Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 43

Thread: [HISTORICAL ISSUE] - South Slavs and Avars…

  1. #21
    Son of Fire's Avatar Tiro
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Southern Ontario Canada
    Posts
    225

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    @ Aru...
    So basically what you're saying is that chances are they used titles like Druzina, and Knez (Dux / duke... though I thought it was Prince), but that was just given corresponding titles in whatever language of the source material?
    Or are you saying that the South Slavs adopted the foreign titles?

  2. #22
    Aru's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Here.
    Posts
    4,795

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    Quote Originally Posted by Son of Fire View Post
    @ Aru...
    So basically what you're saying is that chances are they used titles like Druzina, and Knez (Dux / duke... though I thought it was Prince), but that was just given corresponding titles in whatever language of the source material?
    This.

    But there are also writings in Latin by Slavs themselves. Latin was the language of state and diplomacy in entire Europe (except areas under Greek Byzantine influence), same was among Slavs.

    For South Slavs, the title of Knez was Dux in Latin or Archont in Greek(am I correct with this one?). English translation is Duke. The realm is Duchy. Prince and Principality are used for East and West Slavs (Duke is used among West Slavs also). It's basically the same, the original is Knez and Kneževina, it's only English sources which make the distinction.

    In native Slavic sources Knez is used extensively, Dux is only when written in Latin.
    Has signatures turned off.

  3. #23
    Son of Fire's Avatar Tiro
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Southern Ontario Canada
    Posts
    225

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    @ Aru...
    Savvy... I personally prefer Knez = Prince... but hey, that is just me...
    So then I take it Zupan = Count / Earl...
    And for "Praetorian" = Druzina?

  4. #24
    Aru's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Here.
    Posts
    4,795

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    It depends about writer, document and time period, really. We often see Knez, Župan, Ban and Vojvoda used in a same sense. Knez could be any noble of high standing in 14. century Dalmatian town, tribal chieftain of Slavic village in 7.century, Dux of Slavic states in 9. century or position equal to king in 19. century. Then we have Veliki Župan which ruled as Dux in medieval Serbia, and Župans were other rulers, his vassals, but also Župan in medieval Croatia who was a ruler of specific Županija which were territorial units in kingdom, but Bans were kings vassals and they were above Župans. Then Priest of Duklja equates Ban and Vojvoda, as well as Knez and Župan (note, I was reading modern translation, can't find Latin original, I wonder if Slavic terms were used there).
    Another example, knez was the title of ruler of tiny town of Motovun in 14. century Istria (word knez used in Croatian language in original document), modern translation makes that title equal to Grof, which is in English Count.

    So it's a clear mess of who's called what.
    Last edited by Aru; March 17, 2010 at 04:24 PM.
    Has signatures turned off.

  5. #25
    Son of Fire's Avatar Tiro
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Southern Ontario Canada
    Posts
    225

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    @ Aru...
    I am not even familiar with Grof...

    This is mighty confusing... I will have to try and sort this out to some degree...

  6. #26
    Aru's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Here.
    Posts
    4,795

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    Let me try o explain a bit:

    All titles in medieval Europe are equated to a certain Latin title. Here they are by order of power:
    In Latin we have Imperator - That is Emperor, Kaiser, Car, Tzar, Tsar, Autocrator.
    Then comes the Rex - King, Konig, Kralj, Kral, Basileus, Kiraly.
    It's fallowed by the title of Dux - Primarily Duke, Knez, Knyaz, Archont. *However some other Slavic titles have also been equated with Dux at one time/place or the other: Župan, Vojvoda, Ban. Also titles like Grand Prince or Grand Duke (Velikiy Knyaz and Veliki Župan) denote that person is above others of the same title, but not the king. It is not uniquely Slavic, Germansused it extensively (Großherzog).
    And finally Comes - Count, Vojvoda, Župan, Ban, Grof, Graf. *Grof comes from German Graf, and is a later medieval title found among some Slavs. As you see, there are even cases when Comes was called Knez.

    I don't really know where Boyar fits here. Among Comes, probably. edit: Or no, the boyar simply denoted that person was of noble class, of course.

    The titles for anything below king were often used for all the levels of power, but those I posted in Italic are how it was usually used. I don't know why the confusion. Maybe they were used differently in different areas (even very geographicaly near areas). Or as the Vojvoda would grow in power his title remained, but was elevated to mean Dux. The strict rules about titles came to be only in later medieval and early modern times.

