Open history lesson "Slavic warriors and heroes". The fighting spirit of the ancient Slavs

Okiyan, will raise a howl, Will pour onto the empty shore, Splash in a noisy run, And find themselves on the shore, In scales, like the heat of grief, Thirty-three heroes, All handsome young, Daring giants, All are equal, like a selection, Uncle Chernomor is with them " . A.S. Pushkin, when writing his works, drew ideas from ancient documents. It is quite possible that there were some special units (special forces) among the ancient Slavic warriors ....

Despite the fact that the famous heroes took many secrets of combat sorcery with them to the grave, through the efforts of folklorists, researchers of antiquity and ancient magical traditions it became possible to slightly fill this gap in knowledge modern man. The ancients perfectly understood that a military clash or battle takes place not only at the level of the physical world, but also at the subtle, astral level, therefore only those who have taken care of protecting or strengthening the body of their astral counterpart in advance can count on victory even over strength and numbers of the enemy. And although the highest military magic, which made it possible to destroy the enemy at a distance with one effort of will or completely transfer the duel to astral space, was available only to professional high-flying magicians, there were many fairly simple rituals that made it possible to gain advantages over the enemy.

So, for example, the ability to create a weapon that gives a warrior great strength and allows him to emerge victorious from all battles was called "Ki-Biy". To create it, a warrior on a dark moonless night would go with his weapon to a forest or to a wasteland and put it under a large stone ", covering from above with leaves of oak and St. John's wort. After that, he made a fire not far from the stone and sat with him all night long, and without fail with his back to the stone. The cry of a bird of prey or a wild beast, heard in the silence of the night behind the fighter, meant that the weapon was ready to battle. If this did not happen, the ritual was repeated again. Taking out the weapon from under the stone, the warrior said: "For protection and care, against all hardship."

In the arsenal of the Zaporizhzhya Cossacks of Kharakterniki there was a way to deprive the enemy of strength and courage at a distance, and this strength passed to the conjurer himself. Isn't this the secret of the Cossacks' victories, inexplicable from the point of view of military science, when a detachment of poorly armed fighters not protected by armor could utterly defeat the elite army of Polish knights? Mastering this technique is quite difficult and requires a certain level of psychic ability. A warrior who wants to gain the strength of the enemy had to clearly imagine him and imagine a fast and strong river flowing from the enemy. At the same time, it was necessary to pronounce the words: “As the river flows, so do you, strength, flow from it to me.” Success depended on the vivacity of the imagination of the conjurer, on the realism and brightness of the mental image of the enemy created by him and the strength flowing from him. It should be noted that similar witchcraft techniques are used today by almost all magicians and are integral part many rituals that are not at all related to war and weapons, and the ability to create a distinct, expressive image of the desired result is one of the basic skills of any occultist.

A similar rite was used in antiquity to gain strength before a fight. On the eve of the battle, one should go to the spring, draw water in the palm of one’s hand and drink it with the words: “I drink the water of strength, I drink the water of power, I drink the water of invincibility.” After that, you need to wipe your hands on the weapon, clearly imagining that you are endowing it with power and strength Then, turning his gaze to the sun, the warrior said: "As I see (name) this day, so let me, Almighty God, see the next one."

A significant part of Slavic military magic refers to folk magic, which attaches exceptional importance to the pronunciation of this or that spell or the formal performance of any ritual action. Probably, this could give a tangible result if a person had innate psychic abilities or he firmly believed in the power of the rite performed by him. There were hundreds of conspiracies designed to protect in battle, to gain heroic strength and courage, bestial dexterity and endurance, and all of them invariably contain images and objects that are familiar to many from epics and folk tales: stone Alatyr, sword. The incantatory form also almost always remained unchanged, but, as mentioned above, one can hardly expect a tangible result from such rites of village folk magic.

"... WHAT YOU GET WITH THE SWORD."

The main weapon of the Slavs was the sword. It was wide, with wavy stripes on the blade and was decorated various drawings. The father gave a weapon to a newborn son, saying at the same time: “Yours is the only thing that you get with a sword.” If the arguing were dissatisfied with the court of the prince, he told them: "Sue with the sword." The Slavs usually took an oath on a shield and a sword.

"LET BE SHAMED ON ME"

The Slavs were distinguished by courage, courage, contempt for physical pain and such honesty that instead of an oath they said: “Be ashamed of me.”

The Slavs usually went to war on foot, in chain mail, a helmet covered their heads, a heavy shield was at the left hip, a bow and a quiver with arrows soaked in poison were behind their backs; in addition, they were armed with a double-edged sword, an ax, a spear and a reed. Over time, the Slavs introduced cavalry into military practice. The personal squad of the prince among all the Slavs was equestrian.

The Slavs did not have a permanent army. In case of military necessity, all men capable of carrying weapons went on a campaign, and they sheltered children and wives with belongings in the forests.

The Slavic tribes in the 6th century led a settled way of life, which is confirmed by the nature of their occupations and the arrangement of settlements, which were usually located in forests and swamps. These were settlements, consisting of dugouts with many exits, so that in case of an attack it was possible to hide through one of the emergency passages. The Slavs also settled on rivers and lakes, where special houses were built - pile buildings. Thus, the settlements of the Slavic tribes were securely hidden and inaccessible, and therefore there was no need to build such defensive structures of the fortress type, which, for example, were built in ancient Egypt, the Middle East, Greece and Rome.

The ancient Slavs knew how to make monoxyls - one-deck boats, on which they descended along the rivers to Pontus. On boats, Slavic warriors appeared near Korsun in the Crimea, near Constantinople and even on Crete in the Mediterranean Sea.

According to the Byzantine historian Procopius, the Sklavins and Antes were very tall and huge force and this is how he described appearance ancient Slavs: "The color of their skin and hair is not very white or golden and not quite black, but still they are dark red." Since ancient times, chroniclers noted among the Slavs and Antes dexterity, endurance, hospitality and love of freedom.

From the stories of Mauritius, as well as from other sources, we can conclude that the Slavs had a blood feud, which resulted in armed conflicts between the tribes.

A feature of the development of the Slavic tribes was the absence of debt slavery; only prisoners of war were slaves, and even those had the opportunity to redeem themselves or become equal members of the community. It was patriarchal slavery, which among the Slavs did not turn into a slave-owning system.

The Slavs had a tribal community, which had land ownership. There was no private ownership of land even when the family began to receive a certain arable field, since arable land was periodically subject to redistribution. Pastures, forests, meadows, hunting and fishing grounds continued to be communal property.

According to Procopius, "these tribes, sklavins and antes, are not ruled by one person, but since ancient times they live in the government of the people, and therefore they have happiness and unhappiness in life considered a common thing." Veche (a meeting of a clan or tribe) was the highest authority. The affairs were in charge of the eldest in the family (headman, ruler).

