Military Review

Tactics, armor, weapons of medieval Eurasia. Part of 1

38
The conquests of the Tatar-Mongols struck contemporaries, and even now they are amazing. And Western Europe was on the verge of hysteria in front of formidable Chyngyz Khan warriors who conquered a huge part of the world. So what was the mystery of the Tatar-Mongol military successes? To understand this, more than one generation of domestic and foreign scientists have studied numerous written sources, conducted archaeological research. But very few people paid tribute to military affairs of the Tatar-Mongolian.


To begin with, all outstanding victories and successes were achieved due to the fact that these nomads were born warriors. And due to the brilliant personality of Chyngyz Khan, his iron hand and with the help of the gallant commanders in the army, centralization was carried out, phenomenal discipline was established, and intelligence was brilliantly staged. The enemy was often disunited and experienced various other difficulties, and the Tatar-Mongol generals not only mastered the art of war, but were also well-versed in politics and diplomacy.

In fairness it should be noted that not all opponents were weak, there were many and at the top of power. For example, the state of Khorezmshah with the Kipchak army, the Polovtsians, Russian principalities, the Hungarian kingdom, etc. were very strong. Due to the specifics of the nomadic economy, the number of the Tatar-Mongolian army was small compared with the armies of sedentary peoples, but we know quite a few examples when this mobile and highly organized army, significantly inferior to the number of the enemy, was victorious. An important role was played by the high morale of the Tatar warriors, their courage and resourcefulness. Here is what Josaphat Barbaro wrote in his notes - a prominent political figure in the Republic of Venice, an experienced diplomat (XV century):

“On this occasion, I’ll tell you what happened to me once when I was in Tanya. I once stood on the square; Tatars came to the city and reported that in the grove, about three miles from here, Circassians-riders, numbering about a hundred, hid, and intended to raid the city itself, as was their custom. I was sitting in the shop of the master in dressing arrows; there was another merchant-Tartar there, who came there with a citrated seed. Learning about the Circassians, he got up and said: “Why don't we go to capture them? How many riders are there? ” I answered him: "One hundred people." “That's good,” he said, “there are five of us, and how many riders can you have?” I replied: "Forty." And he said: "... Come, grab them!". Hearing all this, I went to look for Messer Francesco and told him about these speeches, but he asked me with a laugh if I had the courage to go there. I replied that was enough.

And so we mounted our horses, ordered our people to arrive by water, and by noon we flew down on these Circassians. They stood in the shadows, some of them were asleep, but, unfortunately, it happened that a little earlier than we reached them our trumpeter blew. Therefore, many managed to escape; however, we both got killed and captured by about 40 people. But all the beauty of this case refers to what was said about the "crazy brave men." The Tatar, who offered to go to catch the Circassians, was not satisfied with the prey, but single-handedly rushed in pursuit of the fugitives, although we all shouted to him: “You will not return, you will never return!”. He returned after almost an hour and, joining us, complained, saying: “Woe is me, I could not catch a single one!” - and strongly lamented. Judge for yourself what his madness was, because if at least four of the Circassians had turned against him, they would have cut it into small pieces. Moreover, when we reproached him, he turned everything into a joke. ”
(Barbaro I. Journey to Tanu. Text reproduced from: Barbaro and Kantarini on Russia. M. Science. 1971.)
Tactics, armor, weapons of medieval Eurasia. Part of 1


But back to the article. Indeed, the tactics of the Tatar - Mongols was traditional - massive archery, false retreats with ambushes, envelopes, entourage, exhausting the enemy with a long siege. In the overwhelming majority of cases, numerical superiority plays a crucial role in the battle. But it is important to recognize the decisive time and the battlefield in order to concentrate in this place, precisely in this area, superior forces and defeat the enemy, even if he has a general superiority in manpower and armament.

Now what can we say about the armament of the Tatar - Mongol? Indeed, we all have a stereotype that speaks of a Tatar on a short sturdy steed with a bow and arrows in his hands. But at the same time, reading European, Asian, Caucasian authors of the 13th - 15th centuries, we see admiration for the art of archery, mobility, and the phenomenal effectiveness of the Tatar - Mongolian archers. Again we turn to the example that I. Barbaro describes:

“Tatars are great hunters with falcons, and they have a lot of gyrfalcons; they catch birds in the burdock (which is not used here), they go to deer and to another large beast. Krechetov they wear on the fist of one hand, and in the other hold a shit; when they get tired, because after all [these birds] are twice as large as eagles, they substitute one for the arm. At times a flock of geese rushes over their army; then people from the camp shoot arrows as thick as a finger, curved and without feathers. The arrows fly straight, then turn and fly across the birds, crushing - when they are overtaken - the neck, the legs, the wings. Sometimes it seems that these geese are full of air; from the cry of the people, they are stunned, frightened and fall to the ground. ” (Barbaro I. Journey to Tanu. Text reproduced from: Barbaro and Kantarini on Russia. M. Science. 1971.)

According to many researchers, the Tatar bow was the most powerful in the Middle Ages. The tension of the famous English bow was about 35 kg., And shot this bow at a distance of 230 meters. And the Tatar bow was complex with horn and bone patches and received reinforcement in 40 - 70 kg., Moreover, the Tatars had a special shooting technique and shooting from horses, their arrows covered the distance to 320 meters, while they could break through all the existing armor of that time .

Carved lining on the bow (bone). XIII-XIV centuries. from the fund of Engels Museum of Local Lore.

