Military Review

“Wrapped up in battens” Birger and others like him against modern Russian historiography

123
"... And she feeds on fables!"
(Boris Godunov. A.S. Pushkin)



Who argues that history Do you need to know your fatherland? No one! But you can know it in different ways. You can restrict yourself to a school textbook and ... the younger scooper of the cesspool truck is no longer necessary. You can read more and "School of future commanders." Very ... "advanced" for the appropriate age book. Next comes the university and there is its own specificity: domestic history is read in one semester for “techies” ... and that’s all! Humanities studies it in greater volume, but often, too ... "gallop across Europe." But worst of all, in the university, there are auxiliary historical disciplines and such a discipline as historiography. I remember well how I and my classmates studied it in the period from 1972 to 1977 a year. How did we do it? And here is how - “anyhow!” “Auxiliary” read ... a scientist, yes, but he loved to “give in”. The second discipline - his drinking companion, not at all an authoritative little man, who mumbled something under his breath, and who failed to convince us of the main thing - that only having information about who wrote what and how did write to you ! And, perhaps, I hope so, somewhere all this has been studied and studied quite differently, although the teaching experience from the 1982 of the year shows that the importance of these particular subjects is still underestimated, at least by students.

“Wrapped up in battens” Birger and others like him against modern Russian historiography

In the articles of Mr. Samsonov, the term "chained knights" is so often used that it literally "takes out the brain." Was it possible, by the way, to check this very "stiffness" of the then knights before writing about it? Yes, easily! For example, when I had such a need, I turned to the British "Medieval Society" and they provided me with photographs of ... effigy - gravestone sculptures of knights, made either immediately after their death, or several years later. But still they reflect what the sculptor saw. And they are voluminous, unlike miniatures in illuminated manuscripts of that time, and all are dated by the years of death of the deceased, whom they depict. Let's arrange a kind of “time travel”, and see how the effigies reflect the genesis of knightly “from and to” armor. Here is the first and very famous: William Longspe's effigy, mind. 1226 Propulsion Salisbury Cathedral. As you can see, he is all from head to foot in mail. And since the armor was valuable, it must be thought that the same was worn in the 1240 year. Or is it not?

Meanwhile, it is clear what sources are of paramount importance for history, because all this together is the foundation of all historical science. And - I will add, for pseudoscientific journalism. Because you can, of course, take and rewrite a couple of banal editions of the Ochakov times and the subjugations of the Crimea, and publish it, but you can regularly look at, say, an academic journal like Voprosy istorii, where not only many interesting articles are published , again with links to the most authoritative sources, but e-mails of their authors are also given, that is, you can always contact them and get answers to their questions.


Did all the knights go like that then? Yes! Here is the effect of Robert de Roos, mind. 1227 of the London Temple.

That is ... everything is there, starting from the complete collection of Russian chronicles (common abbreviation PSRL) - the fundamental book series for studying the history of ancient and medieval Russia, to the corresponding, again, journal publications and monographs. And now it was necessary for such a thing to happen that I come to my university today and bring me the next issue of Questions of History, and there an article by Ph.D., associate professor Nesterenko AN. “False narratives of the biography of Alexander Nevsky in Russian historiography”. What are good materials in the VI? By the fact that literally every fact, in fact there is a word, a reference to the source and source is given there. That is - go, good people in the library, read, compare and learn a lot. Since, as I wrote above, the sources are very important, then probably we should start with the annals. And again - there were intelligent people who did a great job, wrote an article “Written sources about the Ice Battle” (Yu.K. Runners, I.E. Kleinenberg, I.P. Shaskolsky). And it’s enough for anybody here to “drive” all into Google, as it will be provided to you. And in it, again, links to the chronicles of PSRL. So, if someone is completely Thomas the Unbeliever, he can search for everything himself, compare, compare and draw conclusions. Finally, it’s quite easy to take the file of Pravda newspaper for 1942 a year and see the editorial on April 5. Believe that it is more interesting than the articles placed here on the Neva Battle and the "Ice Battle", and even more historic at times. And you have to remember what time it was, what war was going on, and most importantly, who edited Pravda himself with a blue pencil. And ... I missed everything I wrote, and therefore I approved!


Here is the not very well-preserved effect of William de Sharpenuan of Umberlein, mind. 1240. However, what you are wearing is still visible!

So, based on the totality of the facts available in our national historiography, we can now accurately establish that the battle on the same Lake Peipsi ... was. That the Russian troops (let us say so) under the leadership of Prince Alexander defeated the army of the knights brothers. And that's it! Any details? Yes, there is in different sources! "The dead fell into the grass", "the brothers overpowered the shooters", "the Chud fell countless" and a number of others, but not so many, and again they are all in the chronicles, as well as in the Livonian rhymed chronicle, which, by the way, In his speech, the historian K. Zhukov speaks very well, as is, in fact, about the Ice Battle.


Gilbert Marshall The Fourth Earl of Pembroke, died 1241

And from this entire amount of information the conclusion follows: NO ONE IN THE LAKE HASNT SOMETHED, nobody WITHOUT WRISTLED PERSONS, quite a few warriors from both sides participated in the battle, and all reconstructions of Beskorovnogo and Razin were insinuations of the purest water, designed for simpletons. At the same time, no one disputes the fact that the very fact of the sinking of knights as a result of “breaking the ice” does not raise any doubts, only he had a place a little earlier, in the battle of Ogovzha, which, again, the chronicles tell us, and to be the only battle on the ice really took place ... in 1270, about which, by the way, I wrote in detail in my article here on BO.

Now let's talk about the “pig”, which is dear to our pseudo-historians ... Again, I don’t want to beat off the bread from K. Zhukov, he speaks about it in great detail, but here’s what A.N. Nesterenko (VI, pp. 109-10): “The Germans began the battle with a ram rat” is another common misconception. The fact that the riders' deep formation, the "pig", acts like a ram on the battlefield is nothing more than a fantasy. In fact, with such a construction in battle, only those riders who are in the front row, that is, an absolute minority, can take part. The warriors standing behind them are not only unable to assist those who are ahead, but on the contrary, interfere with maneuver and create a crush. Moreover, the deep construction of cavalry is impossible by definition, since during the attack the horse would not put pressure on the front horses, and if the horsemen try to force them, this will lead to complete chaos in the ranks of the attacking cavalry, and it will itself become easy prey for the enemy .


And this is a knight from the facade of the cathedral in Wales. Just mid-XIII, the helmet Tophel. Surcoat, helmet, shield and chain mail and ... everything!

To avoid this, the "wedge" when approaching the enemy had to turn around in a line. Only in this way the maximum number of heavily armed horsemen could simultaneously engage in battle and cause the greatest damage to the enemy, at the same time depriving him of the opportunity to strike the flanks of the attackers. Therefore, the construction of the "wedge" is only necessary for rapprochement with the enemy. With its help, the massiveness and simultaneity of the strike is achieved by the time when, approaching the minimum distance to the enemy's battle formations, the wedge turns into an attacking horse lava. If the attack of the knightly cavalry began at once with an unfolded line, instead of an organized strike, the knights would have scattered across the entire battlefield. As a result, heavily armed horsemen, chaotically and randomly moving across the field, would turn from a formidable opponent into easy prey for ordinary peasants armed with long-range bows, and would suffer defeat after defeat from the city militia who were chained up in riders' armor, bristling with long arms spears. Or they would have become the prey of light cavalry, attacking the lone rider from all sides, shooting him from afar from a distance.


Here it is - John Leverik, who died in 1350 and was buried in the church of the town of Ash, is the first effect on which we see the torso of a knight in stripes armor. His legs are also "chained" in anatomical armor.

The “wedge” had one more very important virtue: a narrow front. After all, when the squad of knights slowly, “step by step”, was approaching the enemy, it became a great target for archers. And when building a “wedge,” the target of the enemy shooters turned out to be only a few riders in the most reliable protective gear. The rest could only be hit by ineffective out-of-order outboard fire.


But the knight, more or less “chained” in armor, is John de Kabham, who died in the 1354 year and was buried in the Cobham church. True, this is not the effigy, but the breaststroke is also an element of the funeral inventory simpler - the engraving on the brass sheet. And on this brace you can see that this knight is not “chained” to the end ...

Thus, the knight's wedge, “boar's head”, was intended only for rapprochement with the enemy, and in no way for attack and certainly not for “ram attacks”. And it is clear that no infantry in the middle of the wedge could run. The knights had to pick up speed in order to quickly go to a gallop (an hour of trotting in armor was a punishment of the Templars!), And no infantryman behind a galloping horse would hijack! Lynx in the gland - for superheroes, and, as you know, does not happen!


Some effigies were colored, golden, in a word, this is a truly rare monument and an opportunity ... to look into the past. Knight Peter de Grandissan, mind. 1358 g. (Hereford Cathedral). Notice his surcoat of heraldic flowers, the “kidney dagger” on its side, which was also roughly called the “dagger with eggs”. He already has armor on his legs, and shields on his elbows, but no more!


Richard Pembridge, who died in 1375 (Hereford Cathedral), also wears armor, yes, but ... there is also a chain mail barmitsa in his gear, that is, he is not chained to the end!

However, the "pig" - it's not so bad. Some of us were so fond of knights clad in armor that Jarl Birger was also chained into them (whose participation in the Battle of the Neva, according to ANNesterenko, is not reported either in the chronicle or in the Life of Alexander Nevsky. ” !) and who, they say, our Alexander wounded with a spear, although on his skull, and he survived, there were no injuries that sculptor Oscar Nilsson testified in 2010. However, God bless him, with a skull. Let's go about the armor. And here at VO and much earlier, in the works of historian M.V. Gorelik back in 1975 year, published in the magazine "Around the World", the armor of 1240 soldiers of the year was repeatedly described. And ... they did not have any forged armor! But with persistence ... they continue to write about them. What for? In the age of the Internet, this is at least strange. But ... on this, I think, it is possible to finish this material. I do not want to deprive the readers of VO of the pleasure of self-acquaintance with the materials mentioned in the article and independent research, which, no doubt, will increase their competence at times!

Well, as for the photo excursion in the history of armor given here, it should be quite enough! No wonder it says: better to see, is not it? Well, and someone else said that it is necessary to move towards the goal gradually, “step by step”. Most likely, few of those who read all this will find the strength to turn to the above-mentioned sources and, in particular, to the journal Voprosy istorii, after all an academic publication. But at least with the knights, we figured out, is not it? And when we next time, well, let's say, in a year or two, we will again read about the Battle of Neva and the "Ice Battle" again, we can hope that, at least, the knights in armor in these future materials will not be!


