1565 years ago, on June 20-21, 451, the last major battle took place with the participation of the troops of the Western Roman Empire. The empire itself had another 25 years to live, in 476 it ceased to exist. But even in 451 it was already clear that "eternal Rome" stood at the last line. By that time, he had lost more than half of his possessions - Africa, Britain, a significant part of Iberia and Aquitaine. Yes, and in Italy itself, waves of conquerors were already sweeping, who had nothing to stop.

Nevertheless, when the horde of the Huns, who came from the Asian steppes, led by Attila, invaded Gaul in 451, one of the last Roman provinces outside the Apennine Peninsula, the then commander-in-chief and de facto ruler of Rome Flavius ​​Aetius decided to resist. He understood that his own forces were not enough for this, therefore he turned for help to his neighbors and former opponents - the Franks, Alans, Burgundians and Visigoths (they are also Visigoths), with whom the Romans had repeatedly fought before.

He managed to convince them that the Huns would make everything worse, and that it was impossible to defeat their huge army separately. Most of the Western Norwegian tribal unions allocated detachments to the army of Aetius, and the leader of the Visigoths, Theodoric, decided to personally take part in the battle. The Visigothic contingent was the largest among the allies, according to some reports, it even surpassed the Roman army. On the side of Attila, not only the steppe nomads also fought. His horde included many representatives of the previously conquered Germanic tribes and peoples - Ostrogoths, Gepids, Rugs, Thuringians, Skirs, Heruls, as well as part of the Alans who lived on the territory of the Hunnic "empire".

On June 20, the armies clashed in the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields. Historians have not been able to localize this place exactly until now. Presumably, it is located somewhere in the east of present-day France, in the area of ​​​​the city of Chalon-sur-Saone, however, no traces of a grandiose battle have yet been found there. The number of opposing armies is also impossible to establish. Although the Iberian chronicler Idacius wrote that there were as many as 300 thousand Huns, most modern historians believe that this number is overestimated by five or even ten times. Warriors of the anti-Hunnic coalition, apparently, there were about the same number as their opponents. In any case, none of the ancient chroniclers indicates that one of the armies was significantly superior to the other.

The battle began with a cavalry attack by the Huns on enemy battle formations. On the left flank they were supported by the Ostrogoths, on the right - by other allies. Aetius placed the Alans, Franks and Burgundians in the center, he stood with the Romans on the left, and Theodoric with the Visigoths was located on the right on the hill.

Soon the Huns managed to push through the enemy center, but the Visigoths withstood the onslaught, although their leader died in the process, and on the opposite side of the field, the Roman legionnaires put the opponents to flight. When the Visigoths, having repulsed the attack, also counterattacked, Attila realized the danger of his position. His center moved far forward, but both flanks were defeated. The Romans were about to link up with the Visigoths behind the Hun strike force, cut it off from the base camp and attack from the rear. The result was the classic "Cannes".

In order to prevent such a development of events, the Hun leader ordered to immediately stop the pursuit of the Alans, Franks and Burgundians, turn around 180 degrees and return to the camp. The Romans and Visigoths did not have time to close the encirclement. Attila with most of his fighters broke into the camp, surrounded by a fence of wagons. By this time it began to get dark and the fight stopped. The next morning, the Visigoths tried to take over the camp, but the Huns repulsed the attack.

Attila announced that he would stand to the last and ordered to kill anyone who tried to escape. The allies, who suffered heavy losses in yesterday's battle, did not dare to storm the Wagenburg again, deciding to starve it out. However, soon the son and heir of the deceased Theodoric Thorismond received a message that turmoil was brewing in his possessions and those who wanted to plant someone else had already appeared. to the vacant throne.

Upon learning of this, Thorismond decided that power was more important than final victory. Without even warning Aetius, he immediately withdrew his troops to deal with the conspirators. This dramatically changed the balance of power. The Romans could not continue the siege alone, and the Huns had a chance to make a sortie and defeat the remaining enemies. Realizing the threat that had arisen, Aetius also ordered a retreat. This gave Attila reason to declare that he did not lose the battle, although his attack on Gaul was stopped. On the Catalaunian fields, the Huns suffered such damage that they had to return to recuperate and recruit reinforcements to the Hungarian steppes.

The next year, the leader of the Huns began a new campaign of conquest in Western Europe, but that's another story. And on the screen saver - the infantry of the late Roman Empire in battle, drawing by Igor Dzys. It is not clear how Steven Seagal ended up there?

The Romans repel the cavalry attack of the Huns.

The Visigoths are trying to attack the Huns' camp surrounded by wagons.

Roman infantry and cavalry of the 5th century. Second from the right is a centurion.

The Visigoths are temporary allies of the Romans in the Battle of Catalaun.

Horsemen of Attila's army. The Hun aristocracy had a peculiar custom of deforming skulls, for which children from infancy had their heads tightly bandaged, forcing it to grow upwards. This was done so that a noble person in any clothes, and even without it, could be immediately distinguished from a commoner. Such skulls have been repeatedly found in rich Hun burials.

Hun infantry. In the right picture, the Huns gather trophies on the battlefield on the short night of June 20-21, 451.

Diagram of the climax of the Battle of Catalaun. The Romans and their allies are marked in red, the Huns and their allies in blue.

Because yesterday, Max and I talked a lot about the Merovingians, I tossed and turned for half the night and remembered the battle on the Catalaunian fields.

This monstrous "battle of the peoples" took place on June 20 (estimated date) 451 on the territory of Champagne, in the Catalaunian fields, not far from Troyes.
Known for the fact that it was the last battle of the Roman army and the battle that stopped the devastating raid of Attila on Europe, as well as for the first time that kindred tribes pushed each other together - the barbarian world was divided: some of the tribes sided with Rome and Senator Aetius as Roman federates (by the way - the Roman army then already consisted of almost only mercenaries, and not Roman citizens), part was with Attila, including the divided Franks.

Nobody got the victory (although Aetius believed that the victory was for Rome, because the Roman army remained on the battlefield, and Attila retreated and did not advance further into Europe).
The losses were monstrous. Idatius in the "Chronicle" speaks of 300,000 people, Jordan in the "History of the Goths" gives 165,000 dead, some researchers agree on 180,000 soldiers.
Prosper in the Chronicle also reports that Aetius sent away his barbarian allies by cunning and took an incredibly rich booty into the field.
The symbol of the Catalaunian trophies is a certain valuable golden dish, a treasure ready, with a value of 16 kg. gold. This dish has excited the imagination of historians and chroniclers for many centuries... Researcher Nikolai Gorelov mentions that perhaps the golden dish was a kind of national symbol also for the Franks, whose kings (Merovingians) owned a golden dish of monstrous value and showed it to guests and ambassadors ...