    Much later edit: I've noticed I have put Ban in the list, but that is wrong. Ban denotes the position of governorship, not the position on social ladder.
    Last edited by Aru; March 17, 2010 at 09:10 PM.
    Has signatures turned off.

  7. #27
    NikeBG's Avatar Sampsis
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Sofia, Bulgaria
    Posts
    3,468

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    Basically, titles are a mess. Not only do they have varying meanings geographically, but also temporally. While I was compiling a list for the titles used in the SBE, one clear example (also existant in Byzantium) is the despot/sevastokrator change. Also, in the 7th century we can see that kaisar was a high imperial title in Byzantium, right after the basileos, but in the 14th century... eh, where is it, actually? It's gotten so devaluated that if anyone still uses it, it's just for a honorary name, probably.

    Anyway, I've translated the first 2-3 pages of the Strategikon chapter about the Slavs (sorry if there are some errors in translation). It also made me interested to actually compare the differences between the Slavs in the Strategikon (i.e. when they still lived to the north of the Danube) and the Slavs in the later Tactica, which uses the Strategikon as a base (and which is around late IX c., IIRC).
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    12. How you should lead a war against the Slavs, Antes and other similar tribes
    The tribes of the Slavs and the Antes have the same way of living and the same customs. They’re freedom-loving and in no way allow themselves to be enslaved or ruled, especially in their own land. They are numerous and hardy, they easily endure heat, cold, rain, nakedness and lack of food. To the foreigners that come to them, they are kind and carefully take them from one place to another, as need be. So if the guest is hurt due to the negligence of the one who accepted him, the one who sent the guest to him starts a war, believing it to be a sacred duty to avenge his guest. They don’t keep their captives in slavery for an unlimited time like the other tribes, but they set them a term and leave them to decide if they want to go home in exchange for a certain ransom or to stay there as free men and friends. They have a great number of all kinds of domestic animals and foods stacked in piles – mostly millet and wheat. Their women are more virtuous than human nature would allow, most of them take their husband’s death as their own, strangling themselves by free will, as they don’t consider widowhood as real living. They live in forests, rivers, marshes and impassable lakes. They build many exits of their homes, due to the various dangers that usually befall them. They bury in secret places all their necessary things, they don’t keep anything out in the open and they live like brigands. They like to make attacks against their enemies in woody, narrow and steep places. They cleverly use ambushes, sudden attacks, stratagems and spend days and nights devising different ways of action. They’re experienced more than any other people in crossing the rivers and manly enduring in the waters. It is often that if some of them are surprised by some danger in their lands, they plunge into the deep waters, holding in their mouths specially prepared long reeds with holes at the ends. They lie on their backs on the bottom, breathing through the reeds and enduring many hours, so no suspicion about their presence would arise. If the reeds happen to be seen from outside, the inexperienced observers would think they just grow in these waters. That’s why those experienced in this distinguish the reeds by their cuts and their location and either pierce their mouths with them or they pull the reeds and thus the enemy out of the water, since they can’t stay below any longer. Every one of their men is armed with two small spears and some of them with shields – very strong, but uncomfortable for wearing. They also use wooden bows and small arrows tipped in poison, which acts strongly if the one pierced by them hasn’t smeared himself in advance with the liquid ternak or with other remedies known by the medical science. The wound could also be cut off right away, so the poison doesn’t spread to the rest of the body. They live in anarchy and hate each other. They neither know battle ranks, nor are they used to fight in a regular battle or to appear in open plains. But if they decide to engage in an open battle, they advance forward a bit, while they all shout together, and if the enemy retreats from their warcry, they charge fiercely. If not, they go back without engaging in a melee fight. They run to the forests, where they find great protection, as they know well how to fight in the narrow places. And often, as they carry some loot with them, they abandon it and run to the forests due to some feigned noise and while the attackers walk around the loot, they easily attack them and harass them. This is something they’ve learned to do skillfully as intentional bait for their enemies. They’re disloyal in every regard, they don’t come to agreement during negotiations and go back rather out of fear than because of presents. So if some discord appears among them, they either don’t reach an agreement or, if they reach one, immediately others break it, and all adversaries are in enmity with each other till death and no one wants to yield before the others. Especially harmful to them in battles are the hits of the arrows, the sudden attacks, the charges from different sides, the fights with infantrymen, especially the lighter-armed ones, as well as positioning in open and wide places. Therefore it is necessary to prepare against them an army of cavalry and infantry, mostly lightly armed soldiers or archers with a lot of ranged weapons – not only arrows, but also other throwing spears. Bridges should also be prepared, if possible, from the so-called floating bridges, so the rivers could be crossed without being noticed, since there are many impassable rivers in their land. And it should be done in the Scythian manner – ones should build the bridges, while others should prepare traps/caltrops. There should also be ox or goat water-skins, so rafts could be made from them and the soldiers could float with them in the sudden attacks and the crossings during the summer. Attacks against them should happen mostly in winter-time, because the trees are naked and the enemies can’t hide so easily, the snow reveals their tracks, their tribe is exhausted, since they’re all almost naked, and lastly because the rivers could easily be crossed when they’re frozen. The bigger part of the horses and the excess luggage should be left in a safe place in our land with a not large guard unit and one commander. The dromons should be located at the defined crossing points. One cavalry unit should be sent ahead in the enemy’s land, led by skillful commanders, from one side in order to keep guard, so the crossing army doesn’t get routed, as the enemies are probably lying in waiting nearby, and from another side in order to spread rumours that such attacks will be made also in other places. Because of this rumour and by the proposal of their chieftains, they will fight only for their own villages and will not have the chance to get together and cause trouble for our army. The cavalry shouldn’t stay close to the Danube, lest the enemy sees their few numbers and neglects the danger [and thus stay united], neither should they be far away, so they don’t get delayed when they have to unite with the crossing army, but they should be approximately one day’s distance from the Danube. When the army crosses, it should immediately invade the enemy’s lands, passing through flat areas, and one skillful commander with chosen soldiers should then advance forward and capture a prisoner, through whom he would be able to find out what is the situation of the enemy. They should be careful, as much as possible, to not pass in the summer-time through hardly-passable or woody areas just like that, without scouting, especially if there are enemies there, before the infantry or the cavalry disperses them. If it’s believed that the way back would pass through these same narrow places, they should, as it was said in the chapter dedicated to it, either cut them down and flatten them or leave enough forces until the return of the main army, lest the enemy unnoticeably sneaks by and suddenly attacks the army which might carry the loot through the passes. In setting up camp, the woody areas should again be avoided, as much as possible, since it’s easier for the enemy to make attacks and steal cattle there. The infantry should camp, ready for action, inside the camp, while the cavalry should be outside it and the scouting should be done far, around the horses that are out at feed. But if the horses can’t be led to graze, neither at day, nor at night, the cavalry should remain inside. When the time for battle comes, the ranks shouldn’t be formed too deep against them; neither should they be attacked only from the front and not from other sides as well. And if they, as it sometimes happens, take some better fortified location and, guarding their sides, don’t allow us to surround and charge them at the flanks and rear, some of our men should prepare an ambush, while others should feign a retreat before them. In such a case the Slavs, in their desire to chase us, would leave their fortified positions and our men would turn back against them, while the men in ambush would charge out. Since they have many knyazes [reges, i.e. kings], often at strife with each other, it’s not out of place that some of them, especially the ones nearer the border, to be drawn in with promises or gifts, while others are attacked, lest the hostile behaviour towards all of them unites them or creates an autocracy...
    Will continue translating later on.


    Quote Originally Posted by IVIarkI2I View Post
    ...was reading also that slavic women were wery wild, the single ones had been doing sex in public, thats how they choosen their husband but after marriage when husband die mostly the woman was killed also...
    That seems to me more like a mix of Ibn Fadlan's account of the Rus vikings and Herodotus' account of the Thracians.
    Ibn Fadlan about the Rus: "Each man has a couch on which he sits. With them are pretty slave girls destined for sale to merchants: a man will have sexual intercourse with his slave girl while his companion looks on. Sometimes whole groups will come together in this fashion, each in the presence of others. A merchant who arrives to buy a slave girl from them may have to wait and look on while a Rus completes the act of intercourse with a slave girl."
    Herodotus about the Thracians: "...and over their maidens they do not keep watch, but allow them to have commerce with whatever men they please, but over their wives they keep very great watch; and they buy their wives for great sums of money from their parents."
    Interestingly enough, a bit before that Herodotus also speaks how, when a Thracian man dies, "a great competition takes place among his wives... about the question which of them was loved most by their husband; and she who is preferred by the decision and so honoured... her throat is cut... and afterwards she is buried together with her husband...". Which is something similar to what we see about the Slavs in the Strategikon quote above. Fascinating stuff, isn't it? One of the reasons why I like Pagan barbarian cultures so much.

  8. #28
    Grof's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,713

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    speaking of Grof

    Христе Боже распети и свети, Српска земља кроз облаке лети. Лети преко небеских висина, Крила су јој Морава и Дрина.
    На три свето и на три саставно,Одлазимо на Косово равно.
    Кад је драга да одлазим чула,За ревер ми невен заденула.
    Збогом први нерођени сине, Збогом ружо, збогом рузмарине. Збогом лето, јесени и зимо. Одлазимо да их победимо.
    March 24, 1999 - June 11, 1999


  9. #29
    Son of Fire's Avatar Tiro
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Southern Ontario Canada
    Posts
    225

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    @Aru…
    Right, I get there are different terms… but that’s kind of the point… due to translations, interpretations, timing, and cultural influence, the terminologies are varied…

    Kind of like weaponry… in medieval documents the same weapons are called by different names, and the same names are applied to different weapons even in the same document…
    Now to the folks at the time, that was all fairly clear to them as they had conventions and colloquialisms that they were too familiar with, but to us is often times confusing and haphazard…
    That is primarily the reason for my confusion… well that and I don’t speak Serbian anymore…


    @ NikeBG…
    Thanks man; that is really neat…

    The funny thing I did notice is the fact that is seems that the South Slavs have always been somewhat divided… which thought I can’t say about other South Slavs… it seems to be true among Serbs…

    Though if you have a translation from Tactic about South Slavs, I would like to see that as well, if anything for a comparison…

    @ Grof…
    I was wondering when you were going to show up…

  10. #30
    NikeBG's Avatar Sampsis
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Sofia, Bulgaria
    Posts
    3,468

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    Quote Originally Posted by Son of Fire View Post
    The funny thing I did notice is the fact that is seems that the South Slavs have always been somewhat divided… which thought I can’t say about other South Slavs… it seems to be true among Serbs…
    Yes, one of the several similarities with the ancient Thracians, which, I admit, does give me some heretical hypotheses sometimes...
    And, of course, the disunity can be easily seen here too. F.e. there's a famous saying concerning the Liberation times - "One Bulgarian/Macedonian (I've seen both versions) is a vojvoda, two Bulgarians are a cheta, three Bulgarians are a cheta with a traitor".
    Quote Originally Posted by Son of Fire View Post
    Though if you have a translation from Tactic about South Slavs, I would like to see that as well, if anything for a comparison…
    I'll see what I can do about it. The continuing text from the Strategikon, although it has around 5 more pages, is a bit less interesting, IMO, and more about the Byzantine tactics themselves. Of course, that can be used in studying the Slavs of that time, but translating the Tactica would be a bit more fun for me now, so I'll go with it.

    Edit: If anybody can (more or less) read Greek or Bulgarian, here's the excerpt from the Tactica (pages 166-174), taken from the 4th volume of the GIBI (Greek sources for Bulgarian history).


    Much later edit: Ok, here's my translation of the Slavic part of the Tactica, as taken from the GIBI. At least this one is better formatted (and much, much shorter, and mostly retelling the same things from the Strategikon).
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    3. How you should lead a war in the land of the Slavs and the Antes
    XVIII, 79. There was a time when the Slavs lived beyond the Istros as well, which we also call Danube. The Romans attacked them and fought with them while they were still living as nomads, before they crossed the Istros and bent their necks before the yoke of Roman rule. I think I should also make you familiar with their military skills and the rest of their customs and, as they say, I will gather and describe it in detail, as much as my powers allow me, so like a bee you could collect and gather all that is useful.
    99. The Slavic tribes have the same way of life and the same character. They are freedom-loving and in no way allow themselves to be enslaved or ruled, especially when they used to live in their own land beyond the Danube. After they crossed to this side and were forced, so to say, to accept the slavery, they didn’t want to willingly submit to others, but they submit, so to say, only to themselves. They believed that it’s better to endure the tyranny of the knyaz of their own tribe rather than be subjected and abide by the Roman laws. And those who have accepted the holy and redeeming baptism, they follow it, as much as they can, even today according to the customs of their old freedom.
    100. They are numerous, enduring in privation, easily standing heat and cold, rain and nakedness, as well as lack of provisions.
    101. Our venerable father, the Roman emperor Basil, persuaded them to give up on their old rights and Hellenized them and subdued them under chiefs in the Roman norm, awarded them the baptism, released them from the power of their knyazes and trained them to fight against the tribes hostile to the Romans. He had taken this to his heart and for that reason he secured the Romans, who in the old times had suffered many damages and losses from the Slavs, from their frequent attacks.
    102. The Slavic tribes have been, so to say, extremely hospitable, which virtue they haven’t given up to this day and keep it unchanged.
    103. They were kind and careful towards their guests, which they welcomed favourably and protected them, and after the reception they sent them from one place to another, each of them taking the care to keep the guests safe and supplied with food. If it happened that the guest was hurt due to the negligence of his host, the one who had sent him there would go on a campaign against the perpetrator, believing it to be a sacred duty to avenge his guest.
    104. They believed that it’s appropriate to act in the following way: they didn’t keep the ones they’ve taken captives in slavery for as long as they would want to, but as they set them a certain term of captivity, then they left it to their will, if they want, to go back to their land after the term ends, by paying a certain ransom or, if they want, to stay there as free men and friends.
    105. Their women were also exceptionally humble: the bigger part of them believed the death of their husband to be their own death as well, and they used to kill themselves, unable to bear the life of widows.
    106. As food they used millet and were usually satisfied with little, as it was hard for them to endure the other hardships of farming. They preferred to spend their time free and without labour rather than procure varied meals and drinks through great effort.
    107. In the past they were each armed with two little, i.e. throwing spears, while some also carried big and long shields, like doors. They also used wooden bows and arrows tipped in poison, whose effects could be prevented only if the wounded person prepares teriak or other antidote or if he immediately cuts away the wound, so the poison doesn’t spread, lest it acts fatally to the whole body. They had the habit of living and seeking shelter in woody and almost impassable areas.
    108. I previously gave an account, in the chapter about the surprise attacks, how the Romans of that time used to undertake their campaigns and attacks against them, so if something useful can be found in the current presentation, you should have it near at hand, commander, if the need arises, as this has all been tested before, even if you no longer launch unexpected attacks against them, but go against other similar barbaric tribes.
    Last edited by NikeBG; March 21, 2010 at 04:17 AM.

  11. #31
    slavic_crusader's Avatar Biarchus
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Currently Sydney.Australia
    Posts
    607

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    WOW this is great !!!!
    Слава Слога и вјеру у Бога!!!
    Slava Sloga i Vjeru u Boga

    Supporter of Eastern Europe Total War!





  12. #32
    Hrobatos's Avatar Tribunus
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    7,189

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    i thought that Croatia had more cavalary
    and i saw good sources about it, can you Aru show us yours? about how manny cavalarymen Croatia had etc...

  13. #33
    Aru's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Here.
    Posts
    4,795

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    Quote Originally Posted by Hrobatos View Post
    i thought that Croatia had more cavalary
    and i saw good sources about it, can you Aru show us yours? about how manny cavalarymen Croatia had etc...
    That was from DAI, saying that Croatia had 100 000 infantry and 60 000 cavalry strong army, as well as 80 bigger and 100 smaller ships at the time of duke Krešimir (935-945).

    You can read relevant passages of DAI about South Slavs here in croatian. I found also a page in Greek, but can't find it in English.

    However, all historians agree that those numbers were at the best unlikely. Infantry could be possible if we consider that it was pre-feudal time and that every freeman was potentially a soldier (even though it was impossible to gather them on one place, we're talking a good deal of male population here), but cavalry... no.

    Still, it is doubtless that cavalry was used to significant effect, otherwise it would not be mentioned like that.

    edit: but yet again we are now talking about time almost 4 centuries after the migration of Slavs. Many things have change in those centuries (even though no one claimed early Slavs didn't use cavalry at all, just that it wasn't their significant part on the battle field).
    Last edited by Aru; March 23, 2010 at 02:33 AM.
    Has signatures turned off.

  14. #34
    VINC.XXIII's Avatar Retired
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Oxybian hills
    Posts
    4,289

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    "60 000 cavalry" clear, totally fantastic, Hungary have many difficult to nourrish 40000 horse ,with all his Putza, well Croatia with his pre-mediterranean climax, the Mongols themselves had tested the aridity of the Kars.
    The Third Samnite War, a Total War: Rome 2 mod on pre-roman Italy







    Patronized by phoenix[illusion]
    [/SPOILER]

  15. #35
    Sanskrit_Bandit's Avatar Wielki Kniaź Wiślański
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Canada/Polska
    Posts
    896