And finally, the fully knitted armor - Nicholas de Longford, mind. 1416 (Longford Church). We note the presence of a very original laguage - scutes covering the armpits on its armor. Basagu were usually round. And these look like shells. Such was the original! And now let's calculate: with the 1240 year has passed ... 176 years!
Author:
123 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Good cat
    Good cat 9 February 2016 06: 47
    +1
    And what difference does that make? Maybe you are right, "chained in steel armor" is a common stamp, it does not change the essence in any way. And, by the way, the "pig" or how the knights moved differently, the same is not very important.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Generalissimo
      Generalissimo 9 February 2016 07: 04
      +5
      The oblique strike of Frederick the Great is of course also a PR.
    3. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 9 February 2016 07: 44
      +5
      sarcasm mod on / You are right, nothing is important, the main thing is the beauty of the syllable. This is the story, what is it about armor and battle formations / sarcasm mod of
      1. tomket
        tomket 9 February 2016 15: 26
        +8
        Quote: cth; fyn
        You are right, nothing is important, the main thing is the beauty of the syllable. This is the story, what is it about armor and battle formation?

        Shapkovsky's great-great-grandson will open the encyclopedia 200 years later, see the portrait of Zhukov, and then go down to the pedestal, and come to the conclusion that in the 20th century there were no bulletproof vests at all! And helmets appeared only in the 21st century, and before that they fought in the "parade". On portraits and on pedestals, they are in "parades"! And the artist painted what he saw!
        1. Mr. Pip
          Mr. Pip 9 February 2016 15: 49
          +4
          Quote: tomket
          and then it goes down to the pedestal, and comes to the conclusion that in the 20th century there were no bulletproof vests at all! And helmets appeared only in the century 21

          Well, in truth, the generals of helmets and body armor did not appear in the 21st century - and the article is about knights!
          I do not think that great-great-grandchildren will study infantry uniforms from the portraits of generals, well, if they are not "alternative men" of course they will fellow
        2. cth; fyn
          cth; fyn 9 February 2016 20: 49
          +3
          The photo of the soldiers is much larger, so the issue is debatable, and the pace of development has been gaining momentum recently, consider 100 years ago the car worked on castor oil, and now it can drive without human intervention using AI.
      2. gergi
        gergi 10 February 2016 00: 17
        +5
        To the question of the beauty of the syllable. Is it true that Rabinovich won a million dollars in cards? Truth! Only not a million, but a thousand, and not in cards, but in chess, and not dollars, but rubles, and did not win, but lost! So are our historians, luminaries, damn it!
    4. Mangel olys
      Mangel olys 9 February 2016 07: 58
      16
      And what difference does that make? Maybe you are right, "chained in steel armor" is a common stamp, it does not change the essence in any way. And, by the way, the "pig" or how the knights moved differently, the same is not very important.

      So, because of the opinion of such an electorate - history has become a "prostitute". laughing
      1. 3news
        3news 9 February 2016 10: 50
        +7
        Quote: Mangel Olys
        history has become a "prostitute"

        Yes, there are very big doubts that this discipline can be called science. She does not go there on a formal basis.
        Rather, it is a collection of "teachings" approved by the authorities, which is obligatory for memorization to receive a piece of paper called "school leaving diploma." At the same time, the "doctrines" with a sharp and not very change of power again abruptly or not change very much. Those. history is an element of propaganda, but not science.
        1. skullcap
          skullcap 9 February 2016 11: 24
          +1
          Quote: 3news
          there are very big doubts that this discipline can be called a science.

          I agree: history is not a science, but a policy operating from the past.
          1. Glot
            Glot 9 February 2016 12: 05
            0
            I agree: history is not a science, but a policy operating from the past.


            Politics, operates on the present, building the near future. You cannot operate on the past, it has already been accomplished and unchanged.
            History studies the past, it can partially work on one or another political line of the present to present certain moments from this past in the right light, but it cannot change it entirely. And by veiling something in one place, you can always "look under the veil" from another. Especially in the present period. When much is available and open.
            The main thing is to want to do this.
            1. 3news
              3news 9 February 2016 12: 22
              +2
              Quote: Glot
              You cannot operate on the past, it has already been accomplished and unchanged.

              You, just a big comedian. Straight, outstanding. With such a smart look to carry such blatant nonsense. This is not for everyone.
          2. The comment was deleted.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Glot
          Glot 9 February 2016 11: 34
          +2
          Yes, there are very big doubts that this discipline can be called science. She does not go there on a formal basis.


          And can you voice the formal features by which those or other disciplines can be considered scientific?
          Or, on what grounds can historical discipline not be considered scientific?
          1. 3news
            3news 9 February 2016 11: 51
            0
            Quote: Glot
            on what grounds can historical discipline not be considered scientific?

            History has not acquired a single sign of science: it does not contain any verifiable and repeatable components and cannot be subjected to experimental analysis. Yes, there are artifacts, excavation material, and material evidence. But, as you know, they can be interpreted in any convenient way.
            1. Glot
              Glot 9 February 2016 11: 59
              -1
              History has not acquired a single sign of science: it does not contain any verifiable and repeatable components and cannot be subjected to experimental analysis. Yes, there are artifacts, excavation material, and material evidence. But, as you know, they can be interpreted in any convenient way.


              Signs, signs that name. smile
              Everything is checked with the help of auxiliary historical disciplines.
              You just too superficially know about it.
              There are a lot of them. There is archeology, source databases, various dating methods and so on and so forth.
              Everything is not so simple, and one complements or refutes the other.
              To interpret this or that as you like is also not easy therefore.

              I did not hear clearly and clearly marked signs ... request
              1. 3news
                3news 9 February 2016 12: 02
                -1
                Quote: Glot
                Signs, signs that name.

                Now. Only pull up my pants, repeat 2 times.
          2. gergi
            gergi 10 February 2016 21: 05
            +1
            The mathematician believes that the physicist proves, the chemist is experimenting, the historian sucks from his finger and rips off his shirt on his chest, which is the truth!
        4. The comment was deleted.
    5. Vend
      Vend 9 February 2016 10: 15
      +3
      Quote: Good cat
      And what difference does that make? Maybe you are right, "chained in steel armor" is a common stamp, it does not change the essence in any way. And, by the way, the "pig" or how the knights moved differently, the same is not very important.

      Even as it changes. You would still be called upon to teach history from the picture of Prissekin.
      1. Good cat
        Good cat 9 February 2016 11: 34
        +1
        Let me explain my position, of course you need to study history as best you can, but I'm not talking about something else. Such a company is in the details and for some reason only on the one hand generates subsequent stuffing, it is similar researchers who "unearthed" that there was no battle at Dubosekovo, and if there was, then the wrong ones fought there, etc. With whom the author argues in this article. With the media? And normal historians already know who was wearing what. So show-off, as noted below.
        1. Vend
          Vend 9 February 2016 11: 46
          +6
          Quote: Good cat
          Let me explain my position, of course you need to study history as best you can, but I'm not talking about something else. Such a company is in the details and for some reason only on the one hand generates subsequent stuffing, it is similar researchers who "unearthed" that there was no battle at Dubosekovo, and if there was, then the wrong ones fought there, etc. With whom the author argues in this article. With the media? And normal historians already know who was wearing what. So show-off, as noted below.

          Normal historians read and write mainly for each other. But such stuffing is designed for ordinary people. People need to change their historical consciousness, it is on their shoulders that Russia holds. 90% of Russians are ordinary people, they work, raise children, etc. And only 10% are those who create science, culture, art, etc. In which case, soldiers at the front will be forged mainly by 90% of Russians. 10% will contribute, but it is impossible to win without people with simple and understandable values. For them, historical articles are written. It is a pity that not all articles are equally adequate. There is a lot of garbage.
    6. Sweles
      Sweles 9 February 2016 10: 28
      +6
      Shpakovsky, who serves someone else's history, is so keen on parsing not our side in an ice battle that he completely forgets about ours, how the knights were armed and how they fought, it's interesting, but how ours is not interesting. There are many other people's pictures, the study of these images is of real interest for Shpakovsky, but, for example, the same old images like "The Battle of the Mongols with the Hungarians on the Sayo Bridge" are of no interest to such "historians" ...
      1. cth; fyn
        cth; fyn 9 February 2016 11: 10
        +8
        this is not the point, but another. The author wrote extensively and conclusively that it was incorrectly written in an article about Nevsky by another speaker. Consequently, there was no discussion about the armor of Russian soldiers in that article, and they did not discuss them, if the author of the cycle about Nevsky and about domestic armor screwed up, Vyacheslav, I am sure of this, would have created the same detailed and reasoned article on Russian weapons and armor.
    7. skullcap
      skullcap 9 February 2016 18: 20
      +2
      Personally, this material reminded me of the story with the Leningrad writer Viktor Konetsky, when his story was smashed to pieces only because of one stroke: he wrote not a small, but a small-caliber rifle. An obvious slip of the pen, since he was a young man of wartime and that the caliber may be small, but not small, he knew well from childhood.
      So it is here. You can say a big thank you to the author, if he was a friend to complement or correct Samsonov. But he aggressively runs into our comrade, constantly posting interesting articles. I pay attention - articles, but not scientific essays or monographs. Therefore, it is impossible to impose requirements on articles as scientific works.
      The works of Valentin Pikul are also not always scientifically accurate, and many make well-founded claims against him. However, all objective people admit that he aroused an interest in his history among the Russian people. The articles of Samsonov work in the same direction. And, attacking him, you can pursue only one goal - to discredit interest in the history of the Russian people.
      P.S. By the way, the material of Shpakskoky is not perfect, either. For example, the deceased from the first photo is clearly depicted not in chain mail, but in some kind of cloth chiton. For mail in no case can not have such folds, which are made by the sculptor.
      1. kalibr
        9 February 2016 20: 26
        +1
        You don’t even know that the knights at that time wore suriko over chain mail armor. This is for your PS. But this is interesting: it is impossible to make demands on historical articles as scientific works. Do you understand what you write?
        1. cth; fyn
          cth; fyn 9 February 2016 20: 52
          0
          I agree, he called himself a pot, please in the oven.
    8. The comment was deleted.
    9. gergi
      gergi 10 February 2016 00: 12
      +2
      Important! So you can turry on wheels No need to lie.
  2. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 9 February 2016 06: 47
    +1
    Thank. A beautifully written illustrated article.
    1. Generalissimo
      Generalissimo 9 February 2016 07: 07
      +9
      But you, however, with humor. Too many dead crusaders for one article.
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 9 February 2016 09: 08
        +5
        Can you provide the living? Moreover, the original, and not a reconstruction? Please.
        wassat
        1. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 10 February 2016 12: 53
          +1
          Kindly to the museum!
          1. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 11 February 2016 10: 20
            -1
            I have not seen a single original living exhibit in the museum that could have been dated in the meantime. Only some species of trees live so much. Of these, there are so many oaks and some pines in the Arctic region in this region.
            1. Generalissimo
              Generalissimo 17 February 2016 15: 39
              0
              I liked the trees.
  3. Mangel olys
    Mangel olys 9 February 2016 07: 24
    +4
    I agree with you, Vladislav Olegovich:
    Who argues that you need to know the history of your fatherland? No one!

