Despite modern television, the Internet and mobile phones, we know very little what is happening in the world around us, and even more so, we do not know other people. First, there is a language barrier. Yes, they study foreign languages in schools, but they study them in such a way that only a few can learn them! Only a few make their way through this "sieve", but the "few" are not the people as a whole. Secondly, there is also poverty. If every working citizen of Russia could fly on vacation, say, to Thailand or spend Christmas in Paris, then many things would be perceived differently. It was not for nothing that in the past, Russian nobles also assigned foreign tutors to their children, and they themselves liked to travel “there,” and there they often hid from justice. So it turns out that most of us live on what they give. They say that "there" they distort our history and people believe, because they cannot read the books of the local authors, since they are expensive, and "they are not taught languages!"
Another modern reconstruction. Novgorodians are fighting knights. For some reason, those are in red. Who are they?
The situation is similar with the legendary "Battle on the Ice", which we here, at VO, are finally studying not like at school, but scientifically, that is, comprehensively, starting with the chronicles. And now the time has come to tell about him in the words of one of the English historians, namely Phyllis Jestice, who is one of the authors of the book "The Great Battles of the Crusaders 1097-1444", published by the EKSMO publishing house in 2009.
I note, and not without pride, that the first really lengthy article about this battle The Great Battle on ice. Shpakovsky, V. UK. Military wargamer. 1993. oct./nov., I was in England and published it back in 1993. The drawing depicting Russian soldiers participating in the battle was made for me by two girls, graduates of the Penza Art School named after I. Savitsky, and the fact that the British took him suggests that they liked him. Of course, they knew about it before that, but this was the first article by a Russian author after 1991, and everything in it was told in a fairly traditional way.
Then came the book by David Nicolas "The Battle of Lake Peipus", but it makes little sense to consider it. The fact is that he just dumped everything that is known about this battle. Both facts and speculation. And it so happened that there the Mongols are jumping, and the Germans are drowning, in a word, everything is like in Marshak's fable "The Elephant-Painter".
Illustration by A. McBride from the book by D. Nicolas "The Battle of Lake Peipus". This seems to be how the governor Domash was killed. Well, obviously the artist did not try here … But he showed the notorious "grass" at the edge of the coast.
Knights of the Teutonic Order at their castle. But to which order does a warrior with a red shield and a white cross belong? And what is the warrior doing there with the banner? Have you gone for a walk along the shore? Absolutely ridiculous and strange … A. McBride from the book by D. Nicolas "The Battle of Lake Peipus".
But Phyllis wrote more interestingly. That is why I want to give here the translation of his chapter, but, of course, with my own comments, since you cannot do without them. So we read, pp. 158-167:
“THE BATTLE ON THE WONDERFUL LAKE, IN WHICH THE CHRISTIANS FATTLED WITH THE CHRISTIANS, SHOWS THE DUALITY OF THE SO-CALLED CRUSHES IN THE BALTIC. Despite the small number of participants, the collision led to the actual cessation of the offensive of the cross-west on Russia and forever glorified the prince of Novgorod, Alexandr Alexandai Neurovsky, The last non-Christian peoples of Europe lived in the Baltics. Crusades in the eastern Baltic region in the 12th century remained largely ineffective, especially due to the difficulty of holding onto the captured land. Thus, in the XIII century. a new policy was developed: the papacy decided to make every effort to form a "ecclesiastical state" in the Baltics, which would be ruled by bishops and papal legates under the general leadership of Rome. However, two important forces stood in the way of the popes. First, there was a strong influence of Orthodox Christianity in the region. Second: the dissimilarity of incentives for action among the Western crusaders and the lack of unity of their aspirations with the goals of the papacy. Orthodox Christians of Russia did not want to accept Roman spiritual supremacy, and therefore appeared to the Western view as schismatics who prevented the inhabitants of the Baltic region from converting to Catholicism. Perhaps more importantly, Western merchants and lords of military squads saw the Russians as dangerous rivals in the development of local resources. These two factors manifested themselves with particular significance around 1240, the contradictions culminated and ended with the defeat of the Crusaders on Lake Peipsi in April 1242.