So, since the name of the Merovingians has sounded here, I will report on the existing version, which is supported by most historians: the Franks who fought for Rome were led into battle by the founder of the Merovingian dynasty, the legendary Merovei (ruled 448-457). Thanks to this battle, the Franks perfectly settled in vast Gaul, and Merovei himself was adopted by Flavius ​​Aetius, therefore he received Gallic possessions also with the legal support of Rome. The first Merovingians were considered pro-Roman kings (for example, Clovis Merovingian "solemnly celebrated the receipt of signs of consular dignity", and Childeric (the son of Merovei, who captured Paris) was considered the "viceroy of the province of Belgica" - the one whose image on the gold ring has come down to us). Childeric's son Clovis created the first united Frankish state, one of the strongest in Europe, with one of the most efficient armies in the world. However, he also "chopped" the roots of the family, dividing the country between four warring sons...
Can it be said that in this way the achievements gained by the Franks at the cost of the monstrous losses of the Catalaunian battle were somewhat devalued?

Useful links:
Pedigree of the Merovingians (table): http://www.hrono.ru/geneal/geanl_fr_01.html
Catalaunian Battle: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalaunian_fields
Merovei: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merovei

Sources:
Nikolai Gorelov: "Chronicles of Long-Haired Kings" (translation of excerpts from medieval chronicles - Prosper, Fredegar, Gregory of Tours, etc.
Lawrence Gardner "Realms of the Ringlords"
"The Merovingian Age - Europe Without Borders" (exhibition prospectus)
J.R.R. Tolkien "The Professor and the Monsters"

Images:
"Battle of the Catalaunian Fields", from a medieval manuscript of the 14th century, original - National Library of the Netherlands
Childeric Merovingian, depiction on a gold ring from Childeric's tomb, opened in 1653, in Tournai (Belgium)
"Merovei, King of France" - bronze medal (by Auteur Dassier, Jean (1676-1763 ; médailleur))

Current page: 12 (total book has 29 pages) [accessible reading excerpt: 20 pages]

"Battle of the Nations" in the Catalaunian Fields

The first victims of the Hun invasion were Worms, Mainz, Trier, Strasbourg (Argentorate), Speyer (Noviomag), Besançon (Besontion) and Metz. Lutetia (Paris) and Aurelianum (Orleans) were supposed to be next, but due to mysterious circumstances this did not happen. Here is how the Russian historian of the 19th century D. I. Ilovaisky described these events: “Folk legends of Gaul tell about various miracles that took place during this invasion. For example, Paris was saved by the prayers of a simple girl, Genevieve. The inhabitants were already preparing to leave it, but the Huns turned away from the city, Attila went further to the banks of the Loire and laid siege to Orleans. The Bishop of Orleans (Saint Anyan) supported the courage of the townspeople with the hope of God's help. Finally, the besieged were brought to the extreme: the suburbs were already occupied by the enemy, and the walls of the city were shaking under the blows of battering rams. Those who could not carry weapons prayed fervently in churches. The Bishop had twice already sent sentinels to the tower; twice the messengers returned without seeing anything. The third time they announced that a cloud of dust appeared at the edge of the horizon. "It's God's help!" exclaimed the bishop. Indeed, it was the Roman commander and governor of Gaul Aetius, who, in addition to the Roman legions, led allies with him - the Visigoths and the Franks.

So say the legends. In fact, Attila simply did not reach Paris, turning on the road to Orleans. He besieged this city, but could not take it due to the lack of support in the rear and the arrival of the forces of the Roman commander and governor of Gaul Aetius. It must be said that, thanks to the great diplomatic skills he showed, he managed to quickly create a pro-Roman alliance in opposition to the Hunnic alliance, which, in addition to the Roman legionnaires, included the Visigoths led by their king Theodoric, the Alemanni, Burgundians, Sarmatians, Saxons, Amorians, part Franks and Alans. Attila, considering the unfavorable alignment of forces for himself and the fact that the wooded area near the fortress walls of Orleans did not allow his cavalry to turn around, was forced to lift the siege from the city and retreat to Chalon-sur-Marne (Chalon-on-Marne), on the Catalaunian fields 29
According to some manuscripts, the battle between the Huns and the Romans took place at Mauriac (in the vicinity of the city of Troyes). The exact location of the battle is unknown.

The Roman-German army went after him.

Approaching the Catalaunian fields, the soldiers of Aetius, as usual, made a fortified camp of logs, protected by a moat and a wall. Attila simply ordered to build their wagons in the form of a circle, and spread tents inside it. His warriors were not used to building fortifications or digging trenches.

Before the battle, the king of the Huns turned to court soothsayers for a prediction of its outcome. Those, according to Jordan, peered for a long time either into the entrails of the sacrificial animals, or into some veins on the scraped bones, and finally announced that the Huns were in danger. The only consolation for Attila could only be that one of the supreme leaders of the enemy was to fall in this battle.

The king of the Huns chose the plain for battle, which gave his cavalry room for maneuver. He withdrew his troops only at three o'clock in the afternoon, placing them as follows: on the left flank were the Goths, led by their leader Valamir, on the right - King Ardarik with the Gepids and representatives of other peoples. Attila himself with the Huns settled down in the center. He apparently planned to attack the Romans first. Aetius, on the other hand, led the left flank of his army, on the right he placed King Theodoric with the Visigoths in order to cut off the enemy from his flanks with these two wings.

Before the start of the battle, Attila tried to inspire his soldiers with a speech. If you believe the Gothic tradition cited by Jordanes, then it said: “We will boldly attack the enemy, whoever is braver always attacks. Look with contempt at this mass of diverse peoples, who do not agree with each other in anything, who, in protecting himself, counts on someone else's help, he exposes his own weakness in front of the whole world ... So, raise your courage and inflate your usual ardor. Show your courage properly to the Huns ... I throw the first dart at the enemy, if anyone can remain calm while Attila is fighting, he has already died. As you can see, the king of the Huns was strong in eloquence, and his appeals always reached the goal. Therefore, this time too, inspired by his words, the warriors rushed into battle with fierce desperation.

The course of the battle, which took place on June 15, 451 30
According to other sources, the battle took place on June 20, 451, and Bouvier-Ajan calls an even later date - June 30 or early July.

Described in detail by Jordanes: “The troops converged ... on the Catalaunian fields. There was a sloping hill on the plain, forming a hill. And so each side sought to capture it. ... To the right stood the Huns with their own, to the left - the Romans and the Visigoths with their allies. And so, leaving the slopes, they enter the battle for the top. The right wing of the army was Theodoric with the Visigoths, the left - Aetius with the Romans, in the middle they placed Sangiban, who led ... the Alans ... The Hun army was located opposite, in the middle of which was Attila with his bravest ... Wings formed numerous nationalities and various tribes, whom Attila subjugated his power. Between them stood out the army of the Ostrogoths, led by Balamir, Theodemir and Videmir ... And the countless army of the Gepids was led by the illustrious king Ardaric, who gained Attila's confidence with his exceptional loyalty ... The rest ... the crowd of kings and leaders of different tribes, like bodyguards, was waiting for Attila's orders, and as soon as he rolled his eyes, so without objection, with fear and trembling, everyone appeared before his face ... One Attila - the king of kings - stood above everyone and acted for everyone ... Attila sent his people to occupy the top of the hill, but Thorismund 31
Thorismund (Thorismond)- the son of Theodoric, who after his death became the new king of the Visigoths.

