Printable View
http://www.totalwar.com/index.html?p...medieval2/1/2/
Quote:
The Varangian Guard, most famous of all Byzantine units, was a military levy sent to the Byzantine emperor from the ‘Rus’. Now a permanent unit often used as royal bodyguards, they were initially composed solely of Scandinavians and later on other Europeans. These superbly skilled and fearless warriors wield two-handed axes with vicious abandon, hacking down the Emperor's enemies.
Ta for linky the_mango55, this is another impressive unit.
One good think i noticed is that there is hardly any of that horrible purple Byzantine faction colour on it.........Other than that looks like a pretty average unit. Who were the 'Rus' btw??
Rus where the Varangians who migrated from scandinavia and ruled over the slavic and finnic tribes in eastern europe, im no pro on the subject though :DQuote:
Originally Posted by CaesarAgustus
Unit looks good.
I loved these things in the original. They took 2 years to produce too, but we don't have to worry about that anymore. I'm eager to see the stats on these guys. I liked their axe more in the original though.
Cool they should make a Rus faction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Basileus
Sorta like this, you mean:Quote:
Originally Posted by CaesarAgustus
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=68900
The VG looks fine to me, but what happened to his shield? Hopefully he'll find it before M2TW comes out.
Ah......Rus=Russsians.........I knew that:sweatdrop:
Purple was the Imperial colour IIRC.Quote:
Originally Posted by CaesarAgustus
Oooo,ahhhh,etc. They look grat. Thse Coyote warriors are wieird looking though. Can't wait to kill them (Coyote W. vs. Gothic Night. Sweet.:laugh4: )
QUOTE=lancelot]Purple was the Imperial colour IIRC.[/QUOTE]
Ya but the faction colours are too bright and they usually cover most of the unit' uniform. I hated the way the Parthians looked in Rome.......like a desert faction's troops would really go into battle wearing bright purple all over.
Same goes for the byzantines.......The Emperor and maybe the nobles would wear purple, but your average soldier wouldn't. Thats why i like the Varangian Guard's realism.
Then again, it's just a game, but I wish that they would just get rid of the whole faction colour thing entirely.
And econ21, are you sure that the Rus and Russians aren't just different peoples with a similar name......for example, today's Roma and Romans?
No mate the Rus were the first Russians, they are the same thing.
Weren't the Rus the Scandianvians who conquered the area around Ukraine? I know they became the Russians, but I was under the impression that it was in the same way the Normans in Ireland became Irish, the slow assimilation of the small conquering elite class into the majority population's culture.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
:sweatdrop: I could easily be mistaken, though.
Yes, but I don't think before that the Slavic populations were known as Rus in the same way the Irish already had their own strong identity.
Quick quote from the Russian Primary Chronicle:
Quote:
Thus they went overseas to the Varangians, to the Rus. These particular Varangians were known as Rus, just as some are called Swedes, and others Normans and Angles, and still others Gotlanders, for they were thus named. The Chuds, the Slavs, the Krivichs and the Veps then said to the Rus, "Our land is great and rich, but there is no order in it. Come reign as princes, rule over us". Three brothers, with their kinfolk, were selected. They brought with them all the Rus and migrated (The Primary Chronicle, 859-862).
Actually I just looked it up, the Rus were a confederation of Slavic peoples that settled in Eastern Europe, and are the ancestors of modern-day Ukranians, Belarusians, and Russians.
Maybe that's even the root of Belarus and Russia.~:)
There are no maybes to it. This is how the Russian "nation" first came into existance. Although the "histories" of this time period are semi-mythological, it is clear that certain Scandinavian types who traded and travelled on the Volga river from the Baltic to the Black sea areas, eventually came to politically dominate the local population of utterly uncivilized and uncultured Slavs in the ninth century. Thus the first "Russians" came to emerge as an actual nation. First their kingdom came to be based in the Ukraine at Kiev. However, after infighting and trouble with steppe people that Kindgom eventually colapsed, but it's smaller brother principality centered around the trade city of Novgorod came to take their place as the Russian nation. With the arrival of the Mongols in the steppe areas of the Ukraine, the Russians were completely driven into the northern forests (areas where the Mongols had far more difficulty fighting) where they dwelt as a subject nation to the Golden Horde for about 200 years. This covers most of the period in MTW2. So in a long winded way -- the Rus were the founders of anything that today is referred to as Russian, since before their coming, the area was completely and utterly unimportant in the scope of world politics (and the root "rus" does indeed always refer back to these people).
P.S. My Russian history class was over 5 years ago, if I screwed up some minor details, I apologize :)
Also if you read historic backrounds
There is currently a political marriage between Russia and Byzatinum Royalty so it makes perfect sense :)
Actually at one point in time the King of Denmark was one of the body guards of the ruler of Byzantium, i'm sure the true historians can tell me who and when I don't member.
No king of Denmark was a bodyguard for the Basileus, but there are two things you could be thinking of:
1) Haraldr Hardrada, who did serve as an officer within the Guard before heading home to claim the throne at home and invade England (only to be defeated by Godwinson in 1066), but he wasn't a Dane.
2) En route to the Holy Land on the (second?) Crusade, the king of Denmark (name slips me) visited with the emperor, who treated him far better than the other crusader kings, because he was the king of his bodyguards.
Rus literally means red or red haired. It is the namesake of RUSsia.
Very good unit thoe.
The Rus were the swedish tribe of Vikings who settled in the Slavic dominated area of Russia and in the vicinity. Many historians believe that "Russia" came from "Rus".Quote:
Originally Posted by CaesarAgustus
Since they had technologically superior and more agressive ways at warfare, they easily assimilated the Slavs, or chased them away.