    “Not knowing history means always being a child”
    Mark Tullius Cicero
    1. Mangel olys
      Mangel olys 9 February 2016 07: 53
      +2
      I apologize for the confusion, Vyacheslav Olegovich.
    2. nnz226
      nnz226 9 February 2016 12: 14
      +3
      Kun Tzu (aka Confucius): "A person who does not foresee the future, failures and misfortunes await in him! STUDY HISTORY TO PREVENT THE FUTURE!"
  4. cth; fyn
    cth; fyn 9 February 2016 07: 50
    +4
    I see the living things touched, it’s understandable when they publish such a pseudoscientific heresy, they can burn the butt from a professional historian, I wish Vyacheslav patience and will in the fight against ignorance and falsehood.
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 9 February 2016 09: 13
      +7
      Over the past six months, many articles have already been published here on this subject. Unfortunately, in the tape they go down and few take it upon themselves to look for them. Now, if the site had a more or less detailed heading for articles, so that you could find them by the library catalog. After all, there, in addition to the original copyright texts, there are very good comments. I've learned a lot of useful things.
      1. cth; fyn
        cth; fyn 9 February 2016 09: 58
        +1
        But it’s awesome to do, and we live about ___ about
        1. Mr. Pip
          Mr. Pip 9 February 2016 15: 14
          +2
          Quote: AK64
          So what new did Shpakovsky reveal to us?
          Except stupid show-offs?

          Oh, how terrible and important we are!
          This is a "popular science" resource on Military topics - for many, this article is really a discovery, because ordinary "amateurs" can hardly imagine the differences between the 13th century and the 14th, you all know ours!
          And the article was a response to another article where the author did not know it. So "would you go" to comment on that news that "the author does not know" and not this one with the words "I know that", you are our bespontovy laughing
      2. Pomeranian
        Pomeranian 10 February 2016 10: 41
        0
        Quote: abrakadabre
        After all, there, in addition to the original copyright texts, there are very good comments. I've learned a lot of useful things.

        Accurate remark. Sometimes comments are much more interesting and informative than the article under discussion.
    2. AK64
      AK64 9 February 2016 11: 01
      +4
      I see the living things touched, it’s understandable when they publish such a pseudoscientific heresy, they can burn the butt from a professional historian, I wish Vyacheslav patience and will in the fight against ignorance and falsehood.


      Who and where "publishes heresy"? Be precise: names, surnames, places of work?

      What is the "discovery" of Mr. Shpakovsky? Anyone who is more or less interested in this issue knows that solid armor and a solid cuirass are at best the 14th century. (And even then rather the end.) As he knows that the armor in museums is SPORTS (tournament).
      So what new has Mr. Shpakovsky revealed to us here? What is all this pont about?

      Ah, "pig"... Did not fight, grit, pigs ...
      Well, I strongly recommend both Mr. Shpakovsky himself and his local fans to use Google and see what Svinfylking is (the Russian term for this system, "pig", precisely from the consonance of these words).

      I am silent about the "oblique attack" (already mentioned), the columns of the French and Suvorov, and other deep constructions: from the point of view of the couch strategist Shpakovsky, this is all heresy and impossible: he would have shown them how to fight, something needed!

      So what new did Shpakovsky reveal to us?
      Except stupid show-offs?
      1. cth; fyn
        cth; fyn 9 February 2016 11: 12
        +2
        Truth, answered shortly and clearly.
        1. cth; fyn
          cth; fyn 9 February 2016 11: 31
          +1
          And capital, your captain Evidence.
      2. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 9 February 2016 12: 12
        +1
        In the post above, I see a lot of rudeness with a minimum of my own knowledge. Aggression is completely unmotivated. What should not be a minus, but on the neck to give.

        Now a little on the topic:
        1. A considerable and even most of the armor in museums is really tournament. And the front door. However, there are not just many fighting people, but I apologize to the ass. In the imperial arsenal of the city of Graz alone, various armor and weapons for about ten thousandth army are stored. (initially the city put up 16 fighters against the Turks) There are also for pikemen, and for arquebusiers, and for earlier Landsknechts and for cavalry (including gendarmes). It has been kept since the sixteenth century, since the time of frequent wars with the Ottoman Empire. Moreover, it is stored in the ZERO state! readiness - dress and go into battle (a paradise for fans of survival in the zombie apocalypse). Although the arsenal since 1749 does not work as a storage of military weapons, but as a museum.
        And unlike most museums in Europe, the tradition of servicing armor has not been interrupted for 2-3 hundreds of years. That is, all that needs to be repaired is repaired correctly. It’s not that in which museum right-left shoulder pads are confused, or helmets are worn backwards on a mannequin, or in general, such an enchanting set is assembled from the armor of different centuries ...

        2. If you look at most of the links in the search query Swinfylking , such nonsense is indicated there ... On the presented reconstruction video, for example or (both links are at the top of the search query ranking) everything is very colorful, colorful, but absolutely not related to a real battle. Your knowledge in military formations, let’s say, like ... in oranges. Well, they would have kept it to themselves. So bring it into the light of day. Yes, in a boorish manner.
        1. AK64
          AK64 9 February 2016 15: 21
          +1
          In the post above, I see a lot of rudeness with a minimum of my own knowledge. Aggression is completely unmotivated. What should not be a minus, but on the neck to give.


          Uh, I’ll see. You are the most courageous couch warrior! Fearless is simple. And you try, I can give the address. Try it, warrior.
          So: I’m not at that age to swing our fists with gopes: you’ll go sitfast and easy.
          And even this threat in itself characterizes you, WAR, very specifically.

          Where is the "rudeness", war? This is just rudeness in Shpakovsky: "you are all fools, but I will open your eyes now, I will tell you the whole truth!"

          Once again I ask: what new Shpakovsky said, except for the show off?
          And his Russophobia implied by every line of it ...
          1. cth; fyn
            cth; fyn 9 February 2016 20: 57
            +3
            Yes, who needs you, they will put you as a worthwhile one, he will give the address and immediately went into the hell with the supposedly wrong age.
            Politeness is priceless, because it costs nothing. Miguel Sarvantes.
  5. parusnik
    parusnik 9 February 2016 08: 01
    +2
    At the Faculty of History, at Leningrad State University ... history and bibliography were taught severely ... The first two months you think ... some kind of crap ... but then you begin to see clearly ... Thank you, Vyacheslav!
  6. Maegrom
    Maegrom 9 February 2016 08: 53
    +2
    These elements are of course important, but far from the only monuments that demonstrate the armor of that time. There are literary descriptions, preserved copies, etc. These images, for example, may, by tradition, leave their faces open. Therefore, the study is not complete without a comparative analysis with data from other sources. As a goal, to prove the weakness of knightly armor of the 13th century. generally absurd. The history of the development of knightly knightly armor as a whole is well known, and did not include everything in any way in the school curriculum.
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 9 February 2016 09: 06
      +8
      Chain mail is a very good armor, and the knights were very well protected for their time. Chain mail protects from stabbing blows of the sword and spear, provided that they were not applied very hard, from blows of the ax and halberds (it will not protect much from the crushing effect, but will reduce the chopped wound, the armor will be badly damaged, but will fulfill its role) , from cutting blows of all types, and chopping blows of a sword (here, just like with an ax, with sufficiently strong blows there will be damage to the armor, but it will fulfill its role).
      Taken from personal wholesale, he chopped a piece of chain mail with an ordinary ax and a falsion. When striking with one hand, a deformation of a number of rings occurs, when striking from two hands, breaks and unstucking of the rings are observed, but there has never been a characteristic ax print on the chock.

      PS: with an ax blow, I cut the cow's thigh or spine laid on the chock.
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 9 February 2016 09: 45
        11
        The degree of damage in this case greatly depends on the quality of the chain mail. It should be borne in mind that modern riveted chain mail is made of a better and more uniform metal in properties. This was not available at the time. This time.

        Chain mail reliably protects only from secant and random chopped blows. It does not protect against accented chopped, piercing, strokes of impact-crushing weapons. Even in case of non-penetration of herself. Due to its flexibility. Chain mail also practically does not protect itself from arrows on its own. Only in combination with a thick dense under-arm and against arrows with a universal tip. Against special awl-shaped does not protect at all. These are two.

        However, these protective properties were enough. The main protective items of the knight's armaments at that time were a shield and helmet. They took upon themselves the main burden of repelling the means of attack: spears, swords, arrows.

        The parity of chain mail armor and means of attack was maintained until even such armor was expensive and the bulk of the soldiers could not afford full protective weapons. The means of attack had no incentive to develop. As soon as the armor became cheaper and became massive, the need for a more powerful weapon of attack arose - swords and spears began to become heavier, the stitching function became a priority for swords, and crossbows were widely used in large quantities.
        However, the cost of improved and more effective weapons is also high, and the next saturation of large masses of troops with such weapons was also delayed for some time.
        This in turn led to the gradual spread of brigant and tire-brigant reinforcements to chain mail armor.

        And so on, the eternal confrontation between "sword and shield". But the determining factor in this confrontation has always been the level of economic development. Not the skill of an individual craftsman in piece copies, but in relatively mass production for the needs of the then armies as a whole.
        1. cth; fyn
          cth; fyn 9 February 2016 09: 52
          +3
          I agree about the material, article 3 is not swamp iron, I applied the punches precisely accented, especially with the carpentry ax 2,7 kg, from two hands. After such a blow, part of the rings riveted or torn, but the lump was a whole, only a small dent.
          1. cth; fyn
            cth; fyn 9 February 2016 10: 06
            +2
            Weaving 4 in 1, you can try 6 in 1, but I'm too lazy to sort out and rivet.
            1. abrakadabre
              abrakadabre 9 February 2016 10: 25
              +3
              No, no, no ... do not need 6 in 1. The main part of chain mail is 4 in 1, as you yourself know very well. Unless to make several samples for a special comparative strength test:
              4 1 in
              6 1 in
              8 1 in
              and very rare options are 6 in 2 and 8 in 2.

