Day of Military Glory of Russia - Battle of Kulikovo 1380

Day of Military Glory of Russia - Battle of Kulikovo 1380



September 21 celebrates the Day of Military Glory of Russia - the Victory Day of the Russian regiments led by Grand Duke Dmitry Donskoy over the Mongol-Tatar troops in the Kulikovo battle in 1380.

Terrible disasters brought the Tatar-Mongol yoke to the Russian land. But in the second half of the 14 century, the disintegration of the Golden Horde began, where one of the oldest emirs, Mamai, became the de facto ruler. At the same time, Russia was in the process of forming a strong centralized state by uniting Russian lands under the rule of the Moscow principality.

And it’s really impossible to overestimate the impact of this victory on the rise of the spirit, moral emancipation, the rise of optimism in the hearts of thousands and thousands of Russian people in connection with the aversion of the threat, which many considered deadly for the world order, which was already unstable at that troubled, fraught with changeable time.



Like most of the other significant events of our past, the battle on the Kulikovo field is surrounded by many textbook legends that sometimes completely supplant the real historical knowledge. The recent 600th anniversary undoubtedly exacerbated this situation, triggering a flood of popular pseudo-historical publications, the circulation of which, of course, was many times greater than the circulation of some serious studies.
The objects of unfair study, as well as conscious or naive falsification of steel, and especially specific issues related to the details of the weapons and equipment of Russian soldiers and their opponents. Actually, our review is devoted to the consideration of these problems.
Unfortunately, we haven’t yet had any serious research on this topic. True, at one time the study of Russian and Mongolian armament second floor. XIV century. our well-known gun expert A.N. Kirpichnikov was engaged, but he suffered an undeniable failure: the extreme, as it seemed to him, scarcity of archaeological Russian sources according to arms made him turn, first of all, to the written sources of the Kulikovo cycle, ignoring the fact that the text “Tales of the Mamai Massacre” - its main source - was formed by the beginning of the 16th century, and in the absence of “archaeological” thinking in medieval people most of the weapons were a copyist introduced from modern reality to him, including, for example, guns-squeals. At the same time, the Tatar weapons of Kirpichnikov described, according to I.Plano Karpini, to a magnificent, detailed and accurate source ... 130-year-old from the Kulikov battle of old.

Russian weapons of the last third of the XIV century. not represented by a large number of copies, and images. The main sources originate from the northern regions - Novgorod, Pskov. But the center - Moscow, Vladimir, and the east - Pereyaslav Ryazansky (now Ryazan), and the west - Minsk, Vitebsk talk about a single military culture; regional differences were manifested only in details (most likely, related to the sources of imports).

The basis of the Russian troops were the squads of the princes, which consisted in the majority of heavily armed cavalry. City militia consisted of foot connections. In addition, on foot combat, the warriors also fought no worse than on horseback. So the ratio in the battle of horse and foot was not constant. Equally poorly differentiated weapons for horsemen and footmen (except for copies).

The offensive weapon of Russia included swords, sabers, battle axes, spears and darts, bows and arrows, maces and drawstrings. Swords were dominated by the European type - with a blade in the form of an elongated triangle, sharp pointed end, with narrow valleys or faceted. Crosshair - long, straight or slightly curved - with the ends down, the top in the form of a flattened ball. The handle could be single or half length. Part of the swords, of course, imported. Russian sabers XIV century. "Live" unknown. Presumably, they differed little from the Horde. European infantry bladed weapons — short and medium length: daggers, including long, faceted - “konchary”, long combat knives - “cords” were imported (or manufactured according to imported models). Battle axes are more or less uniform in shape, their surface is often decorated with a pattern. There were also axes-maces - with a massive spherical eye and ear aperture. They carried axes in special leather cases, sometimes with a rich appliqué.

Spears better reflected the specifics of foot and equestrian combat. Nevertheless, the spears were dominated by a universal type, with a narrow, flattened-faceted tip, often with a faceted sleeve. The special equestrian peak had a very narrow, square cross-section tip and a conical sleeve. The roatina for foot combat was distinguished by a huge, up to 50 cm long, leafy tip and thick short shaft. Darts (“sulitsy”) were imported, in particular, from the German states, as well as from the Golden Horde, as reported by “Zadonschyna”.



Russian bows were made up of parts - handles, shoulders and horns, glued together from layers of wood, horns and boiled tendons. The bow was wrapped with a tape boiled in the drying of birch bark. Onions were kept in leather leather. Arrows with faceted or flat tips were worn in a steppe-type bark or leather quiver - in the form of a narrow long box. The quiver was sometimes decorated with rich leather appliqué.

In the XIV century. once very popular maces with large faceted spikes disappear from the military use of Russia: they are replaced by the shestopery favorite by the Horde. Kisteni - combat weights connected to the handle with a belt or chain, apparently, have not lost their former popularity.

Russian armor of the time consisted of a helmet, armor and shield. There are no written and archaeological data about braces and leggings, although the leggings were undoubtedly used since the 12th century, as indicated by the figurative sources of the 12th — 14th centuries.