Already at the end of the 5th century, more or less significant associations of Slavic tribes began to arise to repel the attacks of enemies or organize campaigns within the Eastern Roman Empire. The wars contributed to the strengthening of the power of the military leader, who began to be called a prince and have his own squad.

The social structure of the Slavs in the 6th century was a military democracy, whose organs were a veche or a meeting of tribes, a council of elders and a prince - a military leader. Some military leaders entered the service in the army of the Eastern Roman Empire. But the Slavic tribes settled on the Balkan Peninsula not as mercenaries, but as conquerors.

Mauritius noted that the Slavs had tribal strife. “Having no head over them,” he wrote, “they are at enmity with each other; since there is no unanimity between them, they do not gather together, and if they do, they do not come to a single decision, since no one wants to yield to another. To fight the Slavs, Mauritius recommended using their tribal strife, setting one tribe against another and thereby weakening them.

Byzantine politicians were very afraid of large political associations of the Slavs.

When external danger threatened the Slavs, the tribes forgot all their feuds and united for a common struggle for independence. Speaking about the struggle between the Avars and the “Sklavian people” at the end of the 6th century, Menander, a Byzantine, reported the answer of the Slavic elders to the leader of the Avars, who demanded that the Slavic tribes submit to him and pay tribute. “Has the man who would have subjugated our strength been born into the world,” the Sklavian elders asked, “and is the person warmed by the rays of the sun?”

Eastern sources speak of the Slavs as warlike people. Thus, the Arab writer Abu-Obeid-Al-Bekri noted in his writings that if the Slavs, this powerful and terrible people, were not divided into many tribes and clans, no one in the world could resist them. Other Eastern authors wrote about the same. The militancy of the Slavic tribes was emphasized by almost all Byzantine writers.

According to Mauritius, the Slavic tribes had squads, which were recruited according to the age principle - mostly young, physically strong and dexterous warriors.

The number of those who fought was usually in the hundreds and thousands, much less often in the tens of thousands. The organization of the army was based on the division into clans and tribes. The warriors of the clan were headed by an elder (headman), at the head of the tribe was a leader or prince.

Ancient sources noted the strength, endurance, cunning and courage of the Slavic warriors, who also mastered the art of disguise. Procopius wrote that Slavic warriors “got used to hiding even behind small stones or behind the first bush they came across and catching enemies. This they did more than once by the river Istra. During the siege of one of the cities, the Byzantine commander Belisarius summoned a Slav warrior and ordered him to get the language. “And this Slav, having made his way very close to the walls in the early morning, covered himself with brushwood, hid in the grass.” When a Goth approached this place, the Slav suddenly grabbed him and delivered him alive to the camp.

Mauritius reported on the art of the Slavs hiding in the water: “They courageously endure being in the water, so that often some of those who remain at home, being caught by a sudden attack, plunge into the abyss of water. At the same time, they hold in their mouths specially made, large reeds hollowed out inside, reaching the surface of the water, and themselves, lying supine on the bottom (of the river), breathe with their help; and this they can do for many hours, so that it is absolutely impossible to guess their (presence)."

Regarding the weapons of the Slavic warriors, Mauritius wrote: “Each is armed with two small spears, some also have shields, strong, but difficult to carry. They also use wooden bows and small arrows soaked in a special poison, which is very effective if the wounded person does not take an antidote beforehand or (does not use) other auxiliary means known to experienced doctors, or does not immediately cut around the wound so that the poison does not spread to the rest. body parts". In addition to the bow and darts for throwing, which Mauritius spoke of, the Slavic warrior had a spear for striking, an axe, a reed and a double-edged sword.

In addition to a large shield, the Slavs had chain mail, which reliably covered and at the same time did not hamper the movements of a warrior in battle. Chain mail was made by Slavic craftsmen. During this period, the Normans had armor made of leather with metal straps attached to it; Byzantine warriors had forged armor, which greatly hampered movement. Thus, the armor of the Slavs favorably differed from the armor of their neighbors - the Normans and Byzantines.

The ancient Slavs had two types of troops - infantry and cavalry. In the Eastern Roman Empire, under the ruler Justinian (c. 670-711), cavalry Slavic detachments were in the service, in particular, the Slavs served in the cavalry of Belisarius. The commander of the cavalry was Ant Dobrogost. Describing the campaign of 589, the ancient historian Theophylact Simokatt reported: “Having jumped off their horses, the Slavs decided to rest a little, and also give rest to their horses.” Thus, these data confirm the presence of cavalry among the Slavs.

During the battles, the Slavs widely used surprise attacks on the enemy. “To fight with their enemies,” wrote Mauritius, “they love in places overgrown with dense forest, in gorges, on cliffs; they profitably use (ambushes), surprise attacks, tricks, day and night, inventing many (various) ways. Having great help in the forests, they go to them, because among the gorges they know how to fight well. Often they abandon the prey they are carrying (as if) under the influence of confusion and run into the forests, and then, when the attackers rush to the prey, they easily rise and cause harm to the enemy. All this they are masters of doing in a variety of ways they come up with in order to lure the enemy.

Mauritius said that in the art of forcing rivers, the Slavs were superior to "all people." Being in the service in the army of the Eastern Roman Empire, the Slavic detachments skillfully ensured the crossing of rivers. They quickly made boats and transferred large detachments of troops to the other side of them.

The Slavs usually set up a camp at a height to which there were no hidden approaches. If necessary, to fight in the open field, they arranged fortifications from wagons. Theophylact Simokatt told about the campaign of one Slavic detachment that fought with the Romans: “Since this clash was inevitable for the barbarians (Slavs) (and did not bode well), they, having made wagons, made a fortification of the camp from them and in the middle of this camp placed women and children. The Slavs tied the wagons, and a closed fortification was obtained, from which they threw spears at the enemy. The fortification of wagons was a very reliable defense against cavalry.

For a defensive battle, the Slavs chose a position that was difficult for the enemy to reach, or they poured a rampart and arranged notches. When storming the enemy's fortifications, they used assault ladders, "turtles" and siege engines. In deep formation, putting their shields on their backs, the Slavs went on the assault.

Although Mauritius said that the Slavs did not recognize the military system and, during the offensive, moved forward all together, this, however, does not mean that they did not have a battle order. The same Mauritius recommended building a not very deep formation against the Slavs and attacking not only from the front, but on the flanks and from the rear. From this we can conclude that for the battle the Slavs were located in a certain order. “Sometimes,” Mauritius wrote, “they occupy a very strong position and, guarding their rear, do not allow them to engage in hand-to-hand combat, or to surround themselves or strike from the flank, or go to their rear.”