              But this is already a laborious study: five web options for several samples for testing with different weapons.
              smile
          2. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 9 February 2016 10: 14
            +2
            I agree about the material, article 3 is not swamp iron
            Exactly. For what an expensive piece product, the craftsmen could of course make a high-quality wire, similar in properties to steel. But basically, for chain mail very mediocre raw materials were used. According to the properties below modern St-3. And most importantly - very heterogeneous in composition.

            I applied the punches precisely accented, especially with the carpentry ax 2,7 kg, from two hands.
            In a battle ax, unlike a carpenter's, the blade is angled. So that the blow comes out as if with a corner, and not with a full blade.This allows you to penetrate deeper into protective equipment. The highest manifestation of this armor-piercing effect (if you do not take klevtsy with faceted points) are the blades of late halberds and knob-like hatchets "crow's beak" with slightly curved dagger-like warheads.

            By the way, do not share the parameters of chain mail from this experience of yours: the diameter and thickness of the rings, riveted or cross-riveted, from which steel rings, flat rings or riveted only at the junction? Did they imitate the under-armor layer and soft tissues of the human body under the chain mail and on top of the stump?

            After such a blow, part of the rings riveted or torn, but the lump was a whole, only a small dent.
            Keep in mind that the human body is much less durable than lump. To chop off a person’s hand does not need such a strong blow, as in the case of chopping a thick branch or chopping logs along the fibers. And in the case of chain mail, it is absolutely not necessary to cut it through at all. It is enough to dent the unhealed coif chain mail into the skull or into the chest to the spine. Or just crush your internal organs with a crushing blow. A person dies from internal bleeding.
            1. cth; fyn
              cth; fyn 9 February 2016 11: 14
              +1
              Mdya ... That one of me is a naturalist :(
              1. Kombrig
                Kombrig 9 February 2016 17: 38
                +1
                For completeness of the experience, try to "put" a chain mail on a pork carcass, the damage will be even less, ideally, you need to use a ballistic gel (current where to get it) ..))))
                1. cth; fyn
                  cth; fyn 9 February 2016 21: 01
                  +3
                  It doesn’t roll, then it’s still possible to catch fragments of bones from the fight, and it will come out a little expensive, a rat rat.
            2. cth; fyn
              cth; fyn 9 February 2016 11: 30
              +1
              Initially, st3 wire diameter of 1,6 mm, the inner diameter of the ring is 11-10 mm, flattened with the edge going to the edge, flattened, drilled and riveted. I didn’t do it myself, I bought it in an artel from the Crimea. Most of them were sold, no one needed the koif, so it spoiled not for fun, but for learning.
              1. abrakadabre
                abrakadabre 9 February 2016 12: 19
                +2
                Thank. In our time, St-3 is the most realistic steel for chain mail. Some spank from annealed 65G wire. But it is very expensive. Although the strength is great. And in terms of reconstruction of combat damage of the Middle Ages - an inadequate choice. Because the strength is much higher than historical samples.
        2. AK64
          AK64 9 February 2016 11: 09
          +1
          It should be borne in mind that modern riveted chain mail is made of a better and more uniform metal in properties. This was not available at the time.


          It is for this reason that chain mail was made and not solid cuirasses. When they were able to get 10-15 kg of iron "in one piece" - then the cuirasses.

          But back to Shpakovsky and his "discoveries": so what new did he say here?


          Chain mail reliably protects only from secant and random chopped blows. It does not protect against accented chopped, piercing, strokes of impact-crushing weapons.


          Well, yes, well, yes ... "But the muzhuki don't even know .."
          The quality of the swords of that time is no better than the quality of chain mail. (That is why they gave names to rare good swords.) So the chain mail just protected from the chopping blow, and continued to protect the aszhnik until the 18th century. Cheres were worn by chain mail back in the 19th century, in the 1st Caucasian War. And for some reason the Cossack peak of these is not very much a knocker, the Cossacks had to trick, "tossing" chain mail. And why would it be like that, huh?


          Chain mail also practically does not protect against arrows by itself. Only in conjunction with a thick dense under-arm and against arrows with a universal tip. Against special awl-shaped does not protect at all. These are two.


          What a horror, and ...
          With what kind of show off do you set forth the truths ...
          Are you Shpakovsky not a brother? And then there’s a lot in common ...

          Before, I somehow liked you more, looked more reasonable somehow.
          1. cth; fyn
            cth; fyn 9 February 2016 11: 34
            +4
            And what's wrong with common truths? Simple, convenient, functional ... Square, practice, gut .... Gee))))
          2. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 9 February 2016 12: 47
            +5
            With what kind of show off do you set forth the truths ...
            Are you Shpakovsky not a brother? And then there’s a lot in common ...
            Not ham, but don’t send to ... you will. (folk wisdom)
            When they were able to get 10-15 kg of iron "in one piece" - then the cuirasses.
            to get a kritz of this weight is not a problem at all. The problem is to get a good and uniform steel without harmful impurities. Yes, unchain it in a large sheet without a burnout. Yes, then give the appropriate form exactly by the standards of the customer, who can even live on the other side of Europe.
            The quality of the swords of that time is no better than the quality of chain mail. (
            An extremely controversial and unfounded statement. Most of the samples that have come down to us (even kopanins or "drowned" ones) are of quite good quality metal to chop chain mail with accented blows. We would stop being rude and each such statement would be accompanied by specific examples available to others. You would be happy and respect your opponents.
            Skulls wore chain mail as early as the 19th century, in the 1st Caucasian War.
            Chain mail against 400-500 gram checkers - zero gud. Against an ax, halberd or a 1,5-pound sword - nothing. So, easy annoyance.
            By the way, why did not the invulnerable Circassian warriors conquer half the world then? With such and such miracle chain mail "armor".
            And for some reason the Cossack peak of these is not very much a knocker, the Cossacks had to trick, "tossing" chain mail. And why would it be like that, huh?
            Link to this fact in the studio. Not verbiage around the bush, but a link to all the rules of source study.
            I didn’t penetrate ... Then you can easily demonstrate a simple experiment:
            Take a fine mesh-netting (the wire there is strong enough for such an experiment). Wrap yourself up with it, even over a padded jacket. And ask the assistant with all the dope to shiban at you with a sledgehammer, butt of an ax or a heavy hammer. Upon completion of the experiment, share with us your feelings about the course of its implementation and happily talk about your own invulnerability and shame of us, your opponents, who do not know how to "turn on their brain." After all, the grid will not be broken through.

            You can also conduct a second experiment: instead of a sledgehammer, take a piece of reinforcement. and take the chain link in 2-3 layers. And why - the mesh is certainly large, and the fittings did not sew.

            Until you tell us about the results of these experiments, your opinion about the invulnerability of chain mail and our (not only me) poor mind is not worth a penny. And will be taken into account accordingly.
            So the chain mail just protected from a chopping blow
            Only and exclusively from accidental not accented.
            1. Mr. Pip
              Mr. Pip 9 February 2016 15: 18
              0
              Quote: abrakadabre
              Not ham, but don’t send to ... you will.

              You would be more careful with this patient, he has already blacklisted Shpakovsky himself laughing
              1. abrakadabre
                abrakadabre 10 February 2016 09: 53
                +1
                First of all, he blacklisted his own education. The rest is just a consequence.
            2. sharp-lad
              sharp-lad 10 February 2016 00: 17
              -1
              Chain mail against 400-500 gram checkers - zero gud. Against an ax, halberd or a 1,5-pound sword - nothing. So, easy annoyance.
              The chain mail alone will not withstand a direct blow from the weapons you listed, and in combination with the cuirass the owner of the "armor" could no longer withstand smile I don’t give a link, I don’t remember the source, but I know for sure that English amateurs (guys were big) of medieval weapons and armor conducted a simple experiment on themselves, put on Maximilian armor and tried to just ride a horse for several kilometers, the result is simply deplorable - loss of consciousness from overheating or complete depreciation from such loads. At the expense of Maximilian’s armor, his weight varied from 24 to 34 kilograms without weapons and shield !!! In general, Google to help us! hi
              1. abrakadabre
                abrakadabre 10 February 2016 08: 44
                +1
                The checker will withstand. Because neither the mass of the blade, nor the angles of sharpening the blade are adapted to deal with a hired opponent. Even if it is only chain mail.
        3. alicante11
          alicante11 9 February 2016 15: 17
          0
          The means of attack had no incentive to develop. As soon as the armor dropped in price and became massive


          Sorry, but how massive could chain mail be? This is, after all, actually a very complex, lengthy and, therefore, expensive work. I understand that if chain mail began to rivet at manufactories according to the type of fabric. But this is impossible at the wrong time.
          1. cth; fyn
            cth; fyn 9 February 2016 21: 14
            0
            Long yes but not too expensive and not too complicated. Chain mail has a very simple manufacturing process, the most difficult is the receipt of wire. The production and assembly of rings into items of military clothing is a primitive process that is mastered in a couple of hours.
            in the Middle Ages there was the concept of Workshop, when each worker did a primitive operation and transferred the product to the next worker. The workshop has been known since the time of Rome.
            personally, I already know how to weave several types of weaving 4in1; 6in1; little dragon; Japanese; differentiated from 4in1 to 6in1. Only I don’t know how to wire, but I think the novice blacksmith will cope with this.
            as a result we have:
            1. The wire can make any blacksmith, even rural;
            2. Assembling rings is a boring, long but simple process.
          2. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 10 February 2016 08: 54
            +2
            Sorry, but how massive could chain mail be? This is, after all, actually a very complex, lengthy and, therefore, expensive work.