Russian helmets XIV century. they are known only from images: these are the spheroconical head-plates, traditional for Russia, sometimes low and rounded, with a low conical underside. Sometimes more elongated shape. Crowned helmets are almost always balls, occasionally the cone converges on the tip. There were no “Yalovtsy” - leather triangular flags attached on very long spiers (like the spiers themselves) - Russian helmets did not have this time. Their mention in the manuscripts and incunabula "Tales of the Mamai Massacre" is a sure sign of the date of the text: not earlier than the end of the 15th century, when this adornment appeared on Russian helmets in imitation of the East. The warrior’s neck and throat were protected by a barmitsa, sometimes quilted, made of felt or leather, but usually chain mail. To it, at the temples, rectangular-shaped naushi could be attached, sometimes two or three - one above the other.

A significant place in the armament of Russian soldiers occupied, apparently, imported helmets. “Zadonshchina” mentions “German Shelomes”: most likely, these were head-dresses with a low rounded or pointed dome and rather wide, slightly lowered fields, so popular in Europe among foot soldiers, but sometimes used by horsemen. The princes defended their heads, according to the information of the same “Zadonshchina”, “Cherkassian shelema,” that is, produced in the lower Dnieper region or in the Kuban region; in any case, these were the products of the masters of the Mamayev ulus of the Golden Horde. Apparently, the high prestige of the Horde gunsmiths masters (as well as jewelers - the authors of “Monomakh’s hat”) did not lose in the eyes of the highest nobility of Russia due to hostile relations with the Horde as a state.

Significantly more information about the Russian armor of the XIV century. Judging by archaeological, graphic and written sources, the main types of armor in Russia then were mail, lamellae and plate-nashivnoy armor. Mail was a more or less long shirt with a slit at the collar and on the hem, weighing from 5 to 10 kg. The rings were made of round wire in cross section, but in the XIV century. chain mail borrowed from the East - from flat rings begins to spread. Its name - Baidana, bodana - goes back to the Arabic-Persian word "bodan" - body, body. Usually the chain mail was worn on its own, but notable and rich warriors, because of its vulnerability to arrows, the chain armor was hooked under other types of armor.

An incomparably safer (although it is about 1,5 times heavier) was a lamella shell - from steel plates interconnected by straps, or braid or cords. The plates were narrow or almost square in shape with a rounded upper edge. The protective qualities of lamellar armor, tested experimentally, are exceptionally high; he did not hold down movements. In Russia, he was known for a long time. Even the Slavs borrowed it from the Avars in the VIII — IX centuries. Chainmail spread around IX. from Europe and from the East at the same time. The last - after the X century. - a plate-embroidered armor appeared in Russia - from iron plates, sometimes of a scaly form, sewn on a soft - leather or woven - base. This type of armor from Byzantium came to us. In the XIV century. under the Mongolian influence, the plates acquired an almost square shape, they were sewn or riveted to the base by means of paired holes located in one of the upper corners of the plate. Variations in the location and number of plates - to what extent they, like scales, find each other - determined the qualities of this armor. More reliable - with a large overlap - was both heavier and less flexible.
The Mongolian influence affected the fact that the plates were sewn not only outside, but also from the inside of the base, so that only rows of rivets were visible from above; the front surface of the base began to be covered with bright rich fabric - velvet or cloth, or good tanned skin. Often in the same Russian armor of the XIV century. Several types of armor were combined, for example, a lamellar shell with a fringe, armored sleeves and a hem (or a separate skirt) made of embroidered plates, and even beneath this all mail. At the same time, another, Mongolian, borrowing came into vogue - a mirror, that is, a steel disk, strongly or slightly convex, fastened independently on belts, either sewn or riveted in the middle of the breast part of the shell.



As the sewn legs, generally not too popular in Russia, used mainly mailing stockings. Judging by the images, the greaves from one forged plate, fastened in front on the shins, could also be used. From the Balkans could come in the last third of the XIV century. the original cover of the upper chest and back, shoulders and neck - lamellar barmas with a standing, lamellar collar. The helmets, as well as the plates of the shells of the nobility, were partially or completely gold.

In the epoch of the Kulikovo battle, Russian shields were no less diverse, and Moscow was famous for its production, judging by Zadonschina. The shields were round, triangular, drop-shaped (and the triangular ones at that time clearly supplanted the more archaic drop-shaped ones). Sometimes a novelty was used - a shield in the form of an elongated rectangle or a trapezoid with a convex vertical trough along the axis - “paveza”.

Overwhelmingly, shits were made from planks, covered with leather and linen, and painted with patterns. They, as a rule, did not have any metal parts, with the exception of the rivets that secured the belt-grip system.


Russian shield. Reconstruction M.Gorelika, master L.Parusnikov. (State Historical Museum)


