Slitherine

In both Early medieval Russian and Early Teutonic lists it is stated by book authors that battle on Neva river and Lake Peipus were hardly "battles", but rather insignificant skirmishes, blown out of proportion by later propaganda. I'd like to know what is that statement based on ( biblio).
Regards, SMS

not quite the "rules question"

Thread moved to more appropriate location. Continue with your regularly scheduled discussion.

Marc

Probably such works as The Chronicle of Novgorod etc.

John Fennell, The Crisis of Medieval Russia, 1200-1304, has claimed that the battle was less signficant than currenlty believed:

http://www.amazon.com/Crisis-Medieval-1 ... 536&sr=8-1

Naturally, there is some disagreement on this.

It seems it was historically significant, even if not thought by some to be militarily so.

Marc, thanks for moving the post- shows you how long since I have been here.
I still hope here for response...

sergeis64 wrote:Marc, thanks for moving the post- shows you how long since I have been here.
I still hope here for response...

Service is my life.

Marc

I want to know why the Imperial German list gives restrictions on using Polish allies, but doesn't actually give Polish allies as an option?
Similarly, why do Fuedal German armies not get to have Polish allies if using south or east options? Wasn't Silisia Polish?
Didn't Ottakar II's army at the Marchfeld contain a significant proportion of Poles?

sergeis64 wrote:In both Early medieval Russian and Early Teutonic lists it is stated by book authors that battle on Neva river and Lake Peipus were hardly "battles", but rather insignificant skirmishes, blown out of proportion by later propaganda. I'd like to know what is that statement based on ( biblio).

It's pretty easily to discern by simple number crunching. For example the usually reported number of Teutonic Knights would have meant almost every Brother in the Order being present (and getting killed), as we still got most of the order rosters it can be demonstrated that this didn't happen. As far as we can tell only the Meisterei Livland (Livonian Order - pretty much what remained of the absorbed Schwertbrüder Orden) was involved and lost about 1/2 of it's total number (in Brothers, probably only 50-70% of whom being present at the battle). In other words about 25 Brother Knights got killed or captured. The majority of the Force (probably no more then 3.000) were Livonian Militia & Levies plus some Danish Crusader Knights.
As for sources if you can read German* I can try to dig them out, but it will have to wait till after the IWC in Brussel (and thereafter probably also until the double rankings are completed). The main primary source on the battle itself is probably the "Chronicon Livoniae". You should have no problems finding that one.
* One was in Polish, but not sure I can find that one again (no I can't read polish, but I've a friend that helped with that.)

gozerius wrote:I want to know why the Imperial German list gives restrictions on using Polish allies, but doesn't actually give Polish allies as an option?

Because it's a fluke. When I started to draw up the list I tried for a single one, not two. That turned out to be unsatisfactory and I split the list. The list notes for the city state lists were accidentally left as is.

gozerius wrote: Similarly, why do Fuedal German armies not get to have Polish allies if using south or east options? Wasn't Silisia Polish?

If Silesia (Schlesien) was Polish, Bohemian, German or independent heavily depends on whom you ask and what time frame exactly we are talking. Military wise it was probably closer to Bohemia (which deserves a list of his own if I ever manage to put one together that has less then 10 pages) or 'Germany' then to Poland, so IMO does not justify a 'Polish Ally'.

gozerius wrote:Didn't Ottakar II's army at the Marchfeld contain a significant proportion of Poles?

Yes, but they are usually considered mercenaries, not allies and the list allows plenty enough mercenaries to cover them.

Thanks Karsten. I pretty much anticipated those remarks.

@ Ghaznavid
Nobody disputes here the small numbers of participants in both of the battles. However their importance for both "Crusaders" and Russians should not be underestimated- especially at the time of Mongol Invasion of Kievan Rus.
By denigrating these events Osprey and FoG is falling in usual fallacy of showing things Russian as unworthy and insignificant.
Well, nothing new from the West. Certainly left a bad taste in my mouth...

Only Russians are allowed to express their opinions?

(Modern) discussions of politics, religion and nationalism stop here, OK?

peterrjohnston wrote:(Modern) discussions of politics, religion and nationalism stop here, OK?

Ah, a totalitarian amongst us. That should calm things down

If this was the FoG:R forum, at this point I would introduce Ivan IV and his contribution to constitutional democracy (and heavy artillery) but as it is not, it would be off topic so I will not.

@ ShrubMiK- by all means express yours, otherwise I will look like lonely Yaroslavna on the Putivl' wall- bemoaning what ails me.
@Timmy1- mmm- Pushka bol'shaya and Pushka malen'kaya!!! Once my Art (s) took a head off some hapless Irish dragoon about a mile away- across the table- first shot of the battle!!!

sergeis64 wrote:@ Ghaznavid
Nobody disputes here the small numbers of participants in both of the battles. However their importance for both "Crusaders" and Russians should not be underestimated- especially at the time of Mongol Invasion of Kievan Rus.
By denigrating these events Osprey and FoG is falling in usual fallacy of showing things Russian as unworthy and insignificant.
Well, nothing new from the West. Certainly left a bad taste in my mouth...

Personally I've my doubts the Order (as in the Hochmeister and his inner circle) really planned to push into Russia, seems a bit unlikely, especially at that time. The Knights simply lacked the resources and manpower to do so and had their hands full enough as it was. Of course there probably were some hard liners (and former Sword Brethren members agitated by the Bishop of Riga, are likely candidates) so that "invasion" came to be. The results meant that most of the proponents for expanding into Russia were either dead or sobered up. So yes the battles had political implication (how much exactly is difficult to say, possibly greater for the Scandinavian expansionists then for the Order). Still the battle at Peipus Lake for example has been well overhyped by later Russian propaganda (especially Eisensteins movie left a massive mark). So, sorry if you feel that is a slight on Russia (as it certainly isn't), but trying to put things back into the actual magnitude is warranted IMHO.