scholarly journals The Relief on the Door of the Msho Arakelots Monastery (1134) as a Source for Studying Arms and Armour of Medieval Armenian Warriors

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 207-250
Author(s):  
Dmytro Dymydyuk
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Military History ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Military ◽  
Medieval Historiography

Byzantium’s arms and armours were researched by many historians. For that reason, the military history of the medieval Roman Empire enjoyed a dominant position in medieval historiography, with the consequence that very often the military history of small nations (under Roman influences) was written from the perspective of the Eastern Romans historians. The aim of the paper is to change this perspective and give the subject of the medieval Armenian military the attention it deserves. The idea is to perform an analysis of the relief on the Door of the Msho Arakelots monastery, where four equestrians and one infantryman are depicted, and to compare it with other Armenian, Byzantine and Muslim sources. In this relief, a spherical mace head and a sword with sleeve cross-guard are represented, suggesting many parallels with East-Roman archaeological and figurative sources. No less important is the depiction of the military trumpet because it is the first image of this object in Armenian art, which can be compared with pictures from the Madrid Skylitzes (13th c.). In addition, the only defensive weapon which is presented in this relief is a round shield with a floral ornament. There are many depictions of round shields in Armenian miniatures and reliefs from 10th–11th c. Moreover, this relief is one of the few where stirrups and the chape of a scabbard are shown. These elements represent an important piece of information because these pictures can be compared with actual archaeological East-Roman artefacts to reconstruct their real look. The conclusions are that the majority of Armenian weapons bear similarities to Byzantine ones but no less important are the Muslim influences, which have been found in some cases. Located between two civilizations (Byzantium and the Muslim Potentates), Armenians adopted the best solutions of their military technologies, creating their own culture. Moreover, thanks to this comparative analysis, further support will be given to the idea that medieval figurative sources are more or less accurate material for studying medieval military history.

scholarly journals Mace in Bagratid Armenia according to written and figurative sources

2020 ◽  
pp. 15-51
Author(s):  
Dmytro Dymydyuk
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
Military History ◽  
Historical Research ◽  
Primary Research ◽  
Long Time ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Research Objects ◽  
Almost All ◽  
The Military

The military history of the Bagratid era (late 9th– mid-11th centuries) has not been the object of historical research for a long time. Therefore many questions concerning the form and functions of the weapons of that time remains unresolved. However, the studies of the armament of neighboring countries (Byzantium, Caliphate, Georgia, etc.) were researched much better. Previousely historiographers considered the military history of such «small nations» as Armenia from the perspectives of Eastern Roman Empire and Muslim world warfare which were considered as primary research objects. This paper aims to change this perspective and give the subject of the medieval Armenian military history the attention it deserves. The aim of the research is to pay attention to the war mace – one of the earliest weapons in almost all cultures. The task is to reconstruct the types of maces which were used in Bagratid Armenia; to analyse their physical and battle characteristics; methods of use; manufacturing process; terminological issue (լախտ (lakht) and գուրզ (gurz) etc. Taking into consideration the lack of archaeological finds of medieval maces from the territory of Armenia, the author pays attention to the written and figurative sources, comparing them with Byzantine and Muslim written accounts, archaeological finds and figurative sources respectively. Special attention was drawn to Armenian miniatures from the 11th century: «Kiss of Judas» (fig. 1–4), «Jesus before Pilate» (fig. 21) and to the relief on the door of Msho Arakelots monastery (1134) (fig. 6), where various types of maces are depicted. Due to the comparative analysis, further support was given to the idea that medieval figurative sources are more or less accurate material for studying medieval military history.