The arrows were of two types, with small light and large heavy tips.

Tatar - Mongol arrowheads. XIII-XIV centuries.

Arrows with small light tips were hinged shooting for long distances, when the enemy had to be exhausted and wounded. And arrows with large tips were used at close range to ensure the destruction of the target. With the help of a powerful bow, the thickest armor was penetrated and incised wounds were inflicted on both the enemy and his horse.

A well-developed tactical trick of the Tatars was a false retreat, when several units were sent forward, which showered the enemy from a long distance with clouds of arrows, forcing him to attack. After that, the Tatar - Mongols rapidly left the collision. The enemy was drawn into the pursuit and in a certain place the fresh forces of the Tatars were waiting for him. Usually it was heavy cavalry, wrapped in armor-clad armor, including horses. They crushed the tired and outdated enemy. For example, such tactics were used in the Transcaucasus in the battle with the Georgian troops and against the Russian-Kypchak detachments on the r. Kalka.

Yes, the Tatars also had heavy armor, and this was first proved by the famous Swedish armory researcher B. Tordeman in his remarkable book The Battle Arms of Visby. Our famous compatriot, MV Gorelik also confirms this in a number of his works. (The riddle of the conquerors. Knowledge is power. 1974. No. 4; Medieval Mongolian armor. Third International Congress of Mongolians. Ulan-Bator, 1978; Army of Mongols-Tartars of the X-XIV centuries. M., 2002., Etc.)

Kazan Khan in battle garb. Author M. V. Gorelik

Another main tactical technique described in the XVI century. Roman Empire ambassador Sigismund Herberstein, calling it "dance." Moscow nobles who participated in battles with the Tatar - Mongols, described it as a "round dance". Thousands of archers lined up in front of the enemy's line, moving in a circle, showered the enemy with heavy arrows from close range, approximately 20 - 30 meters and from the most advantageous positions sideways forward and sideways back. This provided a good archer with good equipment guaranteed hit and fatal defeat, or a severe wound to enemy soldiers. For such a reception needed a clear organization and iron discipline. But, as S. Herberstein wrote, if for any reason, at some point a failure had occurred, the line broke down at full speed and defeat was inevitable. But with good circumstances, demoralized, strongly reduced in number enemy attacked the cavalry cavalry with swords and spears, completing the rout. After the battle came light cavalry and destroyed the fleeing. But there have been cases when, with such tactics, the enemy fled, without waiting for the heavy cavalry to strike.

To be continued

Sources:
according to the book of K.A. Ablyazova Historical fate of the Tatars. From tribe to nation. T.1, Saratov. Scientific book, 2012
http://www.vostlit.info/Texts/rus9/Barbaro/frametext.htm
Author:
Originator:
Source: according to the book K.A. Ablyazov The historical fate of the Tatars. From the tribe to the nation. T.1, Saratov. Scientific book, 2012. Link: http://www.vostlit.info/Texts/rus9/Barbaro/frametext.htm
38 comments
Ad

Our projects are looking for authors in the news and analytical departments. Requirements for applicants: literacy, responsibility, efficiency, inexhaustible creative energy, experience in copywriting or journalism, the ability to quickly analyze text and check facts, write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. The work is paid. Contact: [email protected]

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Give the light
    Give the light 16 January 2016 06: 44 New
    +1
    I am waiting for the continuation
  2. Semurg
    Semurg 16 January 2016 07: 50 New
    +3
    It is interesting to whom today's scholars of Tatarstan attribute Shyngyskhan to the Mongols, Turks? Shyngyskhan-Chyngyskhan that this name means in the Mongolian language in the Russian Federation Kalmyks live Western Mongols, they probably can give a translation from the Mongolian languages, or maybe this word is the same in the Mongolian and Turkic languages.
    1. sleeping sayan
      sleeping sayan 16 January 2016 09: 41 New
      +3
      Ah, the Buryats still live. The Buryat language is similar to the Mongolian. And Genghis Khan, it will be right, Temuchin or Temujin.
      1. Rarog
        Rarog 16 January 2016 23: 21 New
        +2
        Quote: sleeping Sayan
        And Genghis Khan, it will be right, Temujin or Temujin.


        Do not confuse his name - Temuchin (one of the spelling variations) and, so to speak, the title - Genghis Khan - the Great Khan (Ruler / Prince / Tsar / Emperor). This is not the same thing.
        1. AK64
          AK64 18 January 2016 02: 22 New
          0
          Do not mix his name - Temuchin

          It seems the closest to the Mongolian Temuzhin

          rank - Genghis Khan - Great Khan

          TitleYou wanted to say.