If the Slavs repulsed all attacks, then, according to Mauritius, there was only one remedy left - a deliberate retreat in order to provoke a disorganized pursuit that would upset the Slavs' battle order and allow them to win a surprise strike from an ambush.

Starting from the 1st century, Slavic tribes fought against the troops of the Roman Empire. Ancient sources mention East Slavic tribes that fought against the Roman conquerors. There is a message from the Gothic historian Jordanes about the struggle of the Goths with the Antes in the 4th century. A detachment of Goths attacked the Antes, but was initially defeated. As a result of further clashes, the Goths managed to capture the leader of the Antes Bozh with his sons and 70 elders and execute them.

More detailed information about the wars of the Slavic tribes dates back to the 6th-8th centuries, when the Slavs fought against the Eastern Roman Empire.

By the beginning of the 6th century, the onslaught of the Slavic tribes from across the Danube intensified so much that the ruler of the Eastern Roman Empire Anastasius in 512 was forced to build a line of fortifications stretching 85 kilometers from Selymvria on the Sea of ​​​​Marmara to Derkos on Pontus. This line of fortifications was called the "Long Wall" and was located 60 kilometers from the capital. One of his contemporaries called it "a banner of impotence, a monument to cowardice."

In the second quarter of the 6th century, Emperor Justinian, preparing to fight the Slavs, strengthened his army and built defensive structures. He appointed, according to Procopius, head of the guard on the Istr River, Khilbudia, who successfully defended the Danube line from attacks by Slavic tribes for three years in a row. To do this, Khilbudiy annually crossed to the left bank of the Danube, penetrated into the territory of the Slavs and devastated there. In 534, Khilbudius crossed the river with a small detachment. The Slavs came out “against him all without exception. The battle was fierce, many Romans fell, including their leader Khilbudiy. After this victory, the Slavs freely crossed the Danube to invade deep into the Balkan Peninsula.

In 551, a detachment of Slavs numbering more than 3 thousand people, without meeting any opposition, crossed the Istra River. Then, after crossing the river Gevre (Maritsa), the detachment was divided into two detachments. The Byzantine commander, who had great strength, decided to take advantage of this advantage and destroy the scattered detachments in an open battle. But the Slavs got ahead of the Romans and defeated them with a surprise attack from two directions. This fact shows the ability of the Slavic commanders to organize the interaction of their units and carry out a sudden simultaneous attack on the enemy, who has superior forces and acts offensively.

Following this, regular cavalry was thrown against the Slavs under the command of Asbad, who served in the bodyguard detachment of Emperor Justinian. The cavalry detachment was stationed in the Thracian fortress of Tzurule and consisted of excellent horsemen. One of the Slavic detachments attacked the Byzantine cavalry and put it to flight. Many Byzantine horsemen were killed, and Asbad himself was taken prisoner. From this example, we can conclude that the Slavs had cavalry that successfully fought the Roman regular cavalry.

Having defeated the regular field troops, the detachments of the Slavs began the siege of fortresses in Thrace and Illyria. Procopius reported very detailed information about the capture by the Slavs of the strong seaside fortress of Toper, located on the Thracian coast, 12 days from Byzantium. This fortress had a strong garrison and up to 15 thousand combat-ready men - residents of the city.

The Slavs decided first of all to lure the garrison out of the fortress and destroy it. To do this, most of their forces settled in ambush and took refuge in difficult places, and an insignificant detachment approached the eastern gate and began to fire on the Roman soldiers: “The Roman soldiers who were in the garrison, imagining that there were no more enemies than they see, holding on to weapons, immediately went out against them all. The barbarians began to retreat, pretending to the attackers that, frightened by them, they took to flight; the Romans, carried away by the pursuit, were far ahead of the fortifications. Then those who were in ambush rose up and, finding themselves in the rear of the pursuers, cut off their opportunity to return back to the city. And those who pretended to retreat, turning their faces towards the Romans, placed them between two fires. The barbarians destroyed them all and then rushed to the walls. Thus the Toper garrison was defeated. After that, the Slavs moved to storm the fortress, which was defended by the population of the city. The first attack, insufficiently prepared, was repelled. The defenders threw stones at the attackers, poured boiling oil and tar on them. But the townspeople's success was temporary. Slavic archers began to fire at the wall and forced the defenders to leave it. Following this, the attackers put ladders against the walls, entered the city and took possession of it. At the same time, archers and assault squads interacted well. The Slavs were well-aimed archers and therefore were able to force the defenders to leave the wall.

Of interest is the campaign in 589 by Peter, the commander of the Byzantine emperor Mauritius, against a strong Slavic tribe led by Piragast.

The emperor demanded swift and decisive action from Peter. Peter's army withdrew from the fortified camp and in four marches reached the area in which the Slavs were; he had to cross the river. For reconnaissance of the enemy, a group of 20 soldiers was sent, which moved at night and rested during the day. Having made a difficult night march and crossed the river, the group settled in the thicket to rest, but did not set up guards. The warriors fell asleep and were discovered by a cavalry detachment of the Slavs. The Romans were taken prisoner. The captured scouts told about the plan of the Byzantine command.

Piraghast, having learned about the enemy’s plan, moved with large forces to the place where the Romans crossed the river and secretly settled down in the forest. The Byzantine army approached the crossing. Peter, not assuming that there could be an enemy in this place, ordered to cross the river in separate detachments. When the first thousand people crossed to the other side, the Slavs surrounded them and destroyed them. Having learned about this, Peter ordered the whole army to cross, not being divided into detachments. On the opposite bank, the Byzantines were waiting for the ranks of the Slavs, who, however, dispersed under a hail of arrows and spears thrown from the ships. Taking advantage of this, the Romans landed their large forces. Piraghast was mortally wounded, and the Slavic army retreated in disarray. Peter, due to the lack of cavalry, could not organize the pursuit.

The next day, the guides who led the army got lost. The Romans had no water for three days and quenched their thirst with wine. The army could have died if it were not for the prisoner, who indicated that the Helicabia River was nearby. The next morning, the Romans came to the river and rushed to the water. The Slavs, who were in ambush on the opposite high bank, began to hit the Romans with arrows. “And so the Romans,” reports the Byzantine chronicler, “having built ships, crossed the river in order to grapple with the enemies in open battle. When the army was on the opposite bank, the barbarians in their entirety immediately attacked the Romans and defeated them. The defeated Romans fled. Since Peter was utterly defeated by the barbarians, Priscus was appointed commander-in-chief, and Peter, relieved of command, returned to Byzantium.

The madness of the bloody battle.