            1. Complex - no. This is a very simple and routine job.
            2. Long - yes.
            3. Expensive - the main cost of chain mail in the earlier Middle Ages, this is the cost of the metal itself and the skilled work of pulling the wire. Given the fact that the drag technology, safely forgotten after the collapse of the Roman Empire, was restored only by the 12th-13th centuries. Making rings and weaving itself is an extremely low-skilled tedious job for apprentices who work hard for food and the opportunity to learn. Consider almost slave labor at a cost.
            Therefore, as soon as the technology allowed to increase the production of wire and uniform high-quality metal, chain mail began to become cheaper and move from high-end equipment to a niche in the middle price category, and therefore more massive (14th century). And by the beginning of the 15th century and into the category of armor for the poor.
            1. abrakadabre
              abrakadabre 10 February 2016 10: 40
              0
              But will not the anonymous anonymous person be able to comment on his decision? Tell us how many chain mail he made with his own hands?
              I did this and am doing it myself. Therefore, I speak not firsthand, but from my own experience.
      2. saigon
        saigon 9 February 2016 16: 50
        +2
        Skipping a blow at yourself even in chain mail is a pleasure below the bottom. On the shield, it’s either a direct hit or a lousy sensation. So the blow must be averted even with a shield. Moreover, a blow with the end of a blunt (rounded) sword can break through chain mail.
        1. cth; fyn
          cth; fyn 9 February 2016 21: 19
          0
          It all depends on the strength of the strike, as the accreted hit wrote the game over game, even with no penetration. In the best case, captivity and ransom (it was not uncommon, even kings were redeemed, the same M. Sarvantes and his father redeemed) in the worst case they put on a stake or trample on the spot or beat with clubs.
          1. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 11 February 2016 10: 29
            +2
            In our club in a friendly domestic tournament one and a half weeks ago, a fighter broke through the enemy’s shield through with the guard of a sword. Thank God that a little past the brush. The people believed that the shield in this sense was impenetrable and did not wear the shield on the left hand and the gauntlet. And here is such a demonstration. Now everyone is thoughtful.
  7. Nikolay71
    Nikolay71 9 February 2016 08: 54
    +1
    About Western European knights it is clear that the armor that completely covers the body appeared in the 15 century. And what was the situation in the East? I would like an article about cataphractists, their weapons and armor.
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 9 February 2016 13: 15
      +1
      Knights of the East, very interesting book, I advise.
  8. tacet
    tacet 9 February 2016 09: 17
    +5
    I would like to ask a respected author: Is it correct to conduct an analysis of the armor of German knights based on English effigies?
    1. kalibr
      9 February 2016 09: 37
      +4
      The chivalry was international in nature, I hope you know that? The effigies of England, France, Germany, Italy differed very insignificantly - there is a corresponding academic research by D. Nicolas. There is research on the weapons of the Scandinavian crusaders. Isn't that enough for you? Or give a title and author? There are fewer German ones left (it is clear why), but there are also they and they are the same, I just do not see the logic of laying them out - they are all the same. In addition, it was written that along with the German knights, the "guests" of the Order participated in the battle on the ice. I.e. knights from the same England, France, Italy. But if you so want to see everything with your own eyes, then ... why not - we will look especially for you and ... find. I just don't know German. Do you know? Can you help?
      1. tacet
        tacet 9 February 2016 10: 19
        +2
        I can help with German (I lived 3,5 years in Dresden). The international character of chivalry does not mean the unification of weapons. For example, in Spain, knights had cuirasses made of metal scales already in the 11th century, in 13 there were brigandines from metal strips (I personally observed in the museum). I do not exclude that the differences were caused by Moorish influence. But England was not continental Europe, nevertheless, it was very subject to Scandinavian (Norman) influence to a greater extent than France or Germany, respectively, and differences in equipment could be very significant than between French, German or Italian knights.
        PS I agree with your statement about the "armored" knights. I am trying to say that the example with their English colleagues is not entirely successful.
        1. abrakadabre
          abrakadabre 9 February 2016 10: 58
          +1
          For the period under review in England, the Scandinavian influence was no longer relevant. You’ve been late for 150-200 years. The end of the 12th and the entire 13th century for England was the complete and undivided cultural and technological influence of France. Up to the official state language - French. Most of the English nobility had extensive possessions in France. French influence subsided only in the second half of the Hundred Years War.
          By the way, to a large extent after the massacre of numerous noble French prisoners (instead of leaving them for ransom), arranged by the British after the Battle of Crescy and especially after the Battle of Agincourt.
          Prior to that, in one form or another, the war was fought according to "noble knightly laws", when a ransom was received for a surrendered enemy of noble origin. A striking example is the defeat of the French at the Battle of Poitiers. When even the king of France was captured.
        2. kalibr
          9 February 2016 20: 28
          0
          Thanks for the question and the help offered. But it is no longer necessary. I turned "where I need to" and received excellent materials "especially for you."
        3. The comment was deleted.
    2. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 9 February 2016 09: 51
      +3
      Quite. Because this type of armor was common throughout Western Europe. Moreover, the knightly orders were supranational entities. In which there were knights - people from all countries of Europe. In the same Teutonic Order (as in others), the concept of a knight-guest of the order officially existed. When a "volunteer" joined the army of the order with his retinue for the sake of a fight and the subsequent division of the booty.
      Again, during this period there are epighets both from Germany and from the burial places of the knights of the Teutonic Order itself.
      The armor complex was no different.
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 9 February 2016 15: 24
        +1
        Again, during this period there are epighets both from Germany and from the burial places of the knights of the Teutonic Order itself.


        And this "posthumous death" just strains me. Considering the cost of the armor, it would not be very logical to bury it in it. And, given that all the products were made, most likely from the dead, for some reason it seems to me that their best armor by this time had already been used by someone else (or the heir or the purchaser of the heir).
        1. kalibr
          9 February 2016 18: 11
          +1
          No one in the armor of the CHRISTIAN KNIGHTS did not bury, this is one of the misconceptions. The clothes of the deceased Christian of that time are a shroud and that’s it!
        2. abrakadabre
          abrakadabre 10 February 2016 09: 07
          0
          Epigia is the lid of the sarcophagus with a sculptural image of the deceased. There is no real intravital armor there. This is just a stone. Sometimes colorized.
    3. AK64
      AK64 9 February 2016 10: 22
      0
      Yes, that’s not the point ... In the 13th century, typical armor was chain mail to the knee with a hood, a helmet, and sometimes greaves. And this has long been known to all who are interested in this issue.

      The question is something else: what did you want to say? That This is not "bondage"? Or what? After all, the knight was not "shackled" in solid armor either. And few could afford to have solid armor.
      (Especially since most of the armor in museums is tournament, not combat at all.)

      And if you take the 9th century, then that was not ...

      So is Shpakovsky once again trying to say something? What is the discovery?

      About the "pig" --- what to take from the couch strategist? A dense cavalry formation and a lance ramming strike: the banal question "why should it be smeared along the front" simply does not occur to the sofa strategist.
    4. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 9 February 2016 15: 56
      0
      Quote: tacet
      I would like to ask a respected author: Is it correct to conduct an analysis of the armor of German knights based on English effigies?

      Fine. Simple and logical for the historian. There, below his answer - why? Are they "all the same"?
      That is why the techies do not go through history in every university in general, but where they pass it - an overview, no more than one semester, without any specifics. Because students of technical universities are not schoolchildren. One has only to mention the details and these hideous people include the Historian's Horror Calculator. After which the most "simple" and "logical" historical constructions disintegrate, creep apart, dissipate like a creeping fog.
      Of course, a gradual historian is not capable of answering the hail of questions that practically any historical "truth" gives rise to. He cannot even repeat the arithmetic calculations that sophomores bombard him with, but he senses - they are not lying! Well, how can you bring the historical views of his school to the masses ?! Horror!
      In general, a review of German armor on English gravestones is great. What is better, for example, deep historical conclusions based on frescoes, which historians carelessly finish themselves. One plague, on this side prettier, definitely.
      1. Mr. Pip
        Mr. Pip 9 February 2016 16: 21
        +3
        Quote: Mikhail3
        Simple and logical for the historian. There, below his answer - why? Are they "all the same"?

        And that is, in your opinion, they are "all different"?
        The German knights even then had "secret technologies" different from the common European ones, and the average German knight was armored like a royal tiger?
        In general, history is not taught in detail because techies do not teach that "they are smarter than historians" - but because universities usually train not educated and smart people, but "narrow specialists" and they, as future technical specialists, do not need deep knowledge of history to work by the same engineer for gas turbine installations - your "calculator" has broken.
  9. AK64
    AK64 9 February 2016 10: 17
    -3
    What the ....

    / and shook his head /
  10. Mr. Pip
    Mr. Pip 9 February 2016 10: 31
    +1
    Great article hi
    But Alexander still will not calm down, in the next news you can already read about the fact that the "Mongols" were Europeans - it's fun to live in the era of "intellectual freedom".
    1. 3news
      3news 9 February 2016 11: 03
      -5
      Quote: Mr. PIP
      in the next news you can already read about the fact that the "Mongols" were Europeans

      I don’t know who the "Mongols" were, but the Tartar Moguls were definitely not Asians. There is a lot of visual material from those times. Ordinary Caucasians, only of the Islamic faith. You can see it in their clothes. Yes, and local weapons decorated with Arabic inscriptions (go to the Armory) confirms this.
      But the Islamic period in history did not fit into the concept of "Holy Russia" and "Moscow, the third Rome". Therefore, the German woman Catherine burned out this period from there (in the literal sense of the word). And it was filled with the term of the ROC "yoke". As if everything was true, and the "yoke" really was. Only the meaning of "yoke" was actually different, religious. They just rigged his interpretation.
      1. cth; fyn
        cth; fyn 9 February 2016 11: 22
        +1
        Mongols-nomadic Martians / hid under the table /
        1. Mr. Pip
          Mr. Pip 9 February 2016 11: 33
          +1
          Quote: cth; fyn
          Mongols-nomadic Martians / hid under the table /

          Joking as a joke, but to me one of the reasons why the Mongols could not strike Russia 6000 km from the Mongolian border was mentioned the absence of railways at that time
          / hid in the closet / wassat
          1. Glot
            Glot 9 February 2016 11: 54
            +2
            Joking as a joke, but to me one of the reasons why the Mongols could not strike Russia 6000 km from the Mongolian border was mentioned the absence of railways at that time
            / hid in the closet


            Hmm ... I remembered about the railways ...
            I read it with a homegrown researcher of the Second World War, I don’t remember the last name anymore and it’s useless, such a pearl. Like that Hitler could not conquer the USSR and reach the Urals only because at that time in the USSR there was only one railway line, for the whole country. laughing
            You also understand the lack of railroads prevented. laughing laughing
            1. alicante11
              alicante11 9 February 2016 15: 29
              +1
              Like that Hitler could not conquer the USSR and reach the Urals only because at that time in the USSR there was only one railway line, for the whole country. laughing


              Well, in reality, not one. But the fall of Sevastopol during the Crimean campaign was quite seriously contributed by the lack of railway communication and, accordingly, the problems with supplying a larger army, especially taking into account the presence of two more theater of operations, which also needed to be supplied without railways. One can also recall the notorious RPE, when the small capacity of the Trans-Siberian Railway did not allow the Japanese to be quickly crushed, until they deployed all their reserves on the mainland.
          2. The comment was deleted.
      2. Glot
        Glot 9 February 2016 11: 49
        +3
        I don’t know who the "Mongols" were, but the Tartar Moguls were definitely not Asians.