          And there’s also a “last name”: Borjigin
          1. Arbogast
            Arbogast 18 January 2016 23: 36 New
            0
            Quote: AK64
            It seems the closest to the Mongolian Temuzhin
            There was a boy from the Barlas clan whose idol was Genghis Khan.
            And later it became known under the pseudonym Timur (Tamerlan) - "Iron Lamer", Axak-temip .. Yes, and in most Turkic languages ​​Temip - iron ..
            And if we recall the specialization of ancient Turkuts - iron smelters .. request Immediately make a reservation that for mine Genghis Khan is a Mongol and no nails. But there are already so many questions and interesting parallels in this whole "story"
            Quote: AK64
            The title you wanted to say.
            Kagan, Hakan ..
            Quote: AK64
            And there’s also a “last name”: Borjigin
            Again there is a Türkic-speaking "translation" of this generic surname - Bori Jien (wolf nephew) ..
    2. madjik
      madjik 16 January 2016 09: 42 New
      +7
      but don’t you write you in the Turkic manner the name of the Stunner!
      correct in Mongolian CHINGS KHAN. The article unfortunately relies on one source, and one written by an entrepreneur. I advise you to read Khudyakov and Bobrov in their monographs, the weapons and tactics of the nomads are well described. Yes, and the funniest thing in the language of the Kalmyks there is no such word and people-Tatars!
      1. Arbogast
        Arbogast 16 January 2016 13: 54 New
        +3
        Quote: madjik
        but don’t you write you in the Turkic manner the name of the Stunner!
        correct in Mongolian CHINGS KHAN
        Actually, what's the difference ?! Well, some Kazakhs Shyngyskhan write, so let them write .. Do you have a heart attack from this? Himself by the way I write Genghis Khan.
        Let’s then stop calling China, China.
        After all, this is the name of one of the Mongol tribes that once conquered the Celestial Empire, and in a Turkic manner. Khitan, in Turkic Whine.
        Kazakhs note there is such a ru / clan / clan - Ktai.
        Quote: madjik
        And the funniest thing in the language of Kalmyks is no such word and people-Tatars!
        The funny thing is that the ethnonym Kalmyk himself (stay), can be "decrypted" only with the help of Turkic languages ​​.. repeat
        That is, his appearance, he owes them .. laughing
        Quote: Nagaibak
        Let’s somehow stick to the spelling which is customary in Russia. The site is Russian.
        And the Internet is American. The site itself is registered in Germany. By the way, let's stick to the spelling that is customary in Germany, and call Germany Deutschland.
        Quote: sleeping Sayan
        similar to Mongolian
        The ethnonym "Mongol" itself is suspiciously similar to the self-name of the ancient Turkic power "Mangi El"(" Eternal El / Spruce ")
        1. madjik
          madjik 16 January 2016 16: 52 New
          0
          And even funnier are the Kazakhs? who is it? you are following the path of Great Ukrov. after the 90s your story turned into a laughing stock and fiction. I'm so sorry!
          1. Arbogast
            Arbogast 16 January 2016 21: 37 New
            +2
            Quote: madjik
            And even funnier are the Kazakhs?
            Funnier than Kalmaki laughing
            Quote: madjik
            you follow the path of Great Ukrov
            Arachi fermented ..?!drinks repeat
            Quote: madjik
            after 90's, your story turned into a laughing stock and fiction. I'm so sorry!
            Write with sources, where and how has our story turned into a laughing stock and fiction?
            Quote: madjik
            TURKS MINUTES
            Eh would minus, the status does not allow yet ..
            Quote: madjik
            And remember 4's Oirats
            Well, yes, who are we. And about them you can ask you your question: "Who are they and what has become of them?"
            "Have you lost your head?"no That's where there should be regret ..
            Quote: Nagaibak
            Let's you in Kazakhstan will write in Kazakh Shelkar, Shimkent, Aktobe. And I in Russia and indeed in Russian I will write Chelkar, Chimkent, Aktyubinsk and so on.
            Let’s do it without, you’re writing in Genghis Khan in Russia, if it’s so boiling for you .., and in RK we will write Shyngyzhan ..
            By the way, the Kazakhs made claims here about writing Chelkar, Chimkent, Aktyubinsk ..?
            Quote: Nagaibak
            In Russian, please write as usual if you write in Russian
            Mar Ivanna, you ?! love Contact my lawyer .. Don’t scream so much, otherwise I’m worried about my tomatoes ..
            Here, on the "Military Review", many Russian users write in Russian in such a way that the essence of the claims against the Kazakhs is incomprehensible ..
            Quote: Nagaibak
            In Russian, please be kind as to write if you already write in Russian. In Ukraine.
            Everything is like a textbook hi
        2. Nagaibak
          Nagaibak 16 January 2016 17: 47 New
          +3
          = Arbogast "And the Internet is American. The site itself is registered in Germany. By the way, let's stick to the spelling which is customary in Germany and call Germany Deutschland."
          Hehe hehe ... No, you didn’t understand me. Let's you in Kazakhstan will write in Kazakh Shelkar, Shimkent, Aktobe. And I in Russia and indeed in Russian I will write Chelkar, Chimkent, Aktyubinsk and so on. Write in Kazakh ... write as you like. This is your language. In Russian, please be kind as to write if you already write in Russian. In Ukraine.))) Hamburg instead of Homburg or whatever it is. And if Germany is accepted in Germany then Germany and not Deutschland.))) I’m not guilty of telling you or something like that. Here our politicians themselves are to blame when they went to all sorts of renaming to local languages ​​in the 90s, they were led to this and began to stupidly copy, regardless of the rules and established things. I’m talking about this.
    3. Nikolay K
      Nikolay K 16 January 2016 11: 55 New
      +4
      Do not mix the present Tatarstan and the Mongol-Tatars. Firstly, Tatars in Russia were called all Turkic-speaking, which, for example, belonged to the majority of the peoples of Central Asia, and in the broad sense of all foreigners of Asian descent, as all Europeans were called Germans. Incidentally, the current Russian Tatars also did not always speak Tatar, but only after the state of Volga Bulgaria was conquered by Turkic tribes. Secondly, before attacking Russia, Batu defeated Kazan, and according to the Mongolian tradition, the conquered people were recruited into the army of the Mongols. Therefore, when marching to Russia, the Kazan Tatars constituted a significant, if not dominant, part of the Batu army. Finally, in later times, the Horde troops often came from the side of the strong Kazan Khanate, because among the Russians the horde was associated with Kazan.
      1. The centurion
        The centurion 16 January 2016 13: 42 New
        +7
        Quote: Nikolai K
        Do not mix the current Tatarstan and the Mongol-Tatars.

