I just realized that I have virtually no idea about Russian weaponry and armor in the late medieval and later the early to middle renaissance.
For example I don't even know if Russian plate armor existed or if they used pike formations like in central Europe.
Can you give me a short briefing, fellow anon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7-EwEpl2Kk
>>514598
Sure thing. In the early 15'th (~1400/20) century russians were still using old slavic levies which consisted of basicaly serfs called to arms and asked to bring anything they could. Such levies usually had no armor and were wielding pole-arm weapons,hand axes and bows. In addition to these levies their nobility fought like boyars. Boyars were basicaly russian knights of that period but with a twist. The boyars had fine light or medium armour so they could retain high mobility. As weapons they used a spear,sword and a shield. As for their tactics: have in mind that russia is a vast land dominated by the grassy steppes so cavaly was very important. They used the serf levies as a mobile platform for their boyars to manuver about. It is easily imaginable why they lost to the mongols who were faster on horse and used their horse archers to gain an upper hand.Have in mind that before the mongols russian states fought mostly each other (they were all from the same dynasty) and had no real reason to update their army somewhat like the condotori in Italy.
Part 1.
>>514598
The Muscowites were the first state to start the military reformation. Their main goal was defeating the Mongols and their military thhinking was based on that. This is the middle of the 15'th century (~1450)
They still used serf levies but that mostly carried pole arms called bardiches. These
bardiches were similar to helbards but varied in shape and lenght. The word is used to describe any pole-arm with an axe and a pike. Such units ware far more suited for fighting cavalry charges but were still unorganized and their equipment unregulated. The cavlary still formed the most important part if the russian armies. They were still using boyars and will continue to use them for a long time but in addition to them they used mercanery cavalry bands called "druzhina" which in eglish means the company. These mercaneries were formed from soldiers of the overrun principalities on the south. They were hardy soldiers used to war and were skilled in using any equipmeny including bows. This was the composition of the Muscowite armies that started the liberation of Russia.
>>515766
>Part 1
>2 hours and 40 minutes later
poor form desu senpai
nice dubs tho
>>516370
It's all good, friend, I was merely jesting. You contributed more than I, I just have an affinity for assholish behavior.
>>516375
It's okay. You didn't offend me.
>>516390
I just don't think you should apologize for me insulting you after you've contributed to the thread is all.
>>514598
Russian armor and weaponry was largely Turkic Inspired. This is rather due to having a cavalry culture inspired by the Nomads more than Europe.
Also they fought like Central Asians too
>>516420
That's not at all corect.
>>516441
It's almost sorta 10% true. They did have a cavalry culture. Everything else is just >>>trash though.
>>516449
Agreed. The russian infantry in the medieal ages is influenced by the vikings while the cavalry is influenced by the byzantines.
>>516455
It honestly surprises me that Russia never tried to reclaim greece from the Ottomans. They had a lot of close ties, including religion.
>>516441
>>516449
>Chichack Helmet
>Lamellar fucking everywhere.
>Topuz mace.
>Saber
>Composite bow
Jesus, just look at the names for Russian plated mail armor.
>Behterets = from the Turkic Behter
>Yushman = from the Turkic Yashawn
Though provided the Turkics got them from the Persianates, I'd still say Ruskie armor is heavily Turkic Inspired given that the likes of the Cumans brought it there, compounded by the latter influence of other Altaics such as the Mongols.
>>516455
Except this thread asked about
>late medieval and later the early to middle renaissance.
Nobody gave a shit what the Byzantines thought of warfare anymore.
>>516459
These are examples of some Turkic influence, but you've greatly exaggerated the importance of Turkic peoples on Russia. Especially since Turkic is such a broad word. The Yakuts could be considered Turkic, but they share very little with the Khazars. And even with plate mail such as Behterets and Yushman, they also had kalantar, which was more Japanese. Are we now going to talk about how Russian armor heavily drew upon Japanese influence?
>>516458
Didnt they have a few wars with ottomans? I'm under the impression they tried to expand toward balkans all the way to ww1.
>>516458
They are trying now. Putin demanded the relinquishment of Constantinople during the jet incident. Also the Russians tried during the Crimean war but were stopped by the Brittish and French.
>>516467
I believe Russian wars with the Ottomans were more about trying to keep the Ottomans from carving some land out of them rather than reclaiming Byzantium.
>>516459
They were somewhat influenced but you are definitely exagerating it. Russians used the sword up untill the 17'th century when the cossacks influenced them to use sabers.
>>516466
>they also had kalantar, which was more Japanese. Are we now going to talk about how Russian armor heavily drew upon Japanese influence?
.....
>These are examples of some Turkic influence, but you've greatly exaggerated the importance of Turkic people
Because most of Medieval/Late Russia's wars were against these people? The Nomads?
It doesnt help that the other great enemy of Russia at the time: the Poles, were likewise influenced by Turkic military armor and equipment.
>>516474
Not really it was all about reclaiming Byzantim. The Russian Empire was an empire because they proclaimed themselves successors of Byzantium and Rome.