Many secret knowledge was passed down in oral tradition from father to son and was extremely rarely made public. Such knowledge, until recently kept in the strictest confidence, includes, for example, the development of the abilities and skills of a berserker. By the way, the etymology of the word "berserk" is still controversial in scientific circles. Most likely, it is formed from the Old Norse "berserkr", which translates either as "bear skin" or "shirtless" (the root ber can mean "bear", so is “naked”, and serkr is “skin”, “shirt”).

The future berserker must develop and develop in himself a sense of unity with nature, which completely excludes the consumerist or barbaric attitude to the world around him, which is so characteristic of modern man. You can master special psychotechniques for gathering energy from trees and wildlife, which will further enhance the feeling of an inextricable connection with all living things. A good exercise for developing the skills of receiving energy from nature and increasing awareness of the harmony and strength that reigns in wildlife can be the following training. It is necessary to find a clearing in the forest, hidden from prying eyes, where the practitioner can regularly come and spend several hours alone with the forest, freeing his thoughts from worries and anxieties. In the warm season, it would be useful to take off all your clothes for this time in order to make it easier for yourself to overcome the stereotypes imposed on modern man by civilization. The future berserker must take care of his clearing, treating it like a living being.

All these preparatory exercises, despite their apparent simplicity and ease, are of great importance. Mastering the skills of a berserker is unthinkable without overcoming the consumer attitude to all living things, so typical for a modern person, without developing a sense of an inextricable connection with nature, which is almost completely lost by most people in our time. After these preparatory classes you need to choose an animal with which the practitioner will identify himself in the future and which will become his second "I". You can choose several species (no more than three), and, contrary to popular belief, not only predatory mammals, but also birds and even insects. You need to try to observe the animal in its habitat, trying to get used to its image as much as possible. Now the most difficult part of all training begins - the development of the ability to psychologically identify yourself with the animal, accompanied by a temporary shutdown of logical, rational thinking. Try to look at the world through the eyes animal, to live its feelings and sensations.It is necessary to clearly and distinctly understand the difference between an animal and a person: an animal cannot control its actions, it is not capable of lying or hypocrisy, and it is not capable of making long-term plans for the future.Avoid endowing the chosen image of an animal with human features and thoughts , this can make it very difficult to enter berserk standing. Before falling asleep, you should fully focus on your animal, which will allow you to feel your merger with it in a dream.

After the student has mastered this exercise, you can proceed to the most important part of the training - entering the berserk state. In the warm season, you need to retire to the forest and live the life of your animal for several days. The only thing you need to have with you is a small knife and a loincloth, preferably made from the skin or feathers of the chosen animal. These exercises have much in common with survival training in extreme conditions; one should eat only natural food, do without fire and all the conveniences of civilization. But the main difference is that at this time one should completely identify oneself with the animal, imitate its habits, make sounds typical of it, completely turning off human thinking. Of course, these exercises should be carried out away from settlements, otherwise the consequences of a collision with a civilized person can be very deplorable.

There are three degrees of depth of immersion in the state of berserk. When entering the first degree, the practitioner retains complete control over himself and his actions, but does not receive either the strength or the dexterity of the beast in full. In the second degree of the berserk state, individual glimpses of rational human thinking are preserved, but the exerciser almost completely feels like an animal, gaining inhuman strength, agility and endurance. It is the most difficult to keep in such a state, and beginner berserkers either return back to a controlled degree, or, conversely, completely lose all human traits, reaching an absolute degree of identification with the animal. You can be in this altered state of consciousness from several hours to several days, depending on the level of physical fitness, and after leaving it (a person finds himself lying on the ground in complete exhaustion), the berserker cannot remember anything that he did while being animals.

Further training comes down mainly to developing the ability to quickly enter the berserk state and stay in it. long time without losing full awareness of what is happening and control over oneself. Having managed once to fully identify himself with the animal, the practitioner will always be able to find an acceptable method for him to further develop these unique skills.

In our time, when the whole world is trying to imitate the Americans, from uniforms to tactics and daily dry rations, our soldiers need to look more often into the rich treasury of Russian military traditions and use the centuries-old experience of Russian soldiers. No, I do not urge you to put on bast shoes, grow beards and pick up swords and bows. The main thing is to skillfully identify and generalize those principles with the help of which they defeated a stronger and numerically superior enemy.

Fundamentals and philosophy of Russian military school set out in "The Science of Victory" by A. V. Suvorov. Unfortunately, not many modern commanders, as they say, get their hands on this book. But in order to see and understand the essence of the principles set forth by Suvorov in his immortal work, it is worth making an excursion into the depths of centuries and seeing how the ancient Rusichi fought.

The land on which our distant Ancestors lived was rich and fertile and constantly attracted nomads from the east, Germanic tribes from the west, besides, our ancestors tried to develop new lands. Sometimes this colonization took place peacefully, but. often accompanied by hostilities.

Soviet military historian E.A. Razin in his book “The History of Military Art” tells about the organization of the Slavic army during the period of the 5th-6th centuries:
Among the Slavs, all adult men were warriors. The Slavic tribes had squads, which were recruited according to the age principle by young, physically strong and dexterous warriors. The organization of the army was based on the division into clans and tribes, the warriors of the clan were headed by an elder (headman), at the head of the tribe was a leader or prince

Procopius from Kessaria in his book "War with the Goths" writes that the warriors of the Slavic tribe "used to hide even behind small stones or behind the first bush they come across and catch enemies. This they did more than once by the river Istra. So, the ancient author in the above-mentioned book describes one interesting case, how a Slavic warrior, skillfully using improvised means of disguise, took the "language".

And this Slav, having crept very close to the walls in the early morning, covered himself with brushwood and curled up in a ball, hid in the grass. When a Goth approached this place, the Slav suddenly grabbed him and brought him alive to the camp.

They courageously endure being in the water, so that often some of those who remain at home, being caught by a sudden attack, plunge into the abyss of water. At the same time, they hold in their mouths specially made large reeds hollowed out inside, reaching the surface of the water, and they themselves, lying supine at the bottom of the river, breathe with the help of them; and this they can do for many hours. So it is absolutely impossible to guess their presence.

The area where the Slavs usually took the fight was always their ally. From dark forests, river backwaters, deep ravines, the Slavs suddenly attacked their opponents. Here is what the previously mentioned Mauritius writes about this:
The Slavs love to fight their enemies in places overgrown with dense forests, in gorges. on the cliffs, they profitably use ambushes, surprise attacks, tricks, and by the bottom and at night inventing many various ways... Having great help in the forests, they go to them, because among the gorges they know how to fight well. Often they abandon the prey they are carrying, as if under the influence of confusion, and run into the forests, and then, when the attackers rush to the prey, they easily rise and cause harm to the enemy. All this they are masters of doing in a variety of ways they come up with in order to lure the enemy.