The squads of the Lithuanian princes, vassals of Dimitry of Moscow, were not very different from the actual Russian soldiers in terms of the central European nature of the weapons. The types of armor and offensive weapons were the same; differed only in the details of the form of helmets, swords and daggers, cut armor.
For the troops Mamaia can assume no less unity weapons. This is due to the fact that, in spite of the opinion that was firmly established in our historiography (rightly not shared by most foreign researchers), in the territories of the Golden Horde, as well as the western part of the Zhagatai ulus (Central Asia) and even in the northern territories of Hulaguid Iran, the lands ruled by Chinggis . Those who became Muslims, - formed a single organic subculture, part of which was weapons, military costume and equipment. The presence of identity in no way denied the open nature of the Golden Horde, in particular, culture, with its traditional ties with Italy and the Balkans, Russia and the Carpathian-Danube region on the one hand, with Asia Minor, Iran, Mesopotamia and Egypt - on the other, with China and East Turkestan - the third. Prestigious things - weapons, jewelry, men's costume strictly followed the general Genesis fashion (women's costume in traditional society is much more conservative and preserves local, local traditions). The protective armament of the Golden Horde people from the time of the Kulikov battle was considered in a separate article. So here it is worth bringing only conclusions. As for offensive weapons, then a little more about him. The overwhelming majority of the Horde army was cavalry. Its core, which usually played a decisive role, was the heavily armed cavalry, consisting of military servicemen and tribal nobility, its many sons, rich militiamen and combatants. The basis was the personal “guard” of Vladyka Horde. The numerically heavily armed cavalry, of course, was inferior to the medium and lightly armed, but its units could deal a decisive blow (as it was, in fact, in almost all countries of Europe, Asia and North Africa). The main weapon of attack Horde rightly considered bow with arrows. Judging by the sources, the bows were of two types: “Chinese” - large, up to 1,4 m, with a clearly distinguished and bent apart arm, shoulders and long, almost straight horns; "Near and Middle Eastern" - no more than 90 cm, segmented, with a slightly marked out handle and small curved horns. Both types were, like the Russian bows, complex and distinguished by their exceptional strength - tensile strength up to 60, even 80 and more than a kg. Long Mongolian arrows with very large tips and red shafts, fired from such bows, flew almost a kilometer away, and at a distance of 100 meters or a few more - the limit of aimed fire - penetrated the person through, causing huge torn wounds; equipped with the same faceted narrow or chisel tip, punched plate-nashivnoy armor of not very large thickness. Chainmail also served from them very weak protection.

The shooting kit (saadak) also included a quiver — a long, narrow birch bark box, where the arrows were pointed up (this type of quiver was richly decorated with bone plates covered with complex carved patterns), or a flat long leather bag in which arrows were inserted with upward feathering (they were often according to the Central Asian tradition, it was decorated with a leopard's tail, embroidery, plaques). And on the neck, also decorated with embroidery, leather appliqués, metal and bone patches. The quiver is on the right, while the left side is attached to a special belt, which is usually the old one - from the 6th century onwards. - the steppe tradition was hooked.

The highest efficiency of the Horde horse archers was associated not only with the guns, but also with the accuracy of the shooters, as well as with a special combat construction. Ever since the Scythian times, horse archers of the steppes, building a rotating ring in front of the enemy, showered him with a cloud of arrows from the closest and most comfortable position for each shooter. Sigmund Herberstein, Ambassador of the Kaiser of the Holy Roman Empire, described this system in full detail - at the beginning of the XVI century. - and noticed that the Muscovites called such a battle order a “dance” (meaning “round dance”). He also claimed, from the words of the Russian interlocutors, that this line, if it is not disturbed by random confusion, cowardice or a good blow from the enemy, is absolutely indestructible. The peculiarity of the Tatar-Mongolian shooting was unprecedented accuracy and great destructive power of firing shells, as a result of which, as all contemporaries noted, there were a lot of dead and wounded from the horde arrows. The arrows in the quivers of the steppe find little - no more than ten; Means, hit precisely, on a choice.

After the first, arrows, strike - “sui-ma” - followed by the second “suim” - an attack of heavy and medium armed cavalry, in which the main weapon was a spear, so hung behind the right shoulder with the help of two loops - at the shoulder and the foot. The tips of the spears were mostly narrow, faceted, but they were also used wider, flattened. Sometimes they were also equipped with a hook under the blade for clinging and pushing the enemy off the horse. The shafts under the tip were decorated with short bunchuk (“bangs”) and a narrow vertical flag, from which 1-3 of triangular tongues departed.

Darts were used less frequently (although they later became more and more popular), apparently between a spear battle and melee. For the latter, the Horde had two types of weapons - blades and percussion.

Blades include swords and sabers. Swords, however strange it may seem, the Tatar-Mongols were used until the XV century. quite often, and nobility. Their handle differed from saber straightness and the shape of the tip - in the form of a flattened ball (Euro-Muslim type) or horizontal disk (Central Asian type). Quantitatively, sabers prevailed. In the Mongolian time, they become longer, the blades - wider and curved, although it was enough, and quite narrow, slightly bent. A common feature of the Horde sabers was a clip, welded to the floor with a crosshair, with a tongue covering part of the blade. The blades sometimes had dol, sometimes vice versa - rhombic section. There is an extension of the blade in the lower third - "Helman". North Caucasus blades often have a "bayonet" faceted end. Characteristic Horde saber cross - with downward and flattened ends. The handle and the sheath were crowned with pommel in the form of a flattened thimble. The sheath had clips with rings. The sabers were decorated with carved, engraved and chased metal, sometimes precious, the skin of the scabbard was embroidered with gold thread. Blade belts were decorated richer, fastened with a buckle.

Wounded by a saber of the enemy, who fell from his horse, the Horde, jumping to the ground, finished off with a combat knife - long, up to 30 — 40 cm, with a bone handle, sometimes with a crosshair.