And Aetius was ahead of him: they had previously captured the height of the hill and easily repelled the Huns rushing there ... They converge hand-to-hand. A battle ensues, fierce and widespread, terrible, desperate. Antiquity does not tell anything of the kind, telling about such deeds ... If you believe the stories of the old people, the stream flowing through the mentioned field in the low banks spread widely from the blood flowing from the wounds of the slain ... horse and, trampled under his feet, ended his old life ... Then the Visigoths, separated from the Alans, rushed to the detachments of the Huns and would have killed Attila himself, if he had not escaped in advance and hid in a camp surrounded by wagons as a precaution.

The battle stopped only at nightfall. For Attila, he was the only one in which the great conqueror was defeated. The victorious Romans took refuge in their fortified camp, and the dejected leader of the Huns, in anticipation of the next assault, began to prepare for the worst. In the event of a new onslaught from the Romans, he even decided to burn himself at the stake, but not fall into the hands of enemies. At the same time, Attila did not lose hope that he would be able to deceive the enemy and get out of the trap. Therefore, he ordered that the sounds of a trumpet and the rattling of weapons be heard from his camp all night long, which were supposed to convince Aetius and his allies that the Hun army was ready to continue the battle in the morning. It was a kind of "psychic attack", with which the cunning conqueror tried to frighten the Roman soldiers. Describing the state of the Hunnic king, Jordanes compared him to a wounded beast: “Like a lion driven from everywhere by hunters, with a big leap retires to his lair, not daring to rush forward, and with his roar terrifies the surrounding places, so proud Attila, king of the Huns, among his the wagon terrified its winners.

But there was no new attack from the Romans the next day. Disagreements arose in their camp, as a result of which the new king of the Visigoths Thorismund left the camp with his army. Left without an ally, Aetius did not dare to attack the Huns. Thanks to this, Attila was able to calmly leave with the remnants of his army behind the Rhine. Based on this, some military historians (in particular, Alexei Patalakh) tend to consider the result of the battle a draw, but the vast majority evaluate it as the first and only defeat of the Hun conqueror. And only Rafael Bezertdinov claims that the Romans and their allies lost in this battle: “Both sides suffered heavy losses, but were eager to win. The terrible massacre lasted for days. The pressure of Aesius was held back not by the allies of the Huns, but by their heroes, who died many on the battlefield. By the evening of the second day, the Roman legionaries retreated. The whole world was convinced that the Turks are invincible.”

One way or another, but the battle on the Catalaunian fields became one of the bloodiest wars in the history. According to a later legend, after it, the shadows of the fallen continued to fight among themselves for another three days. And the death toll on both sides was huge. According to Jordan, a total of 165,000 people died in the battle. Other scientists, in particular the famous Russian historian and publicist of the 19th century M. M. Stasyulevich, bring the number of losses on both sides to 300 thousand people. However, both of these figures can be considered exaggerated. Taking into account the heterogeneity of the participants in the battle, it was called the "battle of the peoples." According to the unanimous opinion of historians, it is one of the most significant battles in world history. It is believed that if Attila won in it, then this could lead to the death of the remnants of Roman civilization and the fall of Christianity in Western Europe, and ultimately to the dominance of the Asians in Europe. In particular, Bouvier-Ajan writes that the "battle of nations" marked the clash of two worlds - "Roman civilization" and "barbarism". Their opposition was expressed both in the level of technological progress and in the confrontation between Christianity and paganism, "or rather, a heterogeneous mixture of pagan beliefs and superstitions combined with atheism." The French historian gave a very capacious and figurative definition of this event, saying that "on the Catalaunian fields, the West and the East, the city and the steppe, the peasant and the nomad, the house and the tent, the Sword of the Lord and the Scourge of God converged." And he also believes that "it was a struggle for independence and freedom," in which "various barbarian tribes rose up against the Hun invaders in order to jointly defend the land of Gaul."

Nevertheless, the outcome of the “battle of the nations” still raises many questions among historians. It is very difficult to answer them, since no memoirs of its direct participants have been preserved, and everything that is known about it is gleaned from the works of mainly Roman authors, containing their personal subjective comments. Examples of this are the letters and poems of Sidonius Apollinaris and the work of Jordanes already mentioned here. But most of all, the echoes of this battle have come down to us in legends, the same among various peoples and carefully preserved for many centuries, which explain little about the alignment of forces and intentions of the opponents. To some extent, Bouvier-Azhan managed to do this in one of the chapters of his book about Attila, which is called “The Mystery of the Catalaunian Fields”. The first question asked by the French researcher is why the Visigoths left the battlefield first. Since the threat from Attila had not yet disappeared and the battle could resume at any time, was not their departure a betrayal of the Romans? But, after analyzing the events in Aquitaine at that time, he came to the conclusion that the behavior of the Visigoths, most likely, was due to the circumstances associated with the tragic death of Theodoric. The young king of the Visigoths, Thorismund, hurried back to his homeland, fearing that his younger brother Evrich, having learned about the death of his father, could seize power in the country. According to Bouvier-Agen, he swore to Aetius that he would return to him if necessary, and left with his soldiers at his request at night, without extinguishing the lights behind him.

But why then did Attila leave the Catalaunian fields? Perhaps, thanks to the fires not extinguished by the Visigoths - this little military trick of Aetius - he did not guess about the departure of the Visigoths and, fearing that his noticeably thinned army would not withstand the next battle, decided to retreat? But the French historian doubts this, believing that even after the battle the size of the Hunnic army remained twice as large as that of the Gallo-Romans. He makes other assumptions about the reason for the retreat of the Huns: “The first assumption: Attila maintained a numerical superiority, and active pursuit of him was fraught with a certain risk for Aetius. He retreated - and that was enough.

The second assumption: Attila was sure that Aetius would not continue the war, because, without receiving additional legions from Valentinian III, he could present the retreat of the Huns as a victory and claim a triumphal meeting in Italy.

The third assumption: the resumption of the battle would lead to the complete defeat of the Huns, from which Aetius preferred to refrain for the time being, realizing that Attila would not attack. Attila realized that heroism and numerical superiority alone were not enough to win the war. He appreciated the advantages of the equipment and equipment of the Romans and feared a new, even more severe defeat. Therefore, he decided to behave like a defeated one, defiantly retreating, so that Aetius considered it unnecessary to finish off a defeated enemy who admitted defeat.

