Then Prince Alexander spoke
and many others with him
Russians from Suzdal.
They had countless bows, a lot of beautiful armor.
Their banners were rich
their helmets emitted light.
Elder Livonian Rhymed Chronicle
Art and history. "Where's The Massacre?" Such appeals from readers of "VO" came to me after the publication of material about the Battle of Kulikovo in images and pictures. And with "The Massacre" so: there was a time when it was very reluctant to write. Then, on the contrary, unless the lazy one did not write it. So it is physically impossible to give analysis to all the pictures in which it is depicted. But the topic is certainly very interesting, so it's time to consider it as well. But we will have to start … again, with the newspaper Pravda, which on April 5, 1942, that is, just in time for the anniversary, published an article dedicated to this event. Other material, and even with a picture, was published by the Moscow Bolshevik newspaper.
By this time, Eisenstein's film Alexander Nevsky was on the screens of the USSR, which was first released for hire, then, after August 23, 1939, it was removed from the box office and put on the shelf, but after June 22, 1941 it was released again, though and not immediately, but only after Stalin's words that in the fight against the enemies of our Motherland we need to be equal to our heroic ancestors.
Well, then paintings on this epic theme fell like a cornucopia. And it's clear why …
VA Serov painted two pictures. The first is the actual battle and the second: "The entry of Alexander Nevsky to Pskov after the Battle on the Ice." It is interesting that the latter is somehow very much in common … with "Boyarynya Morozova". And here we, in fact, have nothing to look for. There is a prince, there are German prisoners at the stirrup, the people are present and rejoicing … There is nothing to complain about.
But that's where the battle is …
That is, it began with this, and then samples of blatant negligence, completely unworthy of national history, began to multiply and multiply, and multiply. For example, the artist Dmitry Pavlovich Kostylev. And he graduated, and a member of prestigious unions, and went to the open air in France … In a word, a master. He writes to himself: “For me, creativity is an attempt to find answers to the eternal questions of human existence … And an appeal to worthy and strong personalities of the past and present - such as St. Peter, Metropolitan of Moscow or Peter I, Emperor of Russia, and others, comes from the desire to get closer to this goal by the examples of their lives … Great! And this is how it is solved in color …
Here we see downright riot of the author's boundless imagination. Let's start from left to right and laugh a lot. First of all, an archer in a cuirass and a bourguignot helmet, that is, in armor from somewhere in the middle of the 16th century. There and then again a bunch of helmets from "Nevsky …", and in full view there is a crossbowman and turns the "Nuremberg knob", which also had not yet been invented in 1242. Prince Alexander lost his helmet somewhere, but did not abandon the battle, well, it happens, but something else makes me laugh: a man in an undershirt with a three-piece pitchfork. And the Germans with halberds are one more strange than the other. Apparently borrowed from Swiss mercenaries after the Battle of Sempach. And those were simpler then. And those that are here, in the picture - this is the 17th century, no less! Well, in the foreground, of course, who? A man in bast shoes! But bast shoes were the peasants' working shoes, and summer ones. On the issue of the history of the spread of bast shoes in Russia, there is a rich historiography and a whole range of opinions, often mutually opposite. It is also known that they put on all the best in war in order to impress the enemy. So, although there is no consensus about the bast shoes, I would not draw the bast shoe in the foreground. What a strange desire to exaggerate our austerity? What for? I would have put on some goat skin supports. Did they do such then? And the picture from this would not have become worse!
In the 90s, many battle paintings were painted by the artist Igor Dzys. And among his works is "The Massacre". And this work of his (see below) is an excellent example of what an artist can do, who, firstly, knows how to draw, and secondly, knows historical realities, that is, the material component of culture, the statutes of knightly orders, and most importantly - understands the difference between singular and mass. And on this canvas of his there is both a single, and a mass, and corresponding to the era, and able to correspond - in a word, this is perhaps the only work that can be set as an example to other artists.
If you look at his blog, individually, the warriors will look very good. But in the picture we see that both the knights and our warriors use spears completely wrong. This is how they used the Bayeux Tapestry. But then the dominant technique became the javelin (that is, when it is clamped under the arm!), Since the spears themselves became longer! And for some reason they all belong to the Order of the Dobrzyński brothers. Maybe this shows their battle with Daniel Galitsky, who defeated them in 1237? Because on Lake Peipsi the knights were wearing black crosses. Well, why did the knight in the horned helmet bow his head like that? To see nothing in the slit of the helmet? That is, it is not enough to know who was dressed how at that time. We must also have an idea of tactics and not interfere with the infantry in the front ranks of the cavalry!
By this time, as they say, well, everything, everything became known, everything is there, the Internet works - take it and write. Or … sketch. But no! We look at "this" carefully. God bless him, with the knight that crawls out of the hole. But look how Prince Alexander, being on his horse a little behind from the German knight in the center, still manages to hit him in the chest with a spear! Well, it does not happen like this and it was not necessary to draw like that! And he painted, saw that he was mistaken, so it was possible and necessary to redraw, and not make people laugh, who look at such "revelations" of our "artists"!