        "... The grandson of Genghis Khan Batu headed the western limits of the Mongolian possessions (ulus Juchi) and, fulfilling the precepts of his grandfather, had to expand them as far as possible to the west. By the decision of Kurultay 1235 of the year held in the capital of the Mongolian Empire, Karokorum, 1237 was appointed the year All-Mongolian Western campaign to the Atlantic coast, a campaign to the “last (extreme) sea.” Dozens of tumens from the whole Mongolian empire were mobilized, 14 Tsarevich-Chingizids, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Genghis Khan were at the head of the campaign. Khan Batu is signified, the veteran of the Western campaigns Subedey led the training. The entire 1236 year was spent on preparations and training. In the spring of 1237, the Mongols and the nomadic tribes under their control (in Russian history called the Tatars) concentrated on the territory of the Bashkirs who were subdued by Subedei. they called the Tatars "Mongols", which meant "others, aliens", that is, not Mongols. Indeed, in the ancient Turkic language (also in some modern Turkic languages), the word "tat" means a foreigner, a foreigner nick, stranger. The ending "ar" (er, ir) means a person, man, husband. This Turkic ethnonym is used in many names of peoples and tribes that have the ending "ar": Tatars, Khazars, Bulgars, Avars, Madjars, etc. The Mongolian custom of calling all strangers in one word took root later in Russia. For many centuries all non-Russian peoples of the southeast were also called Tatars by the Russians for many centuries, and all non-Russian peoples of the West were Germans (not we). "
        1. madjik
          madjik 16 January 2016 16: 36 New
          -4
          I’ll explain a little: the STATE of the Mongols was called 40 Mongols and 4 Oirats, that is, it was possible to set roughly 240 thousand people
          1. madjik
            madjik 16 January 2016 18: 10 New
            -1
            TURKS MINUTES laughing A MORE CONDITION says: MY PEOPLE are 44 Mongols living in felt houses. SUBSIDIARY MONGLE DORWEN OORD AND THE OTHER TSOOHURS THUS WAS SAID TO THE LORD. AND LAUGHING IN MONGOLIA, BURYAT, KALMYKIA ABOUT YOUR HISTORY RESTORATION. REMEMBER 4 OIRATS, YOUR HISTORY ON THEM AND KEEP tongue
      2. Nicholas C.
        Nicholas C. 16 January 2016 14: 38 New
        +5
        Quote: Nikolai K
        The current Russian Tatars also did not always speak Tatar, but only after the state of Volga Bulgaria was conquered by Turkic tribes. Secondly, before attacking Russia, Batu defeated Kazan, and according to the Mongolian tradition, the conquered people were recruited into the army of the Mongols. Therefore, when marching to Russia, the Kazan Tatars constituted a significant, if not dominant, part of the Batu army. Finally, in later times, the Horde troops often came from the side of the strong Kazan Khanate

        Are they really teaching such nonsense at school now? Or is it your own fabrications?