"Itzt kommen die Soldaten"

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tilman Venzl
Keyword(s):  
Literary History ◽  
18Th Century ◽  
Military History ◽  
Form And Function ◽  
Social Structural ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
And Function ◽  
The Military ◽  
First Time

In the 18th century, as many as 300 German-language plays were produced with the military and its contact and friction with civil society serving as focus of the dramatic events. The immense public interest these plays attracted feeds not least on the fundamental social structural change that was brought about by the establishment of standing armies. In his historico-cultural literary study, Tilman Venzl shows how these military dramas literarily depict complex social processes and discuss the new problems in an affirmative or critical manner. For the first time, the findings of the New Military History are comprehensively included in the literary history of the 18th century. Thus, the example of selected military dramas – including Lessing's Minna von Barnhelm and Lenz's Die Soldaten – reveals the entire range of variety characterizing the history of both form and function of the subject.

scholarly journals New Research in the Military History of the Late Rome and early Byzantium. A review of : Mekhamadiev, E. A. (2019). A Military Organization of the Later Roman Empire in 253–353 AD: From Emperor Gallienus’ Reforms to the Age of the Tetrarchy (253–305). St. Petersburg: Peterburgskoe Vostokovedenie Publishers. 406 p.

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 ◽  
pp. 408-421
Author(s):  
Arsen K. Shahinyan ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
Military History ◽  
Fundamental Study ◽  
Military Organization ◽  
Political Situation ◽  
History Of ◽  
Military Campaigns ◽  
New Research ◽  
The Military ◽  
Military Units

This paper states that the monograph published E. A. Mekhamadiev, a researcher from St. Petersburg, is a fundamental study of the Later Roman military organization, with especial attention to the epigraphic and papyrological accounts. The use of these sources allows the author to reconstruct the history of specific military units, their spatial movements, participation in various military campaigns and wars, and changes in their ranks. Important is that Mekhamadiev examined the internal (organizational) structure of all regional armies of the Roman empire from 253 to 305 and not restricted himself to specific and narrow aspects of history of a particular province or country. The author of the book under present review has analysed the data related to both the eastern and the western imperial provinces, discovered close interrelations of the western and eastern provinces, and indicated permanent movements of the military units from the west to east and in the opposite direction depending on the geopolitical and home political situation.

scholarly journals barbarización del ejército romano

STUDIUM ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 13-40
Author(s):  
Ignacio Jesús Álvarez Soria
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
Key Words ◽  
Military History ◽  
Roman Army ◽  
Palabras Clave ◽  
The Future ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Military ◽  
Late Roman

Resumen En el presente artículo repasaremos someramente algunos de los hitos más reseñables de la historia militar del Imperio Romano Tardío, haciendo hincapié en el papel de los bárbaros que luchaban junto a los romanos, puesto que la barbarización del ejercito romano ha sido uno de los puntos de referencia en las investigaciones acerca de la decadencia y caída del Imperio Romano. En este sentido, haremos referencia al papel integrador que tuvo el ejército romano durante buena parte de la historia del Imperio Romano, y señalaremos los principales hechos que condujeron al final de dicho papel; esbozando también las desastrosas consecuencias que tuvo este hecho para el futuro del Imperio, especialmente del Occidental.    Palabras clave: Bárbaros, ejército, integración, migración, godos, reclutamiento. Abstract In this article we will briefly review some of the most important milestones in the military history of the Late Roman Empire. In it we will emphasize the role of the barbarians who fought with the Romans, since the barbarización of the Roman army is one of the points of reference in the investigations about the decay and fall of the Roman Empire. In this sense, we will refer to the role played by the Roman army in the integration of foreigners during a large part of the history of the Roman Empire. In addition, we will point out the main events that led to the end of this integrating role; we will also indicate the disastrous consequences this fact had for the future of the Empire, especially for the Western part. Key words: Barbarians, army, integration, migration, goths, recruitment.

scholarly journals Sztuka wojenna słowian w świetle dzieła Teofilakta Symokatty.

2016 ◽  
pp. 53-76
Author(s):  
Łukasz Różycki
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Material Culture ◽  
Military History ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
Military Experience ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
History Of ◽  
Detailed Assessment ◽  
The Military ◽  
Source Of Information

The purpose of the piece Sztuka wojenna Słowian w świetle dzieła Teofilakta Symokatty [The military craft of Slavs as presented in the work of Theophylat Simocatta] was to demonstrate the military history of Slavs in the context of the work of Theophylact Simocatta, a leading source of information about the Balkans at the end of the 6th century. All the fragments including any information about Slavs’ military operations were analyzed and then verified against other contemporary sources, mainly the military treatise Strategikon. The results were anything but dubious; Theophylact’s account of Slavs was corroborated not only in the works of other historians (Procopius and John of Ephesus), but also in a military treatise, most likely written by an experienced commander (Strategikon). The work of Theophylact presents Slavic war craft as a simple, tribal affair. The barbarians made use of all the available stratagems in order to gain advantage over Romans whose military experience and material culture surpassed that of Slavs. Accounts of ambushes, night raids, swift attacks and rapid retreats (especially mentions of how the Slavs adapted to fighting in the woods) appear in all reliable sources. Another frequently mentioned fact is Slavs’ skill in crossing rivers in which they excelled. A comparative analysis of the sources confirms that all ancient authors regarded Slavs highly skilled in this respect. Another conclusion was that Slavs acted differently in Roman territories (where in the event of an attack, they would typically retreat) than in their own lands which they were prepared to defend at any cost. A verification of the reliability of Theophylact Simocatta’s account of the Slavic military craft gives grounds for attempting a more detailed assessment of their activities in the final two decades of the 6th century, and as such adds to our knowledge about barbarian tribes penetrating the Balkans.

Отцейхгаузадомузеяизисториивоенно-историческогомузеяартиллерии,инженерныхвойскивойсксвязи

2019 ◽  
pp. 134-197
Author(s):  
V.E. . Sergei
Keyword(s):  
18Th Century ◽  
Military History ◽  
Peter The Great ◽  
General Field ◽  
Signal Corps ◽  
History Of ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Military Engineering ◽  
The Military

The article is dedicated to the history of the Military Historical Museum of Artillery, Engineering and Signal Corps. The author examines the main stages of the museums formation, starting with the foundation of the Arsenal, established in St. Petersburg at the orders of Peter the Great on August 29th 1703 for the safekeeping and preservation of memory, for eternal glory of unique arms and military trophies. In 1756, on the base of the Arsenals collection, the General Inspector of Artillery Count P.I. created the Memorial Hall, set up at the Arsenal, on St. Petersburgs Liteyny Avenue. By the end of the 18th century the collection included over 6,000 exhibits. In 1868 the Memorial Hall was transferred to the New Arsenal, at the Crownwork of the Petropavlovsky Fortress, and renamed the Artillery Museum (since 1903 the Artillery Historical Museum). A large part of the credit for the development and popularization of the collection must be given to the historian N.E. Brandenburg, the man rightly considered the founder of Russias military museums, who was the chief curator from 1872 to 1903. During the Civil and Great Patriotic Wars a significant part of the museums holdings were evacuated to Yaroslavl and Novosibirsk. Thanks to the undying devotion of the museums staff, it not only survived, but increased its collection. In the 1960s over 100,000 exhibits were transferred from the holdings of the Central Historical Museum of Military Engineering and the Military Signal Corps Museum. In 1991 the collection also received the entire Museum of General Field Marshal M.I. Kutuzov, transferred from the Polish town of Bolesawjec. The Military Historical Museum of Artillery, Engineering and Signal Coprs is now one of the largest museums of military history in the world. It holds an invaluable collection of artillery and ammunition, of firearms and cold steel arms, military engineering and signal technology, military banners, uniforms, a rich collection of paintings and graphic works, orders and medals, as well as extensive archives, all dedicated to the history of Russian artillery and the feats of our nations defenders.Статья посвящена истории создания ВоенноИсторического музея артиллерии, инженерных войск и войск связи. Автор рассматривает основные этапы становления музея, начиная с основания Арсенала, созданного в СанктПетербурге по приказу Петра I 29 августа 1703 года для хранения и сохранения памяти, во имя вечной славы уникального оружия и военных трофеев. В 1756 году на базе коллекции Арсенала генеральный инспектор артиллерии граф П. И. создал мемориальный зал, установленный при Арсенале, на Литейном проспекте СанктПетербурга. К концу 18 века коллекция насчитывала более 6000 экспонатов. В 1868 году Мемориальный зал был перенесен в Новый Арсенал, на венец Петропавловской крепости, и переименован в Артиллерийский музей (с 1903 года Артиллерийский Исторический музей). Большая заслуга в развитии и популяризации коллекции принадлежит историку Н.Е. Бранденбургу, человеку, по праву считавшемуся основателем российских военных музеев, который был главным хранителем с 1872 по 1903 год. В годы Гражданской и Великой Отечественной войн значительная часть фондов музея была эвакуирована в Ярославль и Новосибирск. Благодаря неусыпной преданности сотрудников музея, он не только сохранился, но и пополнил свою коллекцию. В 1960х годах более 100 000 экспонатов были переданы из фондов Центрального исторического военноинженерного музея и Музея войск связи. В 1991 году коллекцию также получил весь музей генералфельдмаршала М. И. Кутузова, переданный из польского города Болеславец. Военноисторический музей артиллерии, инженерных войск и войск связи в настоящее время является одним из крупнейших музеев военной истории в мире. Здесь хранится бесценная коллекция артиллерии и боеприпасов, огнестрельного и холодного оружия, военной техники и сигнальной техники, военных знамен, обмундирования, богатая коллекция живописных и графических работ, орденов и медалей, а также обширные архивы, посвященные истории русской артиллерии и подвигам защитников нашего народа.

Lord Wolseley on Napoleon

1894 ◽  
Vol 40 (169) ◽  
pp. 249-251
Keyword(s):  
French Literature ◽  
Public Life ◽  
Critical Survey ◽  
Physical Decline ◽  
Military Career ◽  
Protracted Conflict ◽  
Definite Answer ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Military

With the publication in the “Pall Mall Magazine” of the first of Lord Wolseley's articles on “The Decline and Fall of Napoleon,” the inveterate controversy as to the position of the “Corsican Parvenu” in the military and general history of the world assumes a new aspect, the development of which, as psychologists, we shall watch with much interest. There have already been three great epochs in this protracted conflict of opinion. To his contemporaries and rivals of the type of Dumouriez, Bonaparte was a magnificent charlatan of mediocre ability, fit only to serve as a divisional commander under men of light and leading like themselves. The school of thought, however, which saw no genius in the famous march from Boulogne to Ulm and Austerlitz necessarily wielded an ephemeral influence, and was quickly superseded by the reactionary school, of whose views Thiers was at once the founder and the ablest exponent. Over the veteran author of “The Consulate and the Empire” the spirit of Napoleon exercised a fascination of which the records of hero-worship furnish few analogies. Then came the school of Lanfrey, Taine, and Seeley. The method which these great writers sought to pursue in investigating the life and character of Bonaparte was excellent. They set before themselves as the object to be attained a cold, critical survey, detached alike from the rancour of Dumouriez and the adulation of Thiers. But they failed, and failed badly. In spite of all their critical acumen—and perhaps because of it—the Napoleonic idea eluded their grasp. They were no better fitted for their task than Bunyan would have been for that of writing an impartial biography of Charles the Second, and the writer who will raise a real living Napoleon from the 32 volumes of “Correspondance” in which his life and thoughts are entombed has still to appear above the literary horizon. Lord Wolseley makes no attempt to fill this vacant rôle. Indeed, we doubt whether it could be adequately filled by one who believes Napoleon to have been “the greatest of all the great men” that ever lived. But he makes a contribution of much interest and value to a question that has been occasionally mooted of late years, viz., What was the mysterious malady from which the French Emperor suffered at the close of his public life in Europe? Perhaps we ought to suspend a definite answer to this question till we see what else Lord Wolseley has to say on the subject in his remaining articles. But in the meantime a rapid summary of the evidence on the point available to any student of modern French literature may not be inopportune. Of course, the matter to be considered is whether there was, in fact, at the end of Napoleon's military career a failing in his powers. Our ancestors would, no doubt, have deemed it unpatriotic to question that the “Boney” whom Wellington beat at Waterloo not only knew his best and did it, but was as competent a general as the hero of Arcola and Rivoli. But this comforting position is no longer tenable. Lord Wolseley points to the fatal delay of Napoleon at Wilna in the Russian campaign of 1812, and his equally fatal omission to support Ney at the crisis of the battle of Borodino; and, if we mistake not, the campaigns of Leipsic and Waterloo yield evidences still more cogent that the very faculty of commandership repeatedly deserted Bonaparte at the time when its presence was essential to his fortunes. The direct testimony of his contemporaries to the same fact is not wanting. Marshal Augereau (as we learn from Macdonald's memoirs) noticed it, although his coarsely-grained and jealous mind saw in it only a proof of the incompetence which he preferred to consider as a characteristic of his master, and the officers who received the fugitive Corsican on his return from Elba were astounded at his alternate fits of garrulity and silence, tremendous energy and hopeless lassitude. If, then, the fact of Napoleon's mental and physical decline is established, what was the cause? Lord Wolseley goes no further at present than “mental and moral prostration,” and there is certainly nothing extraordinary in the theory that the prodigious and continuous strain to which the mighty intellect of the great captain had for years been subjected was at last destroying its machinery. But there is also positive evidence, we think, that Napoleon had become the victim of epilepsy, and without dwelling on the subject further just now, till Lord Wolseley's series has been completed, we may point out that the theory here suggested derives some corroboration from the circumstance on which his lordship's first article offers abundant proof, that while Napoleon's power of executing his plans was impaired, the splendour of his military imagination survived, and even increased in apparent brilliancy at the last.

