Military Review

"Mysteries" of the Kulikov Field are completely solvable

116



21 September Russia celebrates the Day of Military Glory - the anniversary of the Battle of Kulikovo, which largely determined the fate of the country. In the Battle of Kulikovo Field, held on the feast day of the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos, the united army of the Russian lands, under the leadership of Prince Dmitry Ivanovich, defeated the mixed army of the ruler of the Golden Horde Mamaia.

But, although, according to the apt remark of the historian V. Shavyrin, “books devoted to the Kulikovo battle can be used to lay out the entire field where it happened”, there are still many real mysteries around this historical event.



The easiest way to explain why, if historians claim the battle was 8 September 1380, 21 September is the Day of Military Glory. Recall that in 1380, throughout the Christian world, the chronology was based on the Julian calendar. It is on this calendar that the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary falls on September 8. In 1582, Pope Gregory III introduced a new calendar (called the Gregorian calendar), a leading Julian by 10 days. And with each new century, the gap widened for one more day. And to our time, the Gregorian calendar is ahead of Julian by 13 days.

Russia, however, up to the year 1918 adhered to the former, Julian calendar. Therefore, most of her dates stories period 1582 – 1918 usually translated into "new style" by adding the appropriate number of days. Dates before 1582 are usually not subject to such a transfer.

But it was for the day of the Kulikovo battle that it was decided to make an exception. The fact is that the Russian Orthodox Church still adheres to the Julian calendar, according to which the feast of the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos falls on September 8. According to the Gregorian calendar, on which our country now lives, this day falls on September 21.

However, it was precisely because this battle took place on the day of one of the greatest holidays of Orthodoxy, and this circumstance undoubtedly inspired the courage and valor of the Russian soldiers, and it was decided to establish the holiday date falling on the Orthodox feast of the Nativity of the Most Holy Mother of God. That is, on September 8 in the old style (aka - September 21 in the new).

The following question is much more complicated: so where is the Kulikovo field on which this great battle took place? According to the official version, established in the first half of the XIX century, it is located in the south of the Tula region, at the junction of Kimovsk and Kurkinsk districts. However, this version has long been subjected to very thorough criticism of modern scientists.

The history of its origin tells the military historian Alexander Shirokorad:

“There was a nobleman S.D. Nechaev - the director of the schools of the Tula province, the Tula landowner, a freemason, a Decembrist, a member of the Union of Welfare, a close friend of KF Ryleeva and A.A. Bestuzhev. In June 1820, the governor of Tula V.V. Vasiliev raised the question of the construction of a monument, "which marks the place where Russia was liberated and glorified in the 1380 year."

Needless to say, the place of the battle was found in the land of a rich landowner, SD Nechaev. In 1821, in the journal “Vestnik Evropy” (part 118, No. 14, p. 125-129) Nechaev wrote: “According to historical traditions, the Kulikovo Field was between the rivers Nepryadvoyu, Don and Mechei. Its northern part, adjacent to the confluence of the first two, still retains its ancient name between the inhabitants. ” Further, Nechaev points to the toponyms preserved "in this land" - the village of Kulikovka, the village of Kulikovo, the Kulikovsky ravine, etc. In these places, according to Nechaev, "they plow out the most ancient weapons, bells, swords, spears, arrows, also copper and silver crosses and fold. Before the tiller of the farmer, he also tore off human bones. ” But the author considered “the strongest evidence” (we will note this!) Of his opinion to be “the position of the Green Oak Forest, where an ambush was hidden, which“ decided the bloody Kulikovo battle ”. According to Nechaev, the remnants of the oak trees and now exist in the cottages of the village of Rozhdestven, or Monastyrschiny, "lying on the very mouth of the Nepryadva."

In the book “Mysteries of Ancient Russia” published at the beginning of XNUM-s, the “non-Chaevist” version - and the “official” that has been based on it since then - has been subjected to a scathing revision. The authors of the book, for example, pointed out the following: “The strongest evidence” of Nechaev about the location of “Green Oak Wood” does not stand up to criticism at all. Where did Nechaev take that Green Oakwood is a proper name? Yes, in the monuments of the Kulikovo cycle the “oak grove” or “green oak grove” is mentioned, hiding the ambush regiment of prince Vladimir Serpukhov. So what? In Russia in summer, all the oak trees are green. Where does it come from that the Green Oakwood is a proper name?

The objects found by Nechayev on the Kulikovo Field (where exactly? In what place?) And published by him in the “Vestnik Evropy” in 1821 year, were repeatedly reproduced and continue to be reproduced in various publications devoted to the Kulikovo battle. However, we have never found any comments interpreting these findings (except for the comments of Nechaev himself, who all dates back to the time of the Kulikovo battle).



We turned for help to a well-known archeologist, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Doctor of Historical Sciences AK Stanyukovich with a request to comment on the findings of Nechaev. Here is his interpretation of the finds.

Streletsky berdysh (second half of the XVI – XVII centuries), the tip of the Tatar-Mongolian arrow (“cut”) (XII – XIV centuries), the cross of the body (middle of the XVII century), the cross of the body (XIV – XVI of centuries), the cross body (“degenerate encolpion”) (XV century), cross-enkolpion casement (end of XII - first half of XIII centuries, southern Russia (Kiev?)), icon-enkolpy (XIV century, Novgorod); chest obrazok with the image of St. Fedor Stratelates (XII century.).

As you can see, only 2 from 8 items can be considered a stretch of the time of the Kulikovo battle ...

As for Nechaev’s assertions about some massive discoveries of “ancient weapons” at the place of the Kulikov battle, which he had chosen, no one, even Nechaev, saw these finds, so leave this statement without comment. ”

(AB Shirokorad "The Battle of Kulikovo and the birth of Moscow Rus").

But long before the publication of Shirokorad’s book, and the Mysteries of Russian History, Academician Anatoly Fomenko and his co-author Gleb Nosovsky back in 1993 subjected the “non-Chaevist” official version to the same, if not more valid criticism.

“Having plowed about 25 hectares of land, archaeologists found only something:

- Several arrowheads, which are not necessarily left from the battle and could belong to ordinary hunters.

- One iron ring - perhaps from the chain mail, and maybe not.

“Another one or two small pieces of iron, supposedly parts of heavy armor.” And maybe, at all and not an armor, but plows, for example.

Here, in fact, and all, Similar finds, armed with a good metal detector and having searched the area in 25 ha, can be found almost anywhere in Mother Russia. To do this, it is not necessary to go under Tula, ”- this is how they commented on the results of the archaeological research conducted from the beginning of the 1980-s of the Upper-Don archaeological expedition of the State Historical Museum.

In their recently published work “Where are you, Kulikovo field?” Anatoly and Tatiana Fomenko and Gleb Nosovsky note that the archaeologists themselves who conducted these excavations were fairly discouraged by their results. In the television movie “Ghosts of Kulikovo Field”, which was released on the First Channel 1 in November 2002 (written by Ieva Pozharskaya, directed by Igor Ushakov, hosted by the historian Sergey Ilyin-Kozlovsky and Doctor of Historical Sciences Valery Ivanov-Tagansky on issues of the Kulikov battle, the head of the Center for the History of Ancient Russia of the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, V. A. Kuchkin, and the head of the Upper-Don archaeological expedition of the State Historical Museum on the Kulikovo Field, M. I. Gonyaniy It was noted that “from 26,5 ga Kulikova field passed 25. This full-scale operation of archeologists on the clearing of the Kulikovo field was expressed in four arrowheads, several reliquaries and a fragment of heavy armor. ”

Therefore, archaeologists were even ready to start looking for another place for the Kulikovo battle, but, as noted by Fomenko and Nosovsky, then they probably decided that “transferring the place of the Kulikovo battle is far from harmless to the generally accepted version of Russian history. What if it turns out that the battle was in Moscow, as we say? Then today's familiar picture of Russian history crumbles like a house of cards. If in the XIV century. in place of Moscow there was a clean field where Dmitry Donskoy fought with Mamai, then where was the Russian capital at that time? And why do not the annals say anything about her other location? And is it possible to trust such annals if they even indicate the wrong place of the capital? In fact, all major sources in Russian history are immediately suspicious of late forgery. If you pull this dangerous thread, then the false building of Russian history, created in the eighteenth century. visiting professors-historians from Germany, and still carefully serviced by domestic historians, will not be able to resist. ”

At the same time, Fomenko and Nosovsky themselves do not at all deny the fact of the Kulikovo battle (as, by the way, some Russophobic history revisionists have already begun to do). On the contrary, they believe that "the Kulikovo battle was truly the greatest battle that changed the course of world events and has a huge number of different reflections scattered across the pages of historical textbooks." They offer more detailed information on this issue in their previously published works on new chronology, in particular, “Baptism of Russia”, “Tsar's Rome between the Oka and Volga rivers”, “The Conquest of America by Yermak-Cortes and the Rebellion of the Reformation through the eyes of the“ ancient ”Greeks” .



However, in the book “Where are you, Kulikovo Field?”, They first of all argue in favor of their version that the real Kulikovo battle took place precisely between the modern Moscow River and Yauza, and list its traces in toponymic, cultural and archaeological sources. “There are so many traces of them that in a small book we can’t even cover them all. Therefore, we will tell only about the most vivid traces of the Kulikovo battle in Moscow. For a more detailed exposition, we refer the reader to our books, New Chronology of Rus, Moscow in the Light of New Chronology, and also to the full-color edition Rus. A true story, ”the authors indicate in the preface to their work.

They insist that if one does not adhere blindly to the chronology of Scaliger-Petavius, which has been imposed on mankind in the mass consciousness, the notorious “riddles” of the Kulikov Field are completely solvable.

“In the new chronology there is no prohibition on the fact that in the XIV century. in place of the city of Moscow there was a major battle. For historians (standing on the basis of the mentioned chronology of Scaliger-Petavius. - Approx. KM.RU) there is such a ban. Namely, they believe that the city of Moscow was founded by Prince Yury Dolgoruky back in the twelfth century. n e., and at the beginning of the XIV century. Moscow was already the capital of Russia. It is clear that there could be no major battle on the streets of a big city. They fought always in the open field.

According to the new chronology, the generally accepted dates of the foundation and elevation of the city of Moscow are erroneous. As our research has shown, the present city of Moscow probably arose only at the end of the 14th century, in the epoch of the Kulikovo battle, and then only as a small settlement. This settlement to the XVI century. Moscow was not called. The river on which the city of Moscow stands today is also not called the Moscow River.

Until the sixteenth century, the city on the site of Moscow, apparently, was called Krutitsa. The trace of this old name is the Krutitsky Metropolitan Compound in Moscow. According to our reconstruction, Vladimir-Suzdal Russia was called Moscow until the middle of the XVI century. The capital cities of Vladimir-Suzdal Russia - Yaroslavl, Rostov, Vladimir, Suzdal, Kostroma could also be called by this name. (See the details in our books "New Chronology of Rus", "Russia and the Horde", "Russia and Rome", "Moscow in the Light of the New Chronology".)

Therefore, according to the new chronology, it is not surprising that at the end of the XIV century, when there was still a clean field and virgin forests in place of Moscow, the greatest battle of Russian and world history took place here. Maybe it was thanks to the Kulikov battle that the Russian capital, the city of Moscow, was subsequently formed here, ”Fomenko and Nosovsky explained their theory.

They also point out: “Our thought is indirectly confirmed in the next old Moscow tradition. The famous historian of Moscow I.E. Zabelin wrote that when at the beginning of the sixteenth century. they began to say that Moscow is the Third Rome, “there was a need to prove that the Third Rome is Moscow and in its beginning does not move away from its two fellows (i.e. the first two Romes. - Auth.), exactly BASED ON THE BLOOD PROLIGATION. ” The opinion of our ancestors that Moscow stands on blood was not a political invention. It was true. The city of Moscow, as we now understand, has arisen on the site of the cruelest Kulikovo battle. That is, in the full sense, on the blood ... But there were too many remains. A part still lies in Moscow land - on Kulishki, in the old Moscow monasteries of Staro-Simonov and Andronikov. There are huge mass graves of the fallen on the field Kulikovo. ”

In support of his hypothesis, Fomenko and Nosovsky recall that some chronicles directly indicate that KULIKOVO FIELD WAS IN MOSCOW. For example, the well-known chronicler of Arkhangelsk, describing the meeting of the icon of the Vladimir Mother of God in Moscow during Timur's invasion, says: August, on 26 day. ”

The mentioned church stands, as is known, on Sretenka. And not far from Sretenka in Moscow there is a place, still known under its ancient name "KULISHKI".

The opinion that the Moscow toponym "Kulishki" is closely connected with the Kulikovo field existed in Moscow at least until the 19th century. For example, the collection “Old Moscow”, published by the Commission for the Study of Old Moscow under the Imperial Moscow Archeological Society, mentions the alleged “wrong assumption” that existed in Moscow that Moscow’s “Kulishki originated from Kulikov or Kulikov Field”. It also noted that "Kulishki existed before Moscow."

It is on Kulishki that the Church of All Saints stands, which, “according to the old legend, was built by Dmitry Donskoy in memory of soldiers killed on the Kulikovo Field”.

Moscow Kulishki also captured the area of ​​the Pokrovsky Gate, which had 3 – 4 centuries ago and the second name - Kulishsky. “According to our research, it was in this place of Moscow that the famous battle of Kulikovo took place,” claim Fomenko and Nosovsky.

At the same time, they provide a voluminous list of toponymy - the names of the Gatei, fords, hills and localities, which are known from the chronicles and tales of the Kulikovo battle, and correspond precisely to Moscow Kulishki. Red Hill, Kuzmina Gat, the Chur River on Mikhailov, etc., which are not on the Tula Kulikovo Field, Fomenko and Nosovsky easily point on the map of modern Moscow. As well as the Silent and Rapid Pines - the river, where, according to the chronicles, were Russian patrols. Such rivers really exist - but in the Belgorod region, more than 150 versts from “Kulikovo Pole”. In Moscow, Fomenko and Nosovsky point to the Sosnovka River, which flows north and south of Kulishek.

There are no similar toponymic coincidences on the Tula Kulikovo field. Yes, in fact, they can not be, because even according to official data, permanent settlements in those regions appeared only at the end of the XVI - beginning of the XVII centuries.

Even the names of rivers (as is well known, these toponyms are usually the most ancient and store elements of the languages ​​of long-disappeared peoples) are also clearly not in favor of the official version. The name of the Don River itself, noted Fomenko and Nosovsky, does not necessarily have to be associated exclusively with the modern Don. For example, M. Fasmer's Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language reports that for many centuries the words “Don” and “Danube” in Indo-European languages ​​meant a river in general.