At the end of the 1230s. the papal legate Guillelmo di Modena set about preaching a crusade and created a Western coalition against Novgorod. The latter was at that time the greatest of the Russian states - such a large trading center by Northern European standards that it was often called Lord Veliky Novgorod. If any kind of association could challenge the primacy of the West and restrain its expansion in the Baltic States, it was, of course, Novgorod.
In the late 1230s and early 1240s, be that as it may, the Mongol invasion swept across Russia as a devastating rampart. Many Russian principalities fell, and Novgorod, although not defeated, had to eventually recognize Mongol suzerainty. Thus, it seemed that the timing of the West's attack on Novgorod was right. The moment looked attractive - nothing seemed to stop me from defeating these proud and influential townspeople - Eastern Christians - and forcing them into submission.
The efforts of Guillelmo di Modena to raise the western army on a crusade were crowned with significant success, to a certain extent because the kings of Sweden and Denmark tried to somehow advance in an eastern direction, and therefore the "crusade" was very suitable for them as a way to disguise their own aspirations under pious deeds. and as a means of attracting - in addition to achieving spiritual rewards - financial assistance. In a word, they could easily summon volunteers from all over Europe under the banner of the expedition, not as sovereigns in their countries, but as supranational guardians for a common cause.
In the Soviet Union, Alexander Nevsky became a popular hero, and his victories were widely used in propaganda during World War II. This state of affairs is explained by the fact that Alexander performed his feats a very long time ago, when the tsars had not yet ruled in Russia, but the main reason is that the prince successfully repelled the onslaught of the Germans from the West.
No picture can be compared with the film by Sergei Eisenstein, which has become a film classic for all time. And how everything is thought out in it. After all, there was, for example, no duel between the prince and the master. Rather, not a single source reports about him, all the more so that the master of the order was personally captured by Alexander. But it looks like in a movie ?!
By 1240, Guillelmo returned to Italy, convinced that the work he had begun would end with the triumph of Western Christianity.
CAMPAIGN
However, the Western coalition created by Guillelmo was purely formal and did not represent a coherent force; various formations of the crusaders began to move, but no one, it seems, seriously bothered to develop a general strategic line. The Swedes, led by King Eric IX (1222-1250), invaded Finland in the spring of 1240. This alerted the citizens of Novgorod, and they summoned Prince Alexander, who had been expelled from the city shortly before. Alexander took over the leadership of the fight against the Swedes, with the help of very well-trained detachments of archers who served him (I wonder where he got this from? - V. Sh.).
On July 15, 1240, he defeated the Swedes on the banks of the Neva River, for which the grateful Novgorodians began to call Alexander Nevsky.
Despite Alexander's major victory over the Swedes, the threat from the West to Novgorod remained. A second army of Catholics was already gathering to march against him. It consisted of former members of the disbanded military monastic order of the Brothers of the Sword; Western knights who became feudal lords in Estonia; Danes; the militia of the German bishop Dorpat (Dorpat); and a handful of Teutonic knights.
Similarly, the Teutonic knights, members of the military-religious order, who long ago began to carve up territories in the Baltic States, longed for an excuse to attack their powerful neighbors, the borderlands, Henry, Bishop Ezel-Vik, with a request to the Pope to secure their possession of the conquered regions.
Russian soldiers are dressed, one might say, simply with love and are very authentic.
Although Alexander Nevsky again left Novgorod, having once again quarreled with the merchant leadership of the city, in a difficult hour the townspeople called him again.
The Novgorodians agreed to the demands put forward by the prince to fight under his command against the Germans and their supporters in Pskov. Alexander fully justified their trust.
