Questions and mysteries of the Kulikovo battle

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

640 years ago, the largest battle of medieval Europe ended - the battle on the Kulikovo field. At the end of the 20th century, a number of historians said: it was a minor insignificant skirmish, and not at all a large-scale event that launched the formation of a single Russian state. In their opinion, there was simply no talk of any kind of struggle between Moscow and the Golden Horde in this battle: there is not enough space on the battlefield. It turns out that the events described in the annals were almost complete fiction. However, now the situation suddenly turned 180 degrees: it turned out that the place of the battle really lies in the Tula region … but on a completely different field. And this markedly changes the entire history of Russia at that time. Let's try to figure out why.

Battle of Kulikovo, 17th century miniature. This event had a strange fate: due to the mistake of a couple of people who were not even professional historians, it was for some time considered a small skirmish of local proportions, although in fact it played a key role in the history of this part of Europe / © Wikimedia Commons

Historical battle or minor skirmish? And then what about the "unification of Russia"?

The school picture of the history of the struggle of Russia with the Golden Horde yoke reads: until 1380, the Moscow princes collected tribute for the Horde, and then stopped paying it. On this occasion, on September 8, 1380, a battle took place on the Kulikovo field, where the combined forces of the Russian principalities defeated a large army of Tatars.

It turned out only with very great difficulties: at first, Mamai's forces overpowered the main Russian regiments. But the horsemen of the ambush regiment disguised in the oak forest at the decisive moment struck the flank of the Tatars and changed the course of the battle - and the history of their land.

In fact, the Battle of Kulikovo lasted until September 9: the Russians pursued the defeated forces of the Horde 50 miles, which does not fit into the day on September 8, 1380. All these events dealt an important blow to the yoke and for the first time made Moscow from a tax agent of the Horde the center of resistance to them.

There was one key problem with this picture: location. In the "Legend of the Mamayev refuge" and "Zadonshchina", the references to him are brief "on the Don, the mouth of Nepryadva." The place where the Nepryadva flows into the Don in the XIV century from one bank was covered with forest (as indicated by the data on pollen). From this, this coast was clearly not suitable for battle - according to sources, tens of thousands of horsemen took part in it.

There was only a very small treeless space on the other bank of the Nepryadva, where it turns out to be behind the back of the Russian army, and the Don and the Smolka river to the left of it - as on the classic battle map, which can be seen below. The first to point out such a localization was Stepan Dmitrievich Nechaev, a Russian nobleman and amateur local historian from the Tula province.

Scheme of the Battle of Kulikovo on September 8, 1380 from the website of the Ministry of Defense. It is easy to see that there is no scale on the map: if it were, the events shown on it would immediately begin to look unreliable. The armies indicated in terms of size could not be accommodated on a field of a couple of kilometers./ © mil.ru

Already by 1836, this point of view led to the imperial decision to erect an obelisk on the site of the battle - and it still stands there. Of course, under the USSR the monument was completely forgotten, but by the 600th anniversary of the battle under the pressure of historians, the "gray cardinal" Suslov achieved a serious restoration. Now the field is quite visited by tourists - but it has become a real headache for historians.

Before the "Suslov Renaissance", very few people traveled there in Soviet times. But after him, any historian who saw this place with his own eyes could not help but think. The width of the field is two kilometers, the depth of a possible formation of Russian troops is literally several hundred meters. How could the army described in the annals accommodate on such a site? Recall: they call the minimum number of the combined forces of the Russian principalities at 150 thousand people (Extensive chronicle tale of the Kulikovo battle).

It is important to understand that the chronicle written immediately in the wake of the events in Russian chronicle practice rarely contained inaccuracies - in contrast to narratives written much later, such as "The Legend of the Mamayev Massacre", where the number of armies was often significantly exaggerated. By the way, the contemporary German chronicle ("Chronicle of Detmar") says that about 400 thousand participated in the battle on both sides.

Another version of a similar scheme. It is clear that the Russian forces with such a configuration were trapped / © Wikimedia Commons

But even 150 thousand cannot be accommodated within two kilometers. Some are trying to solve the problem by "taking out" the battlefield further from Nepryadva, where there is more space - but there is another difficulty, the ambush regiment was located in the fishing line, and there is simply no fishing line in the field where such a regiment could be located.

How many people can be built in battle formations on two kilometers? Even with a fairly deep construction - at most ten thousand people on each side, no more. This makes the Battle of Kulikovo a very small, miniature battle, an ordinary event for that era. In addition, its content is changing dramatically: a united army of Russian lands is not needed for ten thousand people.