E.P. Savelyev writes: “The names of the rivers and in general the waters“ don ”,“ tone ”,“ dan ”,“ tun ”,“ dun ”are very ancient, found on the threshold of the history of Aryan peoples throughout Europe and Western Asia and have been kept until now in one language, the Ossetians ... The mouths of the rivers bore the common name “Donye”, “Tonya” or “Tone”, which so far have been held in many places of the Slavic lands, like, for example, among us and the Serbs.

“Saveliev is absolutely right that in“ antiquity ”the word“ don ”meant any river. But, following the incorrect chronology of Scaliger, he believes that “antiquity” had already ended several thousand years ago, long before the Battle of Kulikovo. This is not true, ”clarify Fomenko and Nosovsky.



“By the way, the modern river Don was called“ The Quiet Don ”, i.e.“ The River Tikhaya ”. Moreover, “Zadonshchina” in some places quite clearly means the Moscow River when it talks about the Don River. For example, the princess, “Marya, early in the morning, was crying on the visors of the Moscow walls, lamenting:“ O Don, fast river ... bring on my waves my Mr. Mikula Vasilyevich to me. ” But if the princess’s request to bring the body of the deceased prince straight to the MOSCOW WALLS - on which she stands - is facing the Don River, then it means DON STROKE THROUGH MOSCOW. What river flows through Moscow? That's right, the Moscow River. Thus, our idea that the Moscow River is named Don here receives direct confirmation of the original source, ”concluded Fomenko and Nosovsky.

The same thing with Nepravdva. In the Geographical Description of the Russian Empire, published by Moscow University in 1776, its author, Khariton Chebotarev, lists in detail all the rivers that flow into the Don, but Naryadvaya is not among them. And suddenly, after half a century, it turns out that she "is": it turns out that she flows through the possessions of landowner Nechaev! It is quite reasonable to assume that if this landowner added even a flintlock and cannonballs to the "finds" on the site of the Kulikovo battle, then it would cost him nothing to say implicitly to the little river in his estate.

Meanwhile, Fomenko and Nosovsky prove in detail that the real river, today called Yauza, fully corresponds to the chronicle Nepryadva. And in the interfluve of the Moskva River and the Yauza just Kulishki are located.

“Let us reveal, for example, the Facial Chronicle - an extensive, richly illustrated chronicle belonging to the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Russian kings. It clearly shows there that Dmitry Donskoy fought with Mamai in the mouth of the Nepryadva, right on the arrow of two rivers. Can we indicate the river Nepryadvu in Moscow? Yes we can.

From the comparisons of the Kulikov and Moscow names we have already made above, it follows that Nepryadva, which, according to the chronicles, flowed right across the battlefield, should correspond to the Moscow river Yauza. In this case, there is simply an ideal correspondence between the chronicle geography of the Kulikovo battle and the true geography of Moscow Kulisek. There is nothing of the kind on the Nechayevsky Kulikovo Field, ”emphasize Fomenko and Nosovsky.

“The slopes of the hills surrounding the Yauza-Nepryadva estuary from all sides, when approaching the mouth, become very sloping and gradually turn into a vast field between Yauza and the Moskva River. This is Moscow Kulishki. BUT IT IS AS DESCRIBED AND KULIKOVO FIELD IN THE FACIAL SECRETARIUM RECORD: “... and stash on the Kulikovo field, on the mouth of the Nepryadva-river. But this field is great and pure, and the debasement is great in the hands of the Constant. ” Let's pay attention to one more interesting detail.

The Chronicle reports that Mamai's troops descending from a high hill on Kulikovo Field were VERY CLOSELY at the entrance to the battlefield. So crowded that for some time they were even forced to stand still, since "they had no place to part." How can this be explained? On the Nechayevsky “Kulikovo Field” - ANYTHING.

There are neither hills, nor sufficiently deep rivers, nor any other obstacles at the entrance to the battlefield. But if Nepryadva is Yauza, then it could not be otherwise. Just look at Kulishki. The troops of Mamaia simply could not help but be shy in the small space between Yauza and the foot of the Red (Tagansky) hill, before all the soldiers could cross the bridges over Yauza to Kulishki - Kulikovo Field. And again we see the perfect correspondence between the chronicle description of the Kulikovo field at the mouth of the Nepryadva and the Moscow Kulishki at the mouth of the Yauza - cooperation that goes to the smallest details. ”

Help
A.Fomenko and G.Nosovskiy according to the results of their research come to the conclusion that the soldiers who fell in the Kulikovo battle were buried on Kulishki, in the Staro-Simonov and Andronikov monasteries, where there are indeed traces of mass graves. Meanwhile, in the area of ​​the "Nechaevsky" Kulikov field of the traces of burial tens of thousands of dead were not found. Moreover, as noted by Fomenko and Nosovsky, even if the Russians took the remains of their warriors to bury in their native land (although there were no such customs, and therefore this is unlikely), then where did the bodies of thousands of dead Horde go?
Author:
Originator:
http://science.km.ru
116 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Boris55
    Boris55 21 September 2013 08: 09
    14
    In all the pictures, except for the first one, on the banners the face of the "savior" ... So they won ...
    About the "Tatar-Mongol yoke" -
    ... 70-80% of the army of the "Tatar-Mongols" were Russians, the remaining 20-30% were in other small nations of Russia, in fact, as now. This fact clearly confirms a fragment of the icon of St. Sergius of Radonezh, “Battle of Kulikovo”. It clearly shows that the same warriors are fighting on both sides. And this battle is more like a civil war than a war against a foreign conqueror ...
    http://213.141.140.103/page.php?id=239
    1. xetai9977
      xetai9977 21 September 2013 08: 45
      +6
      Very strange. There are known places of battles that took place long before the Battle of Kulikovo, for example, the Battle of Kadesh in 1274. BC. or the campaign of Alexander the Great. Recently specified the place where in the year 9 A.D. Arminius defeated the Romans. And the place of the Kulikovo battle, which by historical standards took place not very long ago, is not exactly known ....
      1. Rink
        Rink 22 September 2013 01: 58
        0
        Quote: xetai9977
        Very strange. There are known places of battles that took place long before the Battle of Kulikovo, for example, the Battle of Kadesh in 1274. BC. or the campaign of Alexander the Great. Recently specified the place where in the year 9 A.D. Arminius defeated the Romans. ...

        Oh?
        The site of the Battle of Kulikovo recently was also considered to be known for certain. Maybe if you throw it with an unsurpassed eye, and dig deeper, then what will come to light with the battle of Kadesh?

        Most importantly, I realized: there should be no dogma in history, and there are no 100% reliable theories. All that is is based on known to the current time information. They are considered true only until new data emerges.

        As, for example, it was in physics.
        By the end of the 19th century, official science believed that everything that could be discovered was open and investigated, and physics as a whole was studied ALL, you can put an end to it and publish a textbook in gold binding. And then Einstein came ... Someone (I don’t remember who) even wrote a poem about this:

        "This world was shrouded in deep darkness.
        - Let there be light! And Newton appeared.
        But Satan did not wait long for a revenge:
        Einstein came, and everything became as before ... "

        Physicists survived their revolution and adopted a new theory. And where to go? It’s stupid to argue against what you can’t argue with, if the theory is supported by facts.
        Historians seem to have just come to this point. They have yet to comprehend the new information and throw away their old books.
        1. Alex
          Alex 28 January 2014 22: 31
          +1
          Quote: Skating rink
          Most importantly, I realized: there should be no dogma in history, and there are no 100% reliable theories. All that is is based on information known to date. They are considered true only until new data emerges.
          Well, this applies to any science. If she is a science, of course.

          As, for example, it was in physics.
          By the end of the 19 century, official science believed that everything that can be discovered is openly and investigated, and physics as a whole has been studied EVERYTHING, you can put an end to and publish a textbook in gold binding.
          Not all physicists thought so. Well, the opinion of some narcissistic scientists (by the way, the British) is not the ultimate truth.

          And then Einstein came ...
          Actually, not Einstein, but Planck. Which quanta suggested.
          By the way, quantum mechanics does not in any way exclude the classical one. It significantly expands and complements it in the area of ​​high speeds and energies and infinitesimal masses, i.e. describes the world of elementary particles. As for the "new chronology of Fomenko-Nosovsky", then she totally rejects everything except herself. And to substantiate their ravings, they, without any effort, throw shit on well-established methods of dating events, the radiocarbon method of analysis in particular (just don’t have to cry out on this issue, there are no "monstrous errors" there and never have been).
      2. Geisenberg
        Geisenberg 22 September 2013 02: 43
        0
        Quote: xetai9977
        Very strange. There are known places of battles that took place long before the Battle of Kulikovo, for example, the Battle of Kadesh in 1274. BC. or the campaign of Alexander the Great. Recently specified the place where in the year 9 A.D. Arminius defeated the Romans. And the place of the Kulikovo battle, which by historical standards took place not very long ago, is not exactly known ....


        The facts you mentioned have a clear reference to the object, one way or another preserved to our days. pass of a power saw for example. the field is very vague. the pies are big and small, with the fields there is even a place where I live. I can also say that the Kulikovo battle was here. It is, in fact, part of the Tatar rampart. fields, as you know, there are countless. in confirmation I will give the tips of copies of a suitable age. so the author may well be right. an assumption is made here and it is in good agreement with the facts. bold assumption. that’s all.
    2. ROA
      ROA 21 September 2013 11: 19
      -8
      Excuse me, where are the Russians from the Tatar-Mongol? All Russian lands rose to this battle with the conqueror.
      1. Vasilenko Vladimir
        Vasilenko Vladimir 21 September 2013 14: 41
        16
        Quote: ROA
        Excuse me, where are the Russians from the Tatar-Mongol?

        probably from the same place where the Tatars in the army of Alexander Nevsky
      2. avdkrd
        avdkrd 21 September 2013 22: 42
        +7
        Tatar-Mongols is, in principle, a collective term of not entirely clear origin. Of course, such a name for the Horde flatter both the Tatars and the Mongols, but it hardly reflects the true state of affairs. Genghis Khan, according to the descriptions, had European facial features and in general the Horde was not a mono-national state, not even a state, but rather a militarized structure based on the economy of the controlled territories (tribute, etc.). By definition, the Horde could not be a full-fledged state, since it did not have most of the attributes of a state. The military component was not represented by the "Tatar-Mongols", although both were there unequivocally, now it is difficult to say, but the Russian squads were not less represented there, but rather even constituted the main backbone. According to the latest genetic studies, Russians have an insignificant number carriers of Mongoloid genes, which is somehow difficult to combine with the stereotype of a two hundred year old yoke. It is impossible to say for sure, but there is some truth in the fact that the so-called liberation from the yoke is no more than a cover for more prosaic separatism, and the ORDA as a whole at that time was a system of government and did not carry any national motive, although it had centralized power outside the area of ​​ancient Russia in our modern understanding. The reign labels that the princes of that time received in the Horde were not considered humiliation and were taken for granted. The Horde, by and large, ruled not a single Rus, but a certain number of principalities and quasi states, while management was limited to collecting taxes (tribute) and providing military protection. This does not diminish the significance of the Battle of Kulikovo, especially since it created the preconditions for the formation of a new center of power, which united all Russian lands and became Moscow Russia, and later Russia.
        1. Rex
          Rex 22 September 2013 18: 39
          0
          Quote: avdkrd
          .Russian according to recent genetic studies have an insignificant number of carriers of Mongoloid genes, which is somehow difficult to combine with the stereotype of a two hundred year old yoke. .


          Familiar doctors of one maternity hospital in the Volga region even 10 years ago, in a private conversation, questioned this fact. supposedly, newborns with Mongoloid genes in the first days of life should have "Mongoloid spots", later disappearing (even if there are no other signs in their appearance), and they do not come across this very often - even among "passport" Tatars.

          On the whole, right up to the 17th century, the accuracy of data on many battles (the number of troops, the duration, losses, etc.) is doubtful.
          Moreover, these data are often based on one written source and do not have sufficient archaeological evidence.
    3. alexpro66
      alexpro66 21 September 2013 15: 22
      -6
      Rave!!! Do not read such articles on an empty stomach !! Re-read Fomenko, it will be more useful!
      1. pavlo
        pavlo 22 September 2013 00: 33
        +1
        All the tales of the Tatar-Mongols came up with this fucking Europe!
      2. Alex
        Alex 28 January 2014 22: 36
        +1
        Quote: alexpro66
        Reread Fomenko Better
        Not better. Is that in the section "Why not" or "Alternative history".
    4. Yemelya
      Yemelya 21 September 2013 17: 12
      +7
      Quote: Boris55
      This fact clearly confirms a fragment of the icon of St. Sergius of Radonezh, “Battle of Kulikovo”. It clearly shows that the same warriors are fighting on both sides.


      Firstly, the icon painter could simply draw the armor, which he saw more often, without going into details of the equipment.

      Secondly, the equipment of the Mongols of the feudal era could be similar to the equipment of the Russians.

      Russian soldiers could indeed be in the ranks of the army of Mamaia.
      1. SlavaP
        SlavaP 21 September 2013 23: 20
        +5
        I agree. In medieval paintings on a biblical theme, the patriarchs were dressed in the latest fashion of the time, and Yeshua Ben-Nun's warriors were dressed in chain mail, shishaks and with knightly spears.
    5. Mairos
      Mairos 21 September 2013 18: 33
      0
      Oh how everything is running !! Kulikovo field in Moscow and Mamai had 80% of the Russian army. What do we smoke?
      1. avdkrd
        avdkrd 21 September 2013 22: 50
        +9
        at the expense of 80% - not a fact, but the princedoms loyal to the Horde (and there were a majority of them) were unambiguously represented in the army of Mamaia by their squads. At the same time, operating in terms of the time, they were not traitors, since there was no single Russia at that time, but, on the contrary, fulfilled their duty. The claims of Dmitry Donskoy at that time were not unambiguously perceived by his colleagues in the workshop (other princes), and a single state that had become Moscow Russia had not yet found a concept.
        1. Mairos
          Mairos 22 September 2013 10: 58
          +2
          The Ryazan prince was for Mamai, but did not participate in the battle .. and that’s it. Count how many princes were with Dmitry
          1. Yemelya
            Yemelya 22 September 2013 11: 21
            0
            Quote: Mairos
            The Ryazan prince was for Mamai, but did not participate in the battle .. and that’s it. Count how many princes were with Dmitry


            Open "Zadonshchina", and read the list of losses of Dmitry's troops.

            Ryazan boyars died most of all.
  2. My address
    My address 21 September 2013 08: 44
    11
    Your will, but I prefer the theory of Fomenko-Nosovsky (although their excesses are awesome - like Moscow is ancient Jerusalem). She explains some things. A classic story only presents with a haughty face and is meaningfully silent when asked.
    1. Setrac
      Setrac 21 September 2013 18: 16
      +4
      Quote: My address
      Your Olya, but I prefer the Fomenko-Nosovsky theory (although they have awesome bends - such as Moscow is ancient Jerusalem)

      Well, modern Jerusalem is just a fake, so where is that ancient Jerusalem? At the same time in Moscow there is an old monastery of the same name.
      1. Sibiryak
        Sibiryak 22 September 2013 10: 14
        +3
        Quote: Setrac
        Well, modern Jerusalem is just a fake, so where is that ancient Jerusalem?