        1. Indeed, the Volga Bulgaria (and the entire right-bank steppe from the Volga) spoke in Turkic only with the Polovtsians. With the Pechenegs this was not yet. And it couldn’t be in principle in the days of the 1st Turkic Haganate.
        2. Under Batu, no Kazan existed. The capital was the ancient Bulgar. Old Kazan was founded only after the final burning of the Bulgar Timur Khromy (aka the great Tamerlan). Although the good grandfather Shaimiev (I hugged him) celebrated the 1000th anniversary of Kazan. So Svidomo Tatars came up with something and told how Kazan moved from place to place.
        3. No "weighty" part of the Bulgars in the army of Batu did not constitute. Because marching home after the defeat of the Polovtsian and Russian troops on Kalka, those two Tatar tumens were completely defeated by the Bulgars in the Battle of Baran (the name changed one captive Tatar for one ram). Therefore, it was not a simple conquest of Batu by Bulgar, but a long punitive operation.
        4. Accordingly, there was no Tatar khanate in Bulgaria under the Golden Horde. On the contrary. As soon as the Great Remorse occurred in the Horde, Bulgaria separated and even managed to release its own money, but was burned out by Timur Khoja.
        5. The Kazan Khanate was created by Ulu Muhammad only after the Golden Horde fell apart into the Great Horde and several khanates separated from it. It was for this Khanate that Ulu Muhammad FOUND the capital - NEW Kazan. And it was not located at all where the old Kazan was.
      3. The comment was deleted.
  3. parusnik
    parusnik 16 January 2016 08: 32 New
    -1
    Well, the beginning is not bad .. We look forward to continuing ... Thank you ..
  4. Cobra77
    Cobra77 16 January 2016 08: 42 New
    +4
    Regarding the weapons of the Middle Ages, I recommend reading Klim Zhukov.
    1. Bersaglieri
      Bersaglieri 16 January 2016 11: 47 New
      +3
      Here is some more glorious material with him:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eu4CoXze6GY#t=282
  5. Nagaibak
    Nagaibak 16 January 2016 09: 42 New
    +9
    The remark is this: among the Kazakhs he is Shyngyskhan, the author is Chyngyz-Khan. You can argue a lot and about nothing. Who pronounces his name more correctly?))) In Russia, there is an established spelling of Genghis Khan or Genghis Khan. Let’s somehow stick to the spelling which is customary in Russia. The site is Russian. So you need to somehow write the names as is customary in Russia. This is me to the author. Anyway. In general, the article is offset, the article is not a bad author plus.
    I think for the author my remark is not the most critical))) now the elves will come out and say that he is not he, but Alexander the Great who, according to their new discoveries, was lost in Mongolia when he went from Persia to Vietnam.)))
  6. Bersaglieri
    Bersaglieri 16 January 2016 11: 07 New
    +3
    This is how the Fomenkovites are now raiding with exclamations about "there was nothing of it! Neither the Tatars, nor the Mongolo, nor Iga. And in the picture is Alexander Nevsky!"
    1. Nikolay K
      Nikolay K 16 January 2016 12: 45 New
      14
      Fomenkovtsy, of course, are still those eccentrics, but on one thing I agree with them: the yoke, in the modern sense of the word, was not in Russia. Now for us, IGO is an oppressive, enslaving force. We immediately recall the colonial yoke and the unfortunate Africans (Americans, Asians) oppressed by Europeans in their colonies. For a Russian person of that time, everything looked different. Firstly, it is well known that under the Mongol-Tatars the size of the tribute paid by the peasants did not change. As they used to pay their prince, they continued to pay the Mongols, and often the same prince remained the tax collector. Those. The people did not experience MORE oppression. In addition, you need to understand that at that time the level of national identity was at its infancy. For the common man, there was a close circle of relatives, neighbors, called PEACE, and there was a distant and alien POWER, which was supposed to pay taxes and protection to PEACE. Who was this power: Russian, Tatar or Mongol, by and large, the simple person was indifferent, for him, AUTHORITY always remained a stranger. This clear division of everyone into PEACE and Power remained with the Russian people at least until the revolution, and by and large lives in us now, when power is still alien to us, when we continue to wait for the good king, who will restore order in the PEACE, when many of us have power above the law, etc. Moreover, if we study the history of the emergence of the state, in particular, the theory of the social contract, if we recall the legend about the calling of the Varangians to Russia, then it turns out that at the initial stage the state was a professional warrior, who was invited by society for their own protection for a fee. Those. the first squads were typical warriors mercenaries to whom the common people had no love and reverence, but who did their work for money. Subsequently, these professionals, in addition to purely military functions, began to perform general managerial, judicial, etc., but as before, little has changed for the money and for the attitude of the people to the Government. Because a simple peasant in the 13-14 century by and large it didn’t matter who paid tribute and who was considered power. Moreover, the Mongols conducted a principled policy of tolerance and strongly supported the local elites.
      Therefore, a true understanding of the meaning of the word IGO lies in its origin from the pre-Indo-World. * jugom "connection". That is, the "yoke" is a union, a union. And in fact, Russian princes took a lot, almost all of the key ideas, from Mongolian laws. Actually the very idea of ​​"igoisization" ie the unification of peoples under a single authority, adopted by the Russians from the Mongols, is fundamentally different from the Western model of colonization. It was this idea that allowed the Russians to create and lead a huge multinational empire. But what is there to create, the Russian Empire appeared on the site of the empire of Genghis Khan, became its successor and follower. In this sense, there would not be the so-called Mongol-Tatar yoke, nor would there be modern Russia.
      1. Proxima
        Proxima 16 January 2016 15: 05 New
        +1
        Quote: Nikolai K
        But what is there to create, the Russian Empire appeared on the site of the empire of Genghis Khan, became its successor and follower. In this sense, there would not be the so-called Mongol-Tatar yoke, nor would there be modern Russia.

        Gold words! The German political scientist Alexander Rahr was asked what would have happened if Alexander Nevsky had entered into an alliance with the Pope, and not with the Horde. To this he did not hesitate to answer approximately the following: “there would be no global Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok, but there would be Europe at best limited to Ryazan and Tambov, and from Kazan to Beijing the world would receive such a global Islamic caliphate, from which there would be everyone would be scared. "
        It turns out that St. Alexander on Lake Peipsi beat two "birds with one stone" - the GLOBAL WEST and the GLOBAL ISLAM.
      2. Proxima
        Proxima 16 January 2016 15: 21 New
        +3
        Quote: Nikolai K
        Fomenkovtsy, of course, are still those eccentrics, but on one thing I agree with them: the yoke, in the modern sense of the word, was not in Russia.