The fourth assumption: there was a conspiracy between Attila and Aetius. Even when they met on the battlefield, they instinctively remained accomplices. Each could strive to defeat the other, but not to destroy. The division of the "world" was still possible, it was only necessary to wait for the right moment and play your personal trump cards. Aetius released Attila, as he had done before at Orleans. Attila would have done the same if the wheel of fortune had turned and Aetius had been defeated. It can even be assumed that Constantius was not the only mediator, and the connection between Attila and Aetius was maintained regularly, even during the most tense periods of their relationship. This is both possible and impossible. It is possible that in 451 this happened ...

Attila also had another reason to leave: he had to maintain the trust of the allies. If under the circumstances Attila agreed to play the role of the vanquished for the Romans and Gallo-Romans, the Huns and their allies did not at all consider the battle lost. The battle has been broken off, and although both sides have suffered heavy losses, nothing has yet been decided."

Bouvier-Azhan categorically disagrees with those scientists who believe that Attila's retreat from Constantinople, his lifting of the siege of Paris and his "senseless desertion" from the Catalaunian fields serve as "proof of his unhealthy inconstancy, inability to complete the work begun, for which he has already paid dearly." In this regard, he writes: “This assumption is completely untenable. Attila's actions have a weighty reason. The assault on Paris did not solve strategic problems, and the retreat from the Catalaunian fields, although it dealt a painful blow to his pride, was dictated solely by common sense. Continuing the battle could have been too costly, it would have been wiser to reconsider the campaign plan. In all likelihood, the Hun conqueror was guided by the well-known principle: retreat is not defeat, retreat does not mean leaving.

It is difficult to judge how true this or that conclusion of the French historian is, since none of them is supported by historical materials. However, the fact that after the brutal “battle of the peoples” Attila did not at all consider himself defeated, but the war over, can be judged at least by the fact that immediately upon returning home, he began to prepare for a new campaign. After analyzing the balance of power on the territory of the Western Roman Empire, he decided that it would be most correct to concentrate on the capture of Italy and the conquest of all the same Gaul, but now from the south. And already in the spring of 452, the Hun conqueror invaded Italy, as usual marking his way with terrible destruction, fires and the extermination of thousands of people. In the words of Bouvier-Agent, “Attila's most terrifying campaign was about to begin. In addition to the bloody massacre, it was notable for the achievements of the Huns in the field of military technology and strategy, as well as for its completely unexpected, paradoxical ending.

Not every commander spared Rome

As conceived by Attila, the plan of the Italian campaign was as follows: go through the classical road of the Roman legions to Sirmium on the Sava in lower Pannonia, then fall on the most powerful fortress in all of Italy - Aquileia, located on the northern coast of the Adriatic Sea. From there, he planned to invade Venice and Liguria, and then go through Etruria to Rome itself and capture it.

Aquileia was considered an impregnable fortress, because it was surrounded by a wide moat with water and high walls with towers. It was the largest and most beautiful port on the Adriatic, which housed the base of the navy, which cleared the sea of ​​pirates. Bouvier-Agent noted: “Along with the strategic, the city was also of great economic importance, being at the crossroads of trade routes connecting various cities of Italy, on the one hand, and Illyria, Pannonia and the Transdanubian barbarian lands, on the other. Two civilizations converged here. The city housed an elite garrison, but the entire male population was at the same time warriors, sailors, merchants and bankers. The guard city and the city are the focus of luxury, the city of generals and merchants, shipowners and gladiators, the big bourgeoisie and the non-poor proletariat. Ancient and modern. Rich and impregnable. The crossroads of two empires, protecting them from anxiety, confident in their fate.

The siege of Aquileia turned out to be long and difficult, although Attila went on an Italian campaign with a large number of catapults and wall-beating machines. For several days the Huns shelled the city and dug tunnels under the fortress walls, but as a result they were able to destroy only the outer side of one of them. It seemed that the further, the more the circumstances were not in favor of the Hun conqueror. This is how Bouvier-Ajan described it: “Attila hoped to starve the city out. But by the end of the first month of the siege, famine threatened the Huns themselves. By devastating the surroundings, they themselves deprived themselves of easily accessible sources of food. Now it was necessary to weaken the army, sending special teams to distant lands, which supplied the troops with sin in half. Epidemics have begun. The spirit of the warriors fell, and - an unprecedented thing - the usually staunch nomads began, as Jordan reports, to grumble and complain about their fate. The camp buzzed and worried.

According to legend, Attila was about to lift the siege, but then he saw a flock of storks flying from the city. It was a sign: the storks are leaving the doomed city, which means that the time has come for a decisive assault.

But this is a legend. Whether there were storks or not, the siege continued for another month without any attempts at a massive assault. Attila sent food teams even further, waited for the enteritis epidemic to subside thanks to the abundant consumption of koumiss, and made sure that the city was able to withstand a long blockade. Attila gives the order to attack. The Huns, Franks and other barbarians allied with them burst into the defeated city. Nothing remains of Aquileia. Speaking about the disappearance of the city, the French historian apparently relied on the testimony of Jordanes, who wrote that the Huns in Aquileia "ruin everything with such cruelty that, as it seems, they do not leave any traces of the city" 32
In fact, Aquileia was soon restored. It died out only in the next century after the invasion of the Lombards, when most of the inhabitants preferred to move to a new, much better protected by the sea city, called Venice.

Following this, the Huns captured the large and rich trading city of Mediolanum (modern Milan). It is interesting to note the fact reported by the Court 33
ships- the name of the Byzantine explanatory dictionary of the Greek language of the 10th century, which contained explanations of ancient realities, biographical notes, quotations from ancient authors. The word "Court" until the 20th century was taken as the name of the author and was often read as Svyda.

: supposedly there, in the imperial palace, Attila saw a picture depicting Roman emperors on a throne with dead Scythians stretched out at their feet. Then he ordered to find the artist and made him draw himself on the throne, and the Roman emperors pouring gold from bags at his feet.

A sad fate befell other Italian cities: Ticinum (modern Pavia), Mantua, Verona, Castillo, Cremona, Brescia, Bergamo, Lodi, Como, Novara, Trecate, Vercelli, Chigliano, Mortara, Magenta, Vigevano ... The crown of this victorious march, according to Attila's plan, of course, was to be Rome. Moreover, it was not so difficult to capture it now, since there were few troops in the city, and the population was panic-stricken due to fear of the barbarians, who had already captured half the country. Thus, as Aleksey Patalakh writes, "this time Rome had no opportunity to resist Attila."

But the cunning conqueror, in order to further facilitate his task of capturing the city, came up with a brilliant strategic move: while Aetius with his legionnaires would be looking for the army of the Huns along the banks of the Po River, Oneges with his army would attack his rear, and Aetius would be forced to repel the attack, leaving part of the legions as a barrier against the expected approach of Attila. Thus the forces of the Romans will be dispersed. Having put the rearguard of Aetius to flight, Oneges will go to Pisa, from where the Aurelian road leads along the coast to Rome. Aetius, of course, will hasten to block his path to the capital, get involved in battle with him and thereby further weaken his line of defense. Then Attila will cross the Po, reach Mantua and Florence, and from there, along the Cassian Way, he will reach Rome! This plan, according to Bouvier-Ajan, "and still delighting strategists", was simply "doomed to success, and in the part that depended on Onegez, the results even exceeded expectations." But when Attila's army was already standing on the Ambouleian Fields, directly in front of Rome, he suddenly unexpectedly ... changed his mind about storming the "eternal city". Why? On this question, historians have a lot of assumptions.

Most researchers believe that Attila's decision was caused by a dangerous epidemic, which in the second half of June 452 struck part of his army. Moreover, its spread was allegedly stronger south of the Po than in the north, and therefore the tempting idea of ​​​​continuing the war on the other side of the river did not bode well. However, Aleksey Patalakh, the only researcher of the life and work of the Hunnic conqueror, along with this version, names another reason for his indecision: “Attila did not dare to go to Rome, knowing that his predecessor, the Gothic king Alaric, did not live long after the capture of Rome.” Considering that the leader of the Huns, like other rulers of that time, was a superstitious person, then such an assumption is not without meaning.

A more interesting and largely supported by subsequent events version is expressed by Bouvier-Azhan: “... it was necessary to put the last point in this campaign. And Attila had a new idea: instead of an offensive, is it possible to create only the appearance of an offensive, sow such panic that fear will force Rome to capitulate and there will be no need for battles? And really, why spend a lot of effort, lose a lot of people and military equipment, when the mere appearance of his army on the Ambouleian Fields can decide everything? In support of this, the Russian researcher R. Bezretdinov writes: “Attila approached the gates of Rome. The capital, the people, the Senate and the Pope were all in a panic. They saw no other solution than to surrender.” Further events in the presentation of the French historian looked like this: “Valentinian III gathered his ministers and advisers. I had to choose the lesser of the evils. It was necessary to find out from Attila on what conditions he agrees to spare the city, send ambassadors with gifts, go to any humiliation, promise an annual tribute, which could be very large if the Hun did not also put forward territorial claims ... The Senate was assembled. The Senate unanimously decided to appoint several senators who, on his behalf, would ask for peace at the price that Attila would appoint. But what will the people think? Will he take this as cowardice and betrayal on the part of the emperor and the nobility?

Announced a general meeting of the townspeople. Senators reported on the danger hanging over Rome. The city could have been completely destroyed. All of northern Italy has been plundered, the legions can only briefly delay the formidable enemy, who will soon be under the walls of the city ... The Senate gathered again, in the presence of the emperor, his ministers and high dignitaries. Who will lead the embassy? Who is sure to be accepted? It is impossible, after all, to ask the emperor himself? And will they even accept the emperor? Then the most famous senator, Gennady Avien, got up and said: "Send the Pope, he will be accepted." So it was decided to send an embassy to Attila, headed by Pope Leo I.

Details of the meeting of the leader of the Huns with the Pope, which took place on July 5, 452, on the Ambulian field, at the ford across the Mancino, became known to historians thanks to Prosper of Aquitaine. According to him, during their face-to-face conversation, “Attila was filled with admiration for the noble and wise old man, and the Pope could not resist the charm of the invincible and famously civilized leader.” What they talked about is unlikely to ever become known, and Prosper recorded only the following about the outcome of their conversation: “The Pope relied on the help of the Lord, who does not leave those who serve a just cause, and his faith brought success.” But about the negotiations between the leader of the Huns and the Roman embassy, ​​which took place the next day, Bouvier-Azhan writes the following: “Attila himself announced that the parties had come to an agreement. He will begin withdrawing troops from Italy on the 8th of July and will choose the path that suits him. The Emperor of the Western Roman Empire will pay a reasonable tribute within five years. He renounces henceforth all attempts to invade Gaul and Italy, provided that he is not attacked elsewhere and Rome refrains from any incitement that sows confusion and undermines the order of her empire. He expects Valentinian to urge Marcian to pay the tribute promised by his predecessor and also not to disturb the emperor of the Huns. Otherwise, he will consider himself free from obligations, and Constantinople will be under attack. At the end of his speech, he thanked the Pope, saying that it was a great honor for him to host "the wisest man in the world" and wished him a long life. Dad was so moved that he couldn't answer. They embraced silently.

Dad retired to his room and changed into simple white clothes. They brought the horses.

Attila, recollecting himself, wanted to leave the last word to himself and mockingly threw parting words to Trigetius: “And remind your emperor that I am still waiting for my bride Honoria!”

As you know, not every commander spared Rome. So, during the barbarian raids in the 410th, 455th 34
It is interesting to note that the same Pope Leo I, who managed to save Rome from destruction by the army of Attila, in 455 could not convince the Vandal king Genseric not to touch the city.

And in 476 years, he was subjected to huge destruction and loss of life. But the barbarian Attila, called the Scourge of God for his cruelty, spared the Eternal City. Who or what touched the heart of the bloody conqueror? Bouvier-Azhan has many versions on this score. According to one of them, the “great power of persuasion” of Leo I could not be the reason for his refusal to attack. Or maybe Attila was simply flattered that he spoke on an equal footing with a man who was revered by the entire Christian world.

The version is interesting, but it was not so easy to delight Attila. He interacted with the Roman emperors and had no special reverence for them. He was an atheist, and the vicar of God on earth was for him the vicar of someone who did not exist, at least for him. It cannot be assumed that the Pope converted him to his faith in ten minutes! .. Attila saw a great man who made a strong impression on him, this is undoubtedly. But one who was humble in hearing was out of the question.

Another option: Leo helped Attila find peace with himself, awakening in him a sense of humanity. It also looks like a miracle. Attila already had glimmers of humanism between two extermination campaigns. There were Troyes, Orleans and Paris, but they did not prevent the Catalaunian fields, and Leo's sermons did not save Augsburg!

According to the French historian, Attila could not have been led to such a decision by his alleged love for the girl Elena, set forth in an Italian legend and not supported by any historical document. Bouvier-Azhan comes to the conclusion of her untruthfulness. The legend tells that in the vicinity of Mantua lived a young Roman woman, beautiful, pious and merciful. Her faith conquered all fears, and she did not leave her home when she learned about the approach of the Huns. Attila was passing by accompanied by an escort and wanted to make a halt and rest a bit. The young girl went out to unexpected guests, invited Attila into the house and began to serve him. Attila was fascinated by her and spoke to the girl. She immediately realized that the emperor of the Huns was in front of her and was surprised at his courtesy.