Thus, we see that the ancient warriors prevailed over the enemy primarily by the lack of a template, cunning, skillful use of the surrounding area.

In engineering training, our Ancestors were also recognized specialists. Ancient authors write that the Slavs excelled "all people" in the art of forcing rivers. Being in the service in the army of the Eastern Roman Empire, the Slavic detachments skillfully ensured the crossing of rivers. They quickly made boats and transferred large military detachments to the other side of them. The Slavs usually set up a camp at a height to which there were no hidden approaches. If necessary, to fight in the open field, they arranged fortifications from wagons.

Theophinatus Siompatt reports on the campaign of one Slavic detachment that fought with the Romans:
Since this clash was inevitable for the barbarians (Slavs) (and did not bode well), they, having made wagons, made a kind of fortification of the camp out of them, and placed women and children in the middle of this camp. The Slavs tied the wagons, and a closed fortification was obtained, from which they threw spears at the enemy. The fortification of wagons was a reliable defense against cavalry.

For a defensive battle, the Slavs chose a position that was difficult for the enemy to reach, or they poured a rampart and arranged an embankment.

When storming the enemy's fortifications, they used assault ladders and siege engines. In deep formation, putting their shields on their backs, the Slavs went on the assault. From the above examples, we can see that the use of terrain in combination with available items deprived the opponents of our ancestors of the advantages that they originally had.

Many Western sources claim that the Slavs did not have a system, but this does not mean that they did not have a battle formation. The same Mauritius recommended building a not very deep formation against them and attacking not only from the front, but on the flanks and from the rear. From here we can conclude that for the battle the Slavs were located in a certain order. Mauritius writes:
... sometimes they take a very strong position and, guarding their rear, do not allow them to engage in hand-to-hand combat, or to surround themselves or strike from the flank, or go to their rear.
The above example makes it clear that the ancient Slavs had a certain battle order, that they fought not in a crowd, but in an organized manner, lining up according to clans and tribes. Tribal and tribal leaders were chiefs and maintained the necessary discipline in the army. The organization of the Slavic army was based on a social structure - division into tribal and tribal detachments. Tribal and tribal ties ensured the necessary cohesion of warriors in battle.

Thus, the use of battle order by Slavic warriors, which gives undeniable advantages in battle with a strong enemy, suggests that the Slavs but only carried out combat training with their squads. After all, in order to act quickly in battle formation, it was necessary to work it out to automatism. Also, it was necessary to know the enemy with whom to fight.

The Slavs could not only skillfully fight in the forest and field. To take the fortresses, they used a simple and effective tactic.

In 551, a detachment of Slavs numbering more than 3,000 people, without encountering any opposition, crossed the Istra River. An army with large forces was sent to meet the Slavs. After crossing the Maritsa River, the Slavs split into two groups. The Roman commander decided to break their forces one by one in an open field. Having a well-placed tactical intelligence and being aware of the movements of the enemy. The Slavs preempted the Romans and, suddenly attacking them from two directions, destroyed their enemy.
Following this, Emperor Justinian threw a detachment of regular cavalry against the Slavs. The detachment was stationed in the Thracian fortress Tzurule. However, this detachment was defeated by the Slavs, who had cavalry in their ranks that was not inferior to the Roman. Having defeated the regular field troops, our ancestors began the siege of fortresses in Thrace and Illyria.

Of great interest is the capture by the Slavs of the coastal fortress of Toyer, which was located 12 days from Byzantium. The garrison of the fortress of 15 thousand people was formidable force. The Slavs decided first of all to lure the garrison out of the fortress and destroy it. To do this, most of the soldiers settled in ambush near the city, and a small detachment approached the eastern gate and began to fire on the Roman soldiers.

The Romans, seeing that there were not so many enemies, decided to go beyond the fortress and defeat the Slavs in the field. The besiegers began to retreat, pretending to the attackers that, frightened by them, they took to flight. The Romans, carried away by the pursuit, were far ahead of the fortifications. Then those who were in ambush rose up and, finding themselves in the rear of the pursuers, cut off their possible ways retreats. And those who pretended to retreat, turning to face the Romans, attacked them. Having exterminated the pursuers, the Slavs again rushed to the walls of the city. Toyer's garrison was destroyed. From the foregoing, we can conclude that the interaction of several detachments, reconnaissance, and camouflage on the ground were well established in the Slavic army.

From all the examples given, it can be seen that in the 6th century our ancestors had perfect tactics for those times, they could fight and inflict serious damage on the enemy, who was much stronger than them, and often had numerical superiority. Perfect was not only tactics, but also military equipment. So, during the siege of fortresses, the Slavs used iron rams, setting up siege machines. The Slavs, under the cover of throwing machines and archers, moved rams close to the fortress wall, began to loosen it and make holes.

In addition to the land army, the Slavs had a fleet. There is a lot of written evidence of their use of the fleet in the fighting against Byzantium. The ships were mainly used for transporting troops and landing troops.

For many years, the Slavic tribes in the fight against numerous aggressors from the territory of Asia, with the powerful Roman Empire, with the Khazar Khaganate and the Franks defended their independence and united in tribal alliances.

In this centuries-old struggle, the military organization of the Slavs took shape, arose military art neighboring peoples and states. Not the weakness of the opponents, but the strength and military art of the Slavs ensured their victory.

The offensive actions of the Slavs forced the Roman Empire to switch to strategic defense and create several defensive lines, the presence of which did not ensure the security of the empire's borders. The campaigns of the Byzantine army across the Danube, into the depths of the Slavic territories, did not achieve their goals.

These campaigns usually ended with the defeat of the Byzantines. When the Slavs, even during their offensive actions, met superior enemy forces, they usually evaded the battle, sought to change the situation in their favor, and only then went on the offensive again.

For long-distance campaigns, crossing rivers and capturing coastal fortresses, the Slavs used the rook fleet, which they built very quickly. Large campaigns and deep invasions were usually preceded by reconnaissance in force by forces of significant detachments, which tested the enemy's ability to resist.

The tactics of the Russians did not consist in the invention of forms of building battle formations, to which the Romans attached exceptional importance, but in the variety of methods of attacking the enemy, both in the offensive and in defense. To use this tactic, a good organization of military intelligence was necessary, to which the Slavs paid serious attention. Knowledge of the enemy made it possible to carry out surprise attacks. The tactical interaction of the detachments was skillfully carried out both in the field battle and during the assault on fortresses. For the siege of fortresses, the ancient Slavs were able to create all the modern siege equipment in a short time. Among other things, the Slavic warriors skillfully used the psychological impact on the enemy.