        Here Lev Nikolayevich Gumilyov agrees with you. Only here is the key phrase "IN MODERN UNDERSTANDING". Everything was much more complicated. It is on these “difficulties” that Fomenko and others like him parasitize.
    2. Nikolay K
      Nikolay K 16 January 2016 12: 45 New
      +1
      Fomenkovtsy, of course, are still those eccentrics, but on one thing I agree with them: the yoke, in the modern sense of the word, was not in Russia. Now for us, IGO is an oppressive, enslaving force. We immediately recall the colonial yoke and the unfortunate Africans (Americans, Asians) oppressed by Europeans in their colonies. For a Russian person of that time, everything looked different. Firstly, it is well known that under the Mongol-Tatars the size of the tribute paid by the peasants did not change. As they used to pay their prince, they continued to pay the Mongols, and often the same prince remained the tax collector. Those. The people did not experience MORE oppression. In addition, you need to understand that at that time the level of national identity was at its infancy. For the common man, there was a close circle of relatives, neighbors, called PEACE, and there was a distant and alien POWER, which was supposed to pay taxes and protection to PEACE. Who was this power: Russian, Tatar or Mongol, by and large, the simple person was indifferent, for him, AUTHORITY always remained a stranger. This clear division of everyone into PEACE and Power remained with the Russian people at least until the revolution, and by and large lives in us now, when power is still alien to us, when we continue to wait for the good king, who will restore order in the PEACE, when many of us have power above the law, etc. Moreover, if we study the history of the emergence of the state, in particular, the theory of the social contract, if we recall the legend about the calling of the Varangians to Russia, then it turns out that at the initial stage the state was a professional warrior, who was invited by society for their own protection for a fee. Those. the first squads were typical warriors mercenaries to whom the common people had no love and reverence, but who did their work for money. Subsequently, these professionals, in addition to purely military functions, began to perform general managerial, judicial, etc., but as before, little has changed for the money and for the attitude of the people to the Government. Because a simple peasant in the 13-14 century by and large it didn’t matter who paid tribute and who was considered power. Moreover, the Mongols conducted a principled policy of tolerance and strongly supported the local elites.
      Therefore, a true understanding of the meaning of the word IGO lies in its origin from the pre-Indo-World. * jugom "connection". That is, the "yoke" is a union, a union. And in fact, Russian princes took a lot, almost all of the key ideas, from Mongolian laws. Actually the very idea of ​​"igoisization" ie the unification of peoples under a single authority, adopted by the Russians from the Mongols, is fundamentally different from the Western model of colonization. It was this idea that allowed the Russians to create and lead a huge multinational empire. But what is there to create, the Russian Empire appeared on the site of the empire of Genghis Khan, became its successor and follower. In this sense, there would not be the so-called Mongol-Tatar yoke, nor would there be modern Russia.
      1. Proxima
        Proxima 16 January 2016 15: 57 New
        +2
        Quote: Nikolai K
        Actually the very idea of ​​"igoisization" ie the unification of peoples under a single authority, adopted by the Russians from the Mongols, is fundamentally different from the Western model of colonization. It was this idea that allowed the Russians to create and lead a huge multinational empire.

        Your post can be safely disassembled into quotes, bravo! The Russian (Soviet) type of Empire is something unique! This fully applies to the Russian imperial type of thinking, worldview. The Russian Empire did not begin with Peter the Great. This is her physical realization. It began at least with Sergius of Radonezh (14th century), who introduced the concept of HOLY RUSSIA. All the rest, for example, “Moscow is the third Rome,” is already a derivative of the unique Russian WORLD VIEW and the great RUSSIAN MISSION. (Sorry for the pathos)
  7. Vladimirets
    Vladimirets 16 January 2016 12: 13 New
    +2
    "They carry the gyrfalcons on the fist of one hand and hold the staff in the other; when they get tired, because [these birds] are twice as many eagles"

    I wonder how this gyrfalcon, a raven-sized falcon, could be double the size of an eagle? Especially when you consider that for hunting from eagles, mainly golden eagles were used? what
    1. The comment was deleted.
  8. abrakadabre
    abrakadabre 16 January 2016 12: 57 New
    +5
    The author has inaccuracies
    Due to the specifics of conducting nomadic farming, the size of the Tatar-Mongol army was small compared with the armies of settled peoples
    Quite the opposite. The army was larger, because there was substantially more contingent of trained riders who were good at shooting.
    You can, of course, expand on this thesis in more detail. If there will be interest from others.

    In a series of videos from the Goblin: Intelligence with Klim Zhukov, questions of manning the steppe army, its tactics and weapons are repeatedly covered in comparison with Russia. This is especially detailed in the video about the Battle of Kulikovo. I highly recommend everyone to watch.
    1. AK64
      AK64 18 January 2016 02: 57 New
      +2
      The author has inaccuracies
      Due to the specifics of conducting nomadic farming, the size of the Tatar-Mongol army was small compared with the armies of settled peoples

      Quite the opposite. The army was larger, because there was substantially more contingent of trained riders who were good at shooting.

      Quite so: among the Mongols, every man from 15 to 60 was obliged to serve in the army. (Because both the old and the teenagers could well cope with the herds).

      This principle of manning (all capable men) continued, for example, among the Crimean Tatars: it is from here that they have huge armies. (Hence the weak political and moral state of her --- it’s nice to rob every shepherd, but fighting is another matter .... But the Mongols simply solved this problem)
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 25 January 2016 07: 58 New
        0
        What are we talking about. Unlike settled peoples.
  9. Bashibuzuk
    Bashibuzuk 16 January 2016 14: 13 New
    +2
    No, but why do all Fomenkovists not give rest, huh?
    Well, the Morozovites, the Bushkivtsi will run in, someone else else - will something change, or what?
    Read the frank nonsense of some messer about travel and wonderful adventures and admire it ....
    No guys fire
    ....
    Circassians are going to attack the city - instead, the ear is crushed.
    One inadequately chases, chases - so I didn’t catch anyone.
    And he didn’t push himself out of the swamp by the hair by chance? Or maybe half a horse back?
    ....
    Than to read this ... I'd rather read the Horde and Russia once again.
    Free will - will
  10. Ratmir
    Ratmir 16 January 2016 14: 34 New
    0
    A good start to an interesting topic. We look forward to continuing. I would like to note another interesting source on the history of the Mongols, the work of Fr. Iakinf (Bichurina).
  11. ando_bor
    ando_bor 16 January 2016 15: 03 New
    -3
    It should be understood before the Mongols jumped to Russia - Mongolia came there, the fields are burning, the forests are burning, there is nothing to eat and then the Mongols are like them, they liked the weather, they multiplied, earlier rare tribes started to get lost - united, they mastered all the best organization techniques and weapons that they themselves didn’t have (for example, Chinese siege technologies) and trampled on their expanded landscape, until the sea (Japan) or snow (Veliky Novgorod, Europe) rested, the Mongols were afraid of snow, - there is no frost.
  12. Max_Bauder
    Max_Bauder 16 January 2016 15: 25 New
    +3
    Mongolian armor.
  13. Assassin
    Assassin 16 January 2016 15: 30 New
    0
    And why did they come to Russia. Far far south, rich China
    1. madjik
      madjik 16 January 2016 16: 58 New
      -2
      in the south the horses degenerate, that india, china and it’s hot and humid there wink
    2. Nikolay K
      Nikolay K 16 January 2016 22: 39 New
      +2
      Because they believed that they should command the whole world from sea to sea, as Genghis Khan bequeathed to them. By the way, by the time of the campaign in Russia, northern China had already been conquered by them.
    3. AK64
      AK64 18 January 2016 09: 53 New
      0
      There is a completely banal opinion: the Mongols made a roundabout maneuver (deep flank bypass), and nothing more.

      The Mongols fought with the Polovtsy. The war with the Kipchaks started back in Siberia, when the Kipchaks accepted the enemies of the Mongols - Merkits. Well, this is a spillover of this war itself.

      So the Mongols decided to go around the flank of the Polovtsian forest.

      In general, given the lengthy negotiations that Batu conducted with the ambassadors of the Ryazan prince, there is a feeling that it was quite possible to come to an agreement with him (with Batu): he was negotiable, Batu.
  14. Max_Bauder
    Max_Bauder 16 January 2016 15: 37 New
    +1
    Scene from the movie "Mongol". I don’t know if such tactics could really be, Klim Zhukov should be asked a question.
  15. owl
    owl 16 January 2016 21: 00 New
    +2
    Quote: Max_Bauder
    Mongolian armor.

    What century? And where is it found \ located. After all, the Horde was heterogeneous in its composition.
  16. Fat
    Fat 17 January 2016 02: 30 New
    0
    Question. In the photo, the arrowheads in the article are predominantly flat - “cut off." This is a weapon for hunting. Mongols faceted and round tips, with greater penetration, not used?
  17. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 17 January 2016 12: 51 New
    0
    So historically, the army of Genghis Khan and his sons
    for a long time there was both a quantitative and a qualitative advantage over
    by all the armies of Asia and Europe of that time. No one could -
    with all desire and in any union scenario - to defeat them in battles.
    For a hundred years, the Tatar-Mongols had an absolute military advantage in Eurasia.
    Then their state fell into several, and appeared
    the ability to defeat them in battle.
    1. The centurion
      The centurion 17 January 2016 16: 32 New
      +2
      Quote: voyaka uh
      No one could -
      with all the desire and in any Allied scenario - to win them in battles

      “... In 1239 - 1240, having crushed the southern Russian principalities, Batu sent his tumens to Western Europe. Warriors from Russia, including the Cherkasy and vagabonds, readily took part in the campaign of the Tatar-Mongol troops against their ancient enemies of the "Ugric and Lyakhov". Numerous European chronicles and chronicles of that time draw a completely non-Mongolian image and language of the Tatar-Mongolian troops who came to Europe. Thus, the Hungarian king Bela wrote to the Pope: “When the Hungarian state was invaded by the Mongols, like the plague, for the most part it was turned into a desert and the sheepfold was surrounded by various tribes of infidels, namely: Russian vagrants from the east, Bulgarians and other heretics from the south ... ".
      Until 1242, Batu Khan led the all-Mongolian Western campaign, as a result of which the western part of the Polovtsian steppe, Volga Bulgaria, Russia were conquered, all countries were defeated and subjugated to the Adriatic and Baltic: Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Croatia, Dalmatia, Bosnia, Serbia, Bulgaria other. The Mongolian military art, brought to perfection by the great Genghis Khan, was an order of magnitude higher than the others, the defeat of the European armies was complete. During this time the Tatar-Mongols did not lose a single battle. The army of the Mongol Empire reached Central Europe. Frederick II, the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation, tried to organize resistance. However, when Batu demanded obedience, he replied that he could become a falconry of the khan. The salvation of Europe has come from no waiting. In the summer of 1241, the great Mongol khan Ogedei fell ill and withdrew his children and grandchildren from the front, and in December 1241 died. The first all-Mongol turmoil was brewing. Numerous Chingizid princes who commanded Tumen in the army of Batu Khan, in anticipation of a fight for power, one after another left the front with their troops and returned to their ulus. Batu did not have the strength to attack alone with only his ulus and completed his campaign against the West in 1242. His troops retreated to the Volga, on the bank of Akhtuba, the city of Sarai-Batu was founded, which became the new center of the Juchi Ulus ... "
  18. Bashibuzuk
    Bashibuzuk 17 January 2016 20: 27 New
    0
    Well, if it would be true, all this was ....
    Genghis Khan ... one and a half thousand people ... with a body of heavy wall-hung guns.
    This is not for you .... onagra, scorpions, ballista cheap .... weapons of the poor, as they say.
    It got along the best weapons engineers (in our understanding) of the Celestial Empire.
    All tactics were set not by anyone, but personally by Temuchin ... Genghis Khan, Tengri Khan of the Great Sky ...
    And at the same time, the operational, strategy and logistics support .... STEPPE !!!!
    This is for you .. not khukh-mukhra.
    .
    And nobody blows a mustache ... doesn’t know because, at least, questions of providing the BATTALION in the upcoming actions.
    They never served either Vanka-platoon, or the first person responsible for everything - the Company.
    Not the first person in charge of the BATTLE.
    No way, in short, not answering .... but perfectly knowing HOW TO BE.
    .
    One hundred years and once kept repeating to the world ... nomads are good at PASSING.
    They are not able to attack regularly.
    .
    If you want to report on the ARMY of Genghis Khan - provide data on the CAPITAL, provide data on the General Staff ...
    Or even about the BATTALON - approximately equal. nomadic.
    There isn’t such a thing - and it’s easy to invent furious, and cheekbones, details.
    .
    I’m standing on that.
    1. AK64
      AK64 18 January 2016 10: 00 New
      +1
      Dear Bashi Buzuk, self-supply at the expense of the enemy was the norm up to and including Napoleon.
      (Only later it became not camillo)

      Here is the answer to your perplexity
      1. Bashibuzuk
        Bashibuzuk 22 January 2016 21: 57 New
        -2
        One question....
        in the vast steppes Deshti_Kipchaka ..... who could provide self-supply?
        How much is a normal camp, clan, nomad?
        How many flocks to disperse, and how many with you?
        What places ... gathering, caching, escape ... exist with the nomad (in the concept of a clan tribe).
        What density should the advancing troops have to comb through?
        How was communication maintained?
        How was the tactic maintained?
        How did you respond to unreceived data?
        ....
        Why did freedom-loving nomads need to risk their lives .... in such a situation?
        About the task - from sea to sea - it is advisable not to mention.
  19. Ahasverus
    Ahasverus 18 January 2016 10: 35 New
    -2
    Well, uhh, this is Tatar-Mongolian splendor - in the form of captured territories and a vast state. Hde treasures ... They are not ...

    But Russia (the Great Tatars) - it is. There are treasures ...

    Yes, by the way, in the army of Genghis Khan, they spoke and wrote in Old Slavonic ... Tatars (people from Tartar-Ada - he is for fascist Europe). For us, these are the good princes and the Russian Army ...
  20. Jääkorppi
    Jääkorppi 20 January 2016 10: 08 New
    0
    The victories of the Tatar-Mongol are due to the fact that the settled states could not put out a large army by definition, since the bulk of the population is farmers. In Europe, even the feudal knight militia was convened only for a couple of months a year, while among the nomads every man was a warrior. And the Mongols were only the basis of the army, and Polovtsy and Bulgars and the so-called Tatars were included in it. The kingdom of Kazan was located on the territory of the Finno-Ugric tribes, for example, Cheremis and our Tatars (not to be confused with the Crimean) is Mordva mixed with Turkic blood. They are not genetically close to the Russian and Mongolian genes in them (just like the Russians - Mordva mixed with Slavic blood, genetically identical to the Finns, of course, everything was noticeably mixed during the years of Soviet rule, mother Ukrainian is at tea
  21. Jääkorppi
    Jääkorppi 20 January 2016 10: 17 New
    -2
    Yes, by the way, as it turned out, the Anglo-Saxons who conquered Britain brought customs, language and culture, but as recent studies show, they didn’t exterminate the local population, but the British themselves were completely assimilated by the Celts, like the Scots and the Irish. This is another argument in the Norman theory of the Varangians-Rusov and the formation of the Vladimir, Rostov, Suzdal principalities and the whole of North-Eastern Russia.
  22. Jääkorppi
    Jääkorppi 20 January 2016 12: 40 New
    -1
    For my posts on this subject I’m constantly minus, probably, Slavophiles. It is interesting how they imagine the migration of the Slavs in the 10-11 centuries to the North-East. So you can see the caravans of carts of peasants leaving the fertile lands of Kievan Rus and moving to dense forests with poor climate and soil! Just like the American colonialists! And adopting the customs, cuisine, clothing and life of local people, taking the toponymy of geographical names. And also a white-eyed one who goes into the woods and disappears there. By the way, archaeological excavations do not reveal traces of Slavic culture, except for the burials of boyars and warriors, and even then mixed with Scandinavian artifacts.
    1. Bashibuzuk
      Bashibuzuk 22 January 2016 22: 04 New
      -1
      My friend ..... bliiiiiin.
      nobody ever went anywhere.
      If current walk.
      Well, count it, cart, eat it, dear device ..... just do not ride on it.
      And you - relocation, carts, alien white-eyed.
      .
      Russian and mastered those open spaces that nobody tries .... were not needed.
      Cold, hungry.
      What kind of iPhone the Vikings drag on Gardarika, where there is NOTHING good, everything is exactly the same as theirs, even more impoverished Scandinavians. And where it is quite possible to grab so hard in the face that you can’t get home.
      And nearby - Byzantium ... Normandy (future) ... Spain ... England, damn it, a transit point, there is no way around ...
      Scandinavians may have fled from poverty.
      But not in the attempt to create a state.
      .
      I do not believe that homeless people are able to create an ORGANIZATION-