In this interpretation, the battle was nothing special and was approximately equal to the battle on Vozha, which happened two years before, where Moscow, for the first time in more than a hundred years of wars between Russians and Tatars, defeated the troops of the Golden Horde in a field battle. So why is Vozhu mentioned in the annals as a small battle, and the Kulikovo field - as the largest in the history of Russia (“And since the beginning of the world there has not been such a force of Russian princes”)?

Russian cities are sending soldiers to Moscow. Fragment of an icon, mid-17th century, Yaroslavl. If you believe that the Kulikovo field was two kilometers wide, then this whole scene simply could not be: an army of five to ten thousand Moscow could have fielded even one / © Wikimedia Commons

All this could still be tolerated, but another logical line breaks. After the defeat at the Kulikovo field, Mamai lost power and was killed. Why is this, if it was about a small skirmish, involving tens of thousands of people, what happened then every year?

And then: all sources mention among his forces the Genoese (infantry), Circassians, Yases, Burtases, Volga Bulgars (“besermens” in Russian chronicles) and other mercenaries. Why would he have mercenaries, if the forces of the Crimean khans alone, without any mercenaries, and in the XVII-XVIII centuries exceeded a hundred thousand soldiers? Really, the head of the Golden Horde could not recruit tens of thousands without attracting mercenaries from many regions at once?

Another puzzling question arose. The bank of Nepryadva in the rear of the Russian troops was (and is) very steep, it is almost impossible to retreat through it: the enemy will kill on the crossing. Why did the Russian prince choose such a strange position for the battle?

"Ustye", "Ust" and "Usta"

The binding of the Kulikov field to the place that today bears this name is the work of not only Nechaev, but also Ivan Fedorovich Afremov, a 19th century Tula ethnographer, who fell under the influence of his assessments. He relied on the phrase of ancient Russian sources - the only reference to the place of the battle - “on the Don, at the mouth of the Nepryadva river”. However, he perceived the word "ust" as an estuary in modern Russian, so he considered that this is the place where the Nepryadva flows into the Don.

The original map of the battle of an amateur local historian Afremov / © Wikimedia Commons

Meanwhile, in ancient times, the word "ust" had a different meaning. The Novgorod Chronicle for the 1320s reports: “In the summer of 6831 (1323 A. D. H.) walked Novgorodtsi with Prince Yuri Danilovich to the Neva and set up the city at the mouth of the Neva on Orekhovy Island,”speaking of the Oreshek fortress. As anyone knows, Oreshek (Noteburg) is indeed located on the island. Only not at the mouth, but at the source of the Neva, in the Ladoga region.

The fact is that in the Old Russian language the word “ust” came from the same root as “mouth” and meant the place where the river joins with another body of water. The source could also be the "mouth" of the river.

Sergei Azbelev, a specialist in Russian chronicles, who by that time was at the very respectable age of 86 (he died not so long ago) was the first to draw attention to this - and set in motion a turning point in the understanding of the situation.

The duel of Peresvet with Chelubey as presented by the artist / © Wikimedia Commons

The researcher drew attention to the strangeness: the chronicles do not mention any river Smolka, located at the confluence of the Nepryadva into the Don, although the Russian chronicles are always careful about rivers, because at that time their mention was one of the most important landmarks.

Also, they do not mention beams that limit the field where the monument stands today, and which we all, before Azbelev's works, considered a real place of battle. Meanwhile, it is difficult to meaningfully describe battles without mentioning large flank obstacles.

To understand the situation, Azbelev once again carefully analyzed the contents of the chronicles. They all agree on the fact (albeit omitting Smolka) that the battle took place "on the Don, the mouth of Nepryadva." The estuary is the place where the river flows into somewhere, so everyone correlated the place of the battle with the place where the Nepryadva flows into the Don. But does the Old Russian "ust" really mean the same as the Russian "mouth"?

Azbelev discovered that even the philologists of the 19th century (Sreznev), touching upon other issues, found out that the word "ust" in the annals means both the mouth of the river and the source. Moreover, in Dahl's dictionary, among the meanings of the word “mouth” there is also the “source” of the river, although in his time it was already dialecticism.

The very word "Kulikovo", often associated with the presence of a nearby settlement Kulikovka, in principle, cannot be an indicator of the exact place of the battle: there were at least ten such settlements in the Tula region. There is also a legend (non-chronicle data) that Mamai's headquarters was on Red Hill during the battle. True, there is a nuance: next to the "traditional" Kulikovo field there is a hill, but it was not called Red before the creation of the monument there.

What if we look at how close to the battle site the zone at the source of Nepryadva fits? This river historically flowed from Lake Volova (Volovsky district of the Tula region), which lies about 50 kilometers west of the so-called "Kulikova Pole". Now, however, only a network of dry ravines remains there, sometimes creating reservoirs in rainy years: the surface of Nepryadva comes out only a couple of kilometers to the east.

It is interesting that the settlement of Krasny Kholm still exists close to this place today - right on the M4 Don highway. In the same area, near Lake Volova and Red Hill, there was the main road from the Crimean Khanate to Moscow - Muravsky Shlyakh. In the XIV century, this road had no name. But, as well as in a later period, this route was the most logical on the way to the Russian lands from the Wild Field, that part of the Horde that later became the Crimean Khanate.

The real Kulikovo field according to Azbelev. Today, Red Hill is located next to the M4 highway. At the top left of the map you can see the forest where the ambush regiment / © S. Azbelev

One of the Russian chronicles describes that when the Russian troops were deployed after the crossing, "the shelves were covered with a field, as if ten miles away from a multitude of soldiers." If you carefully examine the places around the Red Hill and the old source of the Nepryadva, it is easy to find that there really is a large-scale field, where the copses are of a very moderate size, and where there is no “locking” landscape that is unfavorable for the defenders.

It is important to note that such a "different Kulikovo field" also leaves room for the oak groves of the ambush regiment, which played a key role in the battle. Here it is necessary to clarify that our contemporary may not be entirely clear: today the idea of placing cavalry in a fishing line looks absurd, because it will not be able to deploy there normally, and even more so - to move.

In addition, at the present "Kulikovo Pole" the distance to the flank oak grove is so small that the main forces of the Tatars with a high probability would have noticed a Russian cavalry detachment in that forest.

However, if we remember the realities of the times of the battle, then it will be quite simple to explain these two seeming oddities. The modern forests of central Russia are practically devoid of the normal number of large herbivores that still existed in the XIV century, and therefore are filled with dense undergrowth, which there is no one to eat, thinning out.

The oak forests of that time were closer in appearance to those points of the Prioksko-Terrace Reserve, where bison are kept today: they were more reminiscent of an English park than what we are used to calling the forest of the middle zone today.

So, Azbelev discovered that at the very edge of the Kulikov field, in the direction to the north-north-east of Lake Volova, there is a small forest, indicated both on modern maps of the Tula region and on old maps of the general land survey of the Tula province. Moreover, it is located at some distance from the main battlefield: the main forces of the Tatars could not accidentally notice the ambush regiment located in that forest.

So, the real picture of the Kulikovo battle, almost erased by a misreading of the words “the mouth of Nepryadva,” has been restored as a whole. The battle took place near today's M4 Don highway, approximately between Volovoy (then Volovoy Lake, the source of the Nepryadva) from the south, and the present Bogoroditskoye (then the southern edge of the forest) from the north. Russian and Tatar troops met between them.

Manuscript "Legends of the Mamay Massacre" / © Wikimedia Commons

The field in question freely provides 10-20 kilometers of space necessary for the maneuvering of large armies. All sources - both Cyprian's version of the "Legend of the Mamay Massacre" and Western chroniclers of that time ("The Chronicles of Detmar", Krantz) indicate the total number of participants about four hundred thousand people, and these figures, if overestimated, are not very significant, due to rounding …

It follows from this that attempts to overestimate the importance of the Battle of Kulikovo as a starting point for the transformation of the Moscow principality into the center of Russian statehood are not entirely correct. If both foreign and Russian sources agree on the huge scale of the battle and the participation of the Russians as a community (and not just the troops of the Moscow prince) in it, then using the same size of the Kulikov field as a counterargument is not entirely correct.

Especially, given that the identification of this place in the 19th century was made not by a professional historian, but by amateurs, and even in an era when the Old Russian language was not well enough studied and understood by those who read the sources about the Kulikovo battle.

The reports of Russian and foreign sources of that time, apparently, are reliable, and in fact hundreds of thousands of people took part in the battle, with the loss of at least tens of thousands - and perhaps even two hundred thousand. This makes the Battle of Kulikovo the largest in the history of Europe until, probably, the Battle of Leipzig in 1813.

Where could armies of 400 thousand people come from in the Middle Ages?

This part, probably, could not have been written, but practice shows that any historical text will certainly include readers who doubt the possibility of armies of distant centuries to have a large number. Their main ideas sound something like this: large armies require sophisticated technologies for their transport support, which could not have existed in the XIV century and in earlier times. The economy of that time simply would not have withstood such events.

The origins of such misconceptions are the historically incorrect works of the German military historian Delbrück. Based on the norms of movement of military columns of his time, he came to the conclusion that any stories about the capabilities of the armies of antiquity to reach numbers of hundreds of thousands of people have no relation to reality.

Russian forces at the crossing before the battle as presented by the artist / © Wikimedia Commons

The problem with Delbrück's ideas is that they contradict absolutely all historical sources at once, including unconditionally reliable sources of the 18th century. For example, in the Prut campaign of Peter the army of opponents reached 190 thousand people only from the Turks and Tatars - and directly in the area of hostilities against the Russian army there were 120 thousand of them. Another forty thousand people numbered the forces of Peter.

The battle was attended not only by representatives of these peoples, but also by Poniatowski (Pole, observer in the Turkish army), as well as representatives of Charles XII. All of them note the large numerical superiority of the Turks over the Russians. The number of the latter at the level of forty thousand is recorded by documents - that is, contrary to Delbrück's opinion about the unreality of large armies before the 19th century, they were still quite possible.

Logistically, the Horde of the XIV century were on the same level as the Crimean Tatars in the XVII-XVIII centuries: ordinary carts and horses, technically not undergoing noticeable changes. If we consider it impossible for Kulikov Field to have 400 thousand people in one place, then we must deny a whole series of battles of the 17th-18th centuries - and all this, relying solely on the opinion of Delbrück alone and ignoring absolutely all historical sources.

One can question the data of the "Legends of the Mamayev Massacre" or "Zadonshchina": they are written in Russia, their authors are clearly on the side of Moscow. Perhaps they could be interested in exaggerating the scale of the battle. However, foreign sources never sympathized with the Moscow principality, traditionally describing it as a cruel barbarian kingdom of the East, inhabited by "wrong" Christians ("schismatics" as the Catholics called them).

Meanwhile, three independent foreign sources describe the Battle of Kulikovo with the same words, differing only in details. Johann von Posilge from Germany describes the events as follows: “In the same year there was a big war in many countries: the Russians fought this way with the Tatars … on both sides about 40 thousand people were killed.

However, the Russians held the field. And when they were leaving the battle, they ran into the Lithuanians, who were called by the Tatars there to help, and killed a lot of Russians and took from them a lot of booty, which they took from the Tatars."

Detmar Lubeck, a Franciscan monk of the Torun Monastery, writes in his Latin-language chronicle "The Annals of Torun": “At the same time there was a great battle at the Blue Water (blawasser) between the Russians and Tatars, and then four hundred thousand people were beaten on both sides; then the Russians won the battle.

When they wanted to go home with a big booty, they ran into the Lithuanians, who were summoned to help by the Tatars, and took their booty from the Russians, and killed many of them in the field."

Russian and Tatar troops before the battle as presented by the artist / © Wikimedia Commons

Albert Krantz, in a later work, retells the message of the Lübeck merchants about this battle: “At this time, the greatest battle in the memory of people took place between the Russians and the Tatars … two hundred thousand people died.

The victorious Russians seized considerable booty in the form of herds of cattle, since the Tatars own almost nothing else. But the Russians did not rejoice at this victory for long, because the Tatars, having called the Lithuanians into their allies, rushed after the Russians, who were already returning back, and they took away the spoils they had lost and killed many of the Russians, having thrown them down."

Thus, Western sources as a whole show the same thing as the Russians: a battle of an exceptional scale for that era, with a total number of participants of the order of hundreds of thousands and with the number of victims on both sides up to two hundred thousand.

All this restores the logic of further events: Russia and the Horde could not help but be noticeably weakened after such a large-scale battle. Mamai lost a huge number of people, and this is the reason for his further fall and death. For the Russian principalities, this event could not but have enormous psychological significance: for the first time since the time of Kalka, 1221, the forces of several Russian principalities at once, as part of one coalition, gathered a large army and opposed the steppe inhabitants.

And - for the first time since the XII century - successfully. Two hundred years of steppe military domination, ensured by high-quality tactics of maneuverable warfare and excellent composite bows of the steppe inhabitants, are over: technologically, the bows of the Russians have reached the Tatar level, and the ability of their commanders to wage a maneuver war is at the level of their Horde counterparts.

Until the final deliverance from the yoke in 1480 was still a long hundred years, but the first step in this direction was taken.

And a little more about the place of events. Unfortunately, we are almost sure that the Museum of the Battle of Kulikovo, founded near the mouth of the Nepryadva due to the insufficient attention of 19th century historians to the Dahl dictionary and ancient Russian annals, will remain in place for at least the next decades. History is a science where everything does not move very quickly.

Undoubtedly, "the mouth of Nepryadva" was an erroneous interpretation: it is impossible to combine the biography of the current "Kulikov Field" and the description of the battle in the sources. But this is not required for the continued existence of the museum in the same place. The decisions to move it or open a new museum are made by administrators, not scientists, and the chances of quick acquaintance of administrators with new works on the history of Ancient Russia are difficult to estimate any high.

Nevertheless, even without the establishment of a new museum there, anyone passing the M4 Don highway can stop the car at the side of the road and try from Red Hill or any other local hill to inspect a really large field that became the site of the largest medieval battle in Europe. It looks quite picturesque.