Very popular with the Tatar-Mongols and the warriors of the Horde culture in general was the impact weapon - maces and mats. Maces from the second half of the XIV century. prevailed in the form of a first; but often in the form of a simple iron ball or a polyhedron. Cisteni applied less frequently. Battle axes, sometimes exclusively richly decorated with embossed or inlaid patterns, were a regional feature of the Bulgarian ulus.

The overwhelming majority of offensive weapons were produced, undoubtedly, in the workshops of numerous cities of the Horde or by Horde orders and samples in the Italian colonies and the old cities of Crimea, the centers of the Caucasus. But a lot and bought, it turned out in the form of a tribute.

The defense armament of the Horde included helmets, armors, bracers, leggings, necklaces, and shields. The Horde helmets of the time of Kulikov Field are usually spheroconic, less often spherical, with a chainmail barmite, sometimes covering the entire face, except the eyes. The helmet could have eyebrows in the front, overhead forged "eyebrows", a movable earplate - an arrow, discoid science. The helmet was crowned with feathers or with a ring tied with a pair of cloth or leather blades — a purely Mongolian ornament. Helmets could have not only mail, but also forged in the form of visor.



Great was the diversity of the Horde shells. Popular before were the Mongolian chainmail — in the form of a shirt or a hooded caftan. The quilted armor - “Khatangu Degel” (“durable as steel, caftan”; from it Russian. “Tegilyi”), cut out in the form of a robe with sleeves and blades to the elbow, had a mass distribution. Often he had metal parts - shoulder pads and, most importantly, a slab of iron plates sewn and riveted from the underside; such armor was already expensive and was covered with rich fabrics, on which rows of nests of rivets glittered, often copper, brass, gilded. Sometimes this armor was cut with cuts on the sides, fitted with mirrors on the chest and back, long quilted sleeves or shoulders of narrow steel curved transverse plates, riveted on vertical straps, and the same structure with bibs and a cover of the sacrum. Armor of horizontal stripes of metal or solid thick leather, connected by vertical straps or cords, is called laminar. This armor of the Tatar-Mongols were widely used in the XIII century. Strips of material were richly decorated: metal - by engraving, gilding, inlay; leather - painted, varnish.

The lamellar armor - the primordial armor of Central Asia (in Mongolian "huyag") was equally loved by the Horde. In the last third of the XIV century. It was used in conjunction with others: it was worn over the chain mail and "Khatangu DeGel".

The territory of the Golden Horde gives us the earliest examples of armor, which will become dominant in the XV-XVI centuries. on spaces from India to Poland, - annular-lamellar. It retains all the high protective and comfortable properties of lamellar armor, but the strength is further increased due to the fact that the plates are connected not by straps or cords, but by iron rings.

Mirrors - large round or steel rectangular plates - were part of a different type of armor, or were worn on their own - on belts. The upper part of the chest and back was covered with a wide necklace (traditionally Mongolian, Central Asian armor). In the second half of the XIV century. it was made not only from leather or chain mail, but also from large metal plates connected by straps and rings.

Frequently found in the mounds and other burials in the territory of the Mamai horde are bracers - folding, of two unequal lengths of steel halves connected by loops and straps. The Muslim miniature of the Chiigizid and post-Chingizid states confirms the popularity of this armor in all ulus in the second half of the 14th century. Although they were known to the Mongols in the XIII century. Leggings are not found among the finds, but in the miniatures it is clear that they are winged greaves, connected by chain mail weaving with a kneecap and laminar foot cover.

Ordynskys were sewn round, up to 90 cm in diameter, flat, from skin-covered boards, or smaller - 70 — 60 cm, convex, from flexible rods laid out in a spiral and connected by a continuous braid of multicolored threads forming a pattern. Small - 50 cm - bulging shields were made of thick, hard painted leather or steel. Shits of all types almost always had an “umbon” - a steel hemisphere in the center, and in addition a few small ones. Especially popular and valued were rod shield. Due to their exceptional resilience, they reflected any blow of the blade or mace, and the blow of a spear or arrow was taken on a steel umbron. We loved them for their accessibility and bright elegance.

Horses of the Horde cadets were also often defended by armor. It was in the custom of the steppe warriors long before our era and is especially characteristic of Central Asia. Horde Horse Armor of the Last Third of the 14th Century It consisted of a steel mask, collar and cover of the case to the knees, consisting of several parts, connected by buckles and straps. Horse armor was quilted, rarely kolchuzhnoy, and often laminar or lamellar, with plates of steel or not less durable thick solid leather, painted and lacquered. The presence of ring-plate horse armor, so popular in the Muslim East in the XV-XVII centuries., In the era of Kulikovo field is still difficult to guess.



As you can see, the arms of the parties were about the same, although the Horde retinads had somewhat more reliable and progressive defensive arms, especially ring-plate, as well as the protection of horses. Russian military horse armor was not until the XVII century. The myth about him originated thanks to a horse mask from a nomadic barrow (?) Of the XII-XIII centuries. from the collection of the State Historical Museum in Kiev and the finds of long spurs of the XIV century. in Novgorod. But dozens of similar masks - especially many of them in the Istanbul Military Museum, especially the inscriptions and patterns on them, leave no doubt that the Kiev mask is a product of the masters of Damascus or Cairo of the 15th - early 16th centuries. The long spurs of the European type are connected not with horse armor, but with landing on long stirrups and, respectively, stretched legs, so that the heels were far from the horse's belly.