        Genghis - was a European? belay
        Well, actually, yes, Jochi, Sartak, Burke, Ulagchi, Tula Bug and others ... well, purely European names then. smile

        Therefore, German Catherine burned this period from there (in the literal sense of the word).


        What is it like ? Did she go straight and burn with a knapsack flamethrower? laughing
        Somehow, narrative sources, various annals of the vault, in which there is also about the Horde, the khans and the struggle of Russia with the Horde, have reached us.

        Only the meaning of "yoke" was actually different, religious.


        There was only one sense - to milk Russia. That’s the whole point. Milking way out, people and things.
        1. 3news
          3news 9 February 2016 12: 00
          -2
          Quote: Glot
          Genghis - was a European? belay
          Well, actually, yes, Jochi, Sartak, Burke, Ulagchi, Tula Bug and others ... well, purely European names then.

          If you convert to Islam, you too will be called in a new way. Konrad Karlovich you will not stay. And appearance do not change.
          Quote: Glot
          Did she go straight and burn with a knapsack flamethrower?

          No, under pain of death, he ordered the delivery of family books to St. Petersburg, allegedly for making copies. And then they all burned them.
          Quote: Glot
          Somehow, narrative sources, various annals of the vault, in which there is also about the Horde, the khans and the struggle of Russia with the Horde, have reached us.

          As BE it is necessary to understand what was meant by the term "Rus", and what was meant by the term "Horde". Even if the absolutely correct religious term "yoke" was semantic altered.
          Quote: Glot
          There was only one sense - to milk Russia. That’s the whole point. Milking way out, people and things.

          Even if you pull your own tits 24 hours a day, you will not bother anything. The same is about "milking Rus".
          1. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 9 February 2016 13: 03
            +1
            Even if you pull your own tits 24 hours a day, you will not bother anything. The same is about "milking Rus".
            Judging by the depth of the argument, your milk yield is ahead of the rest. Although you are obviously not pulling CIS. But very professional.
            1. 3news
              3news 9 February 2016 13: 37
              -2
              Quote: abrakadabre
              Although you’re obviously not pulling CISK

              Well, why should everyone align themselves?
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. kalibr
        9 February 2016 12: 20
        +4
        Islam was adopted in the Horde only under the khan of Uzbekistan. So the Spanish religion is you in vain.
        1. 3news
          3news 9 February 2016 12: 36
          -1
          Quote: kalibr
          Islam was adopted in the Horde only under the khan of Uzbekistan.

          So what? At this time, Tartaria was no longer part of the Golden Horde?
          1. 3news
            3news 9 February 2016 15: 26
            +2
            Are you not confused by the clothes of the Muscovites of that time? This is an ancient plan of Moscow, if someone did not understand.
            1. sharp-lad
              sharp-lad 10 February 2016 00: 28
              +1
              Why embarrass it! Such we are, East and West mixed in us, melting into sonorous steel.
              1. 3news
                3news 10 February 2016 00: 43
                0
                Quote: sharp-lad
                Why embarrass it!

                This was posted and written in response to the following remark:
                Quote: kalibr
                So the Spanish religion is you in vain.

                At the same time, on the clothes of Muscovites of that time, a conclusion about their religion can be made quite unambiguous.
          2. 3news
            3news 9 February 2016 15: 31
            +2
            And this "Grand Duke", but in fact the Great Khan, receives credentials from foreign ambassadors. The clothes of the "Grand Duke" and the nobility are slightly different from the European clothes of the ambassadors, right?
          3. 3news
            3news 9 February 2016 15: 33
            +1
            And this is a ball at the court of the great khan from the "Book" of Marco Polo. Doesn't the clothes bother you?
          4. 3news
            3news 9 February 2016 15: 41
            +1
            And here is the "Battle of the Russians with the Tatars." Thumbnail from the "Facial Annalistic Arch" of the XIV century. Guess where who.
          5. 3news
            3news 9 February 2016 15: 44
            +2
            And here is the Mughal invasion. Medieval West European miniature, 1353. Somehow the Mughals are not very similar to Asians, are they?
          6. 3news
            3news 9 February 2016 15: 45
            +2
            And this is a fragment from a German medieval chronological table published in Braunschweig in 1725 (Deutsche Chronologische Tabellen. Braunschweig, Berleget von Friedrich Wilhelm Mener, 1725). The following is said about Ivan the Terrible:

            “... IOHANNES BASILOWIZ, ERZERSIEL MIT DENEN TARTARN, UND BRACHTE AN SEIN REICH CASAN UND ASTRACAN ...” (Chron. Table 1533, p. 159). That is: “... IVAN VASILIEVICH WITH OURSрTAZARI TAKEN KAZAN AND ASTRAKHAN IN HIS KINGDOM ... "
            1. Sweles
              Sweles 9 February 2016 18: 56
              0
              Quote: 3news
              And this is a fragment from a German medieval chronological table published in Braunschweig in 1725 (Deutsche Chronologische Tabellen. B


              the traditional story differs from the real one in that it works only with convenient facts, so old engravings and the more chronicles are for them a Chinese letter. As for working with the media to which this site can be attributed, the approach here is this.
              Shpakovsky writes hundreds of articles without paying attention to criticism, and all the rest, traditions approvingly humming and playing along, pretend that some kind of discussion is taking place. In the case of criticism, they are either silent, like a fish talking about ice or humming themselves up- Glot, peep, so if you are surprised at the lack of reaction to your posts, then do not be surprised ...
              1. 3news
                3news 9 February 2016 19: 24
                0
                Quote: Sveles
                Gulp, peep, so if you are surprised at the lack of reaction to your posts, then do not be surprised ...

                Of course, there is no point in communicating with local clowns (or in another way with buffoons). It’s easier not to notice them. What I am doing. It is not clear why they are so upset by this?
              2. Glot
                Glot 9 February 2016 19: 59
                +1
                Gulp, peep, so if you are surprised at the lack of reaction to your posts, then do not be surprised ...


                And there is no reaction because, my dear, that you have nothing to answer.
                For days with your stone ax, you "got snot", and immediately fell silent. Since the nonsense Fomenko cited by you was easily and simply debunked.
                And all of these "fragments" and "engravings" of yours can also be simply debunked as another charlatanism in the field of history.
                And note and keep in mind that I am very far from history, and I don’t know much. And if you really meet a pro, he will simply tear you and all your friends and comrades here like twice two, easily and naturally. laughing
                Although you and this Fomenko-Khomenko know this very well. Therefore, they in every possible way avoid meetings, and even more so disputes with the pros.
                The cat feels whose meat has eaten - as they say in Russia. laughing
                And one case was recalled. When the historian tried to talk with Fomenko, he simply ran away from him. laughing He ran away from the department of Moscow State University, where he and Kasparov caught him laughing , hid in a theater in which he held his gathering of sectarians. laughing
                So my friend, I will not speak for others, be glad that I am not a historian. You "snot" not so hard. laughing
                1. Sweles
                  Sweles 9 February 2016 21: 55
                  0
                  Quote: Glot
                  And all of these "fragments" and "engravings" of yours can also be simply debunked as another charlatanism in the field of history.


                  is it necessary? and the front arch you do not like? so what documents are you going to work with?
                  1. 3news
                    3news 9 February 2016 22: 29
                    0
                    Quote: Sveles
                    so what documents are you going to work with?

                    Why do we need documents? "Correct history" was written in the times of Catherine. Famous Germans. And the point.
                    Since then, the documents are quite tight. Little is left.
                  2. Glot
                    Glot 10 February 2016 05: 57
                    -1
                    is it necessary? and the front arch you do not like? so what documents are you going to work with?


                    And what is there, in the facial vault, I do not like? smile
              3. kalibr
                9 February 2016 22: 04
                0
                You can argue with equals ...
                1. Sweles
                  Sweles 9 February 2016 22: 26
                  -2
                  Quote: kalibr
                  You can argue with equals ...


                  everyone says so when there is nothing to say ...
                2. Glot
                  Glot 10 February 2016 06: 11
                  +1
                  You can argue with equals ...


                  Rather, Vyacheslav can argue with the smart. With those who can understand, realize and accept.
                  And with stubborn, zombie sectarians, amateurs who also have scanty knowledge, argue to no purpose.
                  They will not be able to understand just what the nonsense is saying.
                  This is how Veles just now with a stone ax. Or with another, I bet that I was engaged in a game of letters and words. No, not able to understand what nonsense is saying.
                  And sometimes you think, but what for it in general, these disputes with them? Time to lose ...
                  But, it is necessary to upset them! So that they do not crap their brains on others. They don't need history, knowledge, or the past. This is not what they want. They need spatio-temporal chaos, and so that Baty-Batya, Nevsky-Macedonsky, Rurikovich-Klavdii and other and other fantastic characters, fabulous countries would roam in this chaos, so that reptilians would sleep somewhere in "crystal sarcophagi", and "the Anunnaki led hordes of Tartarians into battle to storm Babylon", it is more interesting for them.
                  Inverted brain, distorted consciousness ... People of empty spaces and heads, alas ... request
                  1. Sweles
                    Sweles 10 February 2016 08: 45
                    -1
                    Quote: Glot
                    They need spatio-temporal chaos, and Batu-Batya, Nevsky-Macedon, Rurikovich-Klavdii and


                    do you know the name of Julius Caesar in full? Guy Octavian Julius Caesar Augusta RAURIC. That's right, but what did Ivan the Terrible write to the Queen of England? - "that our family is from Julius Caesar", so maybe he is this elusive Rurik-ROURIK?
                    1. Glot
                      Glot 10 February 2016 09: 47
                      +1
                      do you know the name of Julius Caesar in full? Guy Octavian Julius Caesar Augusta RAURIC. That's right, but what did Ivan the Terrible write to the Queen of England? - "that our family is from Julius Caesar", so maybe he is this elusive Rurik-ROURIK?


