moscow. Through their compatriot, colonel of the Russian service of Bauman, they got to the Cannon Yard, described some of the designs that were carried out there. In particular, the model of a giant mortar, whose weight was supposed to reach 8 750 pounds (140 t), weight of grenades - 14 050 pounds (5,6 t), required 2 000 pounds of powder (800 kg) for charging, and for igniting grenades and charging - 200 pounds (80 kg). And the powder in the chamber fell asleep with the breech, which was closed on the screws. In general, the main thing for the siege of cities is to somehow bring such a monster into place. And then one bomb threw - and that's enough.

It is unlikely that the super-mortar was made in reality, only the model that “reached the chin” is described. Mention Danes and drawings of other new designs. But they also pointed out samples launched into mass production - these are light field guns on the carriages, they were carried by a 1 horse, and the calculation consisted of 2 people. And they were charged "from behind" from the breech! In the west, these have not been. At the time of arming the Russian army, "screw" (rifled) and "organ" (multi-barreled) guns appeared.

Gulyay-town, field mobile fortification, which was in service with Russian troops in the XVI-XVII centuries.

For the steppe war, in Moscow manufactories, “walking-cities” were regularly manufactured - folding fortifications on carts. С1667 began the serial production of hand grenades, in Moscow the Grenade Yard was built. Only in 5 years they were made 25 thousand.

There were grenades in metal shirts, there were "pot-hole" - in glass, they were worn on a belt in special bags. Foreigners noted their excellent quality.

And the number of "new order" regiments was growing. By the 1661 – 63 years, the Russian army consisted of 22 Strelets Regiment, 48 Soldiers, 8 Dragoons, 22 Reitar, 1 Hussars. Two "elected" guards regiments, Kravkov and Shepelev (and later they will become Butyrsky and Lefortovsky) also appeared. All units had uniform weapons, uniform. The shelves of the "new order" were reckoned to be caftans shorter than Streltsy, to the knee. And the hats were similar to Streletsky, but without a fur rim. The form of different regiments and types of troops differed in the color of collars, hats and boots, and military ranks were determined by the color of the chest lacing on the caftan.

Peter I in front of the Transfiguration and Semenov regiments.

The hierarchy of officer ranks was already quite developed. In our army there were colonels, half-colonels, captains, captain, mayor, lieutenant, ensigns. There were already Russian major generals, lieutenant generals. And in 1669, the Boyar Duma adopted three flag colors: white, blue and red (as the primary colors on the icon of St. George the Victorious). Although the order of their alternation remained arbitrary, and on the banners of different regiments colors were used in various combinations, from different angles.

This army provided Russia with impressive successes. Poland was defeated to such an extent that it dropped forever from among the great powers. From now on, she was left to proudly sing “Another Polish did not disappear,” but others were controlling her fate. Russia has become the undisputed leader in Eastern Europe. When Sweden thrust into the war, she too was “poured” in such a way that not much seemed. The Ottoman Empire intervened, but under Chigirin the Russians buried two Turkish armies. At the same time, between times, Persia’s attempts to grab the Caucasus were repelled, and Chinese troops were scattered around Albazin and Nerchinsk ...

But new times came, other ideas about the army, its essence and purpose, and already Peter the Great set about reforming it.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. anomalocaris
    anomalocaris April 27 2013 08: 40
    Yes, we have always been able to make weapons and use them. "Thank you" neighbors. As for the weapons of that era, I recommend everyone to visit the artillery museum in St. Petersburg.
    1. smile
      smile April 27 2013 12: 30
      Right! When I first got there, I was sent there for several hours ... to my wife, who periodically, like a messerschmit, howling with an engine, and firing from a little dog tried to remove me, informed me that I remained in this museum for good .. for ever. :))))
      In general, many thanks to the author, it is even surprising that this topic has not been raised before (well, or I spoiled it) ....
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris April 27 2013 14: 43
        I crawled around this museum for 7 hours, and then superficially. Unfortunately, the next day I had to leave the capital of the Empire ... So I agree, but it’s better not to take women to such places (my friend’s experience).
        1. Rink
          Rink April 27 2013 21: 07
          The deepest bow to the author!
          How not enough such comprehensive review articles on our history! Rather, the refutation of mythology invented by foreigners, which still replaces our real history.
          I have always told supporters of Western "superiority" over "backward" Russia:
          - "Without going into small details - look at the map? Isn't one glance at the map of Eurasia enough to overturn all the myths about Russia's lagging behind and its weakness at once? A simple geographical map convicts the" historians "of lying in one fell swoop."

          In addition to the topic of the article, we can add that even delving into the distant past, the superiority of our ancestors in the art of war was always overwhelming.
          Not only do Western historians acknowledge that domestication of the horse and the invention of the wheel took place somewhere in southern Russia, from eastern Ukraine to the mouth of the Don, but the ancient Greeks attributed to the Scythians the discovery of iron itself and the invention of iron weapons.
          Recently I read an interesting discussion on this topic. This book is not at hand, so I will retell in my own words.
          The author, analyzing the metallurgy of the ancients, comes to the conclusion that the most accessible to ancient people were swamp deposits of iron ore. In addition, forging, in the process of slag removal, the most high-quality iron is obtained from this ore (is this not the secret of our damask steel?). That is, the first metallurgists needed swamps. Further, the author argues, if copper can be melted in an ordinary bonfire (melting approx. 800 degrees), then iron cannot be melted in an ordinary bonfire - to reach the melting temperature of iron, pressurization is needed, an oven capable of holding this temperature is needed. And where was the art of building stoves developed in the same way as the northern peoples? the hearth of the Greeks or Arabs is the same bonfire ... That is, the second conclusion: the first metallurgists of iron needed good stove-makers. The third consideration - for the smelting of iron needed a hell of a lot of fuel. Iron cannot be melted in the hot Arabian sands on dung, and Greece has never shone with its fuel reserves. Unlike the forest strip of Russia, where there are all three components: there are luxurious vast swamps, there are skilled stove-makers (climate, sorry!) And endless fuel supplies!
          Thus, the author says, the invention of iron and iron weapons probably also occurred on the territory of Russia, which is also confirmed by archeology and the evidence of Greek and Arab chroniclers.
          1. Rink
            Rink April 27 2013 21: 54
            In general, Scythians, our ancestors - an incredible people! For example, according to the descriptions of contemporaries, they were unsurpassed archers: they not only could accurately shoot at full gallop in any direction, but they fired from a bow almost like a machine gun, putting up to a dozen arrows on a bow (not a bowstring) at once and firing them in turn!
            The Sarmatians (Scythian tribe) invented heavy cavalry, even their horses were protected by armor! It was the best cavalry of that era, the Sarmatians did not know defeats for a very long time.

            The fact that the Scythians were nomads is an invention of the Greeks, which they themselves refute, because saying that the Scythians have no cities, they immediately remember about Gelon (somewhere near Poltava) and Naples Scythian (Simferopol).
            Why was Scythia a fabulous country for the Greeks and what they wrote about it was 90% fiction and gossip? Yes, because the Scythians did not let the Greeks (and generally foreigners) deep into their country. The Greeks knew where Scythia begins, but had no idea where it ends and what happens there. As a result of such secrecy, for example, the same Darius I Gistasp, who was going to fight Scythia, did not know anything about the number of Scythians, nor about the area in which he was to fight. As a result, the Scythians lured him deep into their territory, exhausting them in swoops and not giving a general battle, and when they drove the half-700 army of Darius, suffering from heat, waterlessness and starvation, they sent her back exactly along the path that Darius was walking to Scythia - ruined and scorched earlier by Darius himself. Only 10% of the army of the stupid conqueror left Scythia.
            Does this remind anyone of anything? If Napoleon taught history better (even according to the stories of the ancient Greeks), I think he would hardly have climbed to Moscow ....

            History is a powerful thing.
            But there is no science for fools, as you can see. They replace history with myths, then they themselves believe in them, and then again we give them a lesson in history.

            PS The main thing is not to believe in their myths, but to know who we really are.
            1. Marek Rozny
              Marek Rozny April 29 2013 10: 47
              Scythian nomads have nothing to do with the Slavs (and Eastern Slavs).

              Scythians for a very long time were divided into settled and nomads, although initially all were settled. those who lived in the Steppe (Ukraine, Russia, Kazakhstan) - abandoned a sedentary lifestyle, as soon as they finally tamed the horse. After this, the Scythian cities in the Steppe were completely and forever abandoned. It is difficult to engage in farming there for climatic reasons, but transhumance livestock breeding is what our steppe is ideally suited for.

              The settled Scythians of the non-steppe Ukraine and Russia (and this was a smaller part of the Scythians) merged with the Eastern Slavs.
              The main part of the Scythians - nomads - gradually merged without a trace with the same nomadic Turks who came from present-day Mongolia, Siberia, and Altai.
              By the way, read the description of the Scythians and compare with the description of the Kazakhs - almost no difference. Starting from the elements of clothing and ending with koumiss and tents.
              1. Rink
                Rink April 29 2013 19: 30
                Quote: Marek Rozny
                Scythian nomads have nothing to do with the Slavs (and Eastern Slavs).

                Indeed, this nonsense is still widespread, but this theory was invented even before the advent of modern science. But at present the facts are such that learned historians try at least not to raise this topic, so as not to show its complete groundlessness.
                So, for example, according to studies by Keyser C, Bouakaze C, Crubezy E, et al. (May 2009). "Ancient DNA provides new insights into the history of south Siberian Kurgan people." Hum. Genet .. OI: 10.1007 / s00439-009-0683-0. PMID 19449030. "..... Most of the found in burials ..... Scythian skeletons contain haplogroup R1a1"
                If you google at least a little, which means "haplogroup R1A1", then the categorical "do not treat" you will be removed.
                According to V.P. Alekseev, academician, historian and anthropologist, director of the Institute of Archeology of the USSR Academy of Sciences in 1987-1991, “there is no doubt that the majority of the population living in the southern Russian steppes in the middle of 1 millennium BC. e. is the physical ancestors of the East Slavic tribes of the Middle Ages. " And the "Scythian" anthropological type, in turn, shows continuity from the time of at least the Bronze Age - III - II millennium BC. e. These data were obtained on the basis of techniques that allow us to identify the anthropological type of not only two different peoples, but also different groups within the same ethnic group. There is only one conclusion from the foregoing: modern Russians (the superethnos of the Rus, which includes the Great Russians, Little Russians and White Russians and other smaller groups) are direct descendants of the Bronze Age Indo-Europeans, Cimmerians, Scythians, Sarmatians and Alans.

                Scythians for a very long time were divided into settled and nomads, although initially all were settled ...

                The only nomads were shepherds who grazed livestock in the steppes in the summer. For the winter, they went to their sedentary huts, as mentioned by the ancient Greeks. And the Scythians are not the real name of this people. This name is Greek, it was easier for them to pronounce it. The Persians called the Scythians "Sakas". And the self-designation "Scythians" is chipped. Although this is also a polyethnonym, a collective name for a huge ethnos that occupied a huge territory (as the Greeks wrote, "they say, right up to the North Sea") which really could not lead the same lifestyle. This was not possible due to the different climatic zones.
                However, the Slavs were always divided into many tribes, and the abundance of their names confused the Greeks with the Arabs, who were completely lost in this Slavic sea, and were unable to understand these different "peoples" speaking the same language. (For example, Ovid says that, having learned to speak in Geth or Sarmatian, he could listen to the speech of an old Scythian.) And if you turn to the primary sources, it turns out that Svidas and some others write: "... Scythians or Rus" putting an equal sign between them. Anna Komnina calls the Russ from 1092 to 1120 Scythians, like Leo the Deacon. And even back in the 17th century in Russia, no one doubted that our ancestors were Scythians, it was as something self-evident, this is what Mikhailo Lomonosov defended before the "red Germans". However, needless to say that the memory of the people is stronger and more truthful than the revelations of any modern "historians", whose works are often contradict all known annals? Schliemann, based on the "myths" of Troy, found and dug up ...
                1. Rink
                  Rink April 29 2013 19: 38
                  Quote: Marek Rozny
                  The main part of the Scythians - nomads - gradually merged without a trace with the same nomadic Turks who came from present-day Mongolia, Siberia, and Altai.
                  Here, too, is not so simple. Herodotus, on the contrary, writes that there were a majority of Scythian plowmen, and the Greek colonies exported mainly bread, which was available throughout Greece - this was the main export item.
                  In addition, the Arabs write that the "nomads", as you say, the Scythians raised pigs. And pig-breeding and nomadic life are, you know, incompatible things. The Scythians were skilled metallurgists, there is enough ancient evidence of this - they made both the best weapons and still amazing jewelry. Have you seen a lot of nomadic blacksmiths and jewelers?
                  By the way, the Turks do not like being called Turks (from "Turkur" - robbers), they consider it abusive and prefer their own name "Ottoman" or "Ottoman" ...

                  By the way, read the description of the Scythians and compare with the description of the Kazakhs - almost no difference. Starting from the elements of clothing and ending with koumiss and tents.

                  Who to read ?! at Schloetzer?
                  Or is it better to look at the surviving bas-reliefs and descriptions of contemporaries?
                  For example, the most ancient Greek historians, almost unanimously ranked the legendary Achilles (Achilles) among the Scythians. This tradition was preserved by later authors, whether it be Pseudo-Aristotle, Philostratus, Chrysostom, Pindar or Arrian.
                  "Oh, Achilles, ruler of the Scythian land!" - wrote about the XNUMXth century. BC. antique poet Alkey.
                  "Peloid Achilles was a Scythian from Mirmi-kiot, who was standing near Lake Meotisa, ”writes the Byzantine chronicler of the 6th century Leo Deacon (history IX, XNUMX). The Scythian origin of Achilles, the hero of the Trojan war, according to the black-haired Greeks, was proved light blue eyes and blond (blond) hair, the ability to fight on horseback and on foot, a cloak-cape with characteristic fasteners (brooches). In my opinion, the description of the Turks and the Mongol somehow weakly fits, do not you agree?

                  The surviving images also say: Scythians and Russes were distinguished by rather high growth and strong build, fair skin, fair eyes and hair (therefore, “Russes” are “fair, light brown”). According to the descriptions, the Scythian peoples are warlike, for centuries surpassed the surrounding peoples militarily. They were distinguished by freedom of love, beauty and liberty of women. Sarmatians, Central Asian saks and Russ wore the familiar “pot-like” hairstyle, or shaved their heads, leaving a mustache and forelocks, and the Black Sea Scythians had long hair and beards. Even in clothes, the “Sarmatian style” was popular with the Slavs for quite some time. Scythian clothing did not differ much from that worn by the Russians almost until the 20th century. This is a long shirt, a caftan with a belt, a cloak-cloak with a fastener on the chest or one shoulder, wide harem pants or tight pants tucked into leather boots. Scythians loved to bathe in baths.
                  Scythians and Sarmatians worshiped the two most important religious cults - the sun and fire. They worshiped the sword as the god of war. The Slavs have these cults almost completely preserved. And most importantly, the Greeks write that the Scythians - people with red skin, fair-haired and blue-eyed.
                  But did you know that most Slavic tribes, up to those that lived on the island of Rügen in the Baltic Sea, drank koumiss right before the advent of Christianity? And only with baptism did the fight against this considered pagan custom begin? Do you know that the tents of the Cimmerians and Scythians used as summer houses on nomads and during military campaigns even before the peoples who are now considered to be Turks appeared on the historical horizon?
                  1. Rink
                    Rink April 29 2013 19: 41
                    In addition, the Kazakhs have a completely different haplogroup than the remains from the Scythian burials. They are dominated by "C" - 36%, "G" - 17% and "O" - 14%. Their "R1A" does not exceed 5% (and then, I think, these 5% appeared only during the development of virgin lands), while in the Scythian burial mounds "R1A1" reaches 52%, as in modern Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians and Poles.

                    The "Mongols" -Khalkhans inhabiting modern Mongolia were never conquerors, and they learned about the victories attributed to them and Genghis Khan from the Europeans. And the Kalkhasians' own legends have not preserved any mention of their former greatness. But about those peoples, which in our history are spoken of as the conquerors of the Mongol-Tatars in the source You can read the following:
                    “As for the Tatar ruler Temojin (Genghis Khan), he tall and magnificent growth, with an extensive forehead and a long beard. The person is belligerent and strong. [This] is how [he] differs from others ”(Men-da bei-lu (Full description of the Mongol-Tatars) / translated by N.Ts. Munkuev. M .: Nauka, 1975.).
                    Rashid Ad-Din in the "Collection of Chronicles" reports on the appearance of the Borjigin family, from which Genghis Khan comes: "... niruns, who are also called kiyats; they are divided into two branches; Kiyats in general and in this sense (they unite childbirth): Yurkin, Changshiut, Kiyat-Yasar and Kiyat-Burdzhigin, which means - blue-eyed; their branch descended from Genghis Khan’s father and is therefore (therefore) related (to Genghis Khan’s family and his father) ”(Collection of annals / Per. LA Khetagurova. M.-L., 1952.).
                    Abul Gazi wrote that Borjigins have eyes "Blue-green ..." or "dark blue, where the pupil is surrounded by a brown rim" (Quoted from: Ya. N. Gumilev. Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe.).
                    Marco Polo describes Khubilai as follows: “The great sovereign of the kings Kublai Khan [Khubilai-kaan] looks like this: good growth, not small and not big, medium height; thick in moderation and well built; his face is white and like a rose, blush; the eyes are black, glorious, and the nose is good as it should be ”(translated by IP Minaev, which is not entirely accurate, because G.E. Grumm-Grzhimailo writes in notes:“ According to Marco Polo, Khubilai had Roman nose and beautiful black eyes ”(Grumm-Grzhimailo GE Western Mongolia and the Uryankhai Territory. T. I. L., 1926.). Grumm-Grzhimailo did not use the translation of I.P. Minaev, as you understand.)
                    And further, with reference to Rashid ad-Din (after D'Ohsson, op.cit., II, p. 475): “When Khubilai was born, Genghis Khan was surprised at the dark color of his hair, since all his children were blond ".
                    1. Rink
                      Rink April 29 2013 19: 49
                      What can I say ... A set of patterns, assorted historical myths.
                      Historians tell us a completely different story, which is not confirmed by anything, by any primary sources.
                      You need to read the ancients, and then the custom-made political deception of modern historical "science" becomes obvious.

                      And if you look at what is known about Scythian culture! ...
                      For example, do you know that only Russians celebrate the 9th and 40th day after the funeral? Just like the Scythians. And the Scythians also cooked ritual porridges "kutya" or "kolivo", as they still do now and then in some places in Ukrainian and Russian villages.
                      Do you know that the Greeks describe the "Slavic" custom of celebrating funerals even among the Scythians?
                      It is possible to list endlessly the parallels between the Scythians and the Slavs described in ancient manuscripts !!!

                      And only in textbooks, it is not known on what data based, for some reason this is not written.

                      Do not read textbooks and modern historians!
                      Read the source!
                      1. Marek Rozny
                        Marek Rozny April 29 2013 21: 18
                        where did you get that the Scythians celebrated the 9th day of the funeral ??? come up with yourself? and the 40th day is celebrated by many nations. including the Turks (7th, 40th days and anniversary).
                        almost all the peoples of Eurasia make ritual food. just like a creeper. with this approach, Swedes can be declared descendants of Scythian nomads ...
                    2. Marek Rozny
                      Marek Rozny April 29 2013 21: 10
                      Regarding the haplogroups of the Kazakhs. Your data is meaningless without regard to the tribal division of the Kazakhs. Naimans, Kerey, and Jalayirs have a haplogroup like the Mongol peoples - O, N. Argyns (to whom I belong) have a haplogroup G1 and R1a1, Kipchaks have R1a1, etc. About the virgin lands - in general nonsense. In Soviet times, there was no mass mixing of Kazakhs with Russians. And interethnic marriages were mainly between a Kazakh man and a Slav woman. And these haplogroups are transmitted along the male line. Kazakh women rarely marry Slavs.
                      Well, let me remind you once again that among Altaians, Kyrgyz, Kazakh Kipchaks - R1a1 - is more common than among Russians or Belarusians.

                      Well, an attempt to ascribe Genghis Khan to the Slavs - generally smells like a clinic ... You can read about the red hair and light eyes of the Turks on the internet. When Kazakhs have a red-haired child, they usually say "Nagyz Cossack!" ("a real Kazakh!").
                  2. Marek Rozny
                    Marek Rozny April 29 2013 21: 02
                    1) where did you find in Herodotus that there are more plowmen than nomads?
                    2) what kind of Arab sources about the Scythians ????
                    3) nomads - metallurgists. any ancient and medieval description of the Turkic nomads emphasizes the fact that the Turks massively engaged in all stages of metallurgy. Before you wonder, study this topic.
                    4) about the Turks - in general, nonsense is written. I talked and constantly communicate with a bunch of Turks personally. and always talk about history.
                    5) regarding the appearance of the Turks - I will probably surprise you. Kazakhs, for example, are now 70% Mongoloids, 30% Caucasians. A thousand years ago, the ratio of features was exactly the opposite. Red Kazakhs with green / blue eyes are still enough among Kazakhs. Even I have a half-beard red. And my mother from the Kazakh clan Uysun (who has been living in the territory of South Kazakhstan for several thousand years) is generally similar in appearance to a Ukrainian.
                    The Kazakhs (and other steppe Turks) have the most diverse phenotype. And the fact that we have more Mongoloid features in less than 1000 years is the "fault" of the dominant black-haired and brown-eyed genes. For example, in Britain 100 years ago, only 90% of women were blonde. Now only 10% of British women are red or blondes.
                    The word "rus" and "fair-haired" is generally stupid to associate. Well then the Germans were not called that. Do you think that the Germans were darker than the Slavs of the time and the word "rus" would allow them to differ in hair color ???
                    6) Forelocks and mustaches - an obligatory difference between the Turkic wars before the adoption of Islam. The Slavs never wore a forelock. The first to adopt this fashion was Svyatoslav Igorevich from the steppes. Yes, he himself almost completely lived like an ordinary Turkic nomad. Unless in religion and language was different from the steppes.
                    Among the Kazakhs, only the children's forelock, the Aidar, was preserved, and the adult forelock, the Kyokil, was canceled in the Middle Ages in connection with Islam. The worship of the sun and fire among the Scythians persisted until recently among the Kazakhs, even despite Islam.
                    Slavs and Germans in ancient times really consumed horse meat. But not koumiss. Moreover, horse meat was a rare food among the Slavs, and more ceremonial among the northern Germans. Among Turkic-speaking nomads, horse-flesh and koumiss are the basis of the daily diet. By the time of the baptism, the Russians had not eaten horse meat for a long time, and the Germans — yes, they had consumed it a little longer.
                    Well, and just to know - the Slavs never lived in yurts. The transitional link from the camping tent to the modern yurt appeared at the junction of the Scythian and Turkic peoples. Roughly speaking, Russian ancestors wandered once - when they left their European ancestral home on the territory of present-day Russia. They never had a need for a nomadic dwelling. They lived in dugouts, then in log cabins. The Türks lived most of the time in these tents, and only for the winter lived in stationary adobe houses and stone houses (if they were at hand) or in log cabins, as in Altai and Siberia.
                    1. Rink
                      Rink April 30 2013 00: 12
                      Quote: Marek Rozny
                      5) regarding the appearance of the Turks - I will probably surprise you. Kazakhs, for example, are now 70% Mongoloids, 30% Caucasians. A thousand years ago, the ratio of features was exactly the opposite. Red Kazakhs with green / blue eyes are still enough among Kazakhs. Even I have a half-beard red. And my mother from the Kazakh clan Uysun (who has been living in the territory of South Kazakhstan for several thousand years) is generally similar in appearance to a Ukrainian.
                      The Kazakhs (and other steppe Turks) have the most diverse phenotype. And the fact that we have more Mongoloid features in less than 1000 years is the "fault" of the dominant black-haired and brown-eyed genes.

                      This variety of Kazakh genera only affects the distribution of Y-DNA haplogroups according to the data of the Kazakh DNA project (see the graph here
                      ), as well as the conclusions made in the explanatory book of Penzev "Arias of Ancient Rus", published in the series "The Secret of Lev Gumilyov" in 2007. There, the origin of the Turkic and Turkic peoples is considered in detail.
                      Read, this is interesting.
                      You will understand how this colorful carpet came from.

                      As for the Kazakh women, similar to Ukrainian women, I can only say that I myself was born in the Karaganda region, not far from the village of Osakarovka. Dad and mom met there at the power line construction site, because both at the end of the institute were distributed to Kazakhstan. But my family left at the end of the construction, but two cousins ​​got married and became Kazakh women. Now they carry Kazakh surnames, although they do not look like Kazakhs at all, for obvious reasons.
                      So it goes...
                      1. Marek Rozny
                        Marek Rozny April 30 2013 16: 53
                        1) If you have just stumbled upon a Kazakh DNA project on the Internet, then I have been following it since the beginning of its appearance for several years and participate in various forums on the topic of the DNA map of Kazakhs.
                        2) I won't even read the book "Arias of Ancient Rus" because of the title. Pure folk history a la Zadornov. In vain, by the way, they were attached to the series named after Gumilyov - Gumilyov turned over in his grave because someone under his name was promoting the connection of Russians with the Aryans and the connection of Russians with the Scythian nomads.
                        3) How can the Kazakhs differ in haplogroups? On the whole, it’s clear to me, especially since it is not difficult to study the history of Kazakh families - there are a lot of medieval primary sources in Turkic, Chinese, Persian, Arabic. And all these clans, which are mentioned in the early Middle Ages, are still part of the Kazakhs. So it is more or less clearly known where what kind in a certain century was, with whom he fought, with whom he was friends, who was at the head, etc. All Kazakhs know their shezhire (family tree).
                        4) What is your story about cousins? Have you at least carefully read about what I wrote to you about Kazakh-Slavic marriages? And my mother has nothing to do with the Slavs. The fact that her family - the Uysuns - red and blue-eyed - was noted even by the Chinese annals before the birth of Christ. You still say that it was the Russians in the Dzhambul region that lived in those days ...
                2. Misantrop
                  Misantrop April 29 2013 20: 01
                  Quote: Skating rink
                  There is only one conclusion from the foregoing: modern Russians (the superethnos of the Rus, which includes the Great Russians, Little Russians and White Russians and other smaller groups) are direct descendants of the Bronze Age Indo-Europeans, Cimmerians, Scythians, Sarmatians and Alans.

                  And after that, someone else begins to say that before the time of Catherine the Slavs were not in Crimea ... laughing
                3. Marek Rozny
                  Marek Rozny April 29 2013 20: 20
                  Oh, bliiiin ... I put it all together, adjusted it to a convenient conclusion and eventually turned the Scythians into Slavs ... Carcasses of light.
                  1) The haplogroup of the Scythians is not Slavic. This haplogroup is found in a bunch of peoples from Western Europe to the Altai and Kyrgyz people (who have more R1a1 than Russians and other Slavs).
                  2) There were sedentary Scythians and nomadic Scythians. You can not mix them into one compote, although their origin is common. You don’t confuse modern Americans and Norwegians, although they have a common origin? The Scythians lived in the territory of the present CIS before the Slavs from Western Europe entered the territory of present Ukraine and Russia. The Eastern Slavs appeared where then Russia was born one and a half thousand years ago, just because the German tribes ousted the ancestors of the Eastern Slavs. By this moment, the Iranian-speaking Scythians, nomads, had long been completely assimilated by the Turkic-speaking nomads. Some tiny remnants of settled Scythians, already mixed with a bunch of other peoples, joined the composition of the new Slavs. These Scythians did not ride horses, they did not drink koumiss, and did not live in yurts. What you attributed there about archery has nothing to do with the Russian ancestors.
                  Who called Russ Scythians in the 11th century - complete nonsense. Scythians at that time no longer smelled, and European historians of that time actually knew nothing about Scythians. You write Blok into the proofs of your theory.
                  Lomonosov is a genius in the natural sciences, but a complete layman in history. All that he wrote in this thread was written for one purpose - to spoil his German colleagues. To refer to Lomonosov as a historian is the same as considering Albert Einstein as a professional historian.
                  1. Misantrop
                    Misantrop April 29 2013 21: 23
                    Quote: Marek Rozny
                    I put everything together

                    In fact, several years ago, a professor at SSU conducted excavations in one of the cave towns of the mountainous part of Crimea. At Mangup, more precisely. And they began to dig an underground passage, covered with VERY long before the Tatars. His, before he was first left the city, very neat was laid by the builders themselves. And it turned out that with a large crowd of people (i.e. falsification was excluded, the blocks were too heavy, and they were not touched), a section of the passage was opened, where an inscription was found near the ceiling. Apparently, one of the then workers decided to "check in" at the end. Two female names, moreover, written by CYRILLICE. The one that officially appeared a fair number of centuries later. By the way, at the present time this passage has not yet been fully excavated, so where it leads and for what reason it was hidden is not known at the moment.

                    Well, now you can throw anything and shout that the Slavs have never once been Scythians, and in general at that time the cones were nibbling on the tree, catching the branch with its tail ...

                    And yet, the Greek city of Chersonesos was built on ... the ruins of an ancient city. And if you take into account that at present 2/3 of this city is a couple of tens of meters below sea level, then it is not too difficult to estimate when the last time the Black Sea level was SO RISED
                    1. Marek Rozny
                      Marek Rozny April 30 2013 18: 02
                      Misanthrope, what kind of professor, what kind of cave settlement, what kind of inscription exactly? Smells like a "broken phone".

                      History of Mangup Kale:
                      - In the XNUMXrd – XNUMXth centuries, the Mangup plateau was inhabited by Scythian-Sarmatians.
                      - In the XNUMXth – XNUMXth centuries, a settlement of Alans and Goths appeared on a plateau, and catacomb cemeteries in the surrounding beams.
                      - In the second half of the XNUMXth century, the first fortifications were built. At that time, the city was called Doros and was the capital of the country of Dori - Crimean Gothia. In the VI century, a monumental basilica was erected on the plateau, the city became the center of the Gothic diocese in Crimea.
                      - At the end of the XNUMXth century, the Khazar Khaganate subordinates Doros. The Khazar garrison is briefly located in the city.
                      - The capture of Doros served as a signal for the beginning of the anti-Khazar rebellion led by St. John of Gotha.
                      - XIII - mid XV the city was the capital of the late Byzantine principality of Theodoro, who controlled the South-Western Crimea and was under the influence of Byzantium. The city itself was also called Theodoro. It is from this era that numerous artificial caves, defensive walls, the foundations of the basilica and the ruins of the citadel on Cape Teshkli-burun have been preserved.
                      - 1475. The city after the six-month siege of Mangupakak and the entire principality was captured by Ottoman troops. The Ottomans rebuilt the fortress, which during their reign was called Mangup-Kale - Mangup fortress).
                      - 1774 The fortress was abandoned by the Turkish garrison.
                      - 1790 Mangup left the last inhabitants - the community of Karaites. The remains of the Karaite cemetery have been preserved in the Tabana-Dere ravine.

                      Where are the Slavs with their Cyrillic alphabet? In what century?)))

                      I did not write anything offensive about the Slavs, and I don’t need to ascribe about bumps. During the Scythians, the Slavs lived much more westward - in the territory of present-day Germany, until the Germans began to push the Slavs from their lands. Who remained - that was destroyed or assimilated. The ancestors of the Russians turned out to be wiser - and went away from the restless neighbor. On the territory of the USSR;) the ancestors of the Russians appeared only one and a half thousand years ago. And we can trace their history normally only from the 9th century. Even Soviet historiography, which eagerly embellished Russian history, did not even think of calling the Iranian-speaking Scythians the genetic ancestors of the Russians. There is no doubt cultural influence (although whom only the Scythians did not influence), and genetically - these are two different peoples with different destinies.
                      1. Misantrop
                        Misantrop 3 May 2013 14: 54
                        Quote: Marek Rozny
                        In the XNUMXrd – XNUMXth centuries, the Mangup plateau was inhabited by Scythian-Sarmatians.

                        If you take into account that the history of these cave cities (at least) is five thousand years longer (they are older than Feodosia and Kerch), which were more than 2,5 thousand years old in the last century, it’s even strange, then in your so much detailed chronology the exact dates are not indicated wassat
                        Wikipedia is a good thing, but seriously, it’s not worth it to be considered the ultimate truth in the last resort wassat

                        Interestingly, from half a year ago I found links to those excavations on the network. Someone erases very carefully, it seems ... what
                  2. Rink
                    Rink April 29 2013 23: 11
                    Quote: Marek Rozny
                    1) The haplogroup of the Scythians is not Slavic. This haplogroup is found in a bunch of peoples from Western Europe to the Altai and Kyrgyz people (who have more R1a1 than Russians and other Slavs).

                    How I like this style of discussion! He said how he cut it off, and no evidence is required: not Slavic and that’s it, someone else has more. And who?

                    We look at the map, read smart books ... for example, "Another proof of the transition of the Aryans (haplogroup R1a1) to India and Iran from the Russian Plain." Klyosov, AA

                    In another book (V. A. Stepanov et al., Evolution and phylogeography of human Y-chromosome lines: VOGiS Bulletin, 2006, V. 10, No. 1) we read:
                    "Currently, the highest R1a1 frequencies are in the European part of Russia (45 to 65% of the population), Poland (55%), Belarus (49%), Ukraine (43%), Slovakia (42%), Latvia (40 %), Lithuania (38%), Czech Republic (34%), Hungary (32%), Croatia (29%), Norway (27%), Austria (26%), northeastern Germany (23%) and Sweden (19%)."

                    Where are your arguments? Where is the comparison with the gene pool of the Kazakhs? As well as the justification of all other statements ... Lomonosov is in your opinion a layman - do you obviously know a better story than Lomonosov? Show it?
                    1. Marek Rozny
                      Marek Rozny April 30 2013 17: 08
                      1) Can you read Russian? I clearly wrote and then repeated that the Altai and Kyrgyz have more of this supposedly "Slavic" haplogroup R1a than the Slavs themselves.
                      Altai - 92,9%
                      Khotony - 82,5%
                      Kyrgyzstan - 68,9
                      Dongxiang - 54,3
                      Tajiks (northwestern China) - 45,2
                      Tatars (northwestern China) - 60,6
                      Hazaras (Pakistan) - 60,1
                      Shors - 58,8
                      Teleuts - 55,3%
                      Hungarians - 60%
                      Those. it turns out, if you follow your logic that Tajiks, Kyrgyz and Shors are much more Slavic than Russians or Ukrainians.
                      I say again, haplogroup R1a is not Slavic, Hungarian or Turkic. This is a gigantic family that appeared earlier than the proto-Slavs, proto-Kyrgyz or proto-Hungarians began to differ from each other. She generally appeared 15000 years ago, this haplogroup! What kind of Slavs can we talk about?

                      2) Usually even a schoolboy knows history better than Lomonosov. Lomonosov (whom, I emphasize, respect as a scientist of natural sciences) instead of history has one mess, turbidity and exaggeration. It is impossible to refer to it at all. Even a first-year student at the history faculty is embarrassed to cite him as evidence of his thoughts.

                      3) And where are the answers to my questions regarding the 9th day, the prevalence of settled Scythians over nomads and other things that you attributed to Herodotus there? And what kind of Arab sources according to the Scythians?
              2. Andrey78
                Andrey78 April 29 2013 21: 43
                It is difficult to engage in farming there for climatic reasons, but transhumance livestock breeding is what our steppe is ideally suited for.
              3. Andrey78
                Andrey78 April 29 2013 21: 48
                And you lived in the Dnieper-Buzh steppe, in order to say "It's hard to do agriculture there for climatic reasons, but distant-pasture livestock breeding", that's where you can do agriculture, because of which there were vast German communities, and the harvest was removed with proper land use and take pictures good. Not for nothing about those places saying stick a stick, it will sprout
                1. Marek Rozny
                  Marek Rozny April 30 2013 17: 49
                  Andrei, I was not in the Ukrainian part of the Steppe, but in the Russian part of the same steppe - I was born, and in the Kazakh part of the same Steppe - I live now.
                  Any agronomist will confirm to you that on the territory of our Eurasian steppe it is easier and more efficient to engage in distant-pasture animal husbandry than agriculture. The Turks (and the first Cossacks) followed the path of least resistance. Our steppe from Ukraine to Mongolia is a zone of risky farming. Today is the harvest, tomorrow is a bad harvest, today is a cold year, tomorrow is an overly hot year. Plus wind, snowstorms and other "nishtyaks". But our Steppe has something that other pastures in Europe and Asia do not have - steppe herbs, on which amazingly tasty cattle are grown. And the second plus - there is a lot of steppe, enough for normal grazing of this cattle.

                  The German colonists were engaged in horticulture and agriculture, because they couldn’t do anything corny anymore. They never engaged in livestock breeding in their homeland. In Europe, only Hungarians can boast with their piece of the Eurasian Steppe.
                  The Germans were more advanced in the subject of grain farming than the Russians or Ukrainians, usually they received a better crop than the neighbors. But even so, they constantly had crop failures, as a result of which the government of the Russian Empire used to save them money and food on a regular basis.
                  The Germans appeared there in the late 20s of the 19th century. In 1833, all of Ukraine experienced a general crop failure. In 1834, everyone there again suffered from a very severe drought, as a result of which there was a threat of total hunger. And the crop failures of 1862–64 weakened the economic condition of the colonies to such an extent that many colonists became bogged down debtors.
                  Stepnyak, on the other hand, never experienced hunger, even during jute and mass death of cattle. There was always enough cattle left to survive even the most fierce steppe winter.
                  Grain farming was developed in our steppe from despair, so as not to buy from the bourgeois.
                  And here is an interesting phrase about how the Kazakh part of the Steppe was plowed under the virgin soil:
                  “Thanks to the extraordinary concentration of funds and people, as well as natural factors, the new lands in the early years gave ultra-high yields, and from the mid-1950s - from half to a third of all grain produced in the USSR. However, the desired stability, despite efforts, was not achieved: in lean years, even the sowing fund could not be collected on virgin lands, as a result of ecological imbalance and soil erosion in 1962-1963, dust storms became a real disaster. The development of virgin lands entered the stage of crisis, the efficiency of its cultivation fell by 65%.
                  This is the steppe. It is imprisoned by nature for livestock.
              4. Misantrop
                Misantrop April 29 2013 21: 59
                Quote: Marek Rozny
                those who lived in the Steppe (Ukraine, Russia, Kazakhstan) - abandoned a sedentary lifestyle, as soon as they finally tamed the horse. After this, the Scythian cities in the Steppe were completely and forever abandoned. It is difficult to engage in farming there for climatic reasons, but transhumance livestock breeding is what our steppe is ideally suited for.

                Yeah, it’s not for nothing that the hereditary nomads of the Crimean Tatars, after coming to Crimea, began to switch to a settled way of life and engage in gardening. Their old gardens are still full in Crimea, especially in the foothills laughing
                1. Marek Rozny
                  Marek Rozny April 30 2013 17: 20
                  1) Crimean Tatars - a heterogeneous mass, consisting, roughly speaking, of the steppes (real Turks) and settled (the localized NESLAVIAN population - a compote of Caucasians, Got-Germans, Greeks and others). The steppe inhabitants were not engaged in gardening (with rare exceptions) - their destiny is war and raising livestock (horses, rams). The renowned (as early as antiquity) population was engaged in habitual farming.
                  2) Crimea does not all consist of the steppe. Look at the geographical map of Crimea and remember where the gardens were occupied there - those same foothill areas. But in the steppe - exclusively distant livestock breeding. Where is what land - they did that.
          2. yurta2013
            yurta2013 April 29 2013 13: 47
            What happened on the territory of Russia and what happened in Russia is far from the same thing. Russia appeared as a state only at the end of the 15th century on the site of the northeastern principalities of Russia. Russia leads its history from the 8th-9th centuries and was formed on the territory of the Eastern Slavs. Eastern Slavs came here in 4-8 centuries from the territory of modern Poland. Before that, peoples lived here, who had nothing to do with Russia and the Russians. As for the swamps, in ancient times they were quite enough in Europe completely covered with forests, and in Greece iron ore was mined by mining. They melted it on charcoal until the Greeks cut down all their forests, after which they began to buy weapons abroad.
            1. Rink
              Rink April 29 2013 20: 13
              yurta2013Do not repeat what you were taught at school. In order not to fall into an uncomfortable position.
              Oh, that the Slavs are newcomers, and the Scythians do not have the first to the Slavs, the Germans said in the 18th century. But archeology refutes this nonsense.

              Read about finds and dating, for example, temporal rings - typically Slavic female jewelry? So characteristic of the Slavs that historians do not even dispute: if temporal rings were found, the Slavs lived here.
              Read about the Sungir parking lot (for example, here, and slotted discs from there.

              Slavs are autochthons in this territory.
              And let our names change with millennia, which the surrounding peoples called us - the Cimmerians and Scythians among the Greeks, Saks and Getae from the Persians, Wends and Antes from the Romans, Sakalib from the Arabs - the anthropological type, haplogroup and cultural signs of all these seemingly different peoples show continuous smooth development of the same community of peoplestarting at least with Sungiri.
              And this is the objective data of modern archeology, and not fictions from the ceiling, which were engaged in "red-haired Germans" of the 18th century.

              I'm tired of writing, I won’t answer here anymore.
              1. yurta2013
                yurta2013 April 30 2013 14: 06
                You shouldn't refer to history textbooks. Your point of view is basically presented there. It comes from the research of the Soviet historian B.A. Rybakov in the 40-50s of the last century. However, Soviet archaeologists back in the 60s and 70s proved that this version is incorrect. True, Rybakov's version still remained official, since it best corresponded to the state interests of the USSR, and now modern Russia. It also corresponds to the views of supporters of the maximum aging of the history of the Russian people, apparently in order to be able to show "Kuzkin's mother" to some Italians or Jews. Unsurprisingly, near- and pseudo-scientific literature on this topic literally flooded bookstore shelves across the country.
        2. smile
          smile April 28 2013 04: 47
          That's right ... but look, there are girls on this site .... it’s nice to disgrace, indeed the Russian woman will stop the elephant and tear off his trunk .... there are still women in Russian villages ... I remembered Lyudmila Pavlyuchenko, who Merits to the Fatherland are more than a platoon of us and our most honored colleagues .. * although, I am convinced that true heroes here are not very ranting about themselves) .... Remember her statement at the Ford plant — don’t beat American men for verbosity, while you will be hiding behind the skirts of Russian women .... for quite a long time in the USA Lyudmila Pavlyuchenko quite rightly was in the category of goddesses, much higher than all sorts of stars and stars ... a real ... moreover, a really beautiful woman .... judging by girls, no matter what age, expressing their opinion on the VO site with Lyudmila Pavlyuchenko, Marina Raskova and thousands and millions of women forced to take iron in their hands to protect their children, husbands and fathers, a decent change has grown .... here's an interesting pattern - swamps there are more than enough male urrrods of men, and aunts, not one ... all that is is normal ... :)))
  2. anomalocaris
    anomalocaris April 27 2013 08: 44
    Another sample
    1. Horde
      Horde April 27 2013 10: 09
      you seem to have brought photos of the MOST interesting examples of RUSSIAN guns
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris April 27 2013 10: 20
        Not all. There is still a lot of interesting things. And these yes. Looks like artifacts from a classic popadanets. By the way, Krupp developed his wedge lock only in the 60s of the XIX century. It’s a pity you can’t open the shutter and examine its mirror. If there is also a shutter ...
      2. Horde
        Horde April 27 2013 14: 28
        damn damn that FOR THREE HOURS he could not climb into fuel and ate almost all of my post.
        1. Horde
          Horde April 27 2013 14: 55
          three asp

          pishchal "THREE ASPID" beginning of the 17th century on the cannon a WEDGE SHUTTER is applied

          wedge shutter

          in 1880, Alfred Krupp, who was considered the inventor of a wedge-shaped lock for guns in Europe, wanted to buy this 17v gun for any money, in the 19th century it was believed that Krupp had copied a stolen scheme of a Russian wedge lock. The first guns loaded from the CASES were RUSSIAN.
          guns are considered WESTERN INVENTIONS, but there are facts to the contrary.
          TsAPFA - protrusions on the gun’s barrel for changing the aiming angle, traditionally considered a GERMAN word, the etymology of the word cannot really explain the interpretation - the meaning of the word. The meaning of the word becomes clear only in Russian.


          GAMAYUN bird patron of Russian artillery

          Pulo Smolensk end of the XIV century.

          GAMAYUN bird was considered the patron saint of the Russian artillery.
          1. anomalocaris
            anomalocaris April 27 2013 15: 26
            Wow I will probably disappoint you very much. Almost all guns up to the beginning of the XNUMXth century were treasury-loading. This is such a dumb technical fact. It’s practically impossible to simply load the gunpowder pulp (it is comparable in size to cement in size).
            But with regard to these particular samples ("Three Asps" just in my first photo), they are certainly outstanding.
            1. Horde
              Horde April 28 2013 09: 19
              Almost all guns up to the beginning of the XNUMXth century were treasury-loading. This is such a dumb technical fact. It’s practically impossible to simply load the gunpowder pulp (it is comparable in size to cement in size).

              it’s not entirely clear, after all, in order to load a gun from KAZNA, it is necessary not only foundry work, but also LOCKSWORKS using drill tools, machine tools, and this is the next stage in metal processing after casting. In your opinion, it turned out that before the beginning of the 15th century they knew how to make shutters, then they refused to produce breech-loading guns, and then in the 19th century they again switched to loading from the treasury. Something here does not fit with the logic.
              1. anomalocaris
                anomalocaris April 28 2013 10: 08
                1) The first tools were welded from separate strips of iron with fastened hoops. they began to cast them later. If you seriously believe that casting is easier, then you are very mistaken.
                2) After casting, the barrel was drilled without fail. For this, there were machines that were only vaguely similar to modern ones, but still quite effective.
                3) Grain powder learned only in the first quarter of the XV century. Before that, it was a powder pulp. Fine powder is very similar to cement. It, among other things, was extremely hygroscopic, and burned very unevenly.
                So, loading a more or less long barrel with such gunpowder is an extremely difficult task, if at all possible. To ensure this process, loading from the treasury was invented. A certain charge of gunpowder was placed in a detachable chamber (and free space was necessarily left there), then this chamber was inserted into the barrel and pressed against it with a wedge, often wooden (however, some bombards had a screw chamber). For "sealing" the joint was coated with clay and, finally, the core was rolled in. After that, the main part of the calculation was done by the legs, and one kamika ... oh, sorry, gunner, set the fuse on fire. If everything worked fine, then a hiss followed from the seed, the release of powder gases along the joint, and only then the core flew out. Often, this whole structure flew merrily and far away.
                So as soon as granular gunpowder appeared and the casting technology reached a certain perfection, they immediately switched to more advanced muzzle-loading guns.
                With a cast, smoothbore gun, this is an oprimnial way. And according to this, he held out until the middle of the XIX century. Only the urgent need for the transition to rifled implements (those samples that are mentioned, by the way, also rifled) forced us to return to breech-loading systems. But at a new level of technology development, this task was successfully solved.
          2. yurta2013
            yurta2013 April 29 2013 13: 29
            In the same way, the invention of the trunnion can be attributed to any other Slavic people. As for "Pullo Smolenskoye", this is clearly not a 14th century image. At that time, there were no cannons on a carriage with wheels yet.
  3. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 April 27 2013 08: 58
    If we compare the shape of the archers and what Peter introduced, then the archers were 100% better equipped and more correctly in terms of climatic conditions. The European form for severe Russian winters is generally wrecking.
    1. avt
      avt April 27 2013 10: 43
      Quote: vladsolo56
      If we compare the shape of the archers and what Peter introduced, then the archers were 100% better equipped and more correctly in terms of climatic conditions. The European form for severe Russian winters is generally wrecking.

      Quite right! Article plus! In principle, everything is said briefly and accurately. Russia was not a mossy swamp that Peter introduced to “civilization.” They quite took what they needed from both the West and the East.
    2. vladsolo56
      vladsolo56 April 27 2013 10: 58
      I wanted to find on the network when and who came up with the archer’s uniform (equipment), made a request to the search engine and was stunned. Thousands of links, but all about horoscopes. These are the things that survived.
      1. Ascetic
        Ascetic April 27 2013 21: 58
        Quote: vladsolo56
        I wanted to find on the network when and who came up with the archer’s uniform (equipment), made a request to the search engine and was stunned. Thousands of links, but all about horoscopes. These are the things that survived.

        Read the article Uniforms of Streltsy Regiments
        XNUMXth century Russian army
        Y. Veremeyeva I think answers to your questions are given here
      2. yurta2013
        yurta2013 1 May 2013 08: 11
        Whoever came up with the shape of an archer will probably never be known. The documents of the Streltsy order of the middle of the 16th century are hardly preserved. Most likely it was not one person. The model for the best infantry of that time, the Janissary, may have partly served as a model for this form.
  4. borisjdin1957
    borisjdin1957 April 27 2013 09: 47
    We are original and let's remain so! There is no need to look to the West. Our ancestors are an example to us !!!
  5. rexby63
    rexby63 April 27 2013 10: 14
    In general, our weapons seem more beautiful to me. When I was in the Cuban Museum I compared "Tiger" and "Thirty-four". The Tiger is scary, but the T-34 is beautiful. I understand that tanks are not judged by criteria - handsome, ugly, but emotions always come first in humans
    1. Nil
      Nil April 27 2013 21: 10
      I agree, Rexby. You can also give our planes as an example - yaks, twigs, shops. Simply put - stylish, beautiful and deadly.
  6. xan
    xan April 27 2013 10: 57
    "This army provided Russia with impressive successes. Poland was defeated so much that it dropped out of the ranks of the great powers forever. From now on, she had to proudly sing" The Polish has not yet perished, "but others ruled her destinies. Russia became the undisputed leader in Eastern Europe. Sweden pushed in, they also "poured in" it so that it didn't seem a little. The Ottoman Empire intervened, but the Russians buried two Turkish armies near Chigirin.
    All this is taken out of context and really only partially. Why is the author engaged in juggling?
    Russian military power after Peter is an order of magnitude more powerful than before. And the position of Russia under Peter was almost no better than the situation under Ivan the Terrible, and maybe worse - behind him there were no initial victories for Grozny. At the heart of all the victories of the 18th century - the century of military disputes, the witness of the glory of the Russians - Petrovsky drive. This can only be denied from ignorance.
    1. avt
      avt April 27 2013 15: 03
      Quote: xan
      Russian military power after Peter is an order of magnitude more powerful than before. And the position of Russia under Peter was almost no better than the situation under Ivan the Terrible, and maybe worse - behind him there were no initial victories for Grozny.

      Especially when, following the results of the Prut campaign, they sold and burned the unburned remnants of the Black Sea fleet and almost returned to the time of his dad. Well, the deployment of the army with tax cuts, the almost occupation of its own territory, yes, this is really an innovation.
  7. Opera
    Opera April 27 2013 12: 11
    Yes, we always knew how to make weapons and are able to! Regarding the beauty of weapons, I want to say that everything perfect is beautiful! Perfection is the absence of excess. Compare not only our tanks, but also ships and planes with Western models! No bulkiness of forms, swiftness and smoothness of silhouettes ...
    An article for the general mood, so to speak, put a plus. I disagree with the well-known interpretation of the Mongol-Tatar yoke and unrest.
    1. anomalocaris
      anomalocaris April 27 2013 14: 47
      In the same museum there are Zlatoust blades, just look how much superior they are to trophy ones ... And who is lucky, I highly recommend visiting the local history museum of the city of Zlatoust.
  8. AntonR7
    AntonR7 April 27 2013 16: 22
    It is true that the regiments of the new system existed before Peter, however, Peter’s merits cannot be belittled, he carried out modernization, as the article says in accordance with the new spirit of the time.
  9. avt
    avt April 27 2013 18: 22
    Quote: AntonR7
    as the article says in accordance with the new spirit of the times.

    What kind of spirit? Communion according to the Anglican model and the abolition of the patriarchate with the appointment of the head of the church? With the ban on building churches without his permission? Like burned the Old Believers, and then historians wrote that we did not have the Inquisition and they themselves were set on fire? Even daddy’s reformation didn’t settle down and he muddied up a new gathering. Ah, yes! He opened the regiments of soldiers. By the way, he branded crosses on the hand of recruits, hence the thieves cross on the hand, from Peter, when the people fled from his spirit of the time. Well, I won’t talk about the fleet, just take a look at what happened to the Black Sea and how it was served in the Baltic, take a look at the results of the Prut campaign and the admiral’s reports to Peter.
  10. Eric
    Eric April 27 2013 18: 23
    Chic article! In the history books! Immediately!
  11. Consul-t
    Consul-t April 27 2013 21: 49
    Such things need to be told and shown in schools.
    And then they drive us in, that in the West everything is better and in everything they are the first.
  12. Avenger711
    Avenger711 April 27 2013 22: 03
    I still don’t understand, if Russia alone exported 800 guns annually (many of the tanks massively stamped during the Second World War were released in the amount of only a few thousand pieces), then why were very few guns used in the battles of that era? For example, in the battle of Borodino in a much more advanced era, there were 500-600 guns on each side.
    Maybe enough already produce myths?
    1. anomalocaris
      anomalocaris April 27 2013 22: 18
      These are not myths. You just forget one small fact, namely the fact that the 80th century is the century of escalation of the MARINE arms race. Accordingly, the fleet absorbed about 90-800 percent of the products of all cannon yards in Europe, including Russia in particular. And what is XNUMX guns? it is a dozen large, one and a half dozen medium or two dozen small ships. In addition, there are also fortresses ...
      And in field battles, artillery was not so much used. After all, somehow it is necessary to drag it, plus supplies for it ... This continued until the 20s and 30s of the XX century, when mechanized traction made it possible to make artillery on the battlefield a really massive phenomenon (though there are other reasons, but this already another conversation).
  13. воронов
    воронов April 27 2013 22: 57
    Article + !!!
  14. FC SKIF
    FC SKIF April 28 2013 11: 31
    We have many glorious and heroic pages in history. Look at the map - Russia is the largest state. Without a cool army and military equipment, this is simply impossible.
    1. yurta2013
      yurta2013 April 29 2013 13: 57
      Look at the climatic zones of Russia. All of its original territory is in the zone of risky farming, and most of it is not suitable for it at all. The population density in such territories is always very low and its number is many times less than in countries favorable for agriculture. The peoples living here settled on very large territories (hunting and cattle breeding require large areas). Hence the vast territory of Russia. In addition, the few nomadic and hunting peoples could not show serious resistance to the Russians.
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris April 29 2013 14: 04
        Yeah. Go and tell it to the Buryats, Yakuts, Shors, Evens ... Maybe they just laugh, or maybe they kick with their feet, I don’t know how lucky you are.
        1. yurta2013
          yurta2013 April 30 2013 14: 13
          The fact that many Yakuts or Chukchi for a long time resisted the Russian authorities on their territory does not contradict, but only proves what I said. The forces of the parties were too unequal.
  15. Prometey
    Prometey April 28 2013 20: 52
    Good review! The 17th century was the century of strengthening the power of the Russian state. Having strengthened after the Time of Troubles, the Russians began a powerful expansion, which was impossible without a strong army and tolerable industry. In the second half of the 17th century, the Russian army beat both Poles and Swedes (and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth could rightfully be considered one of the strongest states in Europe). Only a possible war on two, even on 3 fronts, including Crimea, did not allow Russia to defeat the Swedes and gain a foothold in the Baltic in the 17th century under Tsar Alexei. But this was a real opportunity, but the consolidation of Ukraine was a priority.
  16. yurta2013
    yurta2013 April 29 2013 13: 15
    The article is very heterogeneous. Along with the real facts, there are a lot of very dubious and even directly sucked from the finger. In such cases, the author quite reasonably prefers not to refer to any sources, since there are none in nature. The fables about Poles, Swedes, Turks and Chinese who were smashed to the head in the 17th century are especially striking. If at first the Poles were really beaten in the 50s of the 17th century, then over the next ten years they lost almost everything that they managed to conquer. As many of us like to invent non-existent successes, as if there were few real victories in our history.
    1. anomalocaris
      anomalocaris April 29 2013 13: 47
      Well, the Chinese (Manchu) were beaten and very much. My native town was under siege four times by a superior enemy and was too tough for them. The same applies to the entire Siberian line. That allowed in 1721 to conduct the first demarcation of the border between Russia and China. So here you hit the sky with your finger.
      1. yurta2013
        yurta2013 April 30 2013 14: 18
        In this case, I remind you that neither near Albazin, nor near Nerchinsk, the Chinese (Manchurians) were not at all scattered by the valiant Russian troops. In the first case, the case ended with the surrender of the garrison after a long siege, and in the second - the signing of the extremely unprofitable Russia Nerchinsky treaty, according to which all the Amur region went to China. Chinese troops did not reach any Siberian line. Nerchinsk in Transbaikalia - their maximum advance into Russian territory.
  17. Shkodnik65
    Shkodnik65 April 29 2013 15: 01
    Well, the writing is very interesting. There is something to argue with, but such is the story, especially 600-700 years ago. Here in modern you can’t figure it out properly. Thanks to the author and +.
  18. dentitov
    dentitov 1 May 2013 00: 02
    The more you learn about the pre-Petrine times, the more you realize that Peter wasn’t great. So, chaos and scumbag.