She told him that she was a Christian and intended to devote her life to the service of the Lord. Her God is kind and merciful, why does he, Attila, bring war, torment and death to people? The emperor, struck by the courage of the girl, replied that he behaves this way only because he is the Scourge of God and must fulfill his destiny. She understood him, his explanation seemed convincing to her, but she said that only the Scourge of God was not yet the Archangel of Death. The girl talked about mercy following revenge, about a humble and happy old age, about the joys of a peaceful life and the rest of a warrior, about a fulfilled destiny. Bouvier-Agent writes: “Attila was delighted. Here the legend begins to diverge: according to one version, Attila seduced a Christian woman who gave herself up, either succumbing to his irresistible charm, or from the spirit of self-sacrifice; according to another, he decided to become a friend of this simple-hearted child and promised her to think, after which he went to sleep alone. In both versions (physical and platonic love), Attila meets her again, allows himself to be convinced, abandons all his plans for her sake and is now looking only for an opportunity to leave without paying off his reputation. And then the Pope - the Pope of the Christian Elena! - asks him to meet with him: the die has already been cast.

Sweet, sweet story. It's all too pretty to be true."

More credible, according to the French historian, deserve explanations of a purely military nature.

And another reason why Attila decided to leave not only the walls of Rome, but also from Italy and Gaul, which he so sought to conquer, could be the deterioration of his health. Here is what Bouvier-Azhan writes about this: “Attila lost his strength and was afraid of the end. Vomiting, headaches, bleeding and fainting. He could no longer play.

He hid his illness, but he knew that soon he would no longer be able to do so. Then why persist? Why try to complete a conquest he would never see the end of, why keep going on and on when he could die along the way? Wouldn't it be wiser to abandon previous plans and devote the rest of the days to strengthening the already created empire in the hope that it will remain strong for many years to come? ... Is it possible, given the above, to explain the departure from Italy by poor health?

Hunnia had little interest in the theological problems of Christianity. Priscus did not notice a special enthusiasm for cults in the headquarters - the capital of Attila.

But the main goal of Leo was to preserve the unity of the Church. He fought the heresy of the Pelagians. But he waged an even more intense war against the Manicheans, who arrived from Africa with the Vandals, and who settled in Rome, and succeeded in establishing the sacraments of the societies of His Holiness (the religious title of Mani). The pope ordered the priests to point out these heretics to the flock, and in 443, together with senators and other officials, he conducted an investigation, during which the leaders of this religious community were identified. In several sermons, he strongly warned the Christians of Rome to take action against this reprehensible heresy, and repeatedly urged them to give information regarding Mani's followers, places of their stops, acquaintances, and meetings.

Many Manicheans in Rome were converted to Christianity and admitted to communion; others who remained rigid were civil judges expelled from Rome in execution of imperial decrees. On January 30, 444, the Pope sent a letter to all the bishops of Italy, in which he added documents containing material against the Manicheans in Rome, and warned them to be vigilant and take action against the followers of this sect. On June 19, 445, Emperor Valentinian III issued, no doubt under the influence of the pope, a strict decree in which he established seven punishments against the Manichaeans. The presbyter of the Aquitanian states in his Chronicle wrote that, as a result of Leo's energetic measures, the Manichaeans were also forced out of these regions, and even the bishops of the East followed the example of the pope in relation to the followers of Mani.

The extreme disorder of the spiritual life of some countries, as a result of the Great Migration of Nations, required closer ties between their episcopate and Rome in order to better promote Orthodox life.
The primacy of the Orthodox Church was also manifested by this pope in the Christological controversies which then so deeply agitated Eastern Christendom, brilliantly showing himself as a wise, knowledgeable and energetic pastor of the Church. From his first letter on this subject, written in 448 to Eutyches and his last letter, to the new Patriarch of Alexandria, Timothy Salofasiolus, in 460, we cannot but admire the clear and systematic way Leo employed to get out of this difficult and confusing situation.

Eutyches (archimandrite of one of the monasteries near Constantinople) turned to the Roman pope after he was excommunicated by Patriarch Flavius ​​of Constantinople, because of his Monophysite views. The Pope, after studying this matter, sent an important letter to Flavius ​​summarizing and confirming the doctrine of the Incarnation, and the union of the divine and human nature in Jesus Christ.
In 449 a Council was held at Ephesus, later named by Leo as "The Robber". Flavius ​​and other prominent prelates of the East turned to the Pope. The latter sent urgent letters to Constantinople, in particular to Emperor Theodosius II and Empress Pulcheria, urging them to convene an Ecumenical Council to restore peace in the Church. For this purpose, he used his influence with the Western Emperor Valentinian III and his mother Placidia, especially during their visit to Rome in 450.
This ecumenical council was held at Chalcedon in 451 under Marcian, the successor of Theodosius. He solemnly accepted Leo's epistle to Flavius ​​as an expression of the Orthodox Faith regarding Jesus Christ. It was in this year that the famous “Battle of the Nations” took place, where mainly two forces of the powerful East (the districts of the future Russia) clashed on the lands of the future France - pro-Western (Aetius) and anti-Western (Attila). They were not fond of debugging religious dogma.

The pope persuaded the new emperor in Constantinople, Leo I, to remove the heretical monophysical patriarch, Timothy, from the see of Alexandria. A new Orthodox patriarch, Timothy Salofasiolus, was chosen to take his place, and received congratulations from the pope in the last letter Leo sent to the East.

Pope Leo died on November 10, 461 and was buried on the eve of St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican. The Catholic Church celebrates the day of St. Leo of the Pope on April 11, and in the Eastern Church it falls on February 18 (old style).

Raphael, along with the “Meeting of Leo I and Attila”, also painted the painting “The Triumph of Philosophy”, mainly dedicated to the Athenian philosophical school.

16th century

The idea of ​​the picture belongs to the Pope of that time - Julius II. The compiler of the picture separated philosophy from religion and assigned a separate temple for it, where the great thinkers of antiquity gathered.
The temple itself resembles Bramante's project and, according to some critics, may have been painted by the artist according to the drawings of this architect.
The central figures were Plato and Aristotle in Greek clothes - calm, solemn, not arguing, but only proving their philosophical positions. Both of them noted the Scythian thinkers and more than once mentioned the Scythians and Scythia in their writings.
Plato and Aristotle are surrounded by many excellent heads, each the fruit of long and hard work: Pythagoras (teacher of Abaris), Democritus, Socrates, Alcibiades, Aristippus, Epicurus, Gallienus, Archimedes, Ptolemy, Hipparchus and others.
Die Schule von Athen. 1. Platon 2. Aristoteles 3. Sokrates 4. Xenophon 5. Aischinos (oder Alkibiades) 6. Alkibiades (oder Alexander) 7. Zeno 8. Epikur 9. Federico Gonzaga 10. Averroes 11. Pythagoras 12. Francesco Maria Della Rovere13. Heraklit 14. Diogenes 15. Euklid (Bramante) 16. Zoroaster (Pietro Bembo?) 17. Ptolemäus 18. Raffael 19. Sodoma (Michelangelo)

Among the unmarked figures, it is quite possible to find the still popular Anacharsis. He was also depicted in Russia.

After the death of Attila, the younger sons (the eldest Ilek was killed) Irnek and Dengizik withdrew the main forces to the lower reaches of the Danube, to the Sea of ​​\u200b\u200bAzov and the Caspian Sea. The territory of the state began to shrink. The Dengizikh dish with Turkic (?) inscriptions was found in the Volga region.

The name of Irnek, as well as other kings of Hunnia, is attested in various spellings: Ernakh (Prisk), Hernak (Jordan), Ernek (Hungarian sources), Irnik (“Namebook of the Bulgarian khans”), and in Armenian sources, he, admittedly, appears under the name of the "King of the Huns" Kheran, which almost coincides with the option of Priscus of Panius - Ernach. The form Ernakh, Kheran is based on the Turkic Eren. Hence the epic - Alp-Eren, which also confirms the deification of historical figures among a number of late antique and early medieval peoples (this is how the Slavs deified Radogost and Prov.
The Armenian historian Yeghishe reported: “... This Kheran ... destroyed the Persian troops in Albania (the territory of present-day Azerbaijan) (in 451) and reached the Greek country (Byzantium) in his raid, and sent many prisoners and booty from Greece and Armenia, and from Iberia, and from Albania. It is also known that Kheran (Eren) was an ally of the Armenians in their struggle against the Sasanian king Yazdegerd II and helped them in 451 to defeat the troops of the Iranian Shah. This was during the lifetime of Attila.

In 460, the Huns of Kheran were on the side of Shah Peroz and against the Albanian king Vache, who had raised an uprising against the Sassanids. Ambazuk was from the royal family. According to Procopius, in 498-518. he owned the Caspian Gates, according to others - the Daryal passage. Under him, the Huns skillfully "traded with Byzantium and Iran", Ambazuk was on friendly terms with the Byzantine emperor Anastasius. “Approaching death, he offered Anastasia to buy a fortress from him, but he refused, not seeing the possibility of maintaining a Byzantine garrison there. When Ambazuk died, the Persian Shah Kavad captured the fortress, expelling Ambazuk’s children from there.

The king (of all?) of the Huns at the beginning of the 6th century was Bolakh (Valach, Volakh; the ononym is known for the oppressors of the Slavs of the Danube), and his wife was the famous Boa-riks, (Berichos) - an ally of Byzantium. According to one version, the residence of the queen was the city of Varachan, where Ullu-Boinak (Ullubiyaul) is now. In the language of the Huns, the name may have sounded: "Berik", "Berik-kiz". N. A. Baskakov gives an etymology from berik (“gift, donation, gift”) + Greek ending. If the Byzantines remembered the name in the Gothic transmission, then it meant - the queen of the Boy (Boya-rix).
Then reigned Ziligd (Zilgivin, Zilgibi), the probable son of Ambazuk.
He, too, was in friendship and alliance with the Byzantine emperor Justinian against the Sassanids. He set up a 26,000-strong Hun army against them. Killed in the war with Kavad.

The name in Byzantine sources is read differently: Ziligd, Zilgivin, Zilgi, Zilgibi. In the original, the name could be Zilgi biy (=3ilgi prince). He bore a similar name in the 9th century. and the king of the Volga Bulgars Silki. Zilgi / Silky meant, perhaps, yylky / zhylky in the meaning of “horse, herd” (Theophan the Confessor, Theophan the Confessor. Chronography // Chichurov I.S. Byzantine Historical Works. M. 1980. P. 49, 50).
The king of the Huns in the first half of the 6th century was also Muager, Muager or Muageris. He became the king of the Huns after the murder of his brother Gorda, a Christian. Subsequently, he himself converted to Christianity. But the Byzantines associated the events of this Christianization with the Bosporus (Azov region), and not with the Caspian region. According to G. Moravchik, the name comes from the Hungarian Moderi, a variant of which is the form Magyar. Yu.Nemeth, calls Mogyeri the king of the Kuban Hunno-Bulgars

Theophanes the Confessor reported about Gorda: “In 527/528, the king of the Huns, who lived near the Bosporus, named Gorda, came to the emperor, became a Christian and was enlightened. The emperor accepted him and, having given him many gifts, sent him to his country to protect the Roman state and the city of the Bosporus. Then, during the hard introduction of Christianity in the Azov region, he was killed.

The Greek lists of the "Chronography" give the readings of Gordas, Hordasd. The etymology of the name - if not from the Slavic Gord, Proud - is not entirely clear. G. Moravchik offers a Turkic-Hungarian etymology from Ogurd - "friend of the ogurs" and Turkic from Kurt - "wolf". There are also Turkic variants from Kardash - "half-brother". But among the multi-ethnic Huns there were already Slavs who gravitated towards Christianity and could well have the nickname Proud. King of the Huns Styrax, an ally of Shah Kavad, in 520 with 12 thousand. the army came out on the side of the Shah, but on the way he was intercepted by the troops of Boariks and defeated in the area now called Manas, Manas (Kumykia). Styrax was shackled and sent in chains to the king in Constantinople. It is believed that the possession of Stirax was located on the territory of the present Buynaksk region, where archaeologists have excavated numerous early medieval settlements and settlements (Fedorov Ya. A. Fedorov G. S. Early Turks in the North Caucasus. M., 1978, p. 184.).

Battle of the Nations

At the end of the 4th century, the Roman Empire, which by that time had disintegrated into Western and Eastern, had a new terrible enemy. These were the Huns - nomads who came from Central Asia. Back in 377, the Huns captured Pannonia (modern Hungary), but they behaved relatively calmly and did not pose a serious danger to Rome. The Romans even used the Hunnic detachments for their military and political purposes. At the beginning of the 440s, the onslaught of the Huns on the Eastern Roman Empire intensified, as the Huns were led by the talented and warlike leader Atilla, who killed his co-ruler brother Bled in 445. Atilla was a born commander. According to legend, once a shepherd found and brought Attila a rusty sword, Attila took the sword in his hands and said: "For a long time this sword was hidden in the ground, and now the sky will grant it to me to conquer all peoples!"

Indeed, the Hunnic alliance under the leadership of Atilla extended its power in the east to the Caucasus, in the west to the Rhine, in the north to the Danish islands, in the south along the right bank of the Danube. In 447, the Huns devastated Thrace and Illyria and reached the outskirts of Constantinople, but the Eastern Roman Empire was able to pay off.

In the early 450s, the Huns invaded the territory of Gaul, plundering and burning everything in their path. The Huns were a mortal danger not only for the Gallo-Romans, but also for the numerous barbarian tribes living in Gaul, on the territory of the Roman Empire. No wonder Attila was called the destroyer of the world. Therefore, a strong coalition was created against the Huns from the Franks, Alans, Amorians, Burgundians, Visigoths, Saxons, military settlers - Lets and Riparians.

Having forced the Eastern Roman Empire to pay a huge annual tribute, Attila began to prepare for an attack on the Western Roman Empire, choosing revenge on the Goths, who were stationed in southern Gaul and partly in Spain, as the reason for the war. Attila gathered an innumerable army, which included Alans, Slavs, Germans, Gepids, Ostrogoths, etc.

In January 451, Atilla's 500,000-strong army set out on a campaign. Following up the Danube, the Huns approached the Rhine and invaded Gaul. Having defeated Worms, Mainz, Trier and Metz, they moved into southern Gaul, where the Goths lived, and laid siege to Orleans. The Goths turned to the Roman general Flavius ​​Aetius for help. Aetius was a talented military leader and had an unusual fate. His father guarded the Danube border of the Roman Empire from the barbarians and was forced to give his son as a hostage to the Huns. Thus Aetius came to know closely their military organization and methods of warfare. Later, he skillfully used the forces of the barbarians against the barbarians, including in the Battle of Catalaun, where he had auxiliary detachments from the Franks, Sarmatians (Alans), Saxons, Burgundians, Amoriadians and Visigoths, led by King Theodoric.

With the help of Aetius, they managed to defend Orleans. Atilla withdrew to the city of Troyes, to the west of which the battle took place in the Catalaunian fields, named after the city of Catalaunam.

Approaching here, the Romans set up a fortified camp in accordance with all the rules, because the most important installation of their military life was the safety of the bivouac. Wherever and for how long the legion stops, it is here. he began to build a camp of logs, protected by a moat and a wall. In the camp, in the once and for all established order, there were gates, a meeting area - a forum, command tents - a praetorium, tents of centurions (centrurions) and foremen (decurions), stalls of horses and other services.

Atilla built his wagons in the form of a circle, inside of which tents were spread.

The barbarian allies settled down without trenches and fortifications. Before the battle, Atilla attracted soothsayers to him, they peered either into the entrails of animals, or into some veins on scraped bones and announced that the Huns were in danger. A small consolation for Atilla was only that the supreme leader of the opposing side was to fall in battle. (Jordan. On the origin and deeds of the Goths. M „ 1960. S. 105.)

Attila chose the plains for battle in order to give his light cavalry freedom of maneuver. He brought the troops to the field quite late - at the third hour of the day. Attila himself stood with the Huns in the center, on his left flank were the Goths, led by their leader Valamir, on the right wing - King Ardarik with the Gepids and other peoples. Apparently, Atilla wanted to rush with the Huns to the Romans and, in case of failure, give time to his weak wings to go on the offensive.

Aetius, at the head of the Romans, was on the left flank, the Visigoths, led by King Theodoric, on the right. The center was occupied by Franks, Alans and other tribes. Aetius intended to cut off Atilla himself from his flanks with his wings.

Between the two armies there was a small elevation, both sides tried to take possession of it. The Huns sent several squadrons there, separating them from the vanguard, and Aetius sent the Visigoth cavalry, which, arriving first, attacked from above and overturned the Huns.

This was a bad omen for the Hunnic army, and Attila tried to inspire his soldiers with the speech that Jordan cites in his work according to the Gothic legend: "... Let's attack the enemy boldly, whoever is braver will always attack. Look with contempt at this mass of diverse peoples who do not agree with each other in anything: whoever counts on someone else's help to protect himself, he exposes his own weakness in front of the whole world ...

So raise your courage and fan your usual ardor. Show your courage properly to the Huns ... I throw the first dart at the enemy, if anyone can remain calm while Attila is fighting, he has already died. I960, p. 106.)

Encouraged by these words, everyone rushed into battle. The battle was fierce and desperate. The half-dry streams that flowed through the valley suddenly swelled from the streams of blood mixed with their waters, and the wounded, quenching their thirst, died instantly. (Ibid., p. 107.)

King Theodoric rode around the troops and encouraged them, but was knocked off his horse and trampled on by his own. According to other accounts, he was killed with a spear. Apparently, this death was predicted by fortune-tellers.

But the Goths of Theodoric defeated the Goths of Attila. Attila rushed to the weak center of the Romans, crushed it, and was already triumphant when Theodoric's Goths crashed into the right side of the Huns, and Aetius turned his wing against them and swooped down on the right. After a fierce struggle, the Huns, squeezed to the right and left, could not stand it and rushed to their camp, while Atilla himself barely escaped. (See. Heroes and battles. M., 1995. S. 52.)

It was one of the bloodiest battles in the history of wars. According to Jordan, 165,000 people died on both sides (Jordan, op. cit. p. 109), according to other sources, 300,000 people. (Stasyulevich M. History of the Middle Ages. St. Petersburg, 1863. P. 322.)

Attila withdrew to his camp and prepared to attack the next day. Sitting behind the wagons, Attila behaved with dignity: the sounds of a trumpet and the noise of weapons were heard from his camp; he seemed ready to strike again. "Like a lion, driven from everywhere by hunters, with a big leap retires to his lair, not daring to rush forward, and with his roar terrifies the surrounding places, so proud Attila, the king of the Huns, among his wagons, terrified his conquerors," Jordan wrote. . (Jordan, op. cit. p. 112.)

But Aetius did not resume hostilities due to the fact that the Goths left him for the funeral of their king. Attila, learning that the Goths had left, ordered the wagons to be laid down and asked Aetius to let him leave freely. Aetius agreed, because he did not dare to start a new battle without allies. Attila was able to leave, but the Huns' campaign ended sadly for them: almost all of the half-million army died.

After the defeat on the Catalaunian fields, the vast and fragile state association of the Huns begins to disintegrate, and soon after the death of Attila (453) it finally collapsed.

The Hunnic danger rallied heterogeneous forces around the Roman Empire for a short time, but after the Catalaunian victory and the reflection of the Hunnic danger, the processes of internal division of the empire intensified. The barbarian kingdoms ceased to reckon with the emperors and pursued an independent policy.

Materials of the book were used: "One Hundred Great Battles", M. "Veche", 2002

Literature

1. Vernadsky G.V. Russian history. Ancient Russia. -Tver-M., 1996. S. 160-162.

2. Military Encyclopedia: In the 8th volume / Ch. ed. comis. P.S. Grachev (prev.). - M., 1995. -T. 3.-S. 508-509.

3. Military encyclopedic lexicon published by the society of military men and writers. - Ed. 2nd. - In the 14th volume - St. Petersburg, 1855. - V.7. - S. 80-81.

4. Heroes and battles. Public military-historical anthology. - M., 1995. S. 45-52.

5. Jordan. On the origin and deeds of the Getae (Goths). - M., 1960. S. 104-109.

6. Marine Atlas / Resp. ed. G.I. Levchenko. -M., 1958. -T.Z.-P.1. - L.2

7. Stasyulevich M.M. And (; thorium of the Middle Ages in its writers and studies of the latest scientists. - St. Petersburg, 1865. - T. 1.-S. 316-329.

8. Tursky G. History of the Franks. - M., 1987. S. 33-35.

9. Encyclopedia of military and naval sciences: In the 8th volume / Under the general. ed. G.A. Leer. - St. Petersburg, 1889. - V.4. - S. 181.