So, in the early morning of June 18, 860, the capital Byzantine Empire Constantinople was subjected to an unexpected attack by the Russian troops. Russ came by sea, landed at the very walls of the city and laid siege to it. The warriors raised their comrades on their outstretched arms, and they, shaking their swords sparkling in the sun, plunged into confusion the Constantinopolitans standing on the high walls. This “attack” was filled with great meaning for Rus' - for the first time the young state entered into a confrontation with great empire, for the first time, as events will show, presented him with their military, economic and territorial claims. And most importantly, thanks to this demonstrative, psychologically accurately calculated attack and the subsequent peace treaty of "friendship and love", Rus' was recognized as an equal partner of Byzantium. The Russian chronicler wrote later that from that moment "the land began to be called Ruska."

All the principles of warfare listed here have not lost their significance even today. Have camouflage and military cunning lost their relevance in the age of nuclear technology and the information boom? As recent military conflicts have shown, even with reconnaissance satellites, spy planes, advanced equipment, computer networks and weapons of enormous destructive power, it is possible to bomb rubber and wooden models for a long time and at the same time loudly broadcast to the whole world about enormous military successes.

Have secrecy and surprise lost their meaning?

Let us recall how surprised European and NATO strategists were when, quite unexpectedly, Russian paratroopers suddenly appeared at the Pristina airfield in Kosovo, and our “allies” were powerless to do anything.

Slavic warriors fought bravely, following the decisions made at the tribal meeting. Preparing to repel the impending aggression, they took an oath: to fight to the death for their father and brother, for the life of their relatives.

Captivity among the Slavs was considered the greatest shame. The word of honor was highly valued, it obliged the soldiers in any conditions to be faithful to the brotherhood of arms - the most ancient custom mutual assistance and mutual assistance in combat.

Prince Svyatoslav, before the battle with the Greeks in 971, turned to the soldiers with the words: “We have nowhere to go, whether we want to or not, we must fight ... If we run, we will be disgraced. So we won’t run, but we’ll stand strong, and I will go ahead of you: if my head lies down, then take care of your own.” The soldiers answered: "Where your head lies, there we will lay down our heads." In that cruel battle, ten thousand soldiers of Svyatoslav defeated the hundred thousandth army of the Greeks.

The military oaths of the Slavs were sealed with the name of the god Perun, since he was the patron of princes and retinues. Being in a foreign land, the warriors in honor of Perun stuck their fighting swords into the ground, and in this place, as it were, his camp sanctuary became.

Warrior culture Slavic peoples was and remains one of the unsolved mysteries of national and world history. The paradox is that even within the framework of a single concept, the skill of the Slavic warriors is often extolled to the skies, and the combat capability of the Slavic army, and the very fact of the existence of any kind of harmonious military organization, is called into question. Information and opinions about weapons, tactics, military and social structure of the Slavic army are ambiguous and contradictory.

The basis of the Slavic military system was local actions, and not the extermination of the enemy, the correct tactics, the planned seizure of territory and actions characteristic of standing armies and justifying their existence, so the task of military training was to survive in battle: a duel, a group fight, a skirmish with a superior single enemy fighter, and then the coordinated actions of the detachment. Yielding to other peoples in armament and professionalism, the Slavs surpassed them in skill, using terrain conditions, organizing reconnaissance, ambushes and surprise attacks, or avoiding unwanted battles of all that was designated by the term Scythian war. Superiority not in quantity, but in fortitude, endurance, the ability to endure hardships, to do little to achieve a big goal is the main core of the guarantee of the victory of the military culture of the Slavic peoples.

Byzantine historians noted that the Slavs were “very tall and of great strength. Their hair color is very white and golden. Entering the battle, most of them go to the enemy with shields and darts in their hands, but they never wear shells. Further: “They are excellent warriors, because military affairs become with them a harsh science in every detail. The highest happiness in their eyes is to die in battle. To die of old age, or of any accident, is a disgrace, more humiliating than which nothing can be. Their gaze is more warlike than ferocious."

“Their greatest art is that they know how to hide in rivers under water. Often, caught by the enemy, they lie at the bottom for a very long time and breathe with the help of long reed tubes, the end of which is taken into the mouth, and the other sticks out to the surface of the water and thus hides in the depths. Anyone who even notices these pipes, not knowing such a trick, will consider them real. Experienced people recognize them by cut or by position, and then they are pressed to the mouth or pulled out and thereby force the sly one to float to the top.

The Slavs are the largest ethno-linguistic community in Europe, but scientists are still arguing about the origin of the Slavs and their early history. What can we say about mere mortals. Unfortunately, misconceptions about the Slavs are not uncommon.

One of the most common misconceptions is the opinion that the Slavs are a peaceful ethno-linguistic community. It's easy to refute it. It is enough to look at the area of ​​\u200b\u200bsettlement of the Slavs. The Slavs are the largest ethno-linguistic community in Europe. The conquest of territories in history rarely took place by peaceful diplomatic means. They had to fight for new lands, and the Slavs throughout their history showed fighting prowess.

Already in the 1st millennium of our era, the Slavs almost completely captured the former European provinces of the Eastern Roman Empire and formed their own independent states on them. Some of them exist to this day.

An important indicator of the combat capability of the Slavs is the fact that the military elite Ottoman Empire, Janissaries, were recruited from Christians who lived mainly in Greece, Albania and Hungary. As a special privilege, the Janissaries could also take children from Muslim families in Bosnia, but, importantly, only Slavs.

All Slavs are fair-haired and light-skinned

Also a misconception is the idea that the Slavs are completely fair-haired, blue-eyed and fair-skinned. Such an opinion is found among radical supporters of the purity of Slavic blood.

In fact, among the southern Slavs dark color hair and eyes, skin pigmentation is a widespread phenomenon.

Some ethnic groups, such as, for example, the Pomaks, are not at all similar in phenotype to the textbook "Slavs", although they are Caucasians, but speak the Slavic language, which retains in the lexicon, including Old Slavonic lexemes.

Slavs and slave - cognate words

Until now, among Western historians there is an opinion that the word "Slavs" and the word "slave" (slave) have the same root. I must say that this hypothesis is not new, it was popular in the West in the XVIII-XIX centuries.

This opinion is based on the idea that the Slavs, as one of the most numerous European nations were often subject to the slave trade.

Today, this hypothesis is recognized as erroneous, the English "slave", the German "Sklave", the Italian "schiavo" on the one hand, and the Russian "Slavs", the Polish "słowianie", the Croatian "slaveni", the Kashubian "słowiónie" on the other hand, do not are interconnected. Linguistic analysis shows that the word "slave" in the Middle Greek language comes from the ancient Greek verb σκυλεύειν (skyleuein) - meaning "to get spoils of war, rob", the 1st person singular of which looks like σκυλεύω (in Latin transliteration skyleúō), another variant σκυλάω (skyláō).