        I think its modern name istanbul!
    2. Alex
      Alex 28 January 2014 22: 40
      +1
      Quote: My address
      Fomenko-Nosovsky theory (although they have awesome bends - such as Moscow is ancient Jerusalem)
      That's what, they and Ancient Egypt moved in the Middle Ages. They proved it with the example of some kind of horoscope.
  3. Pashhenko Nikolay
    Pashhenko Nikolay 21 September 2013 09: 55
    +4
    Quote: Boris55
    . This fact clearly confirms a fragment of the icon of St. Sergius of Radonezh, “Battle of Kulikovo”. It clearly shows that the same warriors are fighting on both sides

    Do you really think that the icon painter was present at the Battle of Kulikovo and saw the faces of the soldiers?
    1. picnic
      picnic 21 September 2013 10: 31
      0
      He lived at that time. And for contemporaries (at all times), naturally, the forces of the parties are well known.
      1. jasper
        jasper 21 September 2013 15: 00
        0
        Once worn on the Internet.

        Ivan Kalita cast a frown at the high congregation and coughed:

        - Gentlemen, I gathered you here to discuss one very unpleasant
        business. Someone, take horsemeat from Baty Dzhuchievich! Baty Dzhuchievich, well
        it’s impossible! And it’s not necessary to immediately grab a saber! Yes i'm in
        to some extent a vassal of your house. Why "some"? Because in a different measure
        in three hundred years your house will be my vassal. Yes, and please sit down
        dear Moshe and Salah ad-Din, may there finally be peace with both of them !!! So,
        let's start. As you all can easily see, I have collected outstanding
        statesmen of different eras and nations ... And Big Hairy Wu,
        Of course, dear Wu, no need to wave a club ... I gathered you, yes ... Hmm,
        respected Big Wu knocked me a little. Perhaps lately you all
        you feel some inconvenience ... Well, for example, they have attacks on you
        uncontrollable sneezing. Yes, Big Woo, just that. The whole body itches ... And not
        We must point a finger at our respected Horde comrades! Of course they are not
        wash, this is a custom, but so far it has not bothered them. The main reason for these
        unpleasant phenomena, as well as comets, meteorites, the displacement of stars and other
        the signs that our esteemed astrologers observe are one man. Dima,
        Vanya, please enter the accused.

        Donskoy and Grozny dragged into the room a small man in strange glasses on
        nose. Terrible, looking furtively, from time to time poked a man sharp
        end of the staff, and Donskoy pinched his mouth.

        Heroes and rulers approached the bound.

        “And is it because of him that my head hurts all the time?” - Alexander Nevsky poked
        little man with a boot.
        - Actually, not so much because of him, but because of what he writes, -
        corrected Kalita.
        “And what does he write this?”
        - Sasha, only you give this sword first?
        - Why is this? - Nevsky squinted suspiciously.
        - Well, what the hell do you not believe in a descendant? Come on here.

        Alexander shrugged and unfastened a huge German bastard sword from his belt.

        “Oh, just don't drop it.”

        Kalita took the sword, took a deep breath ...

        - And he writes, Sasha, that you are not you, but Khan Berke!

        Nevsky sat on the floor, smiling stupidly.

        “Vanya, what are you saying! Look at me, what kind of Berke am I?
        Berke Dzhuchievich - he’s standing there. Tolstoy such. I'm thin. And generally, he
        Mongol, and I am Russian, he is a khan, and I am a prince. I told him, if you want to know, I paid a tribute!
        And he went to the Horde!
      2. Alex
        Alex 28 January 2014 22: 45
        +1
        Quote: Picnic
        He lived at that time.
        Right? And the author’s signature and the year of writing are affixed to the icon?
        Ackte! Most of the icons were painted decades after the events described (and then only if they were canonized, and this time is needed) according to the canons adopted in icon painting, and not according to eyewitness accounts. Otherwise, Jesus would not have been on them in each of the churches (structures, not buildings) with his own national features (among the Armenians, he definitely has the ending "-yan").
    2. Boris55
      Boris55 21 September 2013 11: 36
      -3
      Quote: Pashhenko Nikolay
      Do you really think that the icon painter was present at the Battle of Kulikovo and saw the faces of the soldiers?

      In my opinion, there was a civil war based on religion.
      Orthodox - glorifying the right, fought with Christianity - with the religion of slaves.

      Perhaps you will be interested in this video: "Baptism. Truth and Fiction".
      http://213.141.140.103/catalog.php?cat=10

      and further:

      RUSSIAN FEDERATION
      THE FEDERAL LAW
      ON FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE AND ON RELIGIOUS ASSOCIATIONS
      ... recognizing the special role Orthodoxy in the history of Russia, in the formation and development of its spirituality and culture,
       respecting Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism and other religions that are an integral part of the historical heritage of the peoples of Russia ...

      When reading this, do not skip commas ...
      1. jasper
        jasper 21 September 2013 15: 01
        0
        The thick khan nodded according to:

        - Yakshi, I drove! Koumiss drank, brought a good funeral! Good conaz!
        - Yeah, good one! Why did you poison me?
        “So this is politics,” the khan sighed.
        - You see, Vanya, I and Khan Berke - we are completely different. And you induce sedition!
        “It's not me who leads,” Kalita answered frowningly. - This is he, paskuda, leads. Yes and
        It turns out that Berke is not Burke at all, but Louis of Bavaria!

        Louis, peacefully pouring beer into the khan's cup, started and dropped the barrel.

        “Is that how it is, Louis?” Sorry, he’s mungal, but I’m German! - he shook
        a keg.
        “What are you asking me?” You ask him!

        Statesmen surrounded the little man. He hunted around baited, furiously
        gleaming glasses.

        - Oh, you, ste-e-eklyshki fastened. - Terrible pulled off a man’s nose glasses and
        slowly crushed them in a fist. - And about me, the Tsar of Grozny, you stinking dog,
        what did you write?
        “But you weren’t at all!” - screamed a little man. - You are not a king, but
        Simeon Bekbulatovich, he is St. Basil! And you are Tsarevich Dimitri!
        “A small bug, but smelly,” the emperor marveled. - This is what happens, I'm a friend
        with Simeonka from the holy fool Dimitry survived but he himself turned out to be?
        - Vanya, you slow down, I don’t understand anything. - Don made fingers
        this way and that, trying to imagine the genealogical tree of the descendant.
        -
        1. Vasilenko Vladimir
          Vasilenko Vladimir 21 September 2013 15: 17
          +4
          in order to destroy a theory it is necessary to deride it, one does not need to prove that it is partially or completely erroneous, it is enough to make it funny and ridiculous.
          it doesn’t matter that the feast is that the new theory is trying to refute an even more ridiculous story
      2. Flooding
        Flooding 21 September 2013 16: 29
        +1
        Quote: Boris55
        In my opinion, there was a civil war based on religion.
        Orthodox - glorifying the right, fought with Christianity - with the religion of slaves.

        Read the forum rules. Then for you, perhaps, the ban will not come as a surprise.
      3. Alex
        Alex 28 January 2014 22: 48
        +1
        Quote: Boris55
        In my opinion, there was a civil war based on religion.
        Orthodox - glorifying the right, fought with Christianity - with the religion of slaves.
        Either I don't understand something, or Orthodoxy is one of the directions of Christianity. The prodigious expression seems to me something like "the Russians fought against the Slavs." Nonsense, and nothing more.
        Reading this do not skip commas...
        What and you want.
    3. Tatanka Yotanka
      Tatanka Yotanka 21 September 2013 14: 26
      +9
      Quote: Pashhenko Nikolay
      Do you really think that the icon painter was present at the Battle of Kulikovo and saw the faces of the soldiers?


      you think it is necessary to see faces, even children can schematically reflect the image of the enemy with the corresponding signs and attributes, not talking about professional artists of that time - people of very scientists, respected and sophisticated in the visual arts, moreover, I doubt that a meaningful battle scene was written by one seedy monk, as a rule, they are written in large workshops with the advice and reviews of other masters, and with blessings before and after work, high clergy
      Based on my opinion, I conclude that what is written on the icon corresponds to the real vision of events
      1. jasper
        jasper 21 September 2013 15: 02
        0
        “But there is nothing to understand here,” Grozny grimly scoffed, weighing the staff on his hand. -
        Come on, brothers sovereigns, step aside, here the swing is necessary.
        “Uh, no, little child, wait a minute,” Nevsky squatted down in front of the bound man. -
        This is already interesting. Let us still try it. Well, what else can you say, barker? Here
        about him, let’s say, you know the Genoese? - Nevsky poked a hand in the direction of the thin uncle
        in an Italian costume.
        - This is the so-called Christopher Columbus! - the little man chattered, - allegedly opened
        America! Although in fact he didn’t open anything, because he didn’t
        Columbus, and Noah.
        - Madonna mia! - the Italian grabbed his heart.
        - You wait, what Noah? Is that a pair of every creature? -
        Nevsky grinned incredulously
        - He is! Only he was still a crusader at the court of the Jared Horde and with her
        conquered America.
        - What a Jared horde! - Burke indignantly pushed the belly of the princes and panting
        leaned over the impudent. - This is whose ulus horde? It wasn’t like that, I’m like
        Genghiside I say!

        - What strange entertainments these western and northern barbarians have, -
        the narrow-eyed man in a yellow coat gruffed contemptuously. - Truly, strangeness
        they are second only to their kitchen.
        “And then, Shihuandyushka, we don’t eat cockroaches,” Kalita answered sarcastically. - Yes
        only you, too, were unlucky - and they wrote about you. Hehe.
        - And what did this barbarian who does not know hieroglyphs write about me - arrogantly
        asked Qing Shi Huangdi.
        “Nothing,” Ivan answered gloatingly. - I didn’t have you. And there was no China.
        - But what happened? - Qing Shi Huangdi dropped the jasper seal.
        - And there was just an ulus of our Russian Horde. Christian. And in general, China is
        Russian word!
        “So we never called ourselves China!” - the Emperor protested. - It is you
        there, in the West, you call us that!
        - Sure sure! All the books were collected and burned. You are generally from Russian Cossacks
        come on! - connected the little man. - Braids, braids are Cossack forelocks!
        That's why your comets hurt to fly often! And you weren’t at all!
        - But what is it! I built a wall! Great!
        - And the wall was built only in the 16 century, when you got away from the Horde!
        - And my tomb with a clay army? !!
        - And this is generally under Mao Tse-tung all falsified! Only where do you mind
        mathematics !!!
      2. Yemelya
        Yemelya 21 September 2013 17: 19
        +8
        Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
        , even children can schematically reflect the image of the enemy with the corresponding signs and attributes


        Children have films and books before their eyes.

        Look at the European miniatures about the Crusades, there are opponents in the same armor.

        Siege of Jerusalem:
        1. Tatanka Yotanka
          Tatanka Yotanka 21 September 2013 22: 00
          +1
          Quote: Emelya
          Children have films and books before their eyes.

          do you think children on books display events better than those who have these events before their eyes
          Quote: Emelya
          Siege of Jerusalem:

          the picture is clearly episodic, not reflecting the scale of events, perhaps from some large canvas or map, where weapon-bows, arrows, swords, spears, banners, coats of arms and clothes are the same, maybe the artist showed that these friends put tents outside the city and call plump comrades, perhaps your artist sitting in some sort of Paris heard after 5-10 years about Jerusalem and without going into details of the image of any Arabs prayed with words
          Quote: Emelya
          Look at the European miniatures about the Crusades, there are opponents in the same armor.


          and then the artist clearly knew whom he was drawing
          1. Yemelya
            Yemelya 21 September 2013 23: 07
            +2
            Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
            do you think children on books display events better than those who have these events before their eyes


            The icon painter worked as a war correspondent, or what?

            Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
            Your artist, sitting in some sort of Paris, heard after 5-10 years about Jerusalem and without going into details of the image of any Arabs prayed with words


            Thats exactly what I mean.

            Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
            and then the artist clearly knew whom he was drawing


            In the miniature you brought, the Saracens and the full chain mail of the European type wave the European straight double-edged swords. They have the same size as knights and are covered with blankets with coats of arms in a European manner.
            1. Tatanka Yotanka
              Tatanka Yotanka 22 September 2013 09: 40
              0
              Quote: Emelya
              The icon painter worked as a war correspondent, or what?

              it is quite possible, maybe he fought in the front ranks, and then went to the monks to draw service people when almost all the states and principalities at that time were at war or feudal and princely skirmishes did not constitute a problem, now she’s a prince’s squad on the neighboring lives on the street, on the towers are observers. at the gates, you can go up and ask what and how it was, this is the topic of a war correspondent
              Quote: Emelya
              On the thumbnail of the Saracens you have given

              how did you guess? it means that there are still differences, only on the icon there are absolutely no differences, moreover, both sides are fighting under the banners of Christ, from here we make a logical conclusion, we fight with the Tatar-Mongols
              1. Yemelya
                Yemelya 22 September 2013 11: 35
                +2
                Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
                it is quite possible, maybe he fought in the forefront, and then went to the monks


                In this case, I would draw correctly.

                Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
                at the gates, you can go up and ask what and how it was, this is the topic of a war correspondent


                And did he need it?

                Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
                how did you guess? then there are differences

                In this case, the painter heard about the turban; therefore, he painted, leaving the other details unchanged.
                Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
                only on the icon there are absolutely no differences

                And here the icon painter did not know the details of the uniform.
                1. Tatanka Yotanka
                  Tatanka Yotanka 22 September 2013 14: 37
                  0
                  Quote: Emelya
                  In this case, I would draw correctly.

                  and why on earth is wrong, maybe this is right
                  Quote: Emelya
                  And did he need it?

                  the question is absurd, you are interested in what is happening in the country and around the borders, there were no TVs and correspondents, and people were interested in what and how, people are going to battle, then Tokhtamysh comes up to Moscow, firing, and no one cares?
                  Quote: Emelya
                  And here the icon painter did not know the details of the uniform.

                  I strongly disagree, they lived almost side by side with the wild field, constant wars, skirmishes, prisoners, 300 years of the official yoke, ambassadors, shortcuts to reigns, tribute gatherings, merchants, commerce, Basques with guards, the only enemy in the south and east at the borders, I knew everything thoroughly, just did not see the slanting Mongols on low horses and camels in furry hats, otherwise I would capture
      3. Alex
        Alex 28 January 2014 22: 55
        +1
        Quote: Tatanka Yotanka

        Key phrase with which I completely agree:
        besides with blessings before and after work, high clergy
        And that which does not fit into the vision of the holy face will never fall on the icon.