scholarly journals Comparative analysis of the works published in periodicals and as part of the books, with major texts of A. E. Kulakovsky

Litera ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 47-60
Author(s):  
Aleksandr Pavlovich Nogovitsyn
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Early Period ◽  
Special Significance ◽  
The Past ◽  
Literary Heritage ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
Unpublished Works

This article examines the works of A. E. Kulakovsky based on theoretical positions of D. S. Likhachev and practical data from commentaries to the volume II of A. E. Kulakovsky (author P. V. Maksimov), as well as conducts comparative analysis of the early versions with major texts of A. E. Kulakovsky. The subject of this research is the comparative analysis of A. E. Kulakovsky's early publications with major texts. The goal consists in determination and description of the authorial editing and revisions, which allows substantiating their motives for, as well as tracing the evolution of author’s thought. The discrepancies between the texts of early period and major text are viewed as improvements: addition of lines, substitution of separate words, rearrangement lines and stanzas. The novelty of this study consists in substantiation of early publications of A. E. Kulakovsky and lifetime edition as the subject of textological research. From this perspective, early publications of the works of A. E. Kulakovsky's are attributed to as research materials of cross-disciplinary nature: as the testimonies of the stage of establishment of Yakut literature as a whole, and as the variants of writer's major texts that reveal the history of his works in particular. The relevance is defined by the fact that special textological studies of poet’s separate works, including profound examination of historiographical part of his literary heritage, are currently of special significance. Over the past decade, a sizeable corpus of new documents related to A. E. Kulakovsky’s biography, including the unpublished works and scientific writings, has been revealed; this gives a new perspective on the already familiar materials in the context of analysis of his evolution as a writer and the history of publication of his works in the XX century.

DON HERO OF KABARDINO ORIGIN DAVID GRIGORIEVICH BEGIDOV: A GLORIOUS BEGINNING OR CURVED ANGLES IN A DIRECT BIOGRAPHY

2021 ◽  
pp. 93-100
Author(s):  
A.V. Zakharevich ◽  
Keyword(s):  
19Th Century ◽  
Military History ◽  
War Of 1812 ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Napoleonic Wars ◽  
Main Attention ◽  
Russian Army ◽  
History Of ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
The Military

The article is devoted to the history of the famous Kabardian Uzden (nobleman) and the Don Cossack hero of the Russian army of the era of the Napoleonic wars and the military history of the Don Cossacks of the late 18th - first half of the 19th century, General D.G. Begidov (1778-1838). The author researched the history of history and archival sources about the origin and early years of the biography of D.G. Begidov and paid the main attention to his participation in the Napoleonic wars among the Cossacks of the Ataman regi-ment under the command of the legendary Cossack hero of the Patriotic War of 1812 - Ataman M.I. Platov.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document