                      Again Fomenkovsky nonsense.
                      Okay, let's beat Fomenko into the coffin again.
                      First of all.
                      Guy Julius Caesar, from the Julius-Claudian Dynasty. And that’s it.
                      Secondly.
                      Adopted by Caesar (by the fact that Gaius Julius see above) - Octavian Augustus (who became the first Emperor of Rome), became fully called - Gaius Julius Caesar Octavian.
                      That is, your Fomenko cheated again, and brought together two people.
                      But that's not all. There are no RAURIKS there.
                      You at least would check that ...
                      Thirdly.
                      What kind of letter? This is where he calls the queen "a vulgar girl"? And where about Caesar? There is a phrase that his power is from God, but about Caesar ... Can you show me?

                      You throw these little books Fomenko. Nonsense ones from them ...
                      1. Alexander Romanov
                        Alexander Romanov 10 February 2016 09: 53
                        +1
                        Quote: Glot
                        You throw these little books Fomenko. Stupid ones from them

                        No, it’s sacred for them. The delusions that Fomenko writes are saying laughing
                      2. Sweles
                        Sweles 10 February 2016 10: 39
                        -3
                        Quote: Glot
                        Again Fomenkovsky nonsense.
                        Okay, let's beat Fomenko into the coffin again

                        you don’t hit your finger when you take the hammer, watch xnumx
                      3. Glot
                        Glot 10 February 2016 11: 58
                        +1
                        watch xnumx


                        So what ? There, a voiceover said what you wrote above, and ... that's it.
                        This is absolutely unproven stupidity.
                        Bring me at least ONE narrative or other source, where the prefix - RAURIK is given to the name of Caesar.
                        Then only I will accept your words.
                        I already told you above, advised me more precisely, check the info.
                        You froze stupidity again. Out of ignorance, out of idleness or laziness, or in the totality of all the signs, but - stupidity.
                        You hang banal noodles, and you accept it.
                        Yes, what about the letter from Grozny to the Queen of England?
                        The same phrase from the ridiculous video sequence will be, de he wrote so and so and so?

                        In general, it’s better for you not to post nonsense. And then you look quite unsightly. It’s not that nasty to fool yourself, no? Or do you like it when they laugh at you?
                        Well, a bad case. Clinical looks like ...
                      4. Sweles
                        Sweles 10 February 2016 15: 13
                        -1
                        Quote: Glot
                        Bring me at least ONE narrative or other source, where the prefix - RAURIK is given to the name of Caesar.


                        it's not a prefix, it's a suffix laughing
                      5. Glot
                        Glot 10 February 2016 15: 44
                        0
                        it's not a prefix, it's a suffix


                        Yes, even a prefix, it only says that you and your Fomenko again sat in a puddle. laughing laughing
                        Since neither the links of RAURIK and the links to the letter of Grozny were provided. laughing
                        So, again and again, the Fomenkoids get snot. laughing
                      6. The comment was deleted.
                  2. The comment was deleted.
                3. Loreal
                  Loreal 10 February 2016 11: 03
                  0
                  He is still firing on small arms and in general "insinuating" on the USSR as a whole, this is not a Fomenkovite ... this is "political."
              4. The comment was deleted.
  11. Glot
    Glot 9 February 2016 12: 58
    +2
    Islam was adopted in the Horde only under the khan of Uzbekistan. So the Spanish religion is you in vain.


    I AM ?
    So I didn’t say anything about Islam in the Horde ...
    He became the official state. religion, yes, under Uzbek.
    1. Glot
      Glot 9 February 2016 13: 39
      +2
      And, I realized, this is not about Islam for me.
      Just this one "3news" or whatever it is, laughing I was blacklisted by BUT, continues to respond to my comments. But I don’t see what it writes. laughing
      A brave guy ... or not a guy ... pi *** most likely. laughing laughing laughing
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 9 February 2016 14: 04
        +1
        pi *** most likely
        And the battle ... wassat
      2. Mr. Pip
        Mr. Pip 9 February 2016 15: 28
        +1
        Quote: Glot
        Growth this "3news" or whatever it is, I was sent to the black list, but continues to respond to my comments.

        The most interesting thing is that I, too, have it in an emergency, although I did not even understand right away - hto this!
        The horror is just what these Europeans are crybaby laughing
        ps while the baszduk see 3-2 in your favor hi
        1. Oprychnik
          Oprychnik 9 February 2016 16: 04
          +2
          Well, again, a hot historical skirmish with the transition to the individual.)))
          John Silver come - put things in order!
          https://youtu.be/FEAN8xdVa2c
        2. Glot
          Glot 9 February 2016 16: 39
          +2
          The most interesting thing is that I, too, have it in an emergency, although I did not even understand right away - hto this!


          Yes, he is so dangerous. laughing
          It looks like another fomenkoid. Now he went to insert engravings, he will expose the Horde. laughing
          And they are usually stubborn, these Fomenkoids, like donkeys. laughing
          They didn’t read anything serious, they’ll do some stupid things and let’s scream that there are lies and forgery all around, and other "Tartarian - reptilian horrors". laughing
  12. The comment was deleted.
  • Jääkorppi
    Jääkorppi 9 February 2016 10: 36
    +1
    Thank you, but Jarl Birger has a scar! Museum of the Middle Ages! Welcome! (Literary sources are good, but archeology will be more important. "If all lies are removed from history, this does not mean that the truth will remain, maybe nothing will remain at all!")
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 9 February 2016 11: 19
      +2
      Where does the author bring the skull into evidence? Only if this scar was only a cut of the soft tissues of the face, for example: the cheek is proportioned or the nose is over the cartilage, all other injuries would leave a mark on the bones of the skull.
  • Jääkorppi
    Jääkorppi 9 February 2016 10: 36
    0
    Museum of the Middle Ages in Stockholm!
    1. kalibr
      9 February 2016 12: 22
      0
      A scar on the skull?
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • Alekst
    Alekst 9 February 2016 12: 14
    0
    Quote: Glot
    I don’t know who the "Mongols" were, but the Tartar Moguls were definitely not Asians.


    Genghis - was a European? belay
    Well, actually, yes, Jochi, Sartak, Burke, Ulagchi, Tula Bug and others ... well, purely European names then. smile

    Therefore, German Catherine burned this period from there (in the literal sense of the word).


    What is it like ? Did she go straight and burn with a knapsack flamethrower? laughing
    Somehow, narrative sources, various annals of the vault, in which there is also about the Horde, the khans and the struggle of Russia with the Horde, have reached us.

    Only the meaning of "yoke" was actually different, religious.


    There was only one sense - to milk Russia. That’s the whole point. Milking way out, people and things.

    and the Russian resident of Vladivostok is European or Asian?
    1. Glot
      Glot 9 February 2016 12: 59
      0
      and the Russian resident of Vladivostok is European or Asian?


      Russian
      Why the question? Formulate a clearer thought.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 9 February 2016 13: 05
      +3
      and the Russian resident of Vladivostok is European or Asian?
      Ash stump is Asian. Some Eurasians. wassat
  • Predator
    Predator 9 February 2016 13: 04
    +3
    Well, how can you not recall Philip and Alexander of Macedon! They also had heavy plate cavalry, the main structure of which was a dense wedge, the same structure had the heavy plate cavalry of the Parthians and (horror!) The plate cavalry of the Mongols. The same structure was used by and heavy cavalry of Oleg and Svyatoslav (called the boar's head), but the order with other knights did not know about this and did not know how ?! And they must turn into horse "lava" (otherwise they will trample each other!), isn't it a fairy tale ?! but the order could not ...
    Another question is that neither the Macedonians, nor the Parthians, nor the Mongols with Rusichs went on horseback attack on the united ranks of the infantry, since this is suicide. But the order went, so there was a reason and an opportunity (pros cannot be idiots).
    Consider the situation of A. Nevsky — he cannot lose his professional squad or make big losses, since there is no way to quickly make up for losses, and this is the only mobile force to repel raids from any enemies, having lost it, and North-Eastern Russia is left without It’s a long time to assemble the militia, and besides, it’s not a pro and on foot basically. By the way, A. Mekedonsky also had the same task, you can’t lose your professional troops (there’s nothing to replenish on a long voyage).
    Because the militia was put under the influence of a wedge in the form of a median regiment, the intelligence of the order knew that it was a militia, not a pro and armed accordingly and could not pose a special threat, removing this mass from the battlefield and Alexander’s squad could be dealt with (because they they knew that they shouldn’t lose Nevsky’s squad), therefore they applied a blow to the center with a wedge. The only thing they didn’t know about was that there was a reserve of vigilantes behind the middle regiment, into which they rested after breaking through the middle regiment, but having lost acceleration and penetrative power.
    And just the head of the wedge was protected much better than the main mass, and so the order could equip three dozen knights, but not all of them. Well, as rich as Birger, he could probably afford heaped armor. In addition, I note that the word " plate "then meant - protected, on a par with the word" armored ", which did not mean that the warrior was wearing armor from the 15th century. Well, armor and armor could be anything from a multilayered linen shirt or hard leather, to chain mail and plate armor.
    1. kalibr
      9 February 2016 13: 21
      0
      "In addition, I will note that the word" plate "had a meaning then" - you know that for sure? You know the Middle German, Old Church Slavonic of the 13th century, right? Then you have no price as a linguist. But judging by the chronicles, the term was different "armor" and for a long time! And as armor from plates appeared, another term appeared: "forged men".
    2. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 9 February 2016 13: 44
      0
      Well, how can you not recall Philip and Alexander of Macedon! They also had heavy plate cavalry, the main structure of which was a dense wedge, the same structure had the heavy plate cavalry of the Parthians and (horror!) The plate cavalry of the Mongols. The same structure was used by and heavy cavalry of Oleg and Svyatoslav (called the boar's head), but the order with other knights did not know about this and did not know how ?! And they must turn into horse "lava" (otherwise they will trample each other!), isn't it a fairy tale ?! but the order could not ...
      Bother to enlighten, where does all this come from?
    3. alicante11
      alicante11 9 February 2016 15: 38
      0
      here the order with other knights did not know about it and did not know how?! And they must turn into horse "lava" (otherwise they will trample each other!)