>>516479
If you consider that the Scythians and Sarmatians were Slavs as many historians say... What if all the other peoples of the steppe were influenced by them?
>>516486
Too ancient. The only surviving influence of those two in Russia is in female dress.
Not to mention the Altaic people ran them and the other Indo-Iranian nomads down during their Westwards Migrations.
>>516496
Nothing is too ancient. Thats the problem with western historiography. You never seek the big picture...Its like this autism thats going on about how Albanians are Illyrians (too ancient?) While every sane historian and ethnograph knows they are from the Caucasus...
>>516513
The Scythians were wiped out 300's BC and the remnants of it settled in what is now the Western Shore of the Black Sea became Hellenized. It is fucking ancient. 300's BC. Jesus thats way too fucking ancient.
In any case, Medieval Steppe Nomad culture was dominated by the Altaics this time around. The Rus got influenced by that through the numerous wars, invasions, and migrations of those people into their lands.
>>516534
Western cost? You mean the place where it is persumed that one of the Slavic strongholds (original lands) was located in?
>>516564
>Presumed.
Slavs were from way up North or following the major rivers.
>>516571
That is absolutely incorect. The Russians teach that Slavs originated from the Balkans and were pushed into Dacia by the Romans. And I believe that something like that happened.
>>516581
How do you explain why Slavic is so close to Baltic and Germanic then
>>517064
In what way? As far as I know the only thing similar is certain aspects of their religion and eaven they aren't the same.
>>517079
Language
>>516458
They almost did conquer Constantinople in 1878. The Brits stopped them though, fearing a shift in balance of power.
>>514598
I am monitoring this thread.
The only thing about medieval Russia I know is Alexander Nvestky and Andrei Rublev (the soviet movie)
>>514598
In the 16th-17th centuries the backbone of the Russian military was "pomestnaya konnitsa" (gentry horsemen). They were lightly armed and fought with sabres pikes and bows. Later - also with firearms.
>>517253
more pomestnaya konnitsa
>>517266
>>517277
The infantry played a secondary role in the 16th century Russian army and consisted of the "strelets" (shooter) soldiers armed with muskets and bardich halberds.
>>517290
strelets infantry
>>517294
In the 17th centure the Russian infantry began to adopt Western armor as well as pikes.
>>517294
A 17th century Russian infantryman.
>>517294
>>517290
Wow thanks, these seem extremely lightly armored for the time frame. Lack of ressources?
>>517348
First from the left side is surely Polish.
>>517082
As in western heavy plate armour. No,they kept it light.
>>517348
No, not really. The Medieval Russian noble warriors (druzhina) were armed like pic related. They were heavy cavalry and played the same role as western knights. The armour they used was mainly influenced by Byzantium and Turkic/Iranic people, so you won`t see any Western plate armor here, but nevertheless they were pretty heavy. Everything changed when the Crimean khanate became a vassal of the Ottoman empire and attacked Russia. It was a huge threat, the Crimeans even sacked Moscow itself. The Crimeans used a huge number of extremely lightly armoured horse archers, so the Russians needed a force that would be numerous enough and light enough to beat them. The centralization and the abolishment of private druzhinas of the local prnces played a role too. Because of those factors the bulk of the army began to consist of a big mass of small landowners who exchanged their heavy armor for studded leather.
>>517348
No. Combat in the steppes was quik and brutal. If they used heavy armour they would be dead meat. Keep in mind that the composite and long bow were more powerfull than early rifles and that arrows could pierce any kind of armour. The mongols and other nomads used horse archers.
>>517089
Slavs have nearly nothing in comon with the germanic languages. In every Slavic language germans are called nemci/niemci/etc... Which means the mute ones.
>>517356
>First from the left side is surely Polish.
not necessarily, it has the winged hussar vibe but that kind of armor was common in all over the region
>>517064
Slav here, Slavic and Germanic are completely different, some military terms are used by Russians that are German in origin, but thats mostly because of Prussian influence. There are Germanic influences in Western Slavic languages due to proximity to German speaking countries. South Slavic languages have little to no German words apart from modern ones, mostly about vehicles. South Slavic ones on the other hand have many Greek words.
>>517424
Post more illustrations.
>>517445
>>517459
To your modern ears, yes, but
Proto-Indo-European *o became /a/ in all three languages
All three languages have -m- in the dative, ablative, and instrumental plurals, unlike every other Indo-European language, which has -bh-
Not to mention Balto-Slavic is a widely accepted subgroup, with many of their own innovations in common.
Germanic and Balto-Slavic must have developed out of a PIE dialect around the Baltic, which Slavic was obviously part of, placing them pretty far away from the Balkans.
>>517491
I disagree with you. We have nothing in common with germanic peoples. And the word that describes germans is the same in every slavic nacion. We only share each others words and sounds.
>>517462
ok
>>517511
To elaborate my response which was not very objective. Forgive me for that. The slavic and germanic linguistics are nearly completely different. The only reason why we share certain words and sounds today is because we coexisted near each others borders for thousands of years. The baltic states were heavily influenced by the slavs simply because of that reason and don't forget that most of eastern germany was mainly populated by slavs which were germanized in the medieval ages. Those slavs being the Serbs,Pommeranians,Poles,Bohemians,Ranians.
>>517462
>>517558
i love these face masks, if you have more of these kind of images please post
>>517558
>>517561
>>517561
and another one
>>517537
The coats they wear over their armor seem comfy and styling as fuck.
>>517601
>>517614
>>517641
A contemporary depiction of pomestnaya konnitsa.
>>517679
>>517561
>>517601
same image in better quality
>>517511
Nigga, at one point (during the proto-Germanic period, specifically), the languages shared nasalized vowels (ąęǫ̂) etc. But beyond phonology our languages shared grammatical morphology (cases that only German and Icelandic retain), and obviously our Indo-European lexicon. Compare Russian пoлк polk to folk, Polish ludzie to Leute (people), bauen and być (to be), die Geschichte ((event, (his)story, struggle)- skehaną in proto Germ. to skakać (jump, move)). Pic very related.
>>516458
wut, they tried like that since ever
Or you think declaring their ruler tzar (caesar) and Moscow the third Rome and fighting a number of wars against the Ottomans to recapture Constantinople is coincidence? Crimean war was basicly because Britain and France din't want to let Russia capture Constantinople and have an exit to the Mediterranian.
>>516474
That was more from the ottoman side though
>>517578
This armor setup doesn't look lighter than plate at all though. Quite the contrary.
Mail is heavy as fuck.
>>517537
They look really ottoman
>>521781
Well yeah, Ottoman armor and bladed weapons were really popular with 16th-17th centuries Russians, so the nobleman`s helmet on this pic probably IS Ottoman. For example, here is the helmet of Tsar Alexei Mihailovich (1629-1676). It was made by a Russian craftsman, but it`s a copy of an Ottoman helmet. The craftsman even copied the quranic quotes engraved on it!
>>522451
forgot the pic of the helmet
>>522464
Turkic Gear is gr8 for fighting in the steppes.
>>522464
Dunno. The medieval Russians were happy to purchase orto copy any type of eastern armor and weaponry, but were heavily biased against the western stuff and didn`t really begin to adopt it until the 17th century. Probably it`s a cultural thing - there never was any kind of Jihad on Russia with the purpose of conquering it and converting Russians to Islam, so armor from Islamic countries was viewed as culturally "neutral". At the same time there was a shitton of wars with Catholics who wished to convert the Russians, so there are a lot of sermons and religious texts from that time where everything coming from Catholics is viewed as impure and spiritually harmful.
>>522487
Also this. 16th century western full plate will be of little use when fighting Crimean horse archers, while Ottoman stuff is much more suitable.
>>515816
>eglish
Thanks for translating
>>522505
Was horse archery really that powerful? Hard to believe that for me.
The Mongols faced far inferior armor tech and even they won their battles in melee.
>>522514
Its not that LE ARROWS PIERCE THROUGH YUR ARMOR. They cant get through plate armor probably.
Its more like "if we use static, infantry based, Western European Warfare here, we'd get outflanked like fuck and before you know it some Nomad Scum is burning through towns and villages."
>The Mongols faced far inferior armor tech and even they won their battles in melee.
Other way around: Mongols had no armor styles of themselves to begin with. They were mostly wearing Chinese/Persian/Settled Turkic/Russian gear, often mixing them based on preference.
Not to mention melee is the tail end of a Central Asian battle.
>>522548
Ok, that makes sense.
>Other way around: Mongols had no armor styles of themselves to begin with
Doesn't matter anymore but what I said was that Mongols had to battle against 13th century high medieval mail in Europe, not even plate and still didn't shoot everyone to death with meme arrows.
But your explanation renders this argument mute. Cheers.
Russians were the inheritors of Viking and byzantine equipment, tactics and ethos
speaking of my russian bratushki ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IV3yvOkooYA
>>522581
Flanking with speed beats armor every time!
>>522661
Not only that. But to fight nomads, you have to catch up with them. Otherwise they will burn your villages and only pick the fights they chose.
>>522630
That show is entertaining bullshit and you know it, anon.. ;)
>>517537
>>522699
i know buts its fun to watch
>>522619
True up untill mongols invasion. After that they closer to nomads. What is more intersting for me is the way of manning of "pomestoe voysko". Nomads could mobilize to military campaign much more percentage of population than agricultural russian principalities. So to catch up Ivan III and his successors stripped wealthy boyars and princes from most of their lands and riches to place there pomeschiks that had to fight wars in exchange. Of course both local and western nobles, especially polish szlachta, were shocked with such disrespect to their feudal rights, and considered Moscow grand princes bloody tyrants. As a result, i find really fascinating history of wars for steppes and wild field: tribal muslim nomads vs cocky catholic szlachta vs samurai-like orthodoxal pomeschiks and all kinds of thiefs and robbers and runaway slaves called cossaks in between.