Towards the end of 1241, they recaptured territories east of the Neva and in March 1242 liberated Pskov. Then Alexander and his army embarked on a distant raid on the territory of the German border diocese of Dorpat, apparently wanting to beat the enemy with his own techniques. It is quite obvious that a serious expansion of the territories of Novgorod was not part of his plans; all he was striving for was a large-scale raid. Apparently, pleased with what had already been achieved, Alexander with a 6,000-strong army (the number is not established in the annals! - V. Sh.) turned home after his vanguard was thrown from one bridge.
BATTLE ON THE ICE
It is likely that the Bishop of Dorpat Herman did not quite correctly understand Alexander's maneuver, mistaking the orderly retreat of the Novgorodians for flight. It cannot be ruled out that Alexander seriously underestimated the number of troops at the disposal of the Bishop of Dorpat. Whatever happened in reality, the latter seemed to rejoice, believing that a dangerous opponent found himself in a very uncomfortable position. Most of the crusader army that had acted against Novgorod last autumn dispersed in all directions, but some still remained in the diocese of Herman, and he saw that he could muster forces sufficient for the planned enterprise. Herman began to pursue Alexander's army with an army that included from 1000 to 2000 fighters (the number varies significantly in different sources), which, as it might seem, was a rather rash act, since the enemy had 6,000 (it is obvious that the author is trying to logically reduce ends meet, using the data of the Livonian Rhymed Chronicle - V. Sh.). Here, however, one should take into account the fact that the Westerners possessed the best armor and weapons (there can be only one comment here - ha-ha-ha! Our historian V. NS. Gorelik in his articles in the magazine "Around the World" - V. Sh.)) than most Russians, and probably only intended to properly pat the retreating enemy, and did not expect to meet face to face in an open battle.
But where the director saw such helmets from the Chudi and the order servants, well, none of the museums have such helmets!
Alexander with the army retreated on the ice of the frozen Lake Peipsi, following on his heels the crusader army also entered the ice, but somewhat north of the route taken by the Russians.
One way or another, they went ashore faster, and Alexander Nevsky got time to organize the forces before the arrival of the Westerners. He lined up troops on the eastern side at a place called the Crow Stone, where, in difficult rough terrain, a heavy cavalry attacking from dispersal would have met with great difficulty. The situation was aggravated by uneven layers of ice, which created additional obstacles near the coast as the water in Lake Peipsi then froze, then melted again (very interesting, where did he get all this? - V. Sh.).
The prince was not mistaken in choosing a position for defense and repelling the attacking enemy, especially in light of the fact that the features of the landscape made it difficult to effectively use the strike link - the western heavy cavalry. Alexander placed the infantry armed with spears, bows and axes in the center. It should be noted that, despite the image of the battle on Lake Peipsi by Sergei Eisenstein in his famous film "Alexander Nevsky", filmed in the USSR in 1938, Alexander's troops were professional soldiers, and not the peasant militia, desperately fighting to save the Holy Mother of Russia, as the director tried to show it in an extremely propaganda tape. Alexander had at his disposal a certain amount of light cavalry, which he placed on the flanks. In part, these riders were represented by horse archers, probably the Polovtsians, or the Cumans (again, about the Cumans - where did they come from? - V. Sh.).
Here it is: that article in TM that gave rise to a lot of innuendo, not really based on anything.
The very fact that the Russians were lined up and prepared to give battle to the pursuers, apparently, caused some consternation among the crusaders who found themselves in a significant numerical minority. This is evidenced at least by the behavior of the local Estonian soldiers, who probably did not feel at all the disposition to fight and, as sources tell us, fled as soon as they saw the enemy formation deployed in the distance (sources, that is, chronicles, report that a strange ran a little later - V. Sh.).