      This also seems strange to me. Rebuilding "to lava" "under fire" archers ...? Plus, I don't think Lava is a good formation against a dense formation of infantry, as it is a loose formation. "Lava" is more suitable for attacking a thin formation of infantry, cavalry combat or pursuit of the enemy. Since it allows each cavalryman to gain maximum speed without interfering with each other. To break through the dense formation of the infantry, and even with spears, of course, you need a dense formation, which will allow the mass to push through the formation area and destroy the battle formation to a great depth, so that the "boar's head" looks preferable.
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 10 February 2016 10: 01
        +1
        Do not confuse "lava" - a sparse and disordered "formation" for attacking infantry lines or pursuit and a deployed line - a formation of high (against infantry) and medium (against the same enemy) density. This is already an ordered percussion formation.
    4. Stas57
      Stas57 9 February 2016 16: 11
      0
      Well, if these dudes are not heavy, then who is heavy?! - the rest are generally in a shirt.


      about boar in general, everyone writes both ours and fascists opponents.

      shitty folkhistory on the knee
      second for today
  • King, just king
    King, just king 9 February 2016 13: 12
    -2
    Author! ept! Not! I have to! Press! Of people! Intelligence!
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 9 February 2016 13: 47
      +1
      Do not want to be pressed by the intellect of others, do not read. See better House-2 wassat
      1. King, just king
        King, just king 9 February 2016 15: 53
        -1
        Citizen abrakadabre! Judging by your post - you do not have everything at home (I hope, I really hope that you understand what I mean) ...
  • Alekst
    Alekst 9 February 2016 14: 32
    0
    Quote: Glot
    and the Russian resident of Vladivostok is European or Asian?


    Russian
    Why the question? Formulate a clearer thought.

    no no answer received, thanks
  • Wal
    Wal 9 February 2016 15: 10
    0
    Quote: Sveles
    like "The Battle of the Mongols with the Hungarians on the Sayyo Bridge"

    And who is where in this picture?
    1. 3news
      3news 9 February 2016 15: 16
      0
      Quote: Wal
      And who is where in this picture?

      And what, by the banners is not visible?
  • Andy
    Andy 9 February 2016 17: 46
    +1
    dolbog-author. He did not like the "clad in armor". but nothing that any lousy chain mail cost incredible money and the militias simply DID NOT HAVE it. compared to wearing a pseudo leather armor with an iron plate sewn on, the knight brothers were indeed ironed! And after all, the battle began with the knights hitting the militia, and only then there was the attack of the mounted Russian squads, who had (maybe not all) chain mail!
    1. kalibr
      9 February 2016 18: 19
      0
      Do you know exactly what the militia is? Where from? In what annals is this written?
      And what is the point of putting a minus for these questions? It would be better to give the text of the chronicles, eh? And then the following phrase directly suggests itself "In impotent rage ..."
    2. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 10 February 2016 10: 09
      +3
      This may be surprising to you, but the Russian heavy cavalry kit was heavier and more durable than the Teutonic knights.
      In addition, European knights commonly wore woven surcoat over their armor. This can be seen on the etheries presented in the article. And Russian warriors preferred to wear polished armor openly. This fact is indirectly noted in the annals repeatedly in expressions such as "shelves in the sun burned (shone) like heat".
  • Wal
    Wal 9 February 2016 17: 51
    0
    Quote: 3news
    And what, by the banners is not visible?

    According to the banners, the Mongols on the left are the Hungarians on the left.
  • Stilet
    Stilet 10 February 2016 00: 09
    +1
    Dear author! I suggest you take a more thorough approach to the formation of articles on such topics, do not be offended, but somehow everything is superficial. You did not mention the kind of armor already available at that time as the brigantine. And this is a different level of protection. Agree that the knights' orders in those days had the most advanced innovations in the field of weapons. Information about new types of armor spread rapidly, because many knights participated in the crusades. And as for the punishment in the form of racing for an hour .... The knight was trained from the age of 7, taught to do vaulting, swim in armor, jump with a pole, sleep and even dance in them. What do you think, if these people could cut for hours in the ranks, what did 1 hour of riding mean for them ?!
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 10 February 2016 10: 13
      +1
      Did you, dear, ride a horse? What gait?
      The punishment was not horseback riding in general, but a trot. Here without armor you get sick of compensating for the shaking shaking. Yes, with a modern (not knightly) landing on slightly bent legs (the stirrup is adjustable higher). It's like an hour in a half-squat on a jackhammer to sit with a hard place on your shoulders (armor weight).
      The knight’s landing is for maximum stability during a spear collision - with lowered stirrups on straightened and slightly extended forward legs. Yes, with a high rear bow of the saddle, which does not allow shifting (see. Figure).

      Medieval knight landing in the saddleMedieval knight landing in the saddle


      There is nothing to compensate for shaking. And with armor on the shoulders it is extremely tiring (count the constant squats-ups with iron). So the hour of trotting in armor is torture.
    2. kalibr
      11 February 2016 09: 21
      0
      Not horseback riding, but lynxes! Well ... at chain mail and trot - march! Or do you want to say that I myself came up with a phrase about such a punishment? And ask when the brigandine (with D) appeared!
  • Glad
    Glad 10 February 2016 00: 15
    0
    Quote: nnz226
    Kun Tzu (aka Confucius): "A person who does not foresee the future, failures and misfortunes await in him! STUDY HISTORY TO PREVENT THE FUTURE!"

    So this is the problem, dear nnz226... To predict the future, you need to develop an appropriate methodology. Formulate relevant laws. Like in physics, for example.
    With history, in this sense, everything is far from unambiguous. K. Zhukov mentioned in the article, for example, calls the work of L.N. Gumilyov, who are precisely aimed at predicting the future based on the study of history. As a justification for such an assessment, Zhukov says that Gumilev did not explain where the passionary shocks come from.
    Judging from such positions, then all modern astrophysics with its black holes, dark matter and the big bang is nothing more than "Einsteinism" ...
  • King, just king
    King, just king 10 February 2016 10: 18
    +1
    Quote: Stilet
    What do you think, if these people could cut for hours in the ranks, what did 1 hour of riding mean for them ?!


    There are enough reenactors here, if I'm wrong they'll correct me. So to speak, "experiments" were carried out on this issue. You can effectively “cut” in the ranks for 15 minutes, then you have to give way to the next rank.
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 10 February 2016 10: 59
      +1
      It all depends on the pace / tension of the battle. At the pace that I show it in films and that form a philistine opinion on this issue, God forbid, withstand 1-2 minutes.
      Even extremely trained HMB athletes, the same permanent champion Bern (the base of the Russian team at the Battle of the Nations), at the pace that they demonstrate in the bogurt will stand 4-6 minutes.
      If you look at the finals of the Battle of the Nations, then even a buhurt of 50X50 people (extra-grade category, a maximum score of 21X21) lasts less than two minutes. During this time, ours roll out any enemy. But it's not that. If you watch these videos, you can see that even such fighters somehow pause to relax. Although the team as a whole is like an unstoppable rink. And here comes the coherence of the detachment and tactics.
      For example, look at the final of BN 2015 Russia-USA 21X21. And first of all, it is precisely the tactics of our work in the group, as well as who where and how of the fighters manages to rest and pause.



      Those who wish can find on YouTube the mentioned extra-ordinary gatherings of 50X50 fighters. The winner is against all. Until now, it looks like Russia against everyone. In view of the permanent championship of ours so far.

      Of course, you need to make the amendment that this is a sport and is somewhat different from the battle to the death. But in this case, the question of physical activity and endurance in armor. An example is quite suitable for this.

      But to see the above moments, look at the example of 5X5 fights. There’s not such a mess and it’s better to see who does what and how.
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 10 February 2016 11: 21
        0
        In addition, you can see how, in a first approximation, a really massive battle of the Latniki can look like.

        These are festivals in Russia

        approximately 300x300 people



        and approximately 100X100 people

        1. King, just king
          King, just king 10 February 2016 12: 22
          -1
          Citizen abrakadabre! I realized that you are responding to my post. It may be interesting, but after your yesterday’s escapade in my direction, I can tell you: would you go on a long erotic foot trip exactly there ...
          1. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 11 February 2016 10: 43
            0
            would you go on a long erotic foot trip exactly there ...
            As a man who is gentle and well-mannered, I will answer: Only after you, dear, only after you. smile
            And the information I provided may be of interest to other readers.
        2. Pomeranian
          Pomeranian 10 February 2016 15: 30
          +1
          Quote: abrakadabre
          These are festivals in Russia

          Addresses, appearances, passwords do not throw?
          1. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 11 February 2016 10: 54
            +1
            According to the most popular buhurt - this is for you to contact HMB clubs in Kazan. Last fall, they hosted this festival. With the support of the government of Tatarstan. There was one participant from us.
            For Rusborg and other similar events, I do not particularly follow. Because of the employment and the fact that I specialize more in the manufacture of armor, and I fight not so regularly.
            You can contact the federation (http://vk.com/federation74) to find out the all-Russian calendar of such events. You can write to Klim Zhukov, in Bayard or some other metropolitan club. In Tula, you can write to Ilya Petrukhin. They have a complete reconstruction (not HMB) and they regularly conduct tournaments in full plate authentic armor of the 15-16 centuries
            (http://vk.com/panzerkampf_fusskampf)
            1. Pomeranian
              Pomeranian 11 February 2016 11: 57
              0
              Quote: abrakadabre
              . Last fall, they hosted this festival.

              Thanks for the hint. In the summer I'll go for a ride, see what and how. In our region "And trees grow on the stones" you can see and talk, but in the Khibiny Tolkienists are stirring up something.
  • Pomeranian
    Pomeranian 10 February 2016 10: 30
    +1
    And Mr. Caliber was bitten by lovers of an alternative story ??
    "But they still reflect what the sculptor saw." Well, yes, all the dead knights on their deathbed were obliged to arm themselves in armor to prove to the descendants that they did not fight in nightgowns (by the way, they fought in nightgowns of their beloved ladies. Over the armor) ...

    In the 18 century, wild Russians constantly flaunted armor and knight's helmets. There’s a portrait of the king himself! And what about his subjects: both the king and they ..
    1. King, just king
      King, just king 10 February 2016 12: 25
      0
      Even Peter Alekseich in chain mail would not have looked ...
  • unknown
    unknown 10 February 2016 20: 31
    0
    Which Alexander the Great with heavy cavalry?
    And when did stirrups appear? and where ?
    Of course, if by Alexander the Great we mean Suleiman the Magnificent ...
    But, even among the Ottomans, the main striking force is the infantry.
  • bedinvlad
    bedinvlad 11 February 2016 12: 36
    0
    But interestingly, Peter in real armor poses or the artist himself painted. Something is known about these armors where they were forged. master, etc.
  • AlBir
    AlBir 4 December 2016 23: 23
    +1
    on his skull, and he survived, there are no traces of injury "- in fact, when the grave was opened in 2002, pronounced intravital damage under the right eye socket was discovered. And what the sculptor did in 2010, God knows.
  • Barcid
    Barcid 29 June 2017 11: 35
    17
    By the way, there is a mark on Birger’s skull above his right eye, and there is also a scar on Birger’s bust, made by Oscar Nilsson.