The Slavs did not have a written language before the Glagolitic and Cyrillic

The opinion that the Slavs did not have a written language before the advent of the Cyrillic and Glagolitic alphabets is disputed today. Historian Lev Prozorov, as proof of the existence of writing, writes that in an agreement with Byzantium Prophetic Oleg there is a fragment that deals with the consequences of the death of a Russian merchant in Constantinople: if the merchant dies, then one should “treat with his property as he wrote in his will.”
Indirectly, the presence of writing is also confirmed by archaeological excavations in Novgorod. Written rods were found there, with which an inscription was applied to clay, plaster or wood. These writing instruments date from the middle of the 10th century. The same findings were found in Smolensk, Genzdovo and other places.

It is difficult to say for sure what kind of writing this was. Some historians write about syllabic writing, about writing with "features and robes", there are also supporters of Slavic runic writing. The German historian Konrad Schurzfleisch, in his dissertation of 1670, wrote about the schools of the Germanic Slavs, where children were taught runes. As proof, he cites a sample of the Slavic runic alphabet, similar to the Danish runes of the 13th-16th centuries.

Slavs - descendants of the Scythians

Alexander Blok wrote: "Yes, we are Scythians!" Until now, one can find the opinion that the Scythians were the ancestors of the Slavs, however, in historical sources there is a lot of confusion with the very definition of the Scythians. In the same Byzantine chronicles, Slavs, and Alans, and Khazars, and Pechenegs could already be called Scythians.

In the "Tale of Bygone Years" there are references to the fact that the Greeks called the peoples of Rus' "Scythians": "Oleg went to the Greeks, leaving Igor in Kyiv; he took with him many Varangians, and Slavs, and Chuds, and Krivichi, and Meryu, and Drevlyans, and Radimichi, and Polyans, and Severians, and Vyatichi, and Croats, and Dulebs, and Tivertsy, known as interpreters: these were all called Greeks "Great Scythia".

But that doesn't say much. There are too many "ifs" in the hypothesis of the origin of the Slavs from the Scythians. To date, the Vistula-Dnieper hypothesis about the ancestral home of the Slavs is recognized as the most reliable. It is confirmed by both lexical parallels and archaeological excavations. According to the lexical material, it is established that the ancestral home of the Slavs was away from the sea, in a forested flat zone with swamps and lakes, within the rivers flowing into the Baltic Sea. Archeology also confirms this hypothesis. The bottom link in the archaeological chain of the Slavs is considered to be the so-called "culture of under-closing burials", which got its name from the custom of covering cremated remains with a large vessel. In Polish, "flare" means "upside down". It dates back to the 5th-2nd centuries BC.

The Scythians already existed at that time and took an active part in historical process. After the invasion of the Goths in the III century, they most likely went to the mountainous regions of the Caucasus. Of the modern languages, the language of Ossetians is closest to the Scythian.

Miniature: frame from the film "Kashchei the Immortal" (1944)

"They began to kill the prisoners"... Starting to study the materials that have come down to us, you immediately encounter a clear contradiction.

Thus, the Byzantine court chronicler Procopius of Caesarea, describing the new enemies of the empire, notes: “Entering the battle, the majority goes to the enemy on foot, having small shields and spears in their hands, but they never put on armor; some do not have either a cloak or tunic..."

A similar assessment of the enemy is given by the Byzantine commander Mauritius: "Each man is armed with two small spears, and some with shields strong, but difficult to bear. They also use wooden bows and small arrows smeared with poison." So, the main striking force of the Slavs, according to the unanimous opinion of the ancient authors, was the infantry.

However, it is difficult to imagine how this poorly equipped, almost half-naked and, moreover, foot army could quickly and deeply penetrate the territory of the defending state and smash the army of the empire, which quite rightly claimed the role of a superpower at that time. A contemporary of shameful defeats bewilderedly lamented: "And they learned to fight better than the Romans (Byzantines), they are simple people who did not dare to appear from the forests and did not know what weapons were, except for two or three longids (throwing spears)" Sharing similar amazement, let's try to shed light on this riddle.

Original taken from dmgusev

The main thing is that the Slavs perfectly mastered military tricks. Almost all ancient authors note this: “after all, these barbarians are the most skillful in fighting in difficult terrain,” and they like to attack the enemy “in wooded, narrow and steep places. They use ambushes, surprise attacks and tricks to their advantage.. ."

An excellent description of this tactic has come down to us in the "History of the Longobards" by Paul Deacon, which speaks of the attack of the Slavs on the Duchy of Benevento, and this is nothing less than Italy. The deacon notes that the Slavs set up their camp on the shore, surrounding it with hidden pits. The local Duke of Ayo, who rushed to the attack with his retinue, fell into such a pit along with his horse and was killed.

An even more tragic fate awaited the Duke of Liguria. In order to earn the glory of the conqueror of the Slavs, he did not think of anything better than to bribe some of them to organize an attack ... on his own country! The ambitious man's wish came true - a small detachment of Slavs, having crossed the line, set up camp on a dominant height. When the army of the ambitious duke immediately attacked the Slavs "on the forehead", they, "fighting more stones and with axes than with weapons, "killed almost everyone.

The Duke should have familiarized himself in advance with the treatise "Strategikon" of the same Mauritius, which warned: it is necessary to attack the Slavs not only from the front, but also from other sides, and if, "occupying a more fortified place and being protected from the rear, they do not allow opportunities for being surrounded or attacked from the flanks or from the rear, it is necessary for some to ambush, and for others to pretend to flee in front of them, so that, seized with the hope of pursuit, they leave the fortification.

The treatise of the Byzantine commander indirectly confirms that our ancient ancestors had both their own tactics and a certain battle formation, because the randomly beating crowd of barbarians could not have either a front or flanks. Apparently, they had a well-organized army, so it was far from easy to fight them. Even the Byzantines, who studied Slavic military habits to the subtleties, were not always successful. So, near Adrianople, a large army of Emperor Justinian could not lure the Slavs out of their fortified camp on the mountain, and the assault turned into a complete rout.

The Slavic army never acted in a pattern. If the Slavs, who were devastating the imperial lands, did not have time or "conditions for creating stationary fortifications, they built defenses differently.

There is a description of how a thousand Byzantine soldiers came across 600 Slavs returning from a raid with a lot of booty. A huge number of wagons were carrying trophies and captives. A source (Theophylact Simokatta) reports: "As soon as the barbarians saw the approaching Romans, they began to kill the prisoners. Of the male captives, all capable of carrying weapons were killed." A cruel step, but justified with military point vision. Then the Slavs made up a fortification of wagons, placing children and women in the middle. The Byzantines did not dare to go hand-to-hand for a long time: they were afraid of the darts that the Slavs threw at the horses. When the Romans nevertheless began to destroy the fortification, the Slavs slaughtered without exception all the remaining prisoners - women and children.

"They prepared huge stone-throwers."

But let's leave aside the shocking fact of cold-blooded massacre. It is important for us that already in ancient times, Slavic warriors were fluent in the methods of building fortifications from wagons. It is enough to recall the "Wagenburgs" of the Czech Hussites or the Cossack kurens to understand: a valuable tactical device has survived the centuries. But the ancient Slavic siege technique, alas, was forgotten over time. Meanwhile, once she could be the envy of the Roman legionnaires. Describing the siege by several Slavic tribes Thessaloniki city, the Byzantine chronicler writes: "They prepared helepoles (siege towers on wheels), iron "rams" (rams), huge stone throwers and "turtles" (shelters for infantry), covered with skins of freshly skinned bulls for protection from fire. Moreover, the fleet was actively involved in the siege - having connected their ships in pairs in some semblance to atamarans, the Slavs managed to put throwing machines on them!

The attacks began with a battle cry - "unanimously issued a cry that the earth shook." After such a psychological treatment of the enemy, the troops, divided according to the type of weapons: spear-throwers, shield-bearers and swordsmen, went on the attack, supported by the fire of archers, whose arrows the chronicler poetically compares with "winter blizzard" or "snow clouds". It involuntarily seems that the coordinated actions of the Roman legions are described, but we are talking about barbarians who almost yesterday got out of their forest jungle!

"They took a siege of many fortresses" Thanks to their military skills, the Slavs in ancient times won numerous victories over the professional units of the Byzantines. What is interesting here is this: it is impossible to wage successful wars of conquest, relying solely on the ability to defend and besiege. Someone must have attacked first! Meanwhile, the author, who described the siege of Thessalonica, noted that the Slavs had selected warriors, who, in fact, began the "bestial attack" in "bestial madness" without the support of the main forces.

The Scandinavians also had such warriors. They were called berserkers (warriors in bearskins), and they used to “howl angrily and bite their shield” before the battle, thus falling into a combat trance, as it is believed, not without the help of hallucinogenic mushrooms, which allowed them to mobilize into a critical moment psycho-physical reserves of the organism. It looked pretty creepy. (By the way, similar transformations are also described in the Celtic epic. Here is how the hero of the Irish sagas Cuchulain transforms before the fight: “All his joints, joints and ligaments began to tremble ... His feet and knees twisted ... All the bones were displaced, and the muscles swelled, the tendons from the forehead were pulled to the back of the head and swelled, becoming the size of the head of a month-old baby... The mouth stretched to the ears..." It seems that the saga describes in detail the transformation of a man into a beast.)

But back to the ancient Slavs. Procopius of Caesarea preserved a vivid description of the abilities and habits of the bestial "guardsmen" - Slavs, who fought not in numbers, but in skill. So: "The army of the Slavs, numbering no more than three thousand, crossed the Istr (Danube) River; having immediately crossed the Gebr River (the modern Maritsa River in Bulgaria. Ed.), They split in two. The archons of the Roman army in Illyricum and Thrace, having entered the battle and when the commanders shamefully fled from both barbarian camps, although they were greatly inferior to them in numbers, one enemy unit clashed with Aswad.

This man was the bodyguard of the emperor Justinian and commanded numerous and selected detachments of cavalry. And their slaves were knocked over without any difficulty, Asvad was taken alive at that moment, and then they burned him, throwing him into the flames of a fire, after cutting belts from the back of this man. Having done this, they besieged many fortresses, although they had not previously stormed the walls. Those who defeated Aswad reached the sea and stormed the city of Topir, although it had a military garrison.

It is curious that these warriors did not need any siege equipment to take the fortifications. The capture of the Ax clearly illustrates their tactical savvy and physical ability: leaving the striking force in ambush, a small group of barbarians teased the garrison commander with the possibility of an easy victory. The soldiers who left the city were cut out, the townspeople who did not have time to come to their senses were swept away from the walls by a cloud of arrows, the Slavs climbed the parapet on ropes and ...

Here it is appropriate to return to the source again: “All men, up to 15 thousand, they immediately killed, and children and women were enslaved. However, at first they did not spare any age, but they killed everyone without exception. They killed not with a sword, not with a spear and not in any other usual way, but, having firmly driven the stakes into the ground, they impaled the unfortunates on them with great force. head, these barbarians killed people like dogs ... And they, locking others in sheds ... burned them without any pity.

But here's what's weird. On the one hand, we have before us "pros" who easily deal with the elite imperial units, on the other, a pack of blood-drunk thugs who practically do not care about their own benefit (you could get a good ransom for one Aswad). This strange contradiction disappears if you understand who exactly the imperial bodyguard was unlucky enough to encounter.
"Call to each other wolf howl".

Here we come to the very interesting moment, since in numerous sources the best Slavic detachments are called not just animal, but are defined as "wolves". And here it is worth remembering the mythology, first of all Indo-European peoples. From the unknown depths of primitive times, myths about werewolves have come down to the present day, directly connected among the Slavs with the mysterious cult of the wolf. Probably, the wolf was revered as a totem ancestor - the ancestor of the tribe. The leader who led the tribe had to have the ability to incarnate in his totem beast. (Similar religious ideas existed in antiquity among many Indo-European peoples, in particular the Balts, Germans, Celts, Indo-Iranians, etc.) It is curious that berserkers were also considered werewolves: during the battle they were psychologically reborn into a wolf).

Ethnographic data indicate that among the Slavs the "animal" cult was closely connected with the rites of initiation, that is, trials and secret initiation young men entering adulthood. During the sacraments, the subject experienced a ritual death, was "reborn" into a wolf and became a warrior - a member of a secret male union, after which he had to live for some time away from the settlements of relatives "wolf life", that is, shedding blood, killing. It is not surprising that the Byzantines had not the most flattering impression of our ancestors: "they live in obstinacy, willfulness, lack of authority, killing all the time", "they call to each other with a wolf's howl". And their most delicious dish was supposedly female breasts.

The "transformation" into a ferocious werewolf was accomplished when a person put on a wolf skin and a special belt with magical amulets. Apparently, in order to fall into a ritual frenzy, the warriors used hallucinogens - mushrooms or plants like henbane. The story that has come down to us about the interrogation of the Slavs by the Byzantine commander is extremely interesting: “After arranging the interrogation, Alexander began to inquire where the captives came from. But the barbarians, having fallen into a dying frenzy, seemed to rejoice at the torment, as if someone else’s body was suffering from scourges.”

It is not surprising that with such a brutal spirit and such a military organization, the Slavs captured vast territories, which they would later call the word "Rus".