As for some military-technical means of field combat, we can assume crossbows on both sides and easel shields - “chapars” - from which the field fortifications were composed, from the Horde. But, judging by the texts, they did not play any particular role. Ordinary weapons to Russian troops were enough to crush the Horde, and so to put on the battlefield most of the army of Russian principalities.

In conclusion, it should be said about the composition of the opposing sides. Prince Dimitri in the troops, except for Russian soldiers, were Lithuanian warriors of the princes Andrei and Dimitri Olgerdovich, whose number is undetectable - within 1-3 thousand.

The composition of Mamaev’s troops was more variegated, but not nearly as much as they like to represent. Do not forget that it was far from being ruled by the entire Golden Horde, but only by its western part (its capital was by no means Shed, but a city with its forgotten name, from which there was a huge, undiscovered and perishing Zaporozhye settlement). Most of the troops were cavalry from the nomadic descendants of the Polovtsy and the Mongols. The equestrian units of the Circassians, Kabardians and other Adyghe peoples (Cherkasy) could also be significant, the Ossetian cavalry (Yases) was small in numbers. More or less serious forces in the cavalry and infantry could put under the authority of Mamaia Mordovian and Burtase princes. Within a few thousand, there were detachments of horsemen and footless "bezmenmen" of the Muslim inhabitants of the Golden Horde cities: they didn’t like to fight at all (although, according to the opinions of foreigners contemporaries, they didn’t take courage), and the majority of the cities of the Golden Horde, and the most populous , was not in Mamayeva power. Even less in the army were skillful and persistent warriors - “Armen”, that is, Crimean Armenians, and as for “fryazy” - Italians, the “black (?) Genoese infantry” so popular by the authors, coming thick phalanx, is the fruit of, at least least misunderstandings. With the Genoese of Crimea, Mamai was at enmity at the time of the war with the Moscow coalition - only the Venetians of Tany-Azak (Azov) remained. But there were only a few hundred of them — with their wives and children — so these merchants could only give money to hire soldiers. And if we consider that the mercenaries in Europe were very expensive and any of the Crimean colonies could contain only a few dozen Italian or European soldiers in general (usually local nomads carried guards for a fee), the number of “muds” on the Kulikovo field, if they got there, far short of a thousand.

It is extremely difficult to judge the total number of forces from both sides. One can only with great caution assume that they were approximately equal and fluctuated within 50 — 70 thousands (which for Europe at that time was a gigantic number).
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

32 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. SLAVA 21 September 2011 08: 28 New
    • -7
    • 0
    -7
    The battle on the Kulikovo field is such a big question !!!! It is still not decided where it (the battle) was, and who was fighting with whom and for what ????. And about the Mongol, I generally wallow "the great conquerors"))))) Yes, the pictures provided are talking about a lot of people !!!
    1. SLAVA 21 September 2011 11: 47 New
      • -4
      • 0
      -4
      Mongol minusanul!)))
      1. Dovmont
        Dovmont 21 September 2011 15: 29 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        I agree with you only in part, namely that the actual place of the battle is still unknown. The current Kulikovo Field was officially recognized only at the end of the XIX century. when a certain impoverished Ryazan nobleman announced that the Kulikovo field, which was in his estate, was that same legendary field. PR-action was a success, because the hydronyms and place names of both fields of the vrodeba coincided. However, already in the second half of the 150th century, when archaeologists armed themselves with metal detectors and rummaged through this field along and across, we eventually found several arrowheads of the XNUMXthth centuries, a broken pectoral specimen from the same period, and some other trifle, like chain mail rings. AND EVERYTHING !!! Well, the trophy teams of Prince Dmitry could not clean out the entire field after the battle !!! ??? Especially after each battle of the smallest degree, burials of fallen soldiers should remain, especially since the Orthodox buried not only their dead, but also the enemy. Such burials in the present Kulikovo field for XNUMX years of archaeological research have not been found. Therefore, the real Kulikovo field is still waiting for its discoverers !!! Just as they are waiting for them and a field near the Kalka river, and a field on the lower reaches of the Don where Bus Beloyar fought against the Goths, and the glorious city of Voronezh, which did not submit to the Huns, like many other fields of Russian glory forgotten by ungrateful descendants. Our country loves nameless heroes, alas!
        1. Vadivak 21 September 2011 16: 37 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Well, the lack of armor is not an indicator, in those days all the glands and especially the weapons were cleaned up cleanly, it cost a lot of money
          1. Dovmont
            Dovmont 22 September 2011 20: 14 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            I agree that finding armor on the battlefield is a rare success, but small fragments of weapons, horse equipment, and other artifacts are simply required to be.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. SLAVA 21 September 2011 11: 50 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Mongol minusanul!)))
  2. Asmoday 21 September 2011 10: 29 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I agree. the official history tells us where and how everything happened ... but the archaeological excavations showed us how they say the absence of evidence as such. and again, not the fact of the presence of the Mongols as such ...
    this milestone in history is still covered by the same gloom of mystery and it is a pity that we will never know what really happened ... especially in light of the latest trends in education and the development of science ...
  3. Che
    Che 21 September 2011 11: 09 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    According to Fomenko, this is a strife. The peoples of the great empire and turmoil. Now there is a repeat. But the article is not bad.
    1. SLAVA 21 September 2011 11: 52 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      In addition to Fomenko, there are many sources (including foreign ones) and archaeological data .....
  4. zczczc
    zczczc 21 September 2011 14: 43 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And according to Putin, this is a strife, by the way, probably Fomenko studied:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_WnlokRQyg

    I only agree that any historian is unacceptably much far-fetched - they will find some kind of earring or harness and immediately build theories about who exactly went into them. They pull one to the other, bind it together and pass it off as historical research. And then other people, poking at this research, make out stands in museums, which schoolchildren perceive at face value.

    Self-criticism should be more for historians. And then their clan structure is highly developed - moreover, 99% of them sit in one clan, and they shut their mouths to the rest.

    I do not justify Fomenko’s thoughts, but the official history also raises a lot of questions.
    1. prunx
      prunx 21 September 2011 15: 10 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      I’d rather believe Lomonosov and Fomenko than Miller or Shletser and Karamzin. The Germans wrote our story - a fact. The same Karamzin took the work of the Germans as the basis of his work. And if we turn to Western sources, then the Tatars are described as a Nordic race, not an Asian one. Well, anyone who wants to can continue to believe that our ancestors lived in earthen pits, the entrances of which were littered with branches before the arrival of Rurik.
      1. Asmoday 21 September 2011 16: 41 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        I support. our history was rewritten hundreds of times, and all and sundry, it’s not for nothing that Lomonosov had a fight with historians from Germany at a reception in the palace when they presented the inverted history of the Russian state ... about Fomenko ... he has sound thoughts, and they deserve to be said attention, but on the account of the fact that Russia did not exist before the arrival of Rurik ... this is nonsense, even in Ancient Rome, our country was called the country of proud ... the country of cities. but based on a perverted story that it is being injected from an early age every year, it becomes more and more difficult to separate the seeds of truth from the chaff ...
        1. Dovmont
          Dovmont 21 September 2011 21: 01 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          In the formation of false ideas about the history of the people, many poets, artists, musicians, and writers took a great part. And the more ingenious they were, the deeper their errors settled in the memory of the people. What is only the Blok’s line about the Scythians "with slanting and greedy eyes." And in this topic, the main illustration is a reproduction from Surikov’s painting “Morning on the Kulikovo Field”, which has bypassed all history textbooks over the past 60 years. You look at the picture and think whether it was a gangster rabble who drunk to a glade jumped out, or whether it was the English lords who went to the battle with the Normans. But if the British, at the Battle of Hastings, actually turned out with stone axes, then the Russian squad on Kulikovo Field was equipped in its majority at the request of its time.
          1. oper66
            oper66 21 September 2011 21: 29 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            what are we talking about and with whom do they compare Arthur with the escalibur and even Marlin they already consider to be real historical figures? They don’t have a story, so they came up with it from 15th century novels and no one disputes and which of you does not know Russian epics and almost a fairy tale but with reference for a specific time period, the deeds glorified in legends and why should we descendants doubt the heroism of our ancestors, we should be proud that we have such a heritage that no people on earth have
          2. oper66
            oper66 21 September 2011 21: 32 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            what are we talking about and with whom do they compare Arthur with the escalibur and even Marlin they already consider to be real historical figures? They don’t have a story so they came up with it from 15th century novels and no one disputes and which of you does not know Russian epics and almost a fairy tale but with reference for a specific time period, the exploits glorified in legends and why should we descendants doubt the heroism of our ancestors, we should be proud that we have such a legacy that no people on earth have
          3. oper66
            oper66 21 September 2011 21: 33 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            what are we talking about and with whom do they compare Arthur with the escalibur and even Marlin they already consider to be real historical figures? They don’t have a story so they came up with it from 15th century novels and no one disputes and which of you does not know Russian epics and almost a fairy tale but with reference for a specific time period, the exploits glorified in legends and why should we descendants doubt the heroism of our ancestors, we should be proud that we have such a legacy that no people on earth have
            1. Dovmont
              Dovmont 21 September 2011 21: 36 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              They also had a mean knight Govein - the meaning of his name is clear only to the Slavs.
        2. zczczc
          zczczc 22 September 2011 03: 04 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Asmoday, prunxOf course, Fomenko has sober thoughts. 30 percent, I think, he is right for sure - the rest can be confirmed or refuted by experts.
        3. ballian
          ballian 22 September 2011 10: 19 New
          • -1
          • 0
          -1
          Lomonosov in history is zero. History was written according to specific historical sources, and not according to German fantasies.
          1. Dovmont
            Dovmont 22 September 2011 17: 00 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Lomonosov in history - zeroballian,
            Have you read his History of the Russian State? It was published after the death of Lomonosov, edited by his worst enemy Mayer. Why's that? In addition, after the death of Lomonosov, the manuscripts of the scientist were seized from his office, and not all of them, but only those relating to his work on Istoriya. The history of Lomonosov in tsarist Russia was almost never published; in modern Russia I know only one reprint edition from his edition of the late XNUMXth century. From what I have said, it follows that not so zero was Mikhailo Lomonosov in history.
            1. ballian
              ballian 22 September 2011 19: 03 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              As I understand it, you are quite an adult - in Soviet times, Lomonosov as a historian did not exist.
              1. Dovmont
                Dovmont 22 September 2011 20: 02 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                You are right, I am quite an adult. But the second half of your phrase sounds absurd. Following your logic, Lomonosov became famous only for having discovered the law of conservation of masses for schoolchildren of the 7th grade of the Soviet high school - it was there that he turned out to be a recognized scientist in Soviet times. I don’t think I will make a discovery for you if I say that Lomonosov was not only an outstanding chemist and physicist, but also famous for his work in mineralogy, geology, astronomy. He was also engaged in linguistics, ethnography, and history. He was the first scientist to smash the Normans to smithereens. That is why he turned out to be objectionable to the German princess on the Russian table, and then to the Jews in leather jackets, because he saw in Russians a people with an ancient culture and glorious history. Well, than in Soviet times, shelves in bookstores were made you know without me.
              2. zczczc
                zczczc 23 September 2011 00: 35 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                ballian, a brilliant man is brilliant in everything.
          2. LESHA pancake
            LESHA pancake 24 September 2011 15: 49 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF WESTERN HISTORIANS THIS IS SO BUT WESTERN HISTORIANS IT IS NOT THE LAST INSTANCE.
  5. Rico1977 21 September 2011 15: 14 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    But I will believe in official history, and I will insist that it be taught in schools. And I remember studying in the 90s - there was no Battle of the Ice, and the Battle of Kulikovo - and in general we did not win anywhere, and the Second World War won by a miracle and mountains of corpses. Let's go with such teaching - there is no pride in the country, such a gimmick cannot raise patriotism. Since there is such a victorious story - then, with such heroic examples and teach children, and do not dig, it’s the same as there was really no one to know (maybe everything was cooler). Here in the West they’re doing it right - 5 copecks and screaming, “feats”, praises, and the inviolability of history - a million rubles. And we all delve into it, repent to everyone, apologize, belittle ourselves, find all the questions ... This is not right. We just have something to be proud of - well, so be proud and don’t delve into shit
    1. SLAVA 21 September 2011 15: 59 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      Well, well, and so the noodles on the ears that will soon fall off! It’s better that the truth is even bitter, although in reality there is no reason for us to be ashamed of our past, on the contrary, there are much more reasons for pride, even more than in the “official” one.
      1. Rico1977 23 September 2011 00: 43 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        What is your truth? Have you been there The truth is one, but there are many truths - and I am for ours, and you probably are not. I repeat once again - there are sources where everything is described - and this is the only reliable evidence, and all that you sculpt is only your idle speculation that you pass off as truth, and to the detriment of our history. Such a historic "fifth column". We've been wondering already - none of the youth knows the story, but who knows, he doubts all the time - and was it like that, but was it at all. Leave as unshakable milestones, like statues, like pillars - Ice, Kulikovskoye, Borodino - and do not touch with dirty hands. Let historians be hungry for themselves - but for teaching the version is the same as it was in Soviet times
  6. Dovmont
    Dovmont 21 September 2011 19: 25 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    As if I, as a Russian patriot, didn’t want to consider the Kulikovo battle as a purposeful step of the Russian princes to overthrow the power of the Golden Horde, which was suggested to us from an early age — I cannot consider it such. To do this, one should soberly evaluate the events of those years.
    You should start with the right to a table in the Golden Horde. And only the representative of the Genghisids clan, descendants of Genghis Khan, had the right to occupy a table in Sarai. For more than 100 years, the Juchid clan, the descendants of Genghis Khan’s son, Jochi, the khan, owned the Golden Horde booth. But in 1359, the khan of the Golden Horde Berdibek was stabbed to death by his brother Kulpa (he was also kicked six months later). With this began the twenty-year turmoil in the Horde, when the son slaughtered his father, brother of his brother. The son of Berdibek Tokhtamysh was still a child, the Temnik of Mamai took advantage of this. Being, without a doubt, an outstanding organizer, he excelled not only because of his qualities, but also due to his proximity to the Genghisides - he was married to Khatuni - the daughter of Berdibek and the sister of Tokhtamysh. To her husband, Mamai was the master of most of the Crimea, which already made him one of the richest people in the Horde. Having matured Tokhtamysh in 1379 he wanted to regain his legal right to the table. Tamerlan helped him to clear the Shed from the proteges of Mamai. This led to an open military conflict between Mamai and Tokhtamysh. Tokhtamysh was not strong enough at that time, and here Moscow Prince Dmitry gathers a coalition of dependent or friendly princes and speaks upright ..... Mamaia. If he planned to strike at the Horde he would help Mamay, which would inevitably lead to a civil war in the Golden Horde and its rapid disintegration into small possessions (which happened, only much later). Dmitry acted as a faithful vassal, having rendered invaluable service to Tokhtamysh. The invaluable service turned out to be invaluable - Tokhtamysh burned Moscow in 2 years - on August 26, 1382 (Dmitry shamefully fled from Moscow leaving his wife and children in the city). By the way, he repelled Tamerlane with black ingratitude, speaking against him in the struggle for Persia. Mamai was soon killed by the Genoese in the Cafe (this is not an eatery, but a city on the southern coast of Crimea). And Tokhtamysh ended his life somehow not very well. Nevertheless, the victory at Kulikovo Field was of great importance in terms of uniting the Russian lands around Moscow.
  7. подводник 22 September 2011 12: 38 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    SLAVA, well, Dmyriy Donskoy did not take a GPS-navigator with him to leave the exact coordinates for the descendants !!! Ay-ah-ah, how is he like that !!! DEMONT-you seemed to live then if you subscribe to everything you wrote? (Dmitry shamefully escaped ...) I live next to the Svensky monastery — it was from here that the monk Peresvet went to the cross-section with the Tatar-Mongols.
  8. Magadan 22 September 2011 13: 14 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I agree that official history can and should be trusted. The presence of a fact in the past cannot be overstated, it can only be evaluated in different ways. For example: how can you now, living in the 20 century, lie that there was no battle of Kursk? You can’t write or say a maximum for a thought such as “the Russians filled up the Germans with corpses,” but how do you compose the absence of such a fact as the Battle of Kursk. And how then could the historians of the 14 century come up with a fairy tale about the Battle of Kulikovo, if it was not? Yes, they would be laughed there!
    And on account of the silence of the story - so I'm shocked - you imagine talking with normal 20-year-old guys, so they never heard of Pavlov’s House or the deed of Gastello! our History is being poured with mud, since freaks from the West need us to impose a complex of inferiority, drive the country into a depressive city and arrange the Orange Revolution and finally get Russia, which in open battle always gave them a snot.
  9. UAZ Patriot 23 September 2011 00: 24 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Mongol (Art. Mughal) is translated as great and this word does not belong to any nation. Tatars (from Greek tartar) - a place farther than Hades, i.e. far distance. horde - op-force yes - day or light, i.e. power of light (this is Old Slavonic, I remind you that Orthodoxy came from Byzantium, which included Greece, so the parallel between translations from different languages ​​is quite appropriate). So it turns out the Mongol-Tatar horde is translated as a great light force from far away. And the yoke translates as order. Therefore, the Mongol-Tatar yoke means order from far away. From far away? yes from Russia! which was the ball for Europe by Tartaria, i.e. far away (see maps of Mercator, the projection of which is still used in Europe to translate coordinates from geographic to rectangular and other European "friends", everything is painted there) Thus, at that time (1242) everything came down to about the same what is now pink, tulip, Arab, etc. revolution. Only - this is a new world order. And if there is a new one, then there must be an old one according to the logic of things. And what was he like, my personal opinion is the Mongol-Tatar yoke that he himself is! Only not in relation to Russia, but in relation to all the metropolises located on the territory of the Eurasian continent. And the center of this multinational world order was the Vladimir-Suzdal metropolis, with its infinite wealth for that period. I do not say, but such a version is also in my opinion quite objective. Vladimir-Suzdal Russia crushed everyone for itself, which is why Russia is so hated in the West and many of us are trying to finish off and finally establish our new world order - this is my personal opinion. And by the way, for us it will be called the same MONGOLO-TATAR IGO - The Great World Order is far away, that's it ... and then judge for yourself!
    1. zczczc
      zczczc 23 September 2011 00: 37 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      UAZ Patriot, "Ohr-force, yes - day or light" - is there a pruflink?
      1. UAZ Patriot 23 September 2011 00: 57 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        i took from here
        1. http://www.doverchiv.narod.ru/morozov/8-I03-02.htm again the Greek name
        (Megale order) - the great order. From here, at first, half-translating, they managed to make the "Big Horde", and then, without completely translating the "Mongol horde", calling the Mongols Kirghiz-Kaisakov from the Greek Kirikos-Kaisarikos (Lord Kaiser) .....
        and from here
        2.http: //www.slavyanin.info/node/40
        The Horde is a derivative of the word Order, where "Ohr" is power, and day is daylight or simply "light"
        and even if we assume that the authors of the articles lie in the very understanding of Europeans, as in the great Soviet encyclopedia http://bse.sci-lib.com/article084849.html horde - this is a herd of people (to summarize) it is quite possible and we will allow such an option, so how you can’t call your enemies light power!
        1. zczczc
          zczczc 24 September 2011 15: 03 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Hmm, I have to read it.
          Morozov is the founder of Fomenko, by the way.
          1. UAZ Patriot 24 September 2011 15: 12 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            I generally at these Levashovs, Fomenko and others. FSU. just infect an alternative position. I only state my conclusions on the basis of an elementary translation of words and classical history. By the way, on the same site it is written about an unknown battle in 1399, and Putin has an interiorview somewhere in the shutters of Yu-tube, where he directly speaks of the presence of Tatars and Russians on both sides in the Battle of Kulikovo. And actually, I personally (as many people think) still do not know why the USSR actually collapsed. And what was there in the 14th century is so bad theories can be put forward as much as you like.
            1. UAZ Patriot 24 September 2011 15: 45 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              By the way, here is the link in Yu Tube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMKpg0nJ0EY&feature=related
          2. Dovmont
            Dovmont 24 September 2011 15: 59 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            More precisely, Morozov is the founder of revisionism in history, and Fomenko and Nosovsky are his successors. By the way, in the West there are also quite a few of their supporters.