Nevertheless, despite the superiority of the enemy over the Western army in numerical proportion, at best for the crusaders, three to one, the latter still had a chance of success. The core of their small army was heavy cavalry - knights and "gendarmes". Dressed in strong chain mail, reinforced with forged elements, and mounted on large war horses, the knights - each of them in himself - outweighed any enemy as a combat unit. More importantly, the knights were well trained and were perfectly able to operate in close formation, attacking with horse lava, which a simple, but effective method brought them more than once in the same 13th century. victory in battles, especially against infantry deprived of support.
The leaders of the crusaders (we do not have information under whose direct command they went into battle, possibly under the command of Bishop Herman himself) decided to suddenly strike at the enemy's positions. It is quite clear that they hoped to crush the enemy center and put the Russians to flight, so that they could be easily chopped up during the pursuit. Accordingly, the crusaders built a heavy cavalry without any tricks in a wedge, where the leading positions went to the Teutonic knights and their "gendarmes" - the best of the best in the entire army.
An all-crushing wedge rushed at the Russian infantry (well, why do we always have infantry in the center? In what chronicle is this written? - V. Sh.) in the center of the enemy formation. She, however, resisted. It is very possible that the crusaders did not manage to accelerate properly because of the arrows of the Novgorod riflemen (their weapons could be especially effective against the horses of the crusaders) and because of the complexity of the rough terrain on which they had to act.
Before us is a scene from S. Eisenstein's film "Alexander Nevsky" (1938), where we see the Russian army as a peasant militia that came out to defend the Motherland. In fact, Alexander's warriors were mostly professionals (if so, then where did the infantry with the drecolle come from? - V. Sh.).
FLANGE ATTACK
And yet the knights' rush could still bring them victory if the Russians had not brought into action the cavalry placed on their flanks. Lighter armed horsemen attacked the wings of the western army, horse archers on the left flank of the Russians inflicted particularly serious damage on the Danish knights on the right side of the crusader formation. The Russians outnumbered the crusaders so much that they were able to completely encircle the Westerners (this is all true, but the chronicle says - "they put a regiment", not regiments, and there is nothing about cavalry on the flanks. - V. Sh.).
Judging by the film, the story helped the prince to win, that a blacksmith, the owner of a short chain mail, told his comrades at the fire: The fox jump and jump, and between two birches - and get stuck! And the hare stands nearby and sternly says to her: - Do you want me all your girlish I’ll break my honor?”“Why, what are you, neighbor, how can you have pity! The prince heard this, understood everything, built the troops correctly and … defeated the Germans on the lake!
Many of the Danish knights turned around and tried to gallop back to the other side of Lake Peipsi, pursued on the heels of the Russian cavalry. Apparently, it was only here that the battle took place on the ice of the lake. Even if one of the western warriors on mighty horses fell under the water, it is unlikely that one of them drowned, since the lake is extremely shallow (in some places the depth does not exceed 30 cm) (it is good that at least it is written that way, because it turns out, that there was a battle, the Germans were drowning, but the Russians who fought with them - no. They just stood and watched! But this does not happen on the ice! - V. Sh.)
Nevertheless, the maneuver on the frozen lake was enough to bring Alexander victory in the battle on Lake Peipsi, which the Russians also call the "Battle of the Ice".
About 400 crusaders were killed - up to half of all who entered into direct slaughter with the enemy. Six Teutonic and 44 other knights were captured. The losses could have been, perhaps, even more sensitive, but Alexander Nevsky forbade the pursuit of the defeated Westerners on the far shore of the lake (that is, here the author follows the Russian chronicles and the Livonian Rhymed Chronicle - V. Sh.).