        Well, about this inimitable drawing. The devil, as you know, hides in details. What tanks are the Germans fighting on? Why are all Soviet planes (except one) jet? What machines do the opponents have? Seems to be the same? You know, drawing conclusions on the basis of this kind of "documents", you can even surpass Fomenko-Nosovsky.
  4. avt
    avt 21 September 2013 10: 12
    +8
    Quote: My address
    Your will, but I prefer the Fomenko-Nosovsky theory (although they have awesome bends - such as Moscow is ancient Jerusalem).

    Yes, but old Muscovites, whom I found in my early childhood, always called the Church of All Saints on Blood. Again, Oslyabya and Peresvet were buried nearby - at Avtozavodskaya near the monastery in a separate church at the Dynamo plant. The question is - why weren't they taken to Trinity to Sergius? Well, if, as was said, the army stood for three days - they buried the dead, then everything falls into place. And Donskoy went to Kostroma to heal his wounds and rest. What is it that a wounded man has started such cruises from the capital? Well, since Moscow was not really the capital at that time, and the center was Rostov the Great, later its Kremlin, by the way white-stone, would be called a monastery, then everything falls into place. The trip to Moscow was actually moved to the capital much later, since the time of Bogolyubsky, the Grand Duke's table smoothly moved from Vladimir to Moscow. Well, later by a strong-willed decision, as a capital, but not a city, Moscow “grew old”. And they settled in the place of Moscow for a long time, they are silent about everything that was dug up in Fili and on Poklonnaya.
    1. Andrey57
      Andrey57 21 September 2013 12: 19
      12
      During earthworks at the plant, it seems "Dynamo", they found a huge layer of human bones. in some places several meters high, according to experts, they belonged to about the time of the Kulikovo battle, belonged mainly to young men and bore traces of cold weapons wounds - stab and chopped.
      1. jasper
        jasper 21 September 2013 15: 03
        0
        The emperor only opened and closed his mouth, not knowing what to answer ...

        “Well, this wicked one didn’t write about poor Jews,” Moses sighed.
        “As he did not write,” Kalita was surprised. - Here you go: Moses is the king of Saracen.
        - Whose king is it? - the saber of Salah ad-Din with a hiss crawled out of the scabbard, but shoulder
        the brave sultan lay the hand of the patriarch.
        - What do you need, Moshe? snapped the sultan.
        - Salah, as Semit Semit I ask you - do not rush, - Moses' eyes are unhealthy
        gleamed. “Saber is too fast.” Let's hear this
        miserable.

        “This is necessary,” Genghis Khan scratched his shaggy head, taking it apart with his grandson.
        Batu building zealous hacks. - It turns out that I am Konaz Gurga Danila’s son
        Moscow, and my grandson, Batu, who went to the last sea, this ... - Khan spent
        clumsy finger on paper and stared in shock at Kalita. - It's you, conaz
        Ivan?

        - This is what! - continued, carried away by the peasant. - This is wherever you go!
        The main falsification is with Jesus Christ!

        European and Russian monarchs according to reached for swords, but a peasant
        noticing nothing continued:

        - Jesus actually lived in the 11th century from the birth of Christ, that is, false
        Christmas because he was born later. And the magi - they were, in fact,
        Mongols, that is, Russians, Vladimir the Holy and his wife Malush ...
        - What are you lying about, bastard, Malusha is my mother! - shouted Vladimir.

        The Christian monarchs were shockedly silent.

        “This doesn’t climb into any gates,” muttered Maximilian. - I do not care
        what he writes about me there - I secured my place in one armor
        stories. At least the reenactors will not forget me. But what a scoundrel he is
        about our Lord ...
        - Burn the bastard! No, count! It's too easy! Quarter! - monarchs
        They shook with swords and screamed, and Big Wu, who had no place at all
        a new version of the story spun a club over his head. In a simple brain
        Cro-Magnon squeaked a terrible guess that his vile scribbler would identify with
        despicable Neanderthals.

        “Dear western and northern barbarians ...” he began in a well-posed voice.
        finally recovered Qing Shi Huangdi.
        - KXM ??? !!!
        “... in a good sense of the word,” a smartly-witted man turned out diplomatically.
        the emperor. - In such a case, do not rush. As I understand it, this unfortunate
        indulges in a rare and unnatural perversion called ... - he
        looked questioningly at Kalita.
        “Cronyism,” prompted Kalita.
        “Ahhh,” said Genghis Khan, understandingly. - It happens when there are few women.
        Well, so I would go grab myself. I won - in China grabbed, in the Tangut kingdom
        grabbed, grabbed in Khorezm, even from the Caucasus Subudai brought ...
        “This is not what you think, dear Conqueror of the Universe.”
        Cronyism is when SUCH THINGS are done with history. The essence of the method is
        that two completely different people are taken and based on the fact that both of them
        had two arms, two legs and one head, and also that both were kings and had in
        their names, say, the letter "o", it is concluded that they are one person.
      2. Ascetic
        Ascetic 21 September 2013 16: 35
        +4
        Quote: Andrey57
        During earthworks at the plant, it seems "Dynamo", they found a huge layer of human bones. in some places several meters high, according to experts, they belonged to about the time of the Kulikovo battle, belonged mainly to young men and bore traces of cold weapons wounds - stab and chopped.


        But what about the Nicholas-Ugreshsky Monastery in Dzerzhinsky, which he founded Donskoy on this vow after the legend says on the way to for the battle, an icon of Nicholas the Wonderworker appeared in this place. Where is Dynamo and where is Kapotnya. Moreover, it is known that Dmitry led his troops to Kolomna where the gathering was announced, and this is just on the way. It turns out that Mamai drove Dmitry all the way to the Nagatinskaya floodplain where the battle took place, I think this version is not serious. How did Mamai, according to Fomenko-Nosovsky, manage to be on Kulishki bypassing Dmitry's army going three roads to Kolomna to meet him!
        Elementary facts, you just need to turn on your head! It was not even important that Moseva was a city or a village.
        1. avt
          avt 21 September 2013 21: 45
          +6
          Quote: Ascetic
          and. Where is Dynamo and where is Kapotnya. Moreover, it is known that Dmitry led his troops to Kolomna where the gathering was announced, and this is just on the way. It turns out that Mamai drove Dmitry all the way to the Nagatinskaya floodplain where the battle took place, I think this version is not serious. How did Mamai, according to Fomenko-Nosovsky, manage to be on Kulishki, passing the army of Dmitry, walking three roads to Kolomna to meet him!

          If the gathering was in Kolomenskoye, the troops would more or less understand the maneuver. When approaching Mamai, mainly the horse troops, on the Pererva crossing they left the river, over the Don, then Mamai stood on Taganka, on a red hill. Well, Dmitry, after reflection, went over once again the river and after viewing the field in Luzhniki went on rapprochement. By the way, the place is very convenient on kulichki - on the right is the Moscow River, behind Neglinka and Borovitsky Hill, on the left there are gardens and the terrain is elevated - Bobrok's ambush. Well, in front of Yauza, it’s shallow, but from the swoop cavalry will not pass {remember the previous Drivers}, albeit from the hill and Mamai was not allowed to disperse as cavalry, so he advanced the Genoese infantry forward and fought off the crossing, but still he didn’t reach the expanse in view of the position successful for defense by infantry. In my opinion, the place for combat, given the composition of the opposing forces, is very successful. put to death stand and pro ivnik stripped principal trump - flexibility and speed when used cavalry .ne acceleration - ambush covered flanks, which is also on a hill and the river remains only to push the mass. Yes, I completely forgot! In Moscow, in addition to the Kremlin, there are only two cathedrals, in Izmailovo of the Intercession of the Virgin on the island - the royal residence of the Quietest, a separate conversation is not on this topic and in Pererva, exactly at the site of the alleged gathering - the Cathedral of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker on the site of St. Nicholas of the Perervensky Monastery, the foundation of the monastery begins with Kulikovskaya battle, this is the official data of the Russian Orthodox Church. The cathedral was built in 1696-1700.
    2. My address
      My address 21 September 2013 12: 43
      +4
      avt!
      And you are right! You have an interesting thought!
      I did not meet any logical explanations of what the hell Moscow princes (or not Moscow then?) All ran around Moscow. Something like a populous Moscow is left to be reprimanded by few vorogs, and then they will suddenly set down against a decent army and are not afraid.
      Nice to read your comments, but this is something vaasche. hi hi hi Perhaps you write in a personal your name, but it is inconvenient to contact avt.
      I recently impartially responded about Muscovites, so I apologize to you.

      I wonder what kind of pig .. puts a minus in this topic? Why does not object reasonably or simply that they have been taught this way and therefore a minus?
      1. avt
        avt 21 September 2013 13: 11
        +5
        Quote: My address
        And you are right! You have an interesting thought!

        The idea is not mine, and to be honest, I don’t even remember the original author. Somehow I began to doubt since the time of the second visit to the Moscow Museum that the church was located opposite the Polytechnic University, and then somehow I began to compare and crawl out of the official version. then Fomenko and Nosovsky arrived in time. But what I would like to draw your attention to. If you take their early works, you will see that they ask more questions for the mind and generally stimulate the brain. But the latest works are already in style and snore, yes and due to the sloppiness of the presentation of the material, it seems that the adherents wrote. I ran into this with Gumilyov - the published works published during his lifetime are read easily and naturally, of course a controversial theory, but at least he also stimulates to look for arguments for or against. But after his death, publications appeared and supplemented ", and even not previously published. Well, in general, the trouble! request As if on purpose someone decided to "extinguish" him. It is impossible to read, even the text is different, fortunately he bought a couple of his books during his lifetime - there is something to compare.
        1. jasper
          jasper 21 September 2013 15: 04
          0
          Bright smiles of understanding flashed on the gloomy faces of the sovereigns.

          - ... and, therefore, they, or rather, he, finished the same way, in connection with which
          Judge Bao will install Razdiraiel here ...
          “Uhh,” Genghis Khan shook his head. - Your Cao Shi was a eunuch and that ...
          “Dear Huns,” the Emperor smiled thinly. - Is that a problem? Respected
          Judge, grab also the Boar's Head knife and perhaps ... Donkey?

          He looked inquiringly at those around him. The faces of the monarchs took cruel
          expression.
          “Yakshi,” Batu nodded.
          “The donkey will be just right,” Kalita resolutely nodded.
          - Eeyore !!! - expressed his approval of Big Wu.

          The stifled screams of the chrono-drowner drowned in a friendly mocking neigh.

          ...

          Qing Shi Huangdi rested after the trial, drinking peach wine with Kalita and
          Genghis Khan. From the outside came the wild cries and snapping of the Peaceful
          Tore.

          Suddenly three people stepped right out of the air towards them - a white-faced archer in strange
          clothes, a muscular giant in a lion's skin and a warrior in copper armor and a helmet with
          high comb.

          “Hindi-Rus bhai-bhai, Arjuna,” Kalita greeted those who entered. - What for
          granted?
          - We heard how gathered together, the kings punished the shameful reptile
          The echidna of the infamous, poisonous-speaking ...
          “Forget it, Achilleska,” Ivan waved his hands in dismay. - I will beat your hexameters
          I can’t get it. Are you talking straight?
          - O Great-wheeled Ivan, the Tsar is powerful-armed and strong-hipped, whose eyelashes
          beautiful ones decorated with henna ... In short, Vanya, you are still my descendant, right? Well
          distant, huh? Nevertheless, one family ... Language. Here you have in the south, where Kiev
          the principality was.
          Genghis Khan grinned:
          - Exactly, it WAS. This is my granddaughter, Batychik ...
          - Genghis, wait a minute! In general, three showed up there. Two are handcraftsmen
          some, the third - a grave digger. Any inconsistencies are written about us! What they
          understand in our showdown with kaurava! About my dad, some nonsense was sprinkled!
          - The son of Peleus, the Copperbringer, was boldly passive called
          A hoaxer, wearing armor unworthy!
          - And you, Hercules?

          The giant silently waved his hand.

          In general, Ivan, there is such a thing ... - Arjuna in embarrassment picked the earth with a bow. -
          In short, don’t lend a donkey?

          (c) I. Koshkin
        2. Ascetic
          Ascetic 21 September 2013 18: 48
          +1
          Quote: avt
          from the official version, "shoals" began, and then Fomenko and Nosovsky arrived in time.


          In this case, if we proceed from the version of Fomenko and the Nosovsky battle at the Simonov Monastery, then from a military point of view it should be recognized that as a military strategist Dmitry and his associates are not commanders but boobies of the king of heaven. Being in Kolomna, let the hordes of Mamai pass unhindered to the Nagatinsky floodplain, which is more than 100 km and give a battle there in the swamp. Well, Kutuzov is resting. According to the official version, everything is logical - the main strategic tasks were solved. Firstly, the hostile Ryazan was neutralized, Secondly, as expected, Mamai was waiting for a water line. Even the risky ferry to the Horde coast, cutting off its path to the retreat, paid off, because less numerous Russian army that there is no turning back and fought with a vengeance.
          If we allow the version of Fomenko
          Mamai approached Kulishki (in the center of modern Moscow) on the eastern side of Moscow, being on the left bank of the Moscow River. That is, on the shore where the Battle of Kulikovo is about to take place.
          And Dmitry walked towards him from the southern side of Moscow, being on the right bank of the Moscow River. Before the battle, Dmitry crossed the river.
          The troops converged in the center of modern Moscow - on Kulishki (in the area of ​​Slavyanskaya Square and Sretenka).

          Then how to explain the presence of the Nikolo-Ugreshsky monastery in Dzerzhinsky (Lyublino, Kapotnya) if Dmitry did not go there but walked from the south side? And one more thing, why didn’t Ryazan Prince Oleg, who was negotiating with him and also Jagailo of Lithuania, jointly oppose Moscow, which prevented him from connecting with Mamai, especially since he again, according to Fomenko, freely passed straight from the east to Moscow. But it prevented that Dmitry defeated the Horde outside the Ryazan land in the Battle of Kulikovo, in which 70 Ryazan boyars from the Russian side died.
          In the future, however, this did not prevent the same Oleg in 1382. show Tokhtamysh fords on the Oka, which, however, did not save Ryazan from ruin during the return of the Horde to the steppes after the burning of Moscow and caused the ruin of the Ryazan principality by Dmitry Donskoy in the autumn of that year.
      2. avt
        avt 21 September 2013 13: 38
        +2
        Quote: My address
        I recently spoke impartially about Muscovites, so I apologize to you

        So why apologize to the frontman? There are plenty of people in Moscow, both alien and local. And judge people according to their words and deeds, and, accordingly, how their words are combined with deeds.
      3. jasper
        jasper 21 September 2013 15: 03
        0
        The emperor looked around the shocked fellow sufferers trying
        to realize the full depth of the chronological method.