Being on the northern doorstep of Byzantium, and being of fearsome reputation, the Byzantines first befriended the majority, and then recruited them for local campaigns, eventually making a permanant bodyguard in Constantinople.
And yes, I like how there was little my purple myself.
The actual uniform of the Varangian guards was red. And the shield was red with a black raven, and the master weapon was a two-headed axe.
Thanks pallus your prolly rite got my facts mixed up. Oh wells.
O, my lovely Varangians without you I'm no one...
Not... quite, by what I know of it. First off, there never was a "Swedish tribe of Vikings called Rus" far as I know - the adventurous Scandinavians who sailed abroad to trade and/or pillage tended to come from rather diverse backgrounds, one of the more common elements being poverty and lack of future prospects in the increasingly overpopulated Scandinavia. I've read however that the origin of the word rus would be the same as that of the Finnish name for Sweden Ruotsi, stemming from root word dhruots which apparently referred to either a particular region in Sweden, the crew complement of a ship, or some combination thereof (the Finnish name for Russia, Venäjä, then has entirely different roots). The Vikings' "East Road" to the Russian rivers and all the way down to the Black and Caspian Seas ran along the Finnish-speaking coastlines of the Gulf of Finland, so such an origin is at least conceivable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac Clan
Second, what their major and really only real advantage was is naval technology; the various steppe nomads owned the plains, but the Vikings could dominate the rivers. This obviously gave them rather a bit of influence in trade and war and made their assistance sought after (since among other things hostile territories could be bypassed via their shipping), and as they ranged up and down the rivers both as traders, raiders and mercenaries they naturally wanted base areas. Urban settlements along the great Russian river weren't exactly anything new and these were typically located in strategic locations to begin with, so naturally the Scandinavians sought to establish presence in them by fair means or foul. Which in turn got them mixed with often rather complicated local politics that tended to involve both the inhabitants of the city, settled groups in its vicinity, and the various nomad lords who ranged on the surrounding plain, as well as then of course other settlements and Viking groups...
Anyway, the end result was at least partially Scandinavian leaders and ruling elites in several major centers and the founding of several others to serve as shipping bases and trade emporiums. As usual they became rather mixed up with the multitudous hodge-podge of peoples of the region rather quickly through the usual means of intercourse and adopted local languages and customs (and naturally contributed some of their own), but in any case managed to leave behind a degree of group identification. The succesful centers naturally enough started fighting each other over precedence, territory and so on, and unsurprisingly the other power groups (such as the powerful Khazar Khaganate - which somewhat oddly converted to Judaism, and eventually had a bit of a religous schism and civil war - or the Hungarian-Magyars or any of the other major steppe powers of the period) of the area tended to get involved. I've heard one theory about the Kievans' adoption of Christianity that involved a power struggle with the also staunchly pagan (the Kievan ruler, whatshinsme, Vladimir or something, had reputedly planned to anchor his power base on the same ancient thunder deity or something similar) and until then friendly Novgorod that was not going too well, which persuaded the ruler of Kiev to somewhat hastily send a word to the Byzantine Emperor that he would be interested in receiving missionaries coupled with military aid. Which quite suited Byzantine designs; they were constantly heavily involved in the politics of the Russian area for fairly obvious reasons, not rarely also militarily.
The Byzantines were also always happy to add foreign mercenaries to their armies, and they seem to have gotten a good impression of the Rus' and Vikings' proficiency as heavy infantry from their numerous conflicts with them (unsurprisingly the Rus were rather quick to pick up local military practices and customs such as composite bows and cavalry warfare from their neighbours, mind you; hard to be a power on the steppes without). Why exactly the Emperors decided to make them a part of their palace guard is another question, but they weren't all that picky about where the recruits came from so long as they were familiar with the military tradition - after the Norman conquest of England Anglo-Saxon refugees became rather common, for example.
He was Norwegian - reputedly bribed his way to the crown of Norway with riches he brought back from his tenure in the "Golden City" too.Quote:
1) Haraldr Hardrada, who did serve as an officer within the Guard before heading home to claim the throne at home and invade England (only to be defeated by Godwinson in 1066), but he wasn't a Dane.
The Danes and Norwegians seem to have preferred sailing westwards to the British Isles or along the European coastline. That of course eventually led them down to the Mediterranean (although the Moors tended not look well on their passing the Gibraltar), but there they apparently mainly stuck to the western basin. The eastern route to Russia tended to be more of a Swedish preoccupation, but of course this was anything but a hard and fast rule.
According to Riasanovsky, the Scandinavian origin of the Rus is hotly debated, and far from certain. He explains both the arguments in favor of and against the Norman theory. Some of the problems with it follow. There is no known group in Scandinavia known as the Rus, and the name is not present in any western sources. Byzantine and Oriental writers refer to the Rus before 862 (the year the Primary Chronicle states that the Rus arrived) as a group located in southern Russia. The linguistic arguments to tie the Rus to Scandinavia are highly suspect. The Primary Chronicle itself (the origin of the theory) has some serious internal failings.
There is also little evidence of Scandinavian culture in the culture of Kiev. There are only a few (6 or 7) Norman words in the Russian language, the vast majority being of Greek, Oriental, or Slavic origin. Written literature in Kiev preceded written literature in Scandinavia. Eastern Slavic deities were known as early as the 6th century, so are not an inheritance of Norse mythology.
This is not to say there was no Scandinavian presence in early Russia, or to deny the theory. But the issue is not settled, and it might be unwise to assume too much.
Ajax
Looks great