And here is the diagram of the battle given in the book. And here the author, apparently, wrote one thing, and the artist painted another. Look at the "knight's wedge". The infantry - that is, the chud, inside it! The knights were so protective of the monsters? And why did she fall "innumerable"? Or are they their servants and crossbowmen? Funny, huh? And now the "pig" galloped forward, and the infantry … The infantry remained "backward"! And she simply could not catch up with the riders, and she had nothing to do in the place of a frenzied equestrian battle. And the wedge itself - it may have been a wedge in the beginning, but, gaining speed, it had to disperse into the "palisade" by all means. Otherwise, the rear riders would have crashed into the braking front ones, and they could not help but slow down, having met anyway who - infantry or cavalry. Look at the medieval miniatures - horsemen separately, infantry separately. Do you know why? Because the infantryman cannot catch up with the rider. The horse is fast on its feet! And then there were several knightly detachments. No one would be able to bring them together into one detachment, this is a direct damage to knightly honor. And they entered the battle in parts and were eventually defeated.(This is the only speculation that we can afford, relying on the sources that have come down to us. - V. Sh.)
EFFECTS
Lake Peipsi was not really the site of such an important battle as the anti-Western ideology of the Russians and later legends turned it into. Their resurrection was especially promoted by Sergei Eisenstein with his magnificent theatrical performance on the film "Alexander Nevsky", for which Sergei Prokofiev wrote the stirring music for the blood. Having won the victory, Alexander made peace on conditions rather favorable for the West, which once again confirmed the fact that he did not seek to expand the possessions of Novgorod in the western direction. The Bishop of Dorpat and his allies readily accepted the terms. The Novgorodians left the border territories they had seized, and Alexander freed the captives, while the Westerners also released the hostages they had.
Be that as it may, the battle had a negative impact on the prestige of the Western conquerors and could push some of the conquered peoples of the Baltic states to revolt against the Western masters. So, shortly after the clash on Lake Peipsi, the Prussians rose up against the Teutonic Order, although a mutiny might have happened sooner or later and regardless of the results of the battle we are considering. It is clear that the order was not seriously weakened by losses in the confrontation on the ice. Too few, in fact, Teutonic knights fought there, just as not only the Grand Master, but also the commander of Livonia or one of his deputies did not participate in the battle. The following year, Estonians rebelled against Denmark, but the venture was doomed to failure from the start.
Meanwhile, the sad outcome of the crusade against Novgorod revealed the weakness and illusory nature of the grandiose plans of the papacy in the region, since it clearly failed to channel the efforts and energy of the northerners inclined to independent activity, whose militancy and greed might otherwise have different consequences.
Probably the most important consequence of the battle was the rise in prestige of the Russian prince Alexander Nevsky. The legends about the battles on the Neva and on Lake Peipsi glorified his exploits more and more loudly, which made Alexander the greatest figure and even a saint, as a defender of Russian Orthodoxy. From a political point of view, he too was a clear winner. His reputation helped him in the consolidation of power in Russia, which, several centuries later, led to the unification of the country under the scepter of the great princes and kings - his distant descendants.
FORCES OF THE OPPOSING PARTIES
WESTERN TROOPS (approx)
Teutons
Knights: 20
Order "gendarmes": about 200 Danish and Estonian knights:
about 200
Militia from Dorpat: about 600
Warriors of Estonian tribes: 1000
Total: 2000
NOVGOROD VOYSKO (approximately)
Mixed forces, probably half cavalry and half infantry
Total: about 6000
And now a little about the content. If we discard all the "fantasies" of the author, then we get very detailed, balanced and objective material, in which there is not the slightest hint of belittling or rewriting Russian history. And this text in English is read by the British, Americans, Australians and New Zealanders, and even the inhabitants of South Africa, of course, those who read, because they read little there (as, indeed, we do now!). So you need to have a big "anti-Western" mentality and fantasy in order to see something anti-Russian in all this. Therefore, it is not necessary to lump together politicians-politicians, half-trained journalists (I know many of them, I have met personally) and … historians who value their reputation and, if possible, and such for the historian is the availability of available information, try to write truthfully, without opportunistic tricks and fantasies. Well, each nation has its own manner of presentation and is associated with the peculiarities of the national culture. Our style of presentation is more academic, their style is closer to the conversational manner. And that's it!