        “Therefore, I propose applying his own method to this wicked one.” In times
        of my reign was the eunuch Cao Shi, convicted of spreading false
        rumors that the Lord of the Waters, the Great Dragon of the West - is asexual. Besides,
        it was proved that the above Cao Shi was a hidden bestiality.

        “Wait, wait,” shouted Batu. “If the eunuch, then what kind of bestiality?”
        “Passive,” Qing Shi Huangdi calmly explained.

        Batu twitched. the emperor continued:

        - So, convicted of these crimes, Cao Shi was executed
        through the beneficent Stretcher Great Yui ...
        - And what is this bird? This stretcher, - the interested monarchs buzzed.
        - This ... - With a few skillful strokes of the brush, the Emperor drew a diagram on
        piece of white silk and presented it to the venerable assembly.

        Most monarchs turned pale and turned away, Big Wu undertook
        an unsuccessful attempt to hide behind his club, and Donskoy simply vomited.
        Genghis, Batu and Berke tore the drawing from the hands of the Emperor and set about completely
        childish joy to look at a useful device:

        “Just look, grandfather,” Batu enthusiastically poked into silk. - You look, huh? we
        it’s wild koblitsa, here they are all the time and are torn! And then you see which
        Mechanics? Therefore, it is not torn! Hey Hanese, do you offer him this machine, that?
        “Exactly, dear Huns,” the Emperor nodded. - He served one of my descendants
        Judge Bao-gong, highly experienced in criminal investigation and punishment
        delinquent.

        The emperor clapped his hands:

        - Dear Judge Bao, do not be slow to come to punish the terrible
        blasphemous criminal.

        From the air a majestic, stout bearded man arose with sintering and bone
        a sign. He bowed obediently to the assembly and turned to the Emperor.

        “Dear Bao-gun,” the Emperor began. - Let the crime be known to you
        this person...
        Bao-gun bowed low and said:
        - Do not worry about the Son of Heaven. Performing their duties as in this world,
        so in the Halls of Darkness and Light, I heard about this despicable villain. His
        crimes overflowed the patience of the Lord of the Halls and shock the heavens and
        Hell. What punishment would you like to subject him to.
        - We would like to punish him through the beneficent
        Stretcher Great Yui.

        Bao-gun bowed low.

        - I apologize, O Son of Heaven, but the Beneficent Stretcher is deprecated
        three hundred years before my birth. Currently in the Celestial Empire
        the appeasing Torturer Yan Lo is used, - the judge unrolled the scroll with
        drawing.

        Donskoy collapsed, vomiting everyone, including Batu and Genghis Khan. Pale
        Qing Shi Huang muttered:

        - Progress does not stand still. So, dear ...
        Northern-and-western-barbarians-in a good sense of the word, since obviously
        that Cao Shi and the said chronologer have two arms and two legs, the letter "o" in
        name? Is there an "o" in there? There is? Excellent. And also both claim
        unnatural and blasphemous, it would be logical to assume that this
        one man...
  5. Sergey Medvedev
    Sergey Medvedev 21 September 2013 10: 44
    +5
    A. Fomenko and G. Nosovsky, based on the results of their research, conclude that the soldiers who died in the Battle of Kulikovo were buried in Kulishki, in Staro-Simonov and Andronikov Monasteries, where there are indeed traces of mass graves.

    Well, dig and explore! Set dating, find weapons and other material evidence. Science has already gone a long way, including forensic science. And without evidence, this version, although interesting, does not inspire confidence. Verbiage in one word.
    1. jasper
      jasper 21 September 2013 15: 04
      0
      guys? where can I get a donkey? laughing
      1. 2k11
        2k11 21 September 2013 16: 30
        +1
        In Khorezm, there are certainly not a few)))
      2. kavkaz8888
        kavkaz8888 21 September 2013 17: 52
        +2
        which donkey? let's go on a fairy tale
    2. Tatanka Yotanka
      Tatanka Yotanka 22 September 2013 14: 58
      +1
      Quote: Sergei Medvedev
      Well, dig and explore! Set dating, find weapons and other material evidence. Science has already gone a long way, including forensic science.

      I’ve only stepped in the DNA area — who’s whose relative, radiocarbon analysis — all laboratories have a time spread, they don’t say exactly, they need to be linked to events
      for example: a rusty sword was found, there was a "battle near the village" Pupkino "12th century nearby, -we pay money, we get the result-sword of the 11-13th century, we do not give a 100% guarantee
      1. Alex
        Alex 29 January 2014 00: 07
        +1
        Tatanka Yotanka
        Look, I don’t know who you are, but if you don’t know about radiocarbon dating, then don’t meddle in business where you are not “Copenhagen”.
        Firstly, a steel (and indeed any metal) object is not identified by this method due to the complete absence of carbon in it that meets the necessary requirements. You can say something if there are traces of a wooden handle (or other details) on it, but this only speaks about the age of the given part. This then, on the basis of any logical (or not so) assumptions, you can transfer the received data to the sword itself.

        Second phrase
        we pay money
        already unambiguously sends this result to the wastebasket.

        Thirdly, each method has its own error and confidence interval. For the radiocarbon method, within the limits of maximum acceptability, it is of the order of 50 years in both directions, i.e. within the boundaries of one century. That is why the results of different laboratories diverge (moreover, it is the complete coincidence of these results that will make them doubt their reliability), especially when they want to (voluntarily or involuntarily) give a result accurate to the year.

        Maybe I'm exaggerating, but precisely because organic remains are preserved in the ground for a very short time (preserved artifacts in a form acceptable for research is more luck than a rule), especially in our climate and in our soils, absolutely accurate dating is impossible basically. But this does not mean that everything needs to be thrown into the trash and replaced with more than dubious calculations by Fomenko-Nosovsky. The radiocarbon method has been tested many times and its accuracy has been proven, the errors are determined and known. But the "discoveries" of Fomenko and Nosovsky remained made "at the tip of the pen." But unlike Adams and Liverrier, they stayed on it.
  6. Nayhas
    Nayhas 21 September 2013 10: 46
    15
    An interesting approach to determining the location of the Battle of Kulikovo. Why did they get the idea that archaeological excavations will give results in the form of weapons, household items? Is there archaeological evidence of the Battle of Kalka in 1223? On the River City in 1238? As far as is known after the battle, the place of the battle was left to the defeated, then the collection of weapons, ammunition, and the cleaning of the wounded and the dead. Even broken blades were valuable for steel all the same. Times were not rich and warriors were happy with any trophies. Dead enemies were usually burned, after taking everything valuable, they could throw corpses into the river. They buried their people either nearby or took them to their native places, so in the coming years there were no reminders of the battle. For example, the Battle of Grunwald that took place 30 years later also did not leave any particularly rich traces, although it did not take place in an open field, but in a densely populated area. It is known that 300 soldiers were buried at a chapel built on the battlefield, and only 28 fragments of weapons were found! And despite the fact that thousands of soldiers died on both sides, only 300 bodies were found. But no one claims that the Battle of Grunwald took place in the area of ​​Berlin or Warsaw ... Therefore, Fomenko-Nosenko’s speculation (or sore imagination, to which I am more inclined) is simply ridiculous.
    1. ROA
      ROA 21 September 2013 11: 22
      +1
      The Kulikovo field was actively cultivated under the kings and under the Soviet regime, so it is not surprising that there is practically nothing there.
    2. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 21 September 2013 14: 45
      +9
      Quote: Nayhas
      Dead enemies were usually burned.

      Can you imagine how much fuel is needed to burn so many bones into ashes
      1. Yemelya
        Yemelya 21 September 2013 17: 22
        +1
        Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
        Can you imagine how much fuel is needed to burn so many bones into ashes


        And what were the losses?
      2. Nayhas
        Nayhas 21 September 2013 19: 18
        +2
        Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
        Can you imagine how much fuel is needed to burn so many bones into ashes

        The number of dead enemies, as well as their number at all times, was presented in ten times the size. The main defeated party suffered when a panic retreat began, during an organized battle, the enemy was squeezed out in those areas where this could lead to encirclement. What is now shown in the reconstruction, when the fighters are divided into pairs, they are fighting with each other complete nonsense. Only a closed formation, the front rows back up the following rows, whose function also includes the evacuation of the wounded, the replacement of the tired, the dragging of the dead so that they do not interfere underfoot. Therefore, the infantry's main weapon was spears and swords, i.e. it is a stabbing weapon. In such a crush, it was difficult to kill the enemy, so the losses were relatively low. If the enemy managed to surround, then he was deprived of the opportunity to rotate the soldiers, the wounded and killed prevented from fighting, there was nowhere to rest, and a reserve for replacing the tired could not be brought up. The effect of entering an ambush regiment was similar, a blow to the enemy rear behind the resting and wounded soldiers created an environmental effect, and the enemy had to fight on both sides in this place, which led to the defeat of Mamai who did not have a significant reserve.
        When the enemy fled, usually the weapon was thrown, because you can’t run with such a burden, so the infantry, unlike the cavalry, had high losses. Only the cavalry could lead the pursuit for a long time, the infantry fled only before the enemy’s convoy. Usually, when there was a defeat, there were many prisoners who then cleared the battlefield from the dead, the dead were burned in heaps, although the man consists of 70% water, he burns well, the bones are pulled apart by animals and birds ...
        PS: on tactics. The tactics of the Mongols to mislead the enemy by false stampede are based on the fact that the pursuing enemy disrupts the system, the control system. The subsequent organized U-turn and organized attack, compatible with a strike to the flank from an ambush of the unit that had been waiting in advance, led to the defeat of the pursuer, who could not organize defense in a short time, and the separation from the reserve did not allow them to use it.
      3. Ivan_Ivanov
        Ivan_Ivanov 21 September 2013 21: 49
        +3
        Can you imagine how much fuel is needed to burn so many bones into ashes

        In addition, according to the annals of the Mamaians were not burnt or buried. They were simply left on the battlefield. The fallen Russian soldiers were collected and buried for several days.
      4. Alex
        Alex 29 January 2014 16: 41
        +1
        Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
        Can you imagine how much fuel is needed to burn so many bones into ashes
        Burning to ashes, as in a crematorium, is not necessary. It is quite simple to disrupt the integrity of the inorganic skeleton of the bone and burn out most of the organic component. After that, the bone, of course, will not be scattered in the wind, but nothing will remain of it in the earth for a couple of hundred years.
        Humus, he is generous, because he knows that no one will leave him, we will all be there. Not a carcass, so ashes ...
    3. Ivan_Ivanov
      Ivan_Ivanov 21 September 2013 18: 12
      +1
      Is there archaeological evidence of the Battle of Kalka in 1223?

      actually, historians still cannot decide where this river is located - the Kalka.
    4. Motors1991
      Motors1991 22 September 2013 17: 06
      +2
      I can add that the Cannes field on which Hannibal defeated the Romans cannot be determined to this day either. I think a lot here is about excessive exaggeration of the number of troops participating in the battles. In the same Kulikovo battle, historians give the number of Russian troops to 150 thousand people, and they don’t bother with the question, where did Dmitry Donskoy get so many soldiers from? The immeasurably more powerful Moscow state at the end of the 16th and beginning of the 17th centuries had about 90 thousand soldiers painted with all garrisons and guards throughout the vast territory. tsars could put up to 50 thousand people. Therefore, Dmitry Donskoy could put a maximum of 10-15 thousand people, respectively, and Mamai no more than 20 thousand. For such a large number of people do not need a huge field, dozens of 2-3 hectares are enough. Do not forget the largest city of Russia in at that time there was Mr. Veliky Novgorod, in which from 40 to 50 thousand people lived, these were about 4-5 thousand soldiers, or even less. Moscow at that time was a large village against Novgorod.
  7. nnz226
    nnz226 21 September 2013 11: 16
    +5
    There is one more point: in 2 of the year, Tokhtamysh Khan came under the walls of Moscow, and to repulse him, Muscovites used artillery for the first time from the Kremlin walls! 1382 year is the birthday of Russian artillery. The question is, where, if not to the walls of Moscow, did Tokhtamysh come? What is he? Was Vladimir (Kostroma, hereinafter referred to as a) illiterate and confused with Moscow? Again, over the 2 of the year, it was not realistic to shave off the stone Kremlin at the time, but not even at the present time (and Dm. Placed a white stone Kremlin in Moscow, this is known from the annals), and the wooden one could not stand the fire from its own cannons mounted on the walls. So the picture about the foundation of Moscow on the bones of the fallen on the site of the Battle of Kulikovo does not add up ...
    1. avt
      avt 21 September 2013 13: 26
      +5
      Quote: nnz226
      Here is another point: after 2 years, Khan Tokhtamysh came under the walls of Moscow, and to repulse him, Muscovites used artillery from the walls of the Kremlin for the first time! 1

      Also an interesting fact, especially if you think about it - how much and what kind of artillery was there? In the Armory Museum and the Historical Guns of those times, they look more like guns in caliber and do not pull on full-scale guns.
      Quote: nnz226
      . The question is, where, if not to the walls of Moscow, did Tokhtamysh come? What is he? Was Vladimir (Kostroma, hereinafter referred to as a) illiterate and confused with Moscow?

      And here there are more questions to the same Tokhtamysh than answers. When he came to the prince's wife with the heir, he "pinched" in Moscow, Dmitry, according to the official version, cut circles around him - he was gathering troops, but why did the princess and the heir run away from the inhabitants and Tokhtamysh released. As it does not fit such nobility and the impossibility of taking a real hostage. Well, and then somehow he was quickly blown away, after the siege of Moscow, according to the official version of the Don, after the bloody battle of Kulikovo, where he scored a strong army and the khan left. That's what you want, but somehow I do not believe in such miracles.
  8. Shesternyack
    Shesternyack 21 September 2013 12: 21
    +3
    The article is nonsense. Regarding the age of Moscow - in archeology there is such a concept as the "historical layer", ie. finding certain household items (be it pots or weapons) at a certain depth of the ground, which makes it possible to fairly accurately determine the age of the finds. So - the same Moscow Kremlin was dug more than once and the age of the finds made both in the Kremlin and in the historical center - well, not the 16th century, but much older. There is also a lot of documentary evidence indicating that Moscow in the 16th century was already the capital, one of the largest cities of Muscovy (where did such a name for Russia take root in medieval Europe?). Official history does not consider Fomenko's theory, not out of fear, but because none of the historians wants to spend their time on a written debunking of schizophrenic delusions. By the way, mentally ill people often convincingly for the uninitiated expound their crazy ideas. Fomenko is one of those. But this is already psychiatry, which has nothing to do with history.
    1. My address
      My address 21 September 2013 14: 20
      12
      I'm over sixty. I know a lot about the nearby nature. I don’t see yet what could be hidden in five (thirty) centimeter layer in half a century .. This is to the fact that it will disappear for five hundred years behind layer c) 0,5 - 3 m. And in a million years for 6 km? Of course I am exaggerating, but my head is to think, and my brains are for understanding.

      Sorry, but. And no need to teach an engineer nonsense! And it is not necessary to drag in how many sixtilion tons fall only on the Moscow region from space in a month! And the statements that I am not Copenhagen can only be from ....! And I repeat for the thirtieth time that quantum mechanics is quite understandable to ordinary people in a normal way. And it is much cooler than the special theory of relativity. And archeology with a history is, in many ways, "corrupt deffs for who will pay." Do you, specifically, have something consistent with the logic? Or is there more evidence of the Aztecs about the antiquity of the Moscow Kremlin, even in comparison with Atlantis?

      And the statements about the unwillingness to get involved with Fomenko are not from arrogance, but from the cowardice of loss. I, a sickly boss, in 90, went to the disgruntled workers without declaring that they were byaki and therefore I would not go. And with disgruntled workers, when there are hundreds of them, it’s not for you to scratch your navel with a dirty academic finger. This is ugly. At the same time I did not rob them and did not deceive with promises. And the money that they earned, I had nowhere to take. And he himself received the last pay. I just respect myself a little, not my merit, so I brought up, and many historians ...

      Remove from nick mention gear. I am a technologist, I respect mechanics for plowing.
      1. Alex
        Alex 29 January 2014 17: 04
        +1
        Quote: My address
        and quantum mechanics is understandable to ordinary people in normal terms.
        The popularization of science (this is about the intelligibility of explanation for lay people and non-specialists, even with an engineering degree and administrative experience) does not imply vulgarization, and even more so, manipulation of facts and deception.

        And archeology with a history is, in many ways, "corrupt deffs for who will pay."
        Well, this is a request for personal conscientiousness and scientific cleanliness of each scientist. And each of them solves these issues for himself in his own way. In the 50s, chemistry also criticized the "bourgeois theory of resonance." True, it did not work to repeat Lysenkoism. So, "not all my friend Horatio" is so simple and convenient to put on the shelves.

        Or else the Aztec evidence of the antiquity of the Moscow Kremlin, even in comparison with Atlantis?
        Why is this nonsense? As well as a completely "scientific" argument referring to your courage in conversations with workers?

        And now regarding the disputes with Fomenko-Nosovsky. Butting with them, of course, you can, even to blue in the face, but what's the point? The dispute is of interest if the opponent is able to change his point of view (this, by the way, is the basis of any scientific discussion - if it were not for this, physicists would still be looking for caloric acid, chemists would explain combustion with phlogiston, and biologists, following Aristotle, believed that a fly had eight legs ) and meaning if the audience draws conclusions for themselves from the arguments of the parties. In this case, the first is impossible in principle, since the "authors of modern history" organically reject and reject everything that does not fit into their concept. The second is also doubtful, since the majority of those uninitiated into deep scientific matters simply do not understand the proposed method and, more importantly, they are not offered anything in return. I'm not even saying that this, if I may say so, methodology contains at least three signs of pseudoscience (or scientific charlatanism, if it's more convenient for you).
    2. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 21 September 2013 14: 50
      +5
      Quote: Shesternyack
      in archeology there is such a concept as "historical layer", i.e. finding certain household items (be it pots or weapons) at a certain depth of the ground, which makes it possible to fairly accurately determine the age of finds

      not quite accurate but extremely approximately, in addition, it is far from the fact that the objects belong to the same period as the "layer", a simple example collected bottles, dug a pit for garbage and buried them, and they immediately turned out to be below the temporary layer, dug something out and thrown out and the items were above the temporary layer
      1. Alex
        Alex 29 January 2014 17: 13
        +1
        Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
        a simple example, I collected bottles I dug up a garbage pit and dug, and they immediately turned out to be below the time layer, I dug up something I pulled out and threw out and the items turned out to be above the time layer
        Well, everything is not so primitive, why should archaeologists be so humiliated?

        Although I understand, any simplification is fraught with a loss of rigor. But if you are even familiar with the basics of archeology, then you know that a single find, as well as a single excavation, is not an argument. The whole totality of finds is always taken in complete reference to the environment in which they were found. That is why museums almost never accept objects and artifacts found by private individuals into scientific foundations without an accurate indication of the location of the find and soil samples from which they were extracted. He himself did not know these subtleties until he worked in the museum.
  9. Arkan
    Arkan 21 September 2013 14: 06
    0
    Rivers sometimes change their course. Relevant studies of changes in riverbeds mentioned in the chronicle could shed light on this important question: Where are you Kulikovo field ?!
  10. avt
    avt 21 September 2013 14: 12
    +3
    Quote: Shesternyack
    Regarding the age of Moscow - in archeology there is such a concept as the "historical layer", ie. finding certain household items (be it pots or weapons) at a certain depth of the ground, which makes it possible to fairly accurately determine the age of finds.

    Yes, there is such a method, you know very much an interesting one. For example, they come to the burning layer and say, "All that is higher, after the Mongolian period, but what is lower, to the Mongolian" Ask why? Well, the Mongols burned it. exactly the Mongols? Well, every cultured person knows the "invasion", only they, there is no one else. Well, as you ask - but what about the legend of "The destruction of the Russian land", in the same place, as there is the ruin of the land during the internecine strife of the princely is described in plain text, and they were famously managed - Andrei Bogolyubsky robbed Kiev for three days, for example, and not a word about the Mongols , so it ends, as if someone deliberately tore off - ... and the death of the Russian Land came ... "Well, they say, these are the Mongols with the invasion. And why ? Well, every cultured person knows a layer of burning in the excavations, there is no one to burn it except for them, the Mongols.
    Quote: Shesternyack
    Official history does not consider Fomenko’s theory, not out of fear, but because none of the historians wants to spend their time writing debunking schizophrenic delirium.

    You are wrong, they wrote, there was a work of historians and was called something like "Antifomenko" but somehow sluggish.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. jasper
      jasper 21 September 2013 15: 06
      0
      so how can science refute a joke?
      1. Vasilenko Vladimir
        Vasilenko Vladimir 21 September 2013 15: 19
        0
        maybe just the opposite?
    3. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 21 September 2013 15: 20
      +3
      Quote: avt
      You are wrong, they wrote, there was a work of historians and was called something like "Antifomenko" but somehow sluggish.

      actually Fomenko is not a pioneer in this matter
      1. Vasilenko Vladimir
        Vasilenko Vladimir 22 September 2013 15: 49
        0
        Someone thought that a pioneer?
        Well then, a minus signer needed to read books on this topic, doubts about the existing chronology arose long before the birth of Fomenko
  11. drop
    drop 21 September 2013 14: 56
    +3
    Several times I had to visit that Kulikovsky field, which we considered the place of the battle with Mamai. In the city of Kimovsk there was a plant subordinate to me, and when I came there on business I sometimes visited this field. Then, at the Academy of the General Staff with tactical scientists, we tried to imagine the possibility of the location of troops. And they came to the conclusion. Dmitry Donskoy during the battle used a new crossbow weapon. He could hit the Tatars cavalry at a distance of 200-300 meters, breaking through any chain mail. Dmitry had an outstanding commander, Bobrock, who, one year before the battle, defeated and completely destroyed the 10 thousand army of Mamaia. A blessed memory to our descendants who defended the independence of Russia.
  12. jasper
    jasper 21 September 2013 14: 56
    +1
    Once worn on the Internet.

    Ivan Kalita cast a frown at the high congregation and coughed:

    - Gentlemen, I gathered you here to discuss one very unpleasant
    business. Someone, take horsemeat from Baty Dzhuchievich! Baty Dzhuchievich, well
    it’s impossible! And it’s not necessary to immediately grab a saber! Yes i'm in
    to some extent a vassal of your house. Why "some"? Because in a different measure
    in three hundred years your house will be my vassal. Yes, and please sit down
    dear Moshe and Salah ad-Din, may there finally be peace with both of them !!! So,
    let's start. As you all can easily see, I have collected outstanding
    statesmen of different eras and nations ... And Big Hairy Wu,
    Of course, dear Wu, no need to wave a club ... I gathered you, yes ... Hmm,
    respected Big Wu knocked me a little. Perhaps lately you all
    you feel some inconvenience ... Well, for example, they have attacks on you
    uncontrollable sneezing. Yes, Big Woo, just that. The whole body itches ... And not
    We must point a finger at our respected Horde comrades! Of course they are not
    wash, this is a custom, but so far it has not bothered them. The main reason for these
    unpleasant phenomena, as well as comets, meteorites, the displacement of stars and other
    the signs that our esteemed astrologers observe are one man. Dima,
    Vanya, please enter the accused.

    Donskoy and Grozny dragged into the room a small man in strange glasses on
    nose. Terrible, looking furtively, from time to time poked a man sharp
    end of the staff, and Donskoy pinched his mouth.
  13. jasper
    jasper 21 September 2013 14: 57
    0
    Heroes and rulers approached the bound.

    “And is it because of him that my head hurts all the time?” - Alexander Nevsky poked
    little man with a boot.
    - Actually, not so much because of him, but because of what he writes, -
    corrected Kalita.
    “And what does he write this?”
    - Sasha, only you give this sword first?
    - Why is this? - Nevsky squinted suspiciously.
    - Well, what the hell do you not believe in a descendant? Come on here.

    Alexander shrugged and unfastened a huge German bastard sword from his belt.

    “Oh, just don't drop it.”

    Kalita took the sword, took a deep breath ...

    - And he writes, Sasha, that you are not you, but Khan Berke!

    Nevsky sat on the floor, smiling stupidly.

    “Vanya, what are you saying! Look at me, what kind of Berke am I?
    Berke Dzhuchievich - he’s standing there. Tolstoy such. I'm thin. And generally, he
    Mongol, and I am Russian, he is a khan, and I am a prince. I told him, if you want to know, I paid a tribute!
    And he went to the Horde!

    The thick khan nodded according to:

    - Yakshi, I drove! Koumiss drank, brought a good funeral! Good conaz!
    - Yeah, good one! Why did you poison me?
    “So this is politics,” the khan sighed.
    - You see, Vanya, I and Khan Berke - we are completely different. And you induce sedition!
    “It's not me who leads,” Kalita answered frowningly. - This is he, paskuda, leads. Yes and
    It turns out that Berke is not Burke at all, but Louis of Bavaria!

    Louis, peacefully pouring beer into the khan's cup, started and dropped the barrel.

    “Is that how it is, Louis?” Sorry, he’s mungal, but I’m German! - he shook
    a keg.
    “What are you asking me?” You ask him!

    Statesmen surrounded the little man. He hunted around baited, furiously
    gleaming glasses.
  14. The comment was deleted.
  15. gen-48
    gen-48 21 September 2013 15: 59
    +5
    It doesn’t really matter in which place they gave .. bastards to the new warriors. The main thing was given. It would be on the Indigirka or on Chusovaya, all the same, they would pile up. And you can search for tips everywhere - Russia is big. In our area of ​​search, 41-42 years of fighting have been getting bones a year, they are digging up hundreds of unknown men ... There are no discussions or articles about this, it’s better to talk about Spartans and Nibelungs (the Mongols themselves don’t know about the Don battle, sorry their non-advanced)
    1. tomket
      tomket 22 September 2013 02: 11
      0
      for example, William Shakespeare, despite the fact that he was born only 80 years later, plainly apparently could not learn much about Richard 3 either, for example, Richard was a hunchback and a freak, but in reality was one of the best wars and military leaders in his time. the same Shakespeare reluctantly admits ... The King works miracles hitherto unprecedented on the battlefield. And you require something from the Mongols.
      1. Alex
        Alex 29 January 2014 17: 19
        +1
        Quote: tomket
        for example, Richard was a hunchback and a freak, but in reality he was one of the best wars and commanders in his time.
        I don’t understand what is the contradiction? Or is physical deformity a mental cause? Often just the opposite: people with physical disabilities achieve much more than the handsome written.
  16. pensioner
    pensioner 21 September 2013 16: 28
    +5
    It is a pity, of course, that Kulikovo Field has not yet been found. Archeology has just begun to function more or less after so many years ... Maybe they will. All discoveries in archeology usually happen suddenly. He spent 6 seasons in archaeological expeditions. I found my wife there. I don’t know: is there a special expedition to find the Kulikov field. Usually they are tied to already open monuments. But still I wish you success.
    1. tomket
      tomket 22 September 2013 02: 06
      0
      I hasten to please Kulikovo field found! do not believe somewhere in the Tula region!
  17. fklj
    fklj 21 September 2013 18: 45
    0
    The lack of information is not a reason to compose delusional versions of the history of Russia!
    These pseudo-historical theorists are closer to "ufologists" than to historians and archaeologists.

    In short, hands off history!
    1. pensioner
      pensioner 21 September 2013 18: 48
      +2
      Quote: fklj
      The lack of information is not a reason to compose delusional versions of the history of Russia!
      These pseudo-historical theorists are closer to "ufologists" than to historians and archaeologists.

      In short, hands off history!
      hi hi hi
      1. Ivan_Ivanov
        Ivan_Ivanov 21 September 2013 20: 14
        +5
        The lack of information is not a reason to compose delusional versions of the history of Russia! ...

        Do you have enough information to judge which versions are delusional and which are not?
        1. fklj
          fklj 22 September 2013 15: 33
          -2
          As I understand it, do you have lots of information?
          When there is nothing to say, it is better to remain silent.
    2. avt
      avt 21 September 2013 21: 09
      +8
      Quote: fklj
      In short, hands off history!

      I'm all for it . But just what? Specify. If you are for the fact that Miller and his comrades wrote and received a scent from Lomonosov, and Nartov was thrown into prison altogether, then I’m not your friend. I’m more comfortable with Lomonosov.
      1. fklj
        fklj 22 September 2013 15: 27
        +2
        The story is one. wink
        And so, Miller is a liar.
    3. Setrac
      Setrac 21 September 2013 21: 24
      +4
      Quote: fklj
      The lack of information is not a reason to compose delusional versions of the history of Russia!

      The official story was somehow composed with a lack of information. These are double standards, one version was accepted without evidence, and the other not.
      1. fklj
        fklj 22 September 2013 15: 38
        0
        Correctly. But there can be no double standards in exact science. There are either scientifically proven facts or lies.
    4. kavkaz8888
      kavkaz8888 22 September 2013 09: 51
      0
      FROM ISTORIA? Yes, as you say!
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 22 September 2013 12: 16
        +1
        Quote: kavkaz8888
        FROM ISTORIA? Yes, as you say!

        Well, if you are a Jew, then for you "IzTORIA.
        If you are Russian, then from antiquity.
        1. Corneli
          Corneli 22 September 2013 12: 25
          0
          Quote: Setrac
          Well, if you are a Jew, then for you "IzTORIA.
          If you are Russian, then from antiquity.

          And if you are Greek (and the word is a story of Greek origin) then history (well, or history)
          "The word history comes from the Greek language (ἱστορία, historia) goes back to the ancient Greek term meaning" investigation, recognition, establishment "
        2. kavkaz8888
          kavkaz8888 22 September 2013 17: 12
          0
          From the annals, maybe more correct?
  18. Vyacheslav
    Vyacheslav 21 September 2013 20: 33
    +7
    Quote: Nayhas
    An interesting approach to determining the location of the Battle of Kulikovo. Why did they get the idea that archaeological excavations will give results in the form of weapons, household items? Is there archaeological evidence of the Battle of Kalka in 1223? On the River City in 1238? As far as is known after the battle, the place of the battle was left to the defeated, then the collection of weapons, ammunition, and the cleaning of the wounded and the dead. Even broken blades were valuable for steel all the same. Times were not rich and warriors were happy with any trophies.


    I have a hobby, I am looking for coins. I do not consider myself a pro, but I have great experience in this. And for me, such reasoning causes a smile, you immediately understand what the theorist argues. Believe me, there should be a lot of evidence at the scene of this battle and arrowheads will be the most widespread and widespread item and believe me on an area of ​​25 hectares there should be about several thousand.
    Nosovsky and Fomenko are some of those who apply the scientific approach to the study of history and their main merit is that they proved the utopianism of the generally accepted chronology of historical events. In a word, that world history that we know is nothing more than a lie mixed with real historical events.
    1. tomket
      tomket 22 September 2013 02: 05
      +1
      By the way, as a coin search engine, it doesn’t surprise you why in such a developed, ancient and powerful country like Tartaria it is very scarce with currency? There are no Tartar coins and treasures, only a copper coin from the time of Peter the Great can be dug up or Elizabethan silver, but there is no full gold of the great Tartars, even though you don’t crack, why? used plastic cards. and more ancient it is on the Black Sea Greek ruins with the profile of Athena, for example. where are the artifacts ??? ay gentlemen Fomenkovtsy.
      1. Vyacheslav
        Vyacheslav 22 September 2013 13: 28
        0
        Gold??? Are you kidding? A gold coin in the earth, even Nicholas 2, is a rarity. According to the official history, coins in Russia began to be minted from the 10th century. There was no state single coin; each principality minted its own coins. Before that, there was a usual exchange of goods, or shapeless pieces of silver, copper, etc. were used. The fashion for coins came to us from the Arab countries and at the beginning of the coin they did not receive distribution and only, if my memory serves me, they went into circulation from the 14th century. And only Peter 1 introduced the unified monetary system of Russia.
        So your argument is not convincing. And the lack of money in the ancient state formation in the form of a piece of metal with an image does not indicate its backwardness.
        And I am not an indisputable supporter of Fomenko.
        1. Corneli
          Corneli 22 September 2013 15: 00
          +1
          Quote: Vyacheslav
          Before that was normal exchange of goods, or shapeless pieces of silver, copper, etc. were used.

          Quote: Vyacheslav
          So your argument is not convincing. And yet the lack of money in the ancient state formation in the form of a piece of metal with an image not talking about his backwardness.

          Natural exchange is not considered to be "advanced" of the economy or the state. As an example, in the Roman Empire there were coins, different and in huge quantities - their economy, etc., was considered sufficiently advanced. After the fall, in the early Middle Ages, natural exchange prevailed (the era of decline and degradation). Because how to mint den. signs "with images" can only be afforded by a developed state. Both technologically and with a strong, centralized power (state apparatus, taxes), developed trade and laws governing trade. Otherwise, beads in exchange for gold are the norm.
          So that this is your argument - unconvincing) If the state (and especially EMPIRE) is large and developed, it should have a single monetary unit (even if not coins, but their substitute)
          1. Setrac
            Setrac 22 September 2013 16: 04
            +1
            Quote: Corneli
            , it must have a single monetary unit

            the monetary unit is not necessarily a metal coin, will the coons suit you?
          2. Vyacheslav
            Vyacheslav 22 September 2013 16: 32
            0
            You project the present into antiquity by exaggerating the value of money in those distant times. The Roman Empire developed through wars, i.e. outright robbery, and nothing to do with coins.
            What is a coin in antiquity? This is a piece of metal (gold, silver, copper) whose value was provided by the price of the same metal i.e. essentially the same product, regardless of what shape it is that is depicted on it. And the beginning of coinage with the image of the emperor’s face speaks of something else, namely, the form of government - an absolute monarchy, a cult of personality.
            If you believe Fomenko and Nasovsky, then in Tartary there was no monarchy, but there was a military-democratic rule. And it was a military-economic union of principalities (states). In principle, this explains well the lack of uniform
            money from Tartaria.
            1. Corneli
              Corneli 22 September 2013 17: 00
              -1
              Quote: Vyacheslav
              What is a coin in antiquity? This is a piece of metal (gold, silver, copper) whose value was provided by the price of the same metal i.e. essentially the same product, regardless of what shape it is that is depicted on it. And the beginning of coinage with the image of the emperor’s face speaks of something else, namely, the form of government - an absolute monarchy, a cult of personality.

              Hmm ... read about the Roman census, long before the emperors, there states were measured in sisterces (a silver coin, the $ sign went from it), the salaries of soldiers, the bribery of voters, everything was done on the enti "sistertia", while there was a harmonious monetary system, with copper, silver ... later gold coins (and it was introduced since 217 BC, no "personality cults" were ever close ... until the birth of Caesar 120 years). As soon as coins began to be counterfeited (under Nero, for example), inflation, unrest, and a decline in trade began due to the undermining of confidence in the economic system. The actual monetary system is one of the hallmarks of a developed state. And the "military-economic union", in this context, only explains well the undeveloped economy and trade of these "principalities". Money is the standard of value. Without a standard, exchange trade, but it is not effective, and is found only in primitive (tribal) formations, or small states in a state of extreme decline.
              1. Vyacheslav
                Vyacheslav 22 September 2013 17: 28
                0
                [/ quote] Actually the monetary system is one of the signs of a developed state. / quote]

                Here is just one of the signs, therefore, it is not worth arguing, due to the lack of a single monetary unit, about the backwardness of development.
                1. Corneli
                  Corneli 22 September 2013 19: 18
                  0
                  Quote: Vyacheslav
                  Here is just one of the signs, therefore, it is not worth arguing, due to the lack of a single monetary unit, about the backwardness of development.

                  Clearly clear ... there are no more arguments ...
  19. NOBODY EXCEPT US
    NOBODY EXCEPT US 21 September 2013 22: 30
    0
    You just imagine that the reservoir has been studied very poorly for about a thousand years, because there is little or almost no evidence, we know the history of Egypt for a thousand years better because there are a lot of stone evidence and so on, and imagine what they find, for example, 10 thousand years after that, flash drives with coins the size of a coin, and they will think how we used them as amulets or as ornaments, they will rack their brains for a long time ... And you Kulikovo field .. And about Tokhtamysh it is true that he came to Moscow after two years and devastated and went to Horde ..... and the Kremlin was the first erevyanny, then white stone, too, not one, and then the red stone ..
  20. Irokez
    Irokez 22 September 2013 00: 40
    +8
    Fomenko and Nosovsky and their helpers are the same students, and so on, most mathematics (logic), and mathematics is an exact science rather than a story that each winner tries to turn in his direction. So, they mathematically approach many historical phenomena and facts, and according to statistics (and statistics is an inexorable thing), it turns out that the official chronology of the lime tree and, in it, events are somehow stretched in time further into the ages. And many of the kings and dynasties of Europe were simply invented or copied by historians from someone else who lived in a different time.
    Everything is very ambiguous here and to say that they are crazy and at the same time teach and give lectures is simply unreasonable.
    And by the way, according to their version, Jerusalem cannot be where it is right now, but they point to Turkey near the Bosphorus Strait, where the geographical location also coincides with the description in the Bible.
    And the Mongol-Tatars are not Mongols and Tatars (by the way, the Mongols did not know until they were told that they were so formidable in the past), but most likely the Mughal-Tartars. Tartary - this country was at the time of Moscow Tartary and others, and it was the most powerful in those days, which kept everyone in the district like an empire. The word "Igo" is something like order or correct arrangement. The Horde is a large military unit.
    There was a battle or internecine or religious between Christians and the Old Faith, people like the "Veda" or something else.
    By the way, according to the new chronology, the Russian lands began to expand to Siberia and further, only after the suppression of the uprising of Emelyan Pugachev, but rather a real war was between Russia and some other powerful state (presumably again Tartaria) and after the victory (thanks to the same Suvorov) everything passed to Russia, and they tried to forget and erase the defeated state from the history that Bayer, Miller and Schlozer wrote under the auspices of our Tsars and Tsarits from the new dynasty famously having thrown off the Ivan the Terrible dynasty on which hang all the sins of troubled times right now on Stalin for example.
    Wait. As Wanga said "People will learn the real history" and the time is already close and I assure you Russia is one of the most ancient states and the writing did not come from Cyril and Mythody (they only simplified it once again), but the fact that Etruscan in Italy in those days before AD almost all historians do not recognize in Old Slavonic, but then why half of Europe and the same Macedonians (and especially Alexander the Great) in Slavic, like Serbs and Bulgarians, explain.
    It’s just a scribe when some facts are discovered by chance in the same European archives and there Russia, Slavs, Arias, but why they don’t publish, but because they don’t want to admit that the Rus are a highly civilized people from ancient times and that he can even be the progenitor of all Geyropeytsev. From here they hide and distort or keep silent all that is connected with the history of Russia.
    Even right now, when Syria is being killed from where sound and sensible thoughts are going around the world - I hope you can guess for yourself - these are the descendants of Hyperborea and Ariev - We.
    1. tomket
      tomket 22 September 2013 02: 00
      -2
      Hitler also thought so, what his opinion led him to think I do not need to remind.
      1. Hort
        Hort 23 September 2013 08: 49
        +1
        Hitler believed that only the Germans and, to a lesser extent, the British were descendants of the Aryans. Refusing this kinship to all the other white people of the planet, although until 1945 the white race was called Indo-Aryan. After they changed to "Indo-European", tk. thanks to the Nazis, the word "Aryan" got a negative connotation.
        The Slavs, as you remember, Hitler generally considered subhumans and at first did not believe that in all respects (all measurements and comparisons were made on the prisoners) the Russians are practically the same with the "true Aryans". Then by 44-45. believed the truth, but it was too late
    2. Corneli
      Corneli 22 September 2013 12: 53
      -1
      Quote: Irokez
      but then why the half of Europe and the same Macedonians (and especially Alexander the Great) in Slavic as Serbs and Bulgarians are explained.

      Here I could not restrain myself and burst into a homeric laughter! laughing laughing
      A couple of questions:
      1. What half of Europe are you talking about? (which countries speak Bulgarian and Serbian).
      2. You are aware that there is a state of Macedonia (the former republic of the SFRY - 35,8% of the area of ​​historical Macedonia), the region in modern times. Greece Macedonia ((52,4% of the area of ​​historical Macedonia. By the way, the Greeks made a terrible scandal, after the name of the republic of Macedonia at the break-up of the SFRY, and the courts were in The Hague, and the EU and NATO were not allowed) and Pirin Macedonia region in Bulgaria ( 9,6% of historical Macedonia) And how do you explain this?)
      3. In Greek Macedonia, they still speak ... in Greek. According to TI, the formation of Ancient Macedonia was during the reign of King Philip 2 (359 -336 BC). His son Alexander lived 356 - 323 BC. e. One of his teachers was Aristotle (he seems to be Greek, but I won't be surprised that you will become a Slav), Sashka spoke in Greek (Macedonian is a dialect of the Greek language with elements of other languages, neighbors). The expansion of the Slavs to the Balkans and Greece began around the 4th century AD. e. (after 700 !!! years). Since Alexander, in your opinion, spoke "Slavic", and even "especially" (is it like in literary Russian Sholi?))? And where did you get this? Are there any of his documentary sayings in Slavic? Or at least ANY proof of this? Or did he tell Fomenko himself during a spiritualistic seance?
    3. VADIMKRSK
      VADIMKRSK 30 September 2013 19: 15
      0
      The chronology in history is fairly accurate since Antiquity. For many significant events from more ancient times. I can hardly date the events of my life exactly ... And mathematicians just play around. The joke is - "What happens if ..."
    4. Alex
      Alex 29 January 2014 17: 39
      +1
      Quote: Irokez
      Fomenko and Nosovsky and their helpers are the same students, and so on, most mathematics (logic), and mathematics is an exact science rather than a story that each winner tries to turn in his direction.
      A typical misconception about the omnipotence of science in general and mathematics in particular. Mathematics (and mathematical statistics, which Fomenko and Nosovsky use as its section) is a tool, nothing more. What model you build and what data you insert into it - this is the result you get. And whether it makes sense or not - this is no longer for mathematicians, this is not their paraffia, since from their point of view, everything that does not contradict mathematical laws is true. For example, from a mathematical point of view, the speed of light is completely surmountable (albeit in a jump, because at this point, as mathematicians say, a discontinuity of a function occurs), but all physical quantities at the same time acquire the opposite sign and from true ones become imaginary (from a mathematical point of view ). It is not known what the physical meaning is in this (all the "theories" on this matter are from the same repertoire as the "new chronology"), therefore no one considers this phenomenon.

      But here's what I personally do not like about this "theory": what in return? Well, okay, let the dynasties be invented and written off from others and appropriated to themselves. Well, even if they are not so ancient and artificially lengthened. What's in return? Where is the other, alternative chain of historical events? Not separate pieces, so effectively singled out and sentenced to destruction in the cleansing fire of new views, but a complete and integral historical canvas from the pharaohs of Egypt to Vladimir Putin and Barack Obama. He's gone. Apparently, looking for inconsistencies (and they have always been, are and will be - life is difficult, however) is much easier than creating something better. And until I am presented with a really better alternative, I do not see the need to abandon the previously proposed one.
  21. Bakht
    Bakht 22 September 2013 00: 54
    +1
    Having adopted the version of Fomenko, you have to re-watch the whole story. And first of all it will concern the revision of ALL sources of that time. How does Fomenko explain the presence of Oleg Ryazansky, rati, next to the army of Dmitry? How did Ryazans rob the convoys of Russian regiments and finish off the wounded? How did the gathering take place in Kolomna? Why didn’t Jagiello manage to battle? Kulikov’s version of the field near Moscow does not withstand any criticism from the source. And if the primary sources lie, then the very fact of the battle can be called into question.

    If a theory is once called into question, then it no longer has faith. Therefore, the works of Fomenko and others, definitely need to be lowered into the toilet and forget about them. Even if they are right in some ways. We do not believe the legends about the foundation of Rome. But we repeat them. The history of Russia began with the Kulikov field. And if it is under Ryazan, then let it remain there. And all revisionists and Pravdorubov-to the dump.

    PS And finally. Since 2000, the details have been carried out and the search field itself has been limited. Around the same area. Finds amounted to several thousand artifacts.

    This is from Wikipedia.
    The use of modern electronic metal detectors for the continuous examination of this area made it possible to collect representative collections of hundreds and thousands of shapeless metal fragments and fragments for each field season.
    1. tomket
      tomket 22 September 2013 01: 58
      0
      Do you think Fomenko is interested in finding something really there? or for example, that battlefields were plundered cleaner than the pyramids of a cheops? if the British special forces did not neglect the shoes of the Iraqis in 2003, then why the bunker and the nonsense should have missed such a jackpot ????
    2. sarmat-4791
      sarmat-4791 29 September 2013 22: 58
      0
      No need to bring Wikipedia as evidence - this is a project of Comrade Soros.
  22. Jogan-xnumx
    Jogan-xnumx 22 September 2013 01: 08
    +1
    Quote: Flood
    Quote: Boris55
    In my opinion, there was a civil war based on religion.
    Orthodox - glorifying the right, fought with Christianity - with the religion of slaves.

    Read the forum rules. Then for you, perhaps, the ban will not come as a surprise.

    Although you didn’t contact me, I was curious, but for what exactly could there be a ban in this case? The rules do not say anything about the prohibition to express their versions on the subject of historiography. request
    1. Flooding
      Flooding 23 September 2013 09: 44
      0
      Quote: Jogan-64
      Although you didn’t contact me, I was curious, but for what exactly could there be a ban in this case? The rules do not say anything about the prohibition to express their versions on the subject of historiography.

      The site is strictly prohibited:
      ...
      d) Insulting the religious beliefs and feelings of citizens

      It is not a matter of interpreting historical events or of a point of view on such, but of the thoughtlessness of statements regarding Orthodoxy.
  23. Bakht
    Bakht 22 September 2013 01: 27
    +1
    Quote: Irokez

    I read as a child that there was no Tartaria. And there were no Tatars. Experiencing the constant raids of nomads, the ancient villagers called them immigrants from Tartarus (that is, Hell). And so it has been for a long time. Hence the distorted toponym Tataria.

    As for statistics, we can only say that there are three types of lies: a small lie, a big lie, and statistics.
    1. Jogan-xnumx
      Jogan-xnumx 22 September 2013 11: 22
      +2
      I read as a child that there was no Tartaria. And there were no Tatars.

      Hmm ... and who then lives in Kazan? Or in the Crimea? Iroquois? lol
      What "statistics" do you prefer from the ones you mentioned? laughing
      Have you ever wondered what ancient peoples called Hell Tartarus? In what region did they live and at what times? And was the word "Tartar" in common use among the Russians? fool
      They called Polovtsy Polovtsy, Pechenegs - Pechenegs, Khazars - Khazars, Nogais - Nogais. All of them are nomads and all raided. Like the Tatars. Have you thought, if not in childhood, then at least now, about the absurdity of what you read? Of all the nomads who raided, only the Tatars are identified with Tartarus? No.
      1. Yemelya
        Yemelya 22 September 2013 11: 38
        +1
        Quote: Jogan-64
        They called Polovtsy Polovtsy, Pechenegs - Pechenegs, Khazars - Khazars, Nogais - Nogais.


        They were called filthy.

        Quote: Jogan-64
        Of all the nomads who raided, only the Tatars are identified with Tartarus?


        From some time they could call it that way ("... for our grave sins ...").
        1. Jogan-xnumx
          Jogan-xnumx 22 September 2013 12: 33
          0
          They were called filthy.

          Gentiles were called filthy in Russia. Basically, from the eastern tribes, including Arabs, Persians, etc. This is a collective image. For you I have to repeat myself, was the word "Tartarus" in common use among the Russians?
          From some time they could call

          Could call or, after all, called? From some time ... Is this your personal assumption, or is there any facts, premises?
          1. Yemelya
            Yemelya 22 September 2013 12: 46
            0
            Quote: Jogan-64
            Devil in Russia called the Gentiles. Basically, from eastern tribes, including Arabs, Persians, etc. This is a collective image.


            Thats exactly what I mean.

            Quote: Jogan-64
            Could call or, after all, called? From some time ... Is this your personal assumption, or is there any facts, premises?


            My suggestion.

            Quote: Jogan-64
            From some time ...


            Suppose, since the spread of Greek literature in Russia.
            1. Jogan-xnumx
              Jogan-xnumx 22 September 2013 14: 15
              0
              Sorry, but this is pointless polemic on your part.request I, too, can assume anything, even Tatars, as descendants of the Incas. lol My regards. hi
              1. Yemelya
                Yemelya 22 September 2013 14: 47
                0
                Quote: Jogan-64
                Sorry, but this is pointless polemic on your part.

                Yes, I do not argue. I state the version.

                Quote: Jogan-64
                I, too, can assume anything, even Tatars, as descendants of the Incas.

                How much you want.
      2. Setrac
        Setrac 22 September 2013 12: 23
        +1
        Quote: Jogan-64
        Hmm ... and who then lives in Kazan? Or in the Crimea? Iroquois?

        Apparently the Bulgars? No, according to TI, the Bulgars left, the Russians remained, so where did the Tatars come from? And historians hang this spreading cranberry on our ears.
        1. Corneli
          Corneli 22 September 2013 12: 26
          0
          Quote: Setrac
          Apparently the Bulgars? No, according to TI, the Bulgars left, the Russians remained, so where did the Tatars come from? And historians hang this spreading cranberry on our ears.

          Do you even understand what you wrote?
          1. Setrac
            Setrac 22 September 2013 16: 00
            0
            Quote: Corneli
            Do you even understand what you wrote?

            If you didn’t like something, indicate what. I realized what I wrote.
        2. Jogan-xnumx
          Jogan-xnumx 22 September 2013 14: 44
          0
          I'm so sorry. hi
      3. Corneli
        Corneli 22 September 2013 13: 01
        +1
        Quote: Jogan-64
        Have you ever wondered what ancient peoples called Hell Tartarus? In what region did they live and at what times? And was the word "Tartar" in common use among the Russians?

        In general, it kills me, as alternatives, in attempts to prove that there was no "Mongol-Tatars" at all, but there was a super-duper ancient MEGO-civilization Russia (which is Scythia, and Tartary, and Cymeria, and Aria), trying the Greek word, definition Hell in other Greek. to stick in mythology as a self-name (or, for another reason, add it). Moreover, many of the same alternatives prove that there were no ancient Greeks either, but their language (in terms of the word tartar) is for some reason a proof ... well, it looks like laughing In general, they are still somehow ready to come to terms with the ancient Greeks ... but the Tatars certainly weren’t! fellow
        1. Jogan-xnumx
          Jogan-xnumx 22 September 2013 14: 36
          +1
          In general, it kills me, as alternatives, in attempts to prove that there were no "Mongol-Tatars" at all ...

          Exactly! It was not the Tatars with the Mongols, but the Megarus or, moreover, the ancient Ukrainians ... lol Which is 140 thousand years old ... And in order to get off the slanting Mongols or Tatars - with tape, we pulled the eyelids to the temples. laughing Also, I suppose, the "invention" of ukrov, which the Russians used under license. Or vice versa... fool

          Very regrettable, dear! crying And very much like the beginning of the end. Civilization. With such "progressive" knowledge ...
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Corneli
            Corneli 22 September 2013 14: 48
            0
            Quote: Jogan-64
            Exactly! These were not Tatars with Mongols, but Megarus or, moreover, ancient Ukrainians ... lol Who is 140 thousand years old ... And in order to get off as slanted Mongols or Tatars, they pulled the eyelids to their temples with tape. laughing Also, I suppose, the "invention" of ukrov, which the Russians used under license. Or vice versa ... fool

            Very regrettable, dear! crying And very much like the beginning of the end. Civilization. With such "progressive" knowledge ...

            As I understand it, my flag "hit you in the head", otherwise it is not clear with what fright the hysteria about "proto-breakers" began lol By the way, I still do not understand what kind of knowledge (mine, and even progressive) are you talking about? And in general, what was your post for, except for trying to "trick" at the sight of the Ukrainian dichromatic? request
            1. Jogan-xnumx
              Jogan-xnumx 23 September 2013 00: 01
              +1
              As I understand it, my flag "hit you in the head", otherwise it is not clear with what fright the hysteria about "proto-breakers" began lol By the way, I still do not understand what knowledge (mine, and even progressive) you are talking about? And in general, what was your post for, except for trying to "trick" at the sight of the Ukrainian dichromatic? request

              You are mistaken!!! hi What I sincerely regret! I myself now live under this flag (take a look at my profile). request Either I expressed myself incomprehensibly, or you did not understand my sarcasm. No hysteria on my part, I assure you. The knowledge I meant was not yours at all, and not mine either, but all sorts of pseudo-historians and the majority of today's youth, who are hammered into their heads with utter nonsense and who do not even try to think about the obvious. In this regard, and not with the Ukrainian dvukolor, I recalled the speech at the symposium of historians in St. Petersburg by one, if I may say so, a learned husband from Ukraine, who argued about the origin of proto-ukr 140-150 thousand years ago. The symposium was quite a long time ago, about 5 years ago, but I remember this nonsense. I thought that you heard about this, so I gave an example. Exclusively in support of your opinion about alternatives, as in this I agree with you. And I put you a plus, which has now disappeared ..., not "into the vein" someone can see your comment.
              Once again, I regret the misunderstanding! recourse I won’t bother you anymore.
              1. Corneli
                Corneli 23 September 2013 02: 04
                0
                Quote: Jogan-64
                You are mistaken!!! hi What I sincerely regret!

                Yes, no offense? drinks I was just at a loss (
                And about the "proto-ukrov" ... eh, at one time I was attracted by everything "new", just not 5 years ago) but about 93-95 of the last century, in Ukraine (I loved history) ... like the opening went ( Over time (quite a long time ago), the "novelty" fell under the facts .... that's why I'm surprised at the modern "influx" of tales about "protorussians" so fashionable now in Russia (
                Actually, on the basis of tales about "proto-breakers" 15 years ago, I am extremely skeptical about the trends of modern Russian "alternatives / discoverers". I understand that the loot, the "complex" of the "losers" of the Cold War (but those who are getting up from their knees! And you have to find the guilty! And it is especially desirable not relatives, but from afar!), An attempt to find new / "old" values, but I already passed ... on "non-sloppy". And in Russia, unfortunately, it’s dawn ... what books you don’t look at ... "alternative" ... but it would have been if ... YES, DO NOT THINK ABOUT THIS! And to do without "if"!
                Best regards hi
                1. Jogan-xnumx
                  Jogan-xnumx 23 September 2013 10: 08
                  0
                  Yes, no offense? drinks I was just at a loss (

                  I am glad that our misunderstanding was resolved. yes
                  My respect, colleague! hi
        2. Setrac
          Setrac 22 September 2013 16: 12
          0
          Quote: Corneli
          , try the Greek word, the definition of Hell in other Greek. mythology slap as self

          Do you think that Tartaria came from the Greek tratar? Or maybe the Greek word tartar comes from the name Tartaria? This state looked too terrible in the eyes of the European scum, however, as now, because they are honest, bold, hardworking in the east, what a horror!
          1. Corneli
            Corneli 22 September 2013 16: 43
            +1
            Quote: Setrac
            Do you think that Tartaria came from the Greek tratar? Or maybe the Greek word tartar comes from the name Tartaria? This state looked too terrible in the eyes of the European scum, however, as now, because they are honest, bold, hardworking in the east, what a horror!

            Then why everyone knows about the Greek term and its meaning. But what about the "great" state, from which this "terrifying" word allegedly went to anyone except "alternatives" (well, maybe the ancient Greeks who did not exist)? request
            1. Setrac
              Setrac 22 September 2013 16: 53
              0
              Quote: Corneli
              Then why everyone knows about the Greek term and its meaning. But what about the "great" state, from which this "terrifying" word allegedly went to anyone except "alternatives" (well, maybe the ancient Greeks who did not exist)?

              Well, who are the judges? Those who destroyed this state, they consigned its name to oblivion.
              I would like to draw your attention to the fact that I am not a supporter of the version of Tartaria, but I am not a proponent either, it is the version, and not "the truth that is invincible and not destroyed."
      4. Bakht
        Bakht 23 September 2013 00: 44
        +1
        Quote: Jogan-64

        They called many. Among them are the Slavs.

        Mukhametdinov R.F.,
        Institute of History Sh. Mardzhani AN RT

        ABOUT THE ETHYMOLOGY OF THE WORD “TARTAR” AND THE ETHNONYM “TATAR”
        ------------
        Nevertheless, I believe that the Greek "Tartar" with its roots goes back to the very ambiguous Turkic basis of "tar / tour" and its derivatives, that is, varieties: "tar, tyr, shooting gallery, torus, tour, ball, sar, chor , lar "and to the same derivatives with the initial" d ". Knowing now about the kinship or at least close interaction of the five Nostratic languages, which includes the Altai language family, we should not be surprised at the likelihood of the influence of the Pratürkic language on the ancient Greek.
        ------------
        And the most striking thing is that the Russian expression “flew into tartarara,” meaning “went to hell,” does not come from the ancient Greek word “tartar,” but from the ancient Turkic expression “tartarara,” where “ry” is an ancient Turkic indicator of the directive case in the word “ tartarau "(tearing, hell).


        I have a very wary opinion about statistics. I believe in very short tables. Fomenko's supporters operate on data from 20 years ago and ignore the latest research. Artifacts were found on Kulikovo field in large numbers. But it still claims that nothing was found. The hypothesis of the location of the field near Moscow does not stand up to criticism from the original sources. And the revision of the original sources makes all our polemics absolutely unproductive. So any written act of history can be questioned. Well, I just don't want to talk about the new "chronology". Otherwise, as "hrenology" I do not call it. But this is my personal opinion
    2. sarmat-4791
      sarmat-4791 29 September 2013 23: 02
      0
      And the old maps, where Tartaria is - like the fences that I want, what do I write?
  24. tomket
    tomket 22 September 2013 01: 54
    0
    as soon as he reached the name of Nosowski, all interest was gone. lovers of old pictures and engravings I give as an example an engraving of the battle on the Catalunian fields, find me the Romans and the Huns here, for me they are all medieval knights.
  25. Irokez
    Irokez 22 September 2013 11: 22
    +3
    The most interesting thing is that most of the sources from which the story is told are copies taken from the originals, and where are the originals? Recall the history and the Middle Ages when witches were burned at the stake and, by the way, