Military Review

"Coming on you!" Educating the hero and his first victory

79
"Coming on you!" Educating the hero and his first victory

The Grand Duke Svyatoslav, entered into history as the largest statesman of the era, the greatest commander of the Middle Ages, comparable in scale with Alexander the Great, Hannibal and Caesar. Prince Svyatoslav Igorevich expanded the borders of Russia to the limits of the Caucasus and the Balkan Peninsula. According to the most minimal calculations of researchers, Svyatoslav's squads went on campaigns for several years 8000-8500 km.


Some historians considered the campaigns of Svyatoslav adventures that weakened the forces of Russia. But such researchers as B. A. Rybakov, A. N. Sakharov noted the fact that Svyatoslav’s military activities fully complied with the military-strategic and economic interests of Russia. The Grand Duke destroyed the parasitic state of the Khazars, who lived by controlling trade routes that went from Europe to the East, to Khorezm, the land of the Caliphate, and by collecting tribute from Slavic and other unions of tribes. And often tribute was taken by people for sale into slavery to the East. The Khazars regularly campaigned for "live goods" within the Slavic tribes. The Khazaria itself in the Russian epic was a cruel and bloody "miracle yudom". The destruction of the Khazars liberated part of the Slavic unions of the tribes, which became part of a unified Russian state and cleared the Volga-Caspian way. Volga Bulgaria, a vassal of Khazaria, has ceased to be a hostile barrier. The capital of the Khazar Khaganate, Itil, was wiped off the face of the earth. Sarkel (White Tower) and Tmutarakan became the strongholds of Russia on the Don and Taman (Caucasus). In the Russian favor, the balance of power changed in the Crimea, where Kerch (Korchev) became a Russian city.

The Byzantine Empire led the expansion of the Balkan Peninsula, establishing its control over the Balkan trade route. Svyatoslav established his control over the mouth of the Danube and Bulgaria. The Russian army, which included the Allied Bulgarian, Pechenegian and Hungarian troops, shook the entire Byzantine Empire. Romes (Greeks) had to go to the world, which turned out to be a military cunning. Svyatoslav disbanded most of the troops, and the invasion of the Byzantine army came as a surprise to him (the Romans violated this word, which the barbarians faithfully observed). After heavy battles, a new peace treaty was concluded. Svyatoslav left Bulgaria, but it was obvious that he would return.

Svetoslav entered Russian history as a true warrior: “I easily went on campaigns, like pardus, and fought a lot. In campaigns, he didn’t carry any wagons or boilers, he didn’t cook meat, but, thinly slicing horse meat, or animal, or beef and roasting on coals, he ate it. He didn’t have a tent, but he slept, under a pot with a saddle in his head. All his other warriors were the same. And sent to other countries with the words: "I go to you." Before us is a real Spartan, accustomed to the harsh existence of hikes and battles, neglecting life comforts for the sake of speed of movement. At the same time, Svyatoslav is noble: he keeps his word and warns the enemy about his campaign.

His victories glorified the Russian name and the Russian weapon for centuries. Svyatoslav and his warriors entered history as an example of courage. Even the enemies noted the courage of the Russians. The Greek chronicler Lev Deacon brought one of Svyatoslav’s speeches for us: “... Let us penetrate the courage that our ancestors bequeathed to us, remember that the power of the Russians has so far been indestructible, and we will bravely fight for our lives! It is not for us to return to our homeland, fleeing. We must either win and stay alive, or die with glory, having accomplished feats worthy of valiant men. ” And the Pechenegs, who destroyed the small squad of Svyatoslav in a fierce battle, made a precious bowl out of his skull and said: “May our children be like him!” (Scythian tradition).

Upbringing hero

According to the Russian chronicles in 946, the squad of juvenile Svyatoslav left the field, where the army of the Drevlians awaited him. According to custom, the battle began the young prince. He threw a spear. And the governor Sveneld said: “The prince has already begun; strike, squad, for the prince. " Drevlyans were defeated. This episode rightly characterizes the Russian military education, which was common to all Rus, Slavs. It was about those times that the eastern encyclopaedist researcher Ibn Ruste wrote: “And when one of the Rus has a son, he lays a sword on his stomach and says:“ I don’t leave you any property except that you will conquer with this sword ”. All male children were future warriors. Yes, and many Slav women owned military skills. Thus, the Greek chroniclers noted the presence of women in the army of Svyatoslav, who fight with no less fury than men.

The tutor of the prince was Asmund. There is speculation that he was the son of Prince Oleg the Thing. What he taught Svyatoslav can be guessed only by his deeds. The laws of the military world everywhere - from the samurai of Japan and the Spartans of Greece to the Russian Cossacks, are very similar. This indifference, often contempt for wealth, material wealth. Respect for weapons, coming from the Scythians who worshiped the sword (the material image of the god of war). To risk life, not for prey, but for glory, honor, Fatherland. Svyatoslav, according to the Russian chronicler and direct enemies of the Byzantines, indifferently refused rich gifts, but he gladly accepted weapons.

Svyatoslav, like all "barbarians", was honest, one might say noble. In the eyes of Rus, the oath was one of the most important parts of the world order. No wonder he swore "as long as the world is standing, while the sun is shining." The word, the oath were also not ruin, like the world and the sun. The one who broke the oath, encroached on the foundations of the world. But the duty of a warrior, a prince, was to maintain order with an armed hand. Forgiveness to the perjurers was not.

In addition to selflessness, loyalty to the word, the ancient custom that we see in both the Spartans and in the Indian "Laws of Manu" prescribed to a man of military type ("kshatriya") to devote himself entirely to war and power, in peacetime, hunting, refraining from other occupations . Svyatoslav will tell the Romaic ambassador: "We are men of blood, arms to defeat enemies, and not artisans who earn their living by the sweat of their heads." There was no contempt for the artisans in these words. It’s just that Indo-Europeans (Aryans) had a traditional society, a folk-aristocratic one, where everyone clearly knew their place. Magi (brahmans) served the gods, they vigilant the moral foundations of society, without which it would have fallen into bestiality. For example, modern Western society, spreading its poison throughout the world, has fallen into bestiality, rejecting the foundations laid down in the tribal community (such as family). The warriors defended the clan, dedicated their lives to war, power and hunting. Vesians (all - Old Russian. Village), in the ancient Indian society - Vaishyas, these are farmers, artisans and traders. Moreover, in Russia there were no clear boundaries between the “castes”, unlike India, where the varnas became closed social groups: the “rural” Ilya of Murom thanks to his qualities became a knight, a hero, and at the end of his life became a monk-monk, devoting the rest of his life to serving To god Prince Oleg, thanks to his personal qualities, became the “Prophetic”, since the prince-sorcerer, the witch. Any peasant could rise to a higher social level if he had certain qualities for that. The young kozhemyaka (Nikita Kozhemyaka, Jan Usmoshvets) defeated the Pecheneg bogatyr and was granted a prince in the boyars.

It is clear that moral education was complemented by methods of driving troops, possession of weapons. All the children's games of the Rus for centuries will be aimed at raising a warrior. Their echoes will reach the 20-21 centuries. Even adult holidays will include elements of military training: weight lifting competitions, climbing a log dug into the ground, fistfights, wrestling, wall-to-wall fighting, etc. Svyatoslav, of course, also played with wooden swords and bows , in “knives”, “konyashki”, “king of the mountain”, he took snow towns by attack. And having matured, he met in fist and wrestling fights, learned to fight in the "wall". He learned to shoot from a complicated bow, to wield a sword and an ax, to run for long distances, to ride and fight on a horse. Hunted, learning the secrets of the forest and camouflage, reading the tracks, became hardy and patient, getting the beast. The fight with the beast brought courage, the ability to kill. The young prince comprehended the science of being a prince and a warrior.

The first victory of the prince warrior

In 959, the ambassadors of Princess Olga (at the baptism of Helen) arrived in the courtyard of the head of the Holy Roman Empire - Otto I. The ambassadors of Helena, queens rugues, by the old memory, in the West called the Varangians-Rus, asked for "bishop and priests" instructions in true faith. In those days, such a request meant being recognized as a vassal. Let me remind you that at that moment in the center of Europe a fierce battle was raging between the pagan West Slavic civilization (part of which was the Vikings-Rus) and Christian Rome, which was supported by usurers, Jewish merchants who controlled the lucrative slave trade. It was then that the “onslaught to the East” began, which continues to this day. The Roman throne and the slave traders attacked the Slavic, pagan world with the hands of German knights.

In 961, the Adalbert mission arrived in Kiev. The monk arrived not alone, but with warriors, clergy and servants. Adalbert launched a stormy activity in the Russian capital, which would not have been possible if he had not had the consent of Princess Olga (at that time the former ruler of Russia). Adalbert was practically never in his German courtyard, but he often visited the estates of prominent boyars, merchants, in the grand-ducal courtyard of the Princess Christian. He inclined the Kiev elite to the necessity of adopting Christianity from the hands of "the most Christian ruler" in Europe - the German king Otto. In his opinion, only the Holy Roman Empire, as opposed to the Greek state, mired in the vices, can claim the great heritage of Rome, become the first power of the world, since only in her is the faith of Christ alive.

Adalbert tried to read the sermons and ordinary city residents. But he did not see the response, they listened gloomily, and then went to glorify their gods. It must be said that the Christian community did not exist for a long time in Kiev, but it did not have much importance, since the overwhelming majority of the population was loyal to their native gods. At the same time every day the Germans became more confident and arrogant. Bishop Adalbert already behaved as the head of the local Christian community, although this community was more connected with Constantinople than with Rome. Adalbert was already called the "Bishop of Russia." German missionaries behaved like full spiritual masters and mentors of Russia. The murmuring among ordinary citizens against impudent "Crusaders" went.

Prince Svyatoslav advised his mother to expel the German mission. As a result, he put an end to the series of mistakes of his mother: a dark story with the Drevlyans, an attempt of matchmaking to the Byzantine basileus Konstantin, persuading his son to adopt Christianity, an adventure with the mission of Adalbert. The Grand Duke was no longer a teenager, soon Europe will feel the heavy tread of this mighty warrior. Christianity was rejected by Svyatoslav, as he and his fellow boyars were well aware that baptism would follow vassalage against Byzantium or Rome, and the next basileus or Kaiser would be happy to call him “son” in the feudal sense. Christianity then acted as an information weapon that enslaved neighboring regions.

Svyatoslav had a powerful support - the pagan party, the swords of the Vikings-pagans faithful to Perun and those who hate Christians who drowned their lands in the blood, a powerful folk tradition. Obviously, the coup was not bloodless. Adalbert's supporters were killed, apparently, including representatives of the Christian party in Kiev. Adalbert barely lost his legs. He complained for a long time about the cunning of the Rus. In the "Chronicle of the successor of Reginon," it is reported: In 962, Adalbert returned to the post, placed as bishop to the rulers, for he did not have time for anything that he was sent for, and saw his efforts in vain. On the way back, many of his companions were killed, but he himself barely escaped with great difficulty. ” Svyatoslav defended the conceptual and ideological independence of Russia. From the unreliable hands of Olga, the prince "fed up with the sword" took the reins.

For this feat Svyatoslav should put a huge monument. Unfortunately, the history and struggle of the Western Slavs with Rome in Russia is little known. And she could be an instructive example to those who admire the West. In the vast territories of Central Europe, the Slavs “cleared out” almost at the root. Only the names of rivers, lakes, forests, mountains, cities, and towns remain from them. These are Elba-Laba, Oder-Audra, Lübech-Lübeck, Brandenburg - Branibor, Rugen - Ruyan, Yaromentsburg - Arkona, Stettin - Schetin, Stargrad - Oldenburg, Berlin - grad Bera, Rostock (retained the name), Dresden - Drozdany, Austria - Edges, Vienna - from one of the names of the Slavs "veins, veneta, Venedy", Leipzig - Lipitz, Ratsiburg - Ratibor ...

To be continued ...
Author:
Articles from this series:
"Coming on you!" Educating the hero and his first victory
Saber kick of Svyatoslav on the Khazar "miracle-yuda"
Bulgarian campaign Svyatoslav
Bulgarian campaign Svyatoslav. 2 part
War Svyatoslav with Byzantium. Battle of Arkadiopol
War Svyatoslav with Byzantium. Battle for Preslav and the heroic defense of Dorostol
The mystery of the death of Svyatoslav. Great Russia Construction Strategy
79 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Deniska999
    Deniska999 25 September 2013 08: 45 New
    +6
    Yes, then there were powerful times ...
    1. Petrol
      Petrol 25 September 2013 11: 01 New
      -1
      he is not a hero, this is one of the carriers of the ZORI of Russians ... but that up to the very word "sanctity" in the Russian "pagan" vocabulary never existed and does not exist, as few people now suspect .... therefore, it’s right to say the brave
      1. Hunghuz
        Hunghuz 26 September 2013 02: 25 New
        -1
        hi When Kievan Rus became Svidomo) it turned into the Outskirts of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the stable of the Commonwealth ......))) and it was replaced by UNIAT Lemberg Rus having nothing to do with Novgorod Rus)
    2. vjhbc
      vjhbc 25 September 2013 21: 06 New
      +4
      that’s it, and the Chechens kept it all, and for the sake of their calmness the Russian rulers did everything they could to turn it into a dumb bullshit and practically achieved this about the head of government, don’t dare to say bad power to God, don’t dare to defend yourself it’s bad better run you can’t run, humble yourself, God endured and ordered us to undergo humiliation because honor dignity and pride it’s crazy ravings, it’s better to let your women rape you, but you’ll save your life by killing or robbing or humiliating a stranger or your neighbor, go by, close in your apartment shut up your ears, close your eyes it's not your business, but you’ll die, and life is the main thing and conscience is also nonsense. And now our women begin to teach sons to fight, they called you bad, insulted you, do not pay attention, you have to run away to the army, you don’t need them, there are some stupid people and rogue people, but we have money, we will buy you offended your girl, let them be fools we are smarter you got into a fight and if your women are around then you are guaranteed to get in the face because they will hold you hands and you will not be able to answer but even close yourself from blows
      Quote: Deniska999
      Yes, then there were powerful times ...
      1. strannik595
        strannik595 26 September 2013 01: 29 New
        +1
        oh, oh, oh ........ directly the nation of cowards ..... speak for yourself, you don’t have to speak for everyone, please ..... Russian will put any enemy in any angle
  2. Hort
    Hort 25 September 2013 09: 48 New
    +4
    Well, Arkon was completely destroyed
  3. asadov
    asadov 25 September 2013 09: 51 New
    +5
    All the same, only many centuries ago. People with the same problems and desires, only in their time. There were heroes and scoundrels. It’s just that with these historical examples we need to understand what we should do next and how to avoid our mistakes in the future.
  4. Ross
    Ross 25 September 2013 10: 27 New
    +3
    Very timely stuff! How we now need such a ruler-leader of the nation as Svyatoslav! It is necessary to revive the moral foundations of their ancestors.
    The struggle of the Western Slavs against the Christian invasion of the West is very indicative, a living example for us today, as the West has been fighting the Slavs for centuries. Very well displayed in the book of Oleg Timofeevich Vinogradov. We look forward to continuing.
    1. Petrol
      Petrol 25 September 2013 11: 10 New
      +6
      I agree ... but I would like that the articles would be described in more detail not only on the basis of Christian notes compiled by hired Greek black monsters, as well as texts compiled by the Magi, for example, where it is described how Olga became the murderer and secret wife of the Byzantine Caesar about how Rabbi was chosen in her court brought up Vladimir bloody (baptist) and so on
      1. derik1970
        derik1970 25 September 2013 19: 20 New
        0
        they turned everything upside down ... do you want paganism? collect idols and worship them ...
      2. _Forgiven_
        _Forgiven_ 25 September 2013 22: 28 New
        +1
        I support fully and completely. I once read about Svyatoslav a long time ago, I really liked the material. All who were after Svyatoslav were only parasites and henchmen of Rome and Byzantium. Svyatoslav’s campaigns really show that for a Russian man there was then honor, valor, courage and many other good qualities alien to Western man
        1. Doctorleg
          Doctorleg 25 September 2013 23: 23 New
          +1
          You probably have not read chivalric novels, there is also courage, valor honor. Another thing is that their reliability is the same as in sources about Svyatoslav. They loved to fight and take something
  5. Knizhnik
    Knizhnik 25 September 2013 10: 46 New
    +8
    It is always worth remembering the insidiousness of Byzantium as a lesson that you cannot see the peaceful life of a country without a strong combat-ready army
    1. Corneli
      Corneli 25 September 2013 12: 57 New
      0
      If with this:
      Quote: Knizhnik
      what not to see a peaceful life in a country without a strong combat-ready army

      I agree with arms and legs, it’s possible in more detail about
      Quote: Knizhnik
      It is always worth remembering the insidiousness of Byzantium

      What exactly, Byzantium, in your opinion, "got into trouble" with respect to Svyatoslav?
      1. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 25 September 2013 15: 08 New
        +3
        Quote: Corneli
        What exactly, Byzantium, in your opinion, "got into trouble" with respect to Svyatoslav?

        Did the Pechenegs' ambush appear on the thresholds itself? The Byzantine Empire often fought with the wrong hands. And Russia greatly interfered with them.
        1. Corneli
          Corneli 25 September 2013 15: 42 New
          +2
          Quote: Ingvar 72
          Did the Pechenegs' ambush appear on the thresholds itself? The Byzantine Empire often fought with the wrong hands. And Russia greatly interfered with them.

          The "Tale of Bygone Years" calls the organizers of the ambush not Greeks, but Pereyaslavl (Bulgarians), and John Skilica reports that the Byzantine embassy, ​​on the contrary, asked the Pechenegs to let the Russians go.
          As an option. Russia, Byzantium interfered EXTREMELY weakly, it is pathetic fiction mainly. the Bulgarians, or Arabs, or Germans / Sicilians interfered with them much more than those they fought non-stop.
          For example, according to one version, Nekifor Foka became enraged when the Bulgarians came to him for a tribute and after that asked Svyatoslav to attack them. At the same time, Byzantium fought with the German Emperor in Italy, with the Arams in Sicily, at the same time there were uprisings in Asia Minor and a protracted war in Syria with the Saracens. And then the Bulgarians pinned down. And Svyatoslav was far away, who thought he would throw such a number
          1. Bagatur
            Bagatur 25 September 2013 19: 12 New
            +3
            In full right! The war with Bolgarry Nikifor did not want to-the Vedas 150 years ago (26.07.811) the army of his co-name Nikifor I Genik was completely destroyed by Krum Kum in the Vapbishky pass (eastern Balkans) after an invasion campaign. The Romans were cut to the ground ... the emperor’s head was made a glass .. So Nicephorus II Foka didn’t want a fate. He sent to Kiev - Kalokir, the synonym of the Kherson strategist will convince Svetoslav to attack Bulgaria. What happened! For us, Svetoslav is an aggressor and a hunter! The Bulgarians had good relations with the Pachanegs, it was completely possible that they would have awakened them by the blow of Kiev during the first campaign of Svetoslav, and after Draster ... the emperor Joan Tzimisce had no objection that the Pechenegs had finished off the dangerous prince. I must say another thing .. the Romei came as allies of the Bulgarians against the Yezichniki of Russia ... of course they knew who brought them the Russian misfortune. As Lv Dyakon said for the siege of Preslav: “Together with the Russians, fiercely fought and the Bulgarians knew that the Romans were to blame for their coming ..” When Svetoslav was gone, Joan Tzimiskhi removed his ally’s mask, declared East Bulgaria about the Byzantine theme and the Bulgarian capital named it in honor -Yoanopol! Then, in Constantinople, in front of his eyes, citizenship ordered the captive Tsar Boris II to take away the signs of imperial power ... For Byzantium, Bulgaria no longer existed as a state! And for this great thank you Sveoslav and his rat! Svetoslav dealt a Christian, Orthodox Bulgaria a terrible blow ... the agony of Kotroi began for 40 years ... After the death of Tzimiskhi (976), the battle against Byzantium began, which continued with the unprecedented cruelty until 1018. Kokga Bulgaria was conquered by the Lomei. Russian mercenaries regularly entered the Romanian army ... In 1014, the emperor Vasily II ordered to blind 15 captives of Bulgarian soldiers for which they called him the Bulgarian slayer ... this is also a "merit" Svetoslav and Kievan Rus ... Great Romans were made!
      2. Knizhnik
        Knizhnik 25 September 2013 15: 57 New
        +3
        "Svyatoslav dismissed most of the troops, and the invasion of the Byzantine army came as a surprise to him (the Romans violated this word, which the" barbarians "kept sacred)"
        1. Corneli
          Corneli 25 September 2013 16: 11 New
          +2
          Quote: Knizhnik
          "Svyatoslav dismissed most of the troops, and the invasion of the Byzantine army came as a surprise to him (the Romans violated this word, which the" barbarians "kept sacred)"

          If this is my answer to the question about the "deceitfulness" of the Byzantines, then read my post below ... it just refers to the quote you quoted and absolute deceit.
  6. bya965
    bya965 25 September 2013 10: 50 New
    +6
    We are an ancient people (DNA, unlike historical facts you can not fake) with a rich culture and history. Self-sufficient. We need to go our own way. And so we already lost our ancient writing (Cyril and Methodius) and ancient history (the German historians of Peter I). And to Prince Svyatoslav - Glory!
    In the painting "The capture of the city of Berdaa during the Russian campaign on the Caspian Sea in 943–944. Drawing by N. M. Kochergin, 1947"
    1. Petrol
      Petrol 25 September 2013 11: 15 New
      +1
      I think if you dig deeper then the circle of lies and deceit is like a kaleidoscope and our children absorb it in the lessons ... there are such guardians of the Dawns of Russians as Svetoslav ...
    2. Andrey57
      Andrey57 25 September 2013 13: 19 New
      +4
      Then the chronology of the Rusics is worth remembering - the campaign of 943-944 was in 6452-6453. from the creation of the World in the Star Temple, even then the history of Russian-Slovenes was ancient. By the way, the creation of the World in the Star Temple has nothing to do with the creation of the world in the Christian sense of the word, it was the date of the end of the global war on Earth. And now, on 22 of September, the 7522 year has begun according to the reckoning of the Slovenian Rus.
  7. Aeneas
    Aeneas 25 September 2013 11: 45 New
    0
    Svyatoslav was a very brave warrior, and a strong commander. But it is not in vain that he, and the soldiers, are compared with the Spartans. Svyatoslav and the Spartans were not very strong politicians. Russia, and more precisely Svyatoslav personally, defeated the Khazars and Bulgarians "thanks to" the policy of Byzantium, which was able to achieve its goals with the wrong hands. When Svyatoslav began to try to conduct politics on his own, for example, he wanted to transfer the capital to the Danube, then the Byzantines "set" the same Bulgarians and Pechenegs on him. In addition, historical sources report a version of the ritual murder by the soldiers of Svyatoslav of their brothers in arms who converted to Christianity, after returning from Bulgaria on the way to Kiev. Maybe for this, the Lord punished Svyatoslav, for the pagan Rus did not reach Kiev, and together with Svyatoslav they died on Khortitsa.
    1. Hort
      Hort 25 September 2013 12: 19 New
      +5
      Partially agree, Svyatoslav made several mistakes in politics, than he turned away from himself the same Pechenegs. Prozorov on this subject has a version that in the last major battle with the Greeks, Svyatoslav lost his son, which somewhat undermined the spirit of the prince. and the Pechenegs, seeing that the prince had given slack, were disappointed in him and left.
      Plus, one of the main failures of Svyatoslav can be considered that he did not destroy the Christian lobby in Kiev, which also contributed to the setbacks. Olga and the Christian community from some of the Kiev boyars were negative about the war with the Greeks for obvious reasons.
      Plus, the Bulgarians also dirty tricks and periodically, bribed by the Greeks or out of fear of the Byzantine army, rushed between the parties to the conflict.
      Again, the appropriateness of moving the capital from Kiev to Bulgaria also raises questions. It is clear that Svyatoslav wanted to be away from Olga and the Christian boyars, with whom he was on the counter, but, on the other hand, this caused certain difficulties - a long transition, more time to gather an army, etc.
      Svyatoslav also needed to send ambassadors to the Arabs, with whom the Byzantines fought on the southern borders of their empire and, as an option, conclude an agreement on a joint attack on both sides. And if the Rus conquered Byzantium, then the whole world history and culture would have developed in a completely different way :) Under the influence of our culture.
      Well, as for the fact that the Lord punished Svyatoslav, it was always interesting (since we were talking about higher matters) HOW does the Christian God relate to a pagan who does not just deny his existence, but basically lives, we can say, in a “parallel” the universe ?! That is, he believes in his Gods, has his own worldview, etc.? It’s somehow strange to mix everything together, because even the Bible says that “everyone according to his faith” - therefore, if you continue this phrase, a person receives help and punishments from those Forces in which he believes and with which his worldview is connected and lifestyle;)
      Well, the Russians did not reach Kiev thanks to the intrigues of the Greeks, who bribed the Pecheneg prince Kuryu with his squad (or whatever their army was called there) and they ambushed Khortitsa. Although even the murders of Svyatoslav, the respectful attitude of the Pechenegs to him remained, which is interesting.
      There is a hypothesis that Kurya was a magician or a sorcerer, and remaking the prince's skull in a bowl is a kind of rite to take his strength for himself. something like this :)
      1. Corneli
        Corneli 25 September 2013 13: 48 New
        -1
        Quote: hort
        Plus, the Bulgarians also dirty tricks and periodically, bribed by the Greeks or out of fear of the Byzantine army, rushed between the parties to the conflict.

        Nothing "dirty"! and the fact that he conquered them and some claimed that it was very cool in measures was it like that?
        "They say that having taken Philippopol with battle, he, with his characteristic inhuman ferocity, put on the count of twenty thousand inhabitants remaining in the city and thereby humbled and [curbed] all resistance and ensured humility."Leo Deacon." History ", 6.10. (989–992)
        Quote: hort
        Again, the appropriateness of moving the capital from Kiev to Bulgaria also raises questions. It is clear that Svyatoslav wanted to be away from Olga and the Christian boyars

        By the time of the second campaign Olga had already died, what kind of “Christian boyars2 you say I don’t know. But he wanted to sit in Bulgaria for obvious reasons. I quote from the“ Tale of Bygone Years ”below
        Quote: hort
        There is a hypothesis that Kurya was a magician or a sorcerer, and remaking the prince's skull in a bowl is a kind of rite to take his strength for himself. something like this :)

        Nicephorus I Genic, Byzantine Emperor (802-811). He died in the battle of Vyrbishsky passage with the Bulgarian Khan Krum. From the emperor’s skull, the khan made a feast bowl trimmed with silver. maybe it's just such a strange custom in relation to any "eminent" enemy?
        1. Ingvar 72
          Ingvar 72 25 September 2013 15: 22 New
          +5
          Quote: Corneli
          "They say that taking Filipopol with battle, he, with his characteristic inhuman ferocity, put on the count of twenty thousand inhabitants remaining in the city and thereby humbled and [curbed] all resistance and ensured humility." Leo Deacon. “History”, 6.10. (989–992)

          History, as you know, is written by the winners, and a quote like "thereby humbled, curbed all resistance" is most like an excuse for his own cowardice. The Byzantines loved to embellish their victories, and downplay the importance of defeats.
          1. Corneli
            Corneli 25 September 2013 16: 51 New
            +1
            Quote: Ingvar 72
            History, as you know, is written by the winners, and a quote like "thereby humbled, curbed all resistance" is most like an excuse for his own cowardice. The Byzantines loved to embellish their victories, and downplay the importance of defeats.

            Philippopol (modern Plovdiv), which was discussed - is a Bulgarian city. He planted 20 thousand Bulgarians per stake, not Byzantines. From here, by the way, the opinion went why many Bulgarians began to ask the Byzantines (their sworn enemies for several hundred years). And actually, in Byzantine territory Svyatoslav appeared only not for long. He reached Adrianople, something little understood happened there, and he retreated back to Bulgaria. And a year later, the Byzantines came to him there ...
            1. Ingvar 72
              Ingvar 72 25 September 2013 17: 37 New
              0
              Have you been there? I wouldn’t tear a vest on my chest, claiming about 20 thousand put on a stake. The source clearly smacks of partiality. Moreover, no other source mentions the cruelty of Svyatoslav over the prisoners. Everyone speaks of his honesty, nobility and courage. So let me doubt the sayings of Leo the Deacon.
              Quote: Corneli
              Philippopol (modern Plovdiv), which was discussed - is a Bulgarian city.

              And Constantinople is Turkish.
              1. Bagatur
                Bagatur 25 September 2013 19: 17 New
                0
                Forgive me, but I’m not right .. I’ll just tell you that 100 years after Svetoslav Filipopol stood in ruins ... In Drastr he executed 300 Bulgarian boyars, children were sacrificed ...
              2. Corneli
                Corneli 26 September 2013 01: 42 New
                +1
                Quote: Ingvar 72
                Have you been there? I wouldn’t tear a vest on my chest, claiming about 20 thousand put on a stake. The source clearly smacks of partiality. Moreover, no other source mentions the cruelty of Svyatoslav over the prisoners. Everyone speaks of his honesty, nobility and courage. So let me doubt the sayings of Leo the Deacon.

                The number of victims and the method of their execution is one. Here I agree there may be an exaggeration, as with the number of troops or those who died in battle. But not only Leo writes about this. According to Skilitsa, "the city has become depopulated" (he is talking about Fellipopol) or otherwise "And Svyatoslav went to the capital, fighting and smashing the cities that stand and are still empty."PVL. Such" other "sources will do?
                Quote: Ingvar 72
                And Constantinople is Turkish.

                I was not talking about modern location or belonging. He was then Bulgarian and it was the Bulgarians who died.
                1. Hort
                  Hort 26 September 2013 07: 20 New
                  0
                  Most likely, local residents were executed for violation of any oath or agreement. Previously, it was very severely punished.
                  For example, in Berdaa, our people, too, after taking the city, told the locals that they would not be touched if they promised not to organize uprisings. The townspeople agreed, but the promise was not kept and were slightly reduced in number for this.
            2. Bagatur
              Bagatur 25 September 2013 19: 16 New
              +1
              The defeat of the troops of Svetoslav took place. Then the Bulgarians passed through the Balkans the Romans as allies .. and then, seizing the country by them!
        2. Bagatur
          Bagatur 26 September 2013 16: 27 New
          0
          The Bulgarian of the Jesuit period believed in the so-called. "rent" - the divine power which every man had, and above all the Kan. She was kept everywhere, but in a man's head. Pete from the skull of a defeated enemy is a way to increase your rent. In connection with this, the Bulgarians had a sacred (sacred) murder of the ruler. It happened if he lost his rent in their eyes ... For this, they judged by some kind of ailment ... illness, etc. Then the kana were strangled, according to some information, that’s exactly Krum ended his life ..
      2. Bagatur
        Bagatur 26 September 2013 16: 22 New
        +1
        Plus, the Bulgarians also dirty tricks and periodically, bribed by the Greeks or out of fear of the Byzantine army, rushed between the parties to the conflict.

        If the Greeks were not mistaken, they bought Samy Svetoslav too .... didn’t they pay him that Bulgaria attacked? The Bulgarians will be accused that they fought against Svetoslav, then the Russians will be exactly accused of the Choto fought with Hitler ...
    2. Bagatur
      Bagatur 26 September 2013 16: 20 New
      +1
      By [b] when Svyatoslav began to try to conduct politics on his own, for example, he wanted to transfer the capital to the Danube, then the Byzantines "set" the same Bulgarians and Pechenegs on him. [B] [/ b] [/ b

      And why do Byzantium poison the Bulgarians on Svetoslav? He set them against himself, the Vedas he came to conquer Bulgaria .. so there is nothing to double for the fact that the Bulgarians hated him ...
      1. Corneli
        Corneli 26 September 2013 16: 43 New
        +1
        Quote: bagatura
        And why do Byzantium poison the Bulgarians on Svetoslav? He set them against himself, the Vedas he came to conquer Bulgaria .. so there is nothing to double for the fact that the Bulgarians hated him ...

        It's nice that the forum-Bulgarians are discussing on this subject ... not in vain hoping, all the same look from the "other" side. It’s only a pity that the discus is not too popular (where the stories before the "srach" about that Ukraine and the EU (((unfortunately, the people are smaller.
        A request to the Bulgarians, we can describe in more detail the actions of the sons of Peter during the campaigns of Svyatoslav, I think you have your own research on this topic (if you were interested in them), it would be interesting to listen. Because according to the books that I read, their actions are poorly understood ... then they are for Byzantium, then they are with Svyatoslav ...
        1. Bagatur
          Bagatur 26 September 2013 18: 18 New
          +1
          This is a very big topic ... I'll try to answer. And so ... Still begins with the reign of Simen the Great (893-27 May 927), Prince Boris I the Baptist left the throne, adopted the monastic schema (many sins were committed by the Neg), 52 boyars, he drowned in the shelter that he would keep Christianity in Bulgaria . His first-born Vladimir-Rasate (889-893) ascended the throne; he wanted to return the esic faith in Tangra, for which he paid. Boris, along with his loyalty to the boyars and the third sinah, Simeon overthrew him and blinded him. Then the nationwide proclamation of imon was proclaimed by the prince, Preslav chose the capital and the most important thing - they ANNOUNCED SLAVIC LETTERS SAVIAN EZIK OFFICIAL IN THE STATE !!! The Roman clergy were driven in and their places were taken by the preparation by the disciple Cyril and Methodius of the confessors and book people. Simeon was highly educated. In his youth, he taught mv Magnaurra, a Byzantine university where they prepared the empire. Probably Boris I was preparing sina for the head of the Bulgarian Archdiocese. But he became a prince and a military leader. I won’t write about him in detail. I’ll just say that after the successful wars from Byzantium to Simeon he proclaimed himself “Vasilevs of the Bulgarians and Romans” ie Emperor of two countries. But the most important achievement is the flourishing of the Old Bulgarian book, the reign of Bulgaria in Kolobel Slavic education. He created the Vedas folk culture in the spoken folk language. In those days when in Western Europe they read only in Latin! After the death of Simeon, his syn Peter made peace with Byzantium .. we don’t know all the details but there are three points of lime: 1. The Bulgarian ruler was recognized as the right to call himself "the king (emperor) by the Bulgarian", 2. The Bulgarian Archbishopric was elevated to the Patriarchy, 3. For the first time, the Byzantine princess-granddaughter of Vasileus Roman Lakapin married a foreign ruler .. In Bulgaria, along with the Romanesque queen, many Romans came, the Romans began to penetrate in the courtyard. In addition, Tsar Peter and his co-workers did not strengthen the army, serfdom began, the Bogomil heresy appeared ... The tsar has two Sin-Romanes (b.oc.929) and Boris (b.oc.950). When Svetoslav attacked Bulgaria, the emperor Nikifor Foka, under pressure from the successes of the Russians, proposed an alliance. Boris became a hostage to Constantinople. Peter 927-969 went to the monastery and died on January 30, 970. Boris II was released. But he could not keep Svetoslav ... concluded a contract under pressure of force. The Russian prince left him a crown, but he didn’t have power ... Boris II was captured in Preslav where Ioan Tzimiskhi found him and took the city on April 5, 971. Realistically, the blue Peter didn’t play any special role .. they became an instrument in the hands of Svetoslav and empires. Boris II was forced to remove the signs of imperial power, his brother Roman was made a eunuch. When, around 977, the two of them escaped from the captivity of Boris II by mistake killed the Bulgarian border guards ... Roman announced to the kings but he did not rule, Samuel did it. After the capture of the Roman Romans and his death as a prisoner in about 997, Samuel proclaimed the king to be a Bulgarian, and he ruled desperately to protect the country from Byzantium and his own death. 6X. 1014 g
          1. Corneli
            Corneli 26 September 2013 19: 32 New
            0
            Thank you I would like to clarify a couple of points ...
            Quote: bagatura
            When Svetoslav attacked Bulgaria, the emperor Nikifor Fock, under pressure from the successes of the Russians, proposed an alliance. Boris became a hostage to Constantinople.

            I read that by the end of the first war in Bulgaria, there was a place for an agreement on a military alliance between the Bulgarians and the Byzantines (Nicephorus) reinforced by the marriage of Bulgarian princesses to the sons of the empress. Romana. It seems that they even arrived in Constantinople, but here, as a result of a conspiracy, Nicephorus was killed and plans were frustrated.
            Can you add something about this? Like Boris’s hostage ...
            And it is also interesting how to relate to Tzimiskes in Bulgaria? And to whom is worse to him or Svyatoslav?
            Thanks in advance hi
            1. Bagatur
              Bagatur 26 September 2013 21: 55 New
              +1
              The Bulgarian princes were napril in the hostages of Avo the reign of Nicephorus Fock .. The reason is as follows: in the 20th century Magyars attacked all of Europe. Byzantium paid the Bulgarians for what did not let them rob her snakes. But ... I didn’t give any war help .. Tsar Peter made a separny peace with the Magyars — he robbed Byzantium through Bulgaria, and then they paid for it at the expense of the loot. To avoid a war with the empire, he agreed to send the blue to Constantinople, but they did not marry for the Byzantine princes. All the same, they were the grandchildren of Emperor Roman Lakapin. About the union, it’s full of rights .. Byzantium was counting on a prolonged war between Bulgaria and Svetoslav. She was not frustrated when, at the expense of a weakened Bulgarian kingdom, she received a Russian prince for her neighbor's warlike and unpredictable homeland. Then they made an alliance (probably after the first campaign of Svetoslav) and Roman and Boris II were allowed to go home. But Boris II was then a 30-year-old guy ... an opit had no nikaks. The Bulgarian aristocracy Svetoslav did not want to ... but ... concluded a pact with the devil for the burning of Satan. They didn’t have a useful move. The leader and Jonah Tzimiskes when Boris took Preslav to prisoner Boris II outwardly respected him and called him “King of Bulgaria” .. This was a well-thought-out strategy ... the Byzantine campaign was a help from the Christian empire of the Romans to the Christian Bulgarians against the Hezichists Russi. Thanks UTB and it is necessary to explain how with the troops no more than 000 Romans crossed the Balkans .. they simply missed. Then the Bulgarians and opened the gates of the fortress for the Roman army ... all the same, the Tsar was taken prisoner ... After Svetoslav left, and the fact that Tzimiskes left his troops, he took off his mask. He declared the occupation of the Bulgarian lands part of Byzantium, Preslav called himself Joanopol in honor of himself. After returning to Constantinople, he was in front of the citizenship and forced Boris II to remove the signs of imperial power. For Byzantium, Bulgaria as a state no longer existed ... but very soon the Romans became clear that this was not so. After the death of Tzimiskes in 976, the rulers still free the Bulgarian snake in Western Bulgaria began a war. And she continued until 1018 with the capture of the country by Emperor Vasily II the Bulgarian Slayer ... There is nothing to compare Svetoslav and Yona Tzimiskes for ... we have no sympathy. Together, each, pursuing their own interests, they ruined Bulgaria ... they did not see anything bad from the Bulgarians ...
  8. Corneli
    Corneli 25 September 2013 13: 31 New
    +1
    The beginning of the article is already killing, and the paragraph on arias, kshatriyas and brahmanas ... Well, how can one react normally to this ?:
    Svyatoslav established his control over the mouth of the Danube and Bulgaria. The Russian army, which included allied Bulgarian, Pecheneg and Hungarian detachments, shocked the entire Byzantine empire. The Romans (Greeks) had to go to a world that turned out to be a military trick. Svyatoslav dismissed most of the troops, and the invasion of the Byzantine army came as a surprise to him (the Romans violated this word, which the "barbarians" observed sacredly). After heavy battles, a new peace treaty was concluded. Svyatoslav left Bulgaria, but it was obvious that he would return.

    It is modestly written in this way, but the fact that Nekifor Foka paid “15 gold kentarians (approx. 455 kg)” for an attack on the Bulgarians is not mentioned at all. Further, in the first war, the Byzantines did not fight with the Russians at all! Svyatoslav came and captured Bulgaria there donkey (the Byzantines did not intervene). What kind of "troop deployment" does the author speak about request The same thing about the allegedly "insidious attack" of the Byzantines, which in the first war did not exist at all, and in the second Svyatoslav himself attacked! After the first war and the capture of Bulgaria (968), Svyatoslav left, since the Pechenegs besieged Kiev (there are 2 versions of why, the Byzantines set one by one, the Khazars by the second). Considering that Svyatoslav immediately went on a campaign to the Khazars (969) (in fact, Itil and Semender and Sarkel were captured in it), I believe in Khazars more. All this time, Byzantium and Russia had rather friendly relations. Russian troops were in the forces of Nicephorus Foki in the Cretan campaign (960g). Svyatoslav agreed to the request of the Byzantines for an attack on Bulgaria (at least 3 Byzantine authors speak about this). The Italian ambassador in Constantinople saw Russian ships in the Byzantine fleet in 969.
    And Svyatoslav returned to Bulgaria, in 969, having dealt with the Pechenegs, Khazars ... having buried Olga and dividing his 3 sons into regions. As written in the Tale of Bygone Years:
    "I don’t like to sit in Kiev, I want to live in Pereyaslavtsi on the Danube - for there is the middle of my land, all the blessings flow there: from the Greek land gold, pavoloki, wine, various fruits; silver and horses from the Czech Republic and Hungary; from Russia fur and wax, honey and slave"
    1. brr7710
      brr7710 25 September 2013 17: 34 New
      +4
      Corneli
      Further, in the first war, the Byzantines did not fight with the Russians at all! Svyatoslav came and captured Bulgaria there donkey (Byzantines did not intervene)

      So it was also beneficial for them to pacify the Bulgarians with the hands of Svyatoslav at that time. Therefore, they did not intervene. And as soon as Tsar Peter died, they immediately raised a rebellion in Bulgaria against Svyatoslav by the hands of his sons. This is called indirect exposure polycia.
      1. Bagatur
        Bagatur 25 September 2013 19: 20 New
        +2
        For the Bulgarians, Svetoslav is an enemy, an invader ... I don’t think that he must endure it! It’s another matter that the alliance with the Romes and the enemies completely brought good ... Bulgaria hit Vtsung Tsvang did not have a useful move ..
      2. Corneli
        Corneli 26 September 2013 02: 10 New
        +1
        Quote: brr7710
        So it was also beneficial for them to pacify the Bulgarians with the hands of Svyatoslav at that time. Therefore, they did not intervene. And as soon as Tsar Peter died, they immediately raised a rebellion in Bulgaria against Svyatoslav by the hands of his sons. This is called indirect exposure polycia.

        Nobody denies their benefit, just do not make the Byzantines so super insidious politicians and strategists. Once again, before writing about how the Byzantines wanted or planned something, read what they were doing at that time. Nicephorus (who invited Svyatoslav) fought with the Arabs in all Sicily and Syria (he really didn’t like Arabs very much), at the same time he had to depart from the German Oton 1 in southern Italy. He simply did not have the strength (and desire) to deal with Bulgaria. In addition, before the 2nd war (while Svyatoslav was dealing with the Pechenegs and Khozars), Nicephorus was killed by Tzimiskes (who became the new emperor)
        Tzimiskes had problems (except Svyatoslav and Bulgarians) also above the roof. 3 years of famine in Byzantium (discontent and riots as a result). The Arabs again intensified in the east. At the same time, Nicephorus's nephew, Ward Fock (governor of Antioch), rebelled. In 970, barely repulsing the attack of Svyatoslav near Adrianople, the troops were immediately thrown into Syria to suppress the rebellion. And only after solving these problems somehow Tzimiskesos gathered an army and took up Svyatoslav.
        And by the way, the Bulgarians were the first to start separate negotiations with the Byzantines (it was possible to agree with those, and Svyatoslav was a cruel and unpredictable invader for them). But since the Byzantines were not up to the Bulgarians, the negotiations were inconclusive. In the future, the Bulgarians fought for Svyatoslav, and for Tzimiskes, and against both (they did not have common unity)
    2. derik1970
      derik1970 25 September 2013 19: 35 New
      -2
      you quite correctly told ... but the pagans (present on the site) want to push their homegrown gods (the essence of demons) ... paganism is flourishing in western Europe and we see what all this leads to: a gay parade, lesbian women, bestiality (in Germany already advocate for animals), etc ... is it really that everyone here wants to get the same or is it mishandled Cossacks ??? sometimes it’s disgusting to read comments so praise those present, essentially not understanding what they’re talking about ... and we’ll slide into the Middle Ages, we will worship idols and sacrifice people, pour blood, which in essence is happening, for example, now in Syria. in Syria, type Muslims pour the blood of civilians (including Christians), thereby they make a sacrifice to their pagan god ...
      1. Hort
        Hort 26 September 2013 07: 31 New
        +1
        Do not write heresy, dear. Christianity was also 2 thousand years old, but it did not slide into the Middle Ages.
        In Western Europe, it is not paganism that flourishes, but unculture.

        in Syria, type Muslims pour the blood of civilians (including Christians), thereby making a sacrifice to their pagan god.
        God is one kakbe, they just call him differently
  9. George
    George 25 September 2013 13: 51 New
    10
    Glory to Prince Svyatoslav Igorevich!
    1. Asan Ata
      Asan Ata 26 September 2013 01: 21 New
      +1
      I’m curious, but what kind of work is this?
      1. Hort
        Hort 26 September 2013 07: 39 New
        0
        This is the first version of the draft monument to Svyatoslav for the victory over Khazaria.
        for obvious reasons, it didn’t pass, so there is no David star on the existing monument
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 26 September 2013 13: 58 New
          +1
          Quote: hort
          This is the first version of the draft monument to Svyatoslav for the victory over Khazaria.
          for obvious reasons, it didn’t pass, so there is no David star on the existing monument

          Well yes. Because "Magen-David" as a Jewish symbol appeared only in the 14th century in Central Europe. Prior to this, the Menorah was depicted on Jewish tombstones. But Menorah could not be on the shields of the soldiers of the Khazar Kaganate because for the most part, by the time of their defeat, the Khazars had switched to manning the army at the expense of mercenaries and mainly from Muslims of Central Asia.
          1. Hort
            Hort 26 September 2013 14: 48 New
            0
            but the top was the Jews. Sort of
            1. Corneli
              Corneli 26 September 2013 15: 03 New
              +1
              Quote: hort
              but the top was the Jews. Sort of

              Obviously not purebred, Jews in terms)
              1. Hort
                Hort 27 September 2013 06: 39 New
                0
                well it is clear. This refers to religious affiliation in this case)

                Somewhere I came across a description of the structure of the Khazar community: slaves and lower class, then Bulgars and noble Khazars in the form of mercenaries and the main striking force in the battle and at the top already know the rulers who lived inside the city and made up the main force of the army - the cavalry, Well, Judaism professed
  10. Savva30
    Savva30 25 September 2013 13: 51 New
    +3
    This is about those times, the Eastern scholar-encyclopedist ibn Ruste wrote: “And when a son is born at one of the Rus, he puts a sword on his stomach and says:“ I do not leave you any property except that you will conquer with this sword. ” All male children were future warriors. Yes, and many Slavs possessed military skill. So, the Greek chroniclers noted the presence of women in the army of Svyatoslav, who fight with no less fury than men.It’s nice to read this ... I personally don’t have the “firm hand” of the ruler - Rus.
  11. mithridate
    mithridate 25 September 2013 14: 28 New
    +2
    we judge those events by written sources. And who said that in these sources everything is described exactly as it was in reality?
    1. Doctorleg
      Doctorleg 25 September 2013 23: 20 New
      0
      That's it! Therefore, historians seek confirmation from several unrelated sources. and better on the opposite side
  12. Ross
    Ross 25 September 2013 15: 02 New
    +3
    Quote: Corneli
    And Svyatoslav returned to Bulgaria, in 969, having dealt with the Pechenegs, Khazars ... having buried Olga and dividing his 3 sons into regions. As written in the Tale of Bygone Years:
    "I don’t like to sit in Kiev, I want to live in Pereyaslavtsy on the Danube - for there is the middle of my land, all the blessings flow there: from the Greek land gold, pavoloki, wines, various fruits; from the Czech Republic and from Hungary silver and horses; from Russia furs and wax, honey and slave "


    Svyatoslav built a single Slavic state, which could help the Slavs withstand the onslaught of the West and its ideological cover - Christianity. He was a wise and far-sighted ruler. The trouble is that such bribed "friends" always clean up.
    1. Bagatur
      Bagatur 25 September 2013 19: 23 New
      +1
      No one in Bulgaria Svetoslav called! And I don’t think that he was thinking about “Slavic unity” robbing a snake and Naro, that’s all ... aggression as aggression is no different from others!
      1. ivanovbg
        ivanovbg 25 September 2013 21: 47 New
        +2
        Protection is generally near to your site, but it’s unbelievable that I’ve gotten a brother and forever guilty for nothing ???
        1. Bagatur
          Bagatur 25 September 2013 22: 28 New
          +1
          Moth? Not all harassment, but to the Kazaks they are impoverished! Ako ti se haresva is fable for the hilyadletnata Rusko-Bulgar slaughter friendship from century to century ... Or is it crazy how Svetoslav exempted him from romance ??? The truth is simple: they cloak mu and that they svrshva mrsnata work-razipva Bulgaria! But from where did they know in Constantinople that a bunch of coetos were loosened up from you, huh hapetah? You know what remains of the assumptions ... I didn’t pull it off and offend anyone, hele was forgiven from before 1000. But a certain Narichama is poor with true names for them! Protect 99% of Rusnacite Hal Haber Xi Nyamat from Bulgaria history (for whom it’s not my fault) .. and Si live with the iluziata Th Bulgarite s Cherni thank you Koito s forever for everything! We offer you yes, let’s say good-bye between si..acakas write in the profile of ya i'll give you a favor .. and we can argue without yes we’ll rule stupid reprisals before the audience such audience I have a lot of good intentions of the choir!
          1. Glory333
            Glory333 25 September 2013 23: 12 New
            +2
            Comrade, to begin with, the Bulgarians in those days were not a single Slavic nation, but were divided into the Turkic-Khazar elite — the Bulgarian nomads who formed the basis of the army and the Slavs who were engaged in agriculture. Most likely, Svyatoslav fought and repressed, and it was precisely the Bulgarian nomads whom he considered enemies like the Pechenegs.
            1. Bagatur
              Bagatur 26 September 2013 16: 35 New
              +1
              Dear friend!
              Bulgaria baptize in 864 Prince Boris I 952-889 (120 years before the baptism of Russia)! not everyone agreed, the Bulgarian nobility raised a rebellion. And then he was 52 boyly, Bulgarian clan under the law on punishment of a rebellion against a ruler from God, executed to the ground. To everyone! From newborns to 100 year olds ... Then in 886. he Boris I received the disciples of Cyril and Methodius, and in 893. The Slavic writing was conducted as official in the state .. Until 970 I don’t think that it can be divided into Slavs and Bulgarians .. And because the Bulgarians are some wild nomads, I don’t know who told you ... come and see what cities like Pliska and Preslav built ..
              1. Glory333
                Glory333 26 September 2013 19: 07 New
                0
                Dear brother!
                There was still a division in those days, because there was also Volga Bulgaria where Slavs did not smell but there were cities. And for example, I’m not offended by the “wild nomads,” the Ukrainian (Russian) Cossacks Cossacks originally descended from Turkic tribes: Torques, Berendeys ... who escaped from the Polovtsy under the protection of the Russian principalities, these tribes, like Bulgarians, became related with the Slavs, adopted the Slavic language and culture, my family is also a Cossack family and I see nothing wrong with that.
                The adoption of Christianity was everywhere accompanied by great cruelties.
          2. ivanovbg
            ivanovbg 26 September 2013 01: 02 New
            +1
            Priridzham se kzm vzgleda, than history and politics, attributed kam minaloto. Zatova, sometime obszhdame minaloto sos your brother, it’s rare and you shouldn’t give a moment to the accentiogram, they wouldn’t unite, but not to the namesake, koito wouldn’t separate.

            A lot of hubo da da ima national pride and well-being. But the rag is eaten and the feeling for the gloom. I am serving in the Bulgarian army and I am taking an officer from the reserve, but I am familiar with avatars on the BA. Good to know the military commissar history in Bulgaria. Patriot Not mi lipsvat nito knowledge, nito well-being. And contrary to Comrade Vinagi, I’m a lot of attentive;

            And tee si is a lot of signal. When you take in the light in black and white, do not see the shade on the sivoto. And do not you say yes to cutting and not cutting grades. Zatova ty right rushing.

            I lived in SZ and rented show performances on the Baga tour. Even poeticly remembering:

            In Tozi, the hour is crooked
            Century Ek awakening for no bran
            Dali shche we will seme proklnato
            Or a breath on the way from the volcano

            A lot of beautiful and impressive. Obacha for all slyly ima time and flesh. And your choir directed a lot of hubbubs (with arrows, sword, copy and fire), but the performance was pretentiously chauvinistic before guests from Greece. Shchah yes potya in the earth. And segti se izyavyavash by absolutely eating will start a tuk. Nadiava may well accept moyata, who is well-intentioned and constructive in criticism.

            Congratulations, Ivan :)
            1. Bagatur
              Bagatur 26 September 2013 16: 41 New
              0
              Hello Ivane!
              We’ll explain a little bit with Baga-tour. Nyama beggarly generally ... Right now, it’s a matter of pre-signaling system ... Ami Togava, with pleasure I feel your version for visiting a tourist from Kiev Rus and the tech guide Svetoslav ..)))) They don’t prick Turkish people with shock and horror, they don’t cut Slavic and Orthodox "brother" ..there is another zamitame under a yurgan .. friend e inquire what in the case of the last one who flooded Svetoslav e koi sa Bulgarite .. As soon as you blame the Rusnatsi a little. Ami couldn’t, yes, let’s say something ridiculous to write a bunch of absurdities ...
    2. Fin
      Fin 25 September 2013 23: 54 New
      +1
      Quote: Ross
      Svyatoslav built a single Slavic state,

      "But Svyatoslav, an example of great commanders, is not an example of a great sovereign, for he respected the glory of victories more than a state good and, capturing the poet’s imagination with his character, deserves the historian’s reproach." N.M. Karamzin.
      In short, man is war. They were all afraid, therefore, and persuaded the Pechenegs. Bulgarians could, but Byzantines could.
      Olga was involved in state affairs. After her death, he immediately went to fight in Bulgaria, from where he did not return.
  13. brr7710
    brr7710 25 September 2013 17: 27 New
    0
    Quote: Corneli
    Quote: Ingvar 72
    Did the Pechenegs' ambush appear on the thresholds itself? The Byzantine Empire often fought with the wrong hands. And Russia greatly interfered with them.

    The "Tale of Bygone Years" calls the organizers of the ambush not Greeks, but Pereyaslavl (Bulgarians), and John Skilica reports that the Byzantine embassy, ​​on the contrary, asked the Pechenegs to let the Russians go.
    As an option. Russia, Byzantium interfered EXTREMELY weakly, it is pathetic fiction mainly. the Bulgarians, or Arabs, or Germans / Sicilians interfered with them much more than those they fought non-stop.
    For example, according to one version, Nekifor Foka became enraged when the Bulgarians came to him for a tribute and after that asked Svyatoslav to attack them. At the same time, Byzantium fought with the German Emperor in Italy, with the Arams in Sicily, at the same time there were uprisings in Asia Minor and a protracted war in Syria with the Saracens. And then the Bulgarians pinned down. And Svyatoslav was far away, who thought he would throw such a number


    Do you truly believe in the Tale of Bygone Years?
    1. Corneli
      Corneli 26 September 2013 02: 28 New
      +1
      Quote: brr7710
      Do you truly believe in the Tale of Bygone Years?

      I cited a Russian source, in confirmation of my words, if I brought a Byzantine one, they could say "Greeks lied"). By the way, directly written sources on the events of those times (Bulgarian wars) are: Leo Deacon, John Skilitsa, PVL - they are the main ones. Konstantin Manassia, Zonar, Stepanos Asohik, Yahya of Antioch - minor. So the point here is not in my holy faith, but in the scarcity of the sources themselves. and I think it’s much more useful for education and adequacy to confirm my words with a quote from the historical record than just write: “Svyatoslav was a hero and a good man, and the Byzantines are cunning, lying traitors! - I know everything!”
  14. Igor39
    Igor39 25 September 2013 18: 00 New
    +1
    Even then, the Russians understood what evil the Jews were doing and extinguished them.
  15. ivanovbg
    ivanovbg 25 September 2013 19: 50 New
    +6
    I look forward to continuing how Svyatoslav the Brave defeated the Khazar Khaganate

    After all, the Khazar Kaganate - a creeping serpent, a filthy idol - destroyed Great Bulgaria and expelled us, modern Bulgarians on the Balkan Peninsula. And they could live shoulder to shoulder with the Russian and be a single, great nation.

    Russians will be surprised, but in the modern history of Europe there is no Khazar Khaganate. All historians together seemed to have taken water in their mouths. If someone gives a hint about HC, they will immediately expel him from work and until the end of his life he will not perceive such truthfulness in any humanitarian institution, even as a janitor, cleaner or source. I have already written about how a "scientific" dialogue about the Holocaust is being conducted in the Jewish (op) Union, with the appointment of six to five years in prison to every non-Jew who wants to objectively and impartially investigate this topic.

    If the author has time, let him look at my article “Are the Slavs Bulgarians”? There I also mentioned Svyatoslav Slither.
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 26 September 2013 03: 12 New
      +1
      Quote: ivanovbg
      I look forward to continuing how Svyatoslav the Brave defeated the Khazar Khaganate
      If the author has time, let him look at my article “Are the Slavs Bulgarians”? There I also mentioned Svyatoslav Slither.

      Professionally crashed. True, I still didn’t understand why, after the defeat of the Khazar Kaganate and until the middle of the 15th century, the Russian states made no attempts to seize the territories of the lower Volga region, but this is another story.
      By the way, the original Bulgarians are certainly not Slavs. Not for nothing that the Volga Bu (o) Lgaria, which retained its linguistic and ethnic identity, was the basis for the formation of the Tatar people.
  16. Black
    Black 25 September 2013 20: 34 New
    -1
    Quote: Igor39
    Even then, the Russians understood what evil the Jews were doing and extinguished them.

    laughing "Beat f * and * do-save pagan Russia !!" It is of course! And so it has been since then. What do not talk about, will end either "about women" or "about f * and * dov."
  17. Glory333
    Glory333 25 September 2013 23: 03 New
    -1
    An example of Princess Olga's weak mind is a vivid example of why women should not be allowed to power.
    A recent example in Ukraine is Yulia Tymoshenko, who simply signed a flashy absurdly unfavorable gas contract for the Ukrainian economy.
    1. Corneli
      Corneli 26 September 2013 02: 36 New
      +2
      Quote: Glory333
      An example of Princess Olga's weak mind is a vivid example of why women should not be allowed to power.
      A recent example in Ukraine is Yulia Tymoshenko, who simply signed a flashy absurdly unfavorable gas contract for the Ukrainian economy.

      Let's not talk about Yulia, as they say sad But explain why, in your opinion, Olga is "weak in mind"?
      1. regsSSSR
        regsSSSR 26 September 2013 03: 27 New
        0
        I'm sorry to get in
        An interesting discussion is instructive, and although I am not a strong connoisseur of precisely this topic, I would like to ask you here - tell me where you get historical information from.

        Yes, and do not count for daring, but I would like to ask you why, with your good readiness, you have such a dumb Avotark, it seems to me that it scares half of the readers from you to turn the selected Avatar is what you pay attention to first and foremost (if I am unmistakable, this character of warcravt is really in a bad perspective) ) but I can be mistaken and it’s only purely my point of view as a designer and an artist accustomed to look at the details, well, just in my opinion your choice of an avatar is unsuccessful, he doesn’t live with your texts!
        I apologize in advance if I didn’t set goals to dwell on you hi
        1. Corneli
          Corneli 26 September 2013 06: 19 New
          +1
          Quote: regressSSSR
          - Tell me where do you get historical information?

          At a young age (when there was no neta), I read a lot of history books. Therefore, now there is no particular problem recalling an event, and you just google it, you find the author and text and copy it) Even if you don’t remember the details, it’s still quite easy to find the required one and clarify it.
          Quote: regressSSSR
          why, at your good readiness, you have such a dumb Avotark, it seems to me that it frightens half of the readers from you to turn the selected Avatar is what you pay attention to first and foremost (if I am unmistakable, this is a character of warcravt, really in a bad perspective))

          Yes, from Warcraft, Ilidan. It’s just that when I played it and a character really liked it, or rather a movie (from which I took a picture). To be honest, I didn’t even think that she might “scare” someone) When I made the account I installed it, I had the same on Skype)
          P.S. You did not offend me) hi
          1. regsSSSR
            regsSSSR 26 September 2013 23: 19 New
            0
            Corneli
            Yes, from Warcraft, Ilidan. It’s just that when I played it and a character really liked it, or rather a movie (from which I took a picture). To be honest, I didn’t even think that she might “scare” someone) When I made the account I installed it, I had the same on Skype)


            not well, not even to frighten)) I apparently got a little clumsy. It is more likely to draw initial incorrect conclusions about the person himself. It’s just that usually ava from games and Hollywood action films are more often put by young visitors to the site, well, roughly speaking (children)) older and more intelligent people usually choose ava according to the topic of the corresponding site or their accessory, that is, ava as well as the text should mean something or reflect some kind of relation to those or other things, well, it's just a purely psychological device, and when you and I clashed in a verbal battle, that was what really bothered me at first, your avtarka and under the Ukrainian banner looked like an ava of a young, fabulously Ukrainian fighter (they like to put something like that) and it doesn’t correspond to the profile picture of the electronics)) but most likely I’m just fiddling with the details, it’s professionally with me))
            But just do Blizzard well done they have excellent games and great videos that are the best in the world) by the way, I played pretty well their other playing brainchild, Starcraft even managed to get to the star in battles over the network 1 on 1 (master league) but then got tired of a bit of very nimble fighters from the big leagues (true animals) with such a speed, I already did not succeed in moving the mouse with the mouse))
      2. Glory333
        Glory333 26 September 2013 10: 16 New
        +1
        Because at the time when her son was at war with the mortal enemy of the Slavs - Byzantium, Olga surrounded herself by the Byzantines, adopted the enemy religion and propagandized her.
        By the way, in the Roman Empire, Christianity was also initially accepted mainly by women, and now go to church, or go to the Amway meeting - there are also women.
    2. Bagatur
      Bagatur 27 September 2013 17: 37 New
      0
      Catherine the Great is also a woman .. if they were mistaken)))
  18. Doctorleg
    Doctorleg 25 September 2013 23: 17 New
    0
    Quote: Savva30
    This is about those times, the Eastern scholar-encyclopedist ibn Ruste wrote: “And when a son is born at one of the Rus, he puts a sword on his stomach and says:“ I do not leave you any property except that you will conquer with this sword. ” All male children were future warriors. Yes, and many Slavs possessed military skill. So, the Greek chroniclers noted the presence of women in the army of Svyatoslav, who fight with no less fury than men.It’s nice to read this ... I personally don’t have the “firm hand” of the ruler - Rus.

    However ... Instead of working, is it better to go the long way? In those days, it was accepted. Those who worked for people were not considered, and mocked at them as they wanted. But now it's strange to hear. And if this quote is true, then it seems that either the Rus were a separate people, or the so-called combatants. After all, someone had to work, and not just fight.
  19. Doctorleg
    Doctorleg 25 September 2013 23: 40 New
    +1
    [quote = brr7710] [quote = Corneli] [quote = Ingvar 72]
    Do you firmly believe in the Tale of Bygone Years? [/ Quote]
    For lack of a stamp we write in simple :) Do you have more reliable sources?
  20. Ross
    Ross 25 September 2013 23: 48 New
    0
    Quote: DoctorOleg
    And if this quote is true, then it seems that either the Rus were a separate people, or the so-called combatants. After all, someone had to work, and not just fight.


    Each plowman could join the ranks of the militia. But from childhood military training was certainly taught by boyars.
    1. Doctorleg
      Doctorleg 26 September 2013 00: 31 New
      0
      As far as I understood from the read books there was no militia - professionals fought. The peasants did not have a chance against them - they fought with a sword and bow, and they required constant exercise. Therefore, the armies were small. It seems that the nomads all fought.
  21. Black
    Black 26 September 2013 00: 00 New
    0
    Quote: Ross
    But from childhood military training was certainly taught by boyars.

    Warriors-boyars ... How is it?
    1. Doctorleg
      Doctorleg 26 September 2013 00: 33 New
      0
      Quote: Chen
      Quote: Ross
      But from childhood military training was certainly taught by boyars.

      Warriors-boyars ... How is it?

      Perhaps then the boyars appeared - close to the princes. And they always fought
    2. Corneli
      Corneli 26 September 2013 02: 14 New
      +4
      Quote: Chen
      Warriors-boyars ... How is it?

      It was later that the "boyars" became fat, bearded uncles ... forever dissatisfied with everything. And initially, the boyars were the same feudal knights (if in the European manner), the closest associates of the prince (who later received land and power from him)
  22. Irokez
    Irokez 26 September 2013 00: 02 New
    +2
    Right now it’s hard to say what actually happened in those distant times. Many original sources have been lost or simply rewritten in a favorable light for certain circles and politicians, and right now we can talk about who is good and who is bad and who won whom. If right now you look at the past 100 years, so many enemies have reconciled and united in alliances and then back, and for the same reason in those days there could be many intrigues in politics and distortions of reality.
    As far as many wars go between the religions of Islam and Christianity. In those days, there was Byzantine Christianity (we are his heirs) and Roman (Catholics), and there was also intrigue and friction between them, like everyone with Islam.
    Christianity is also not what Christ carried in the faith, but rather something is distorted, but the situation is different, namely, right now that Orthodox Christianity spread rot all over the world and it is not surprising that Svyatoslav was on the side of Byzantium because he could understand that ancient geopolitics when Byzantine Christianity was between two lights Catholics and Muslims (remember the crusade when they stormed Constantinople).
    Pagans, Vedas and so on are also faith, and by the way a certain understanding of the world and world order, not only of life on earth, but also of space and many knowledge lost right now. It could be that the Vedic and Christian direction went side by side, although with some friction as right now in Russia, for example, but there could be great excesses and unrest incited by the enemies of Russia. And right now we are discussing those events and we cannot really reconcile where and where and just guess at the past, it is not clear who compiled the sources.
    The history of all Slavs is large and ancient, and our brains are still powdering to us that we are dark tribes without a kind and history (such as peasants lapotniki and mediocrity).
    Surely in those days, right now, Russia stood for peace and the normal existence of all peoples and religions against lies and deceit of cunning and greedy enemies. Therefore, there were wars and campaigns, and right now, the winner took away from the vanquished values ​​and established his order (who is democracy and who is king).
    1. Doctorleg
      Doctorleg 26 September 2013 00: 27 New
      0
      In the days of Svyatoslav, Christianity had not yet split, although there seemed to be friction.
      1. ivanovbg
        ivanovbg 26 September 2013 01: 11 New
        +1
        There were friction, and even what. The baptism of Bulgaria in 865 was one of the first open confrontations between Constantinople and Rome, although an official split occurred already in 1054.
      2. Russkiy_Prapor
        Russkiy_Prapor 26 September 2013 01: 45 New
        +1
        Svyatoslav burned the church, and of the Christians he only endured his mother: Princess Olga. Then his illegitimate son, Vladimir, killed his brothers (legal heirs) and baptized Russia by force to strengthen his power. And with this treacherous deed all our troubles began: the baptism of all bastards opened the way to Russia, Prince Vladimir, the enemy of the people.
        1. Bagatur
          Bagatur 26 September 2013 18: 23 New
          +1
          If not Vladimir, everything is exactly ... baptized by Rus when someday ...
  23. Corneli
    Corneli 26 September 2013 03: 00 New
    +1
    Since the article and the conversation about military valor and Svyatoslav in particular, I would like to hear the opinion of members of the forum on this:
    "he did not accept the call and added mocking words that he supposedly understands his advantage better than the enemy, and if the emperor does not want to live anymore, that is, tens of thousands of other paths to death; let him choose whichever he wants."John Skylitz" Review of Stories "
    - Svyatoslav’s response to the proposal of John Tzimiskes (Byzantine emperor) to Svyatoslav’s proposal to solve the war by a duel between them, during the siege of Dorostol.
    Why did the emperor suggest such a thing? And who would win if Svyatoslav agreed?
    1. Hort
      Hort 26 September 2013 07: 50 New
      0
      perhaps he considered John a non-warrior and unworthy of a duel?
      1. Corneli
        Corneli 26 September 2013 12: 29 New
        0
        Quote: hort
        perhaps he considered John a non-warrior and unworthy of a duel?

        Perhaps, but ... Do you think that he had not heard anything about John before, or could not imagine who it was? And you are not surprised by the fact that the emperor even challenged such a thing, did he really know who? (And the Byzantines won, it was just a siege that dragged on ...)
    2. Bagatur
      Bagatur 26 September 2013 18: 27 New
      +1
      But is it possible to trust the Romance chronicles for everything? True, Tsimiskhi is a professional; he could and would like to meet in a duel with Svetoslav. But .. for what risk is needed when everyone understood that there is no Russian devatz from the besieged city .. But this option is also possible, Svetoslav offered Vasilevs podratsa and he refused it ... it seems to me a lot. And then they thought that the Russian prince refused the duel .. it is necessary to preserve the face of the God-protected Vasilevs Roma ...
      1. Corneli
        Corneli 26 September 2013 19: 59 New
        0
        Quote: bagatura
        But is it possible to trust the Romance chronicles for everything?

        No, of course) they are interested persons)
        Quote: bagatura
        But .. for what risk is needed when everyone understood that the Russians have no devats from the besieged city ..

        On the one hand, I agree, on the other ... there was an attempt of rebellion in the capital, the siege of Dorostol was prolonged and fraught with heavy losses, and John's main problems (and interest) were more likely in Syria.
        Quote: bagatura
        And such an option is also possible, Svetoslav suggested Vasilevs Podrats and he refused it, but it seems to me a lot. And then they thought that the Russian prince refused the duel .. it is necessary to preserve the face of the God-protected Vasilevs Roma ...

        It is also quite possible, given that Leo is silent about this as a partisan, and only Skilica writes, who lived later ...
        1. sarmat-4791
          sarmat-4791 29 September 2013 19: 25 New
          0
          You can read Shvedov, he has some versions of what they are silent about in various chronicles
  24. brr7710
    brr7710 26 September 2013 06: 52 New
    +3
    [quote = derik1970] you quite rightly told ... but the pagans (present on the site) want to push their homegrown gods (the essence of demons) ... paganism is flourishing in western Europe and we see what all this leads to: a geyparad, lesbians, bestiality (in Germany they are already advocating for animals), etc ... do all those present here really want to get the same or are they mishandled Cossacks ??? it’s disgusting to read sometimes the comments so praise those present, essentially not understanding what they are talking about ... so we’ll slide into the Middle Ages, we will worship idols and sacrifice people, pour blood, which in essence is happening, for example, now in Syria. in Syria, type Muslims pour the blood of civilians (including Christians), thereby they make a sacrifice to their pagan god ... [quote]

    And here paganism and gay parades. Ksatiti most of the Europeans are just Christians (Protestants), not pagans. They regularly go to church, but if there is no god in the soul, then at least go to church, at least do not go, there will be no sense.
    1. sarmat-4791
      sarmat-4791 29 September 2013 19: 23 New
      0
      Yes, in the days of “paganism” Rome became famous for its debauchery, then the Orthodox Byzantium was noted, then Rome again with its Popes (some give evidence that some Popes were mothers). LGBT people do not care about religion, where they give relief - there they are in the ass and climb.
  25. Xay
    Xay 22 October 2013 11: 39 New
    0
    Christianity then acted as an information weapon that enslaved neighboring regions. I AGREE IN FULL .....