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    I'm quite flattered my work was referenced in this discussion . ANd i'll throw in my 2 cents regarding to meaning of druzhina and knez. from the polish etymological dictionary by W. Boryś, druzhina is a general slavic word that means company, group of friends/comrades, a sort of union, bortherhood, etc. Given the commonality of the word to all tongues it can be said that the word existed in the time of the proto-slavic language split around the 9th-10th centuries AD. For Old Slavic it states "a group of people constituting a union, either through blood relations, friendship, common goals, or fealty to one person. From the common slavic word drug (person or item connected with something from its surroundings, member of some sort of group, friend, comrade, etc. Therefore it makes common sense for such a word to be prevalent among all the slavs, even if it might not be mentioned in southern sources, which is something i've noticed as well.
    Regarding knez, its a very difficult word to translate, infact, id suggest to complete stay away from trying to put it into a corresponding latin or greek term. Knez varied across time and region, and could be applied to the leading prince of a tribe, a high nobleman, any simple nobleman, and so forth. Its a very ambiguous term, hard to grasp the meaning of it is difficult unless you speak a language in which its a native word.
    And yes, as MArk said we will be updating the SLavic project to underline the different trends between the West, East and South Slavs.

  16. #36
    Son of Fire's Avatar Tiro
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Southern Ontario Canada
    Posts
    225

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    Thanks man... I look forward to the update!
    "Such Heroic Nonsense."

  17. #37
    Hrobatos's Avatar Tribunus
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    7,189

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    Quote Originally Posted by Rus-Bey View Post
    "60 000 cavalry" clear, totally fantastic, Hungary have many difficult to nourrish 40000 horse ,with all his Putza, well Croatia with his pre-mediterranean climax, the Mongols themselves had tested the aridity of the Kars.
    everybody agrees that numbers of "100 000 infantry and 60 000 cavalary are far to big, yet it proves that cavalary was very important in croatian warfare, it was hugely important in time of war against Ottomans and we know a lot about that era, much more than eras before

    and it remained important all the way to 20 century

    i even found page concernig archeological findings of clevis, even those for children, dating from 9 century
    from river cetina, i cant find the page now,if i do ill send you a link

  18. #38

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    Quote Originally Posted by IVIarkI2I View Post
    hello Iam wotn slavic unit maker, the list you posted here is kinda old version we´re working on more accurate one , the sources are good becouse polak is studing history in Canada and hes sources are mostly books, many good ones, the language we used for units is half way his guessing and half what remains from old writtings so result is the most realistic thing you can get in 21st century , in later slavic armies was chainmail with helmets common armour, also sword becoming common in slavic armies, shield , spear, javelin or axe was standard, slavic armies were indeed powerfull , fast to move and their tactic was really deadly , for example Frankicsch empire recomend to fight with slavs only in winter, becouse they were able to hide in forest so they looked like wood or something , was reading also that slavic women were wery wild, the single ones had been doing sex in public, thats how they choosen their husband but after marriage when husband die mostly the woman was killed also or western slavs were good at trade , you can see the power of slavic warfare in varagian guard, most were hired slavic warriors, from kiev rus , becouse theyve been well known of their non human power and I could continue so loooong time .....
    Could you tell me that source where have you read about slavic woman?

  19. #39

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    Quote Originally Posted by IVIarkI2I View Post
    hello Iam wotn slavic unit maker, the list you posted here is kinda old version we´re working on more accurate one , the sources are good becouse polak is studing history in Canada and hes sources are mostly books, many good ones, the language we used for units is half way his guessing and half what remains from old writtings so result is the most realistic thing you can get in 21st century , in later slavic armies was chainmail with helmets common armour, also sword becoming common in slavic armies, shield , spear, javelin or axe was standard, slavic armies were indeed powerfull , fast to move and their tactic was really deadly , for example Frankicsch empire recomend to fight with slavs only in winter, becouse they were able to hide in forest so they looked like wood or something , was reading also that slavic women were wery wild, the single ones had been doing sex in public, thats how they choosen their husband but after marriage when husband die mostly the woman was killed also or western slavs were good at trade , you can see the power of slavic warfare in varagian guard, most were hired slavic warriors, from kiev rus , becouse theyve been well known of their non human power and I could continue so loooong time .....
    Could you tell a source where you have read phrase about slavic woman?

  20. #40
    Darios's Avatar Slava Darios!
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Dumbrava Roșie, Romania
    Posts
    2,167

    Default Re: South Slavs and Avars…

    Quote Originally Posted by lebed View Post
    Could you tell a source where you have read phrase about slavic woman?
    Well, I have read in a book on the subject of Slavic mythology that after the Christianization of the East Slavs, St. Paraskeva took on the aspects of Zemlya Mat' and she was often 'honored' with orgies in which entire communities (both old and young) participated. The Church had a hard time stamping that particular practice out)
    Under the Patronage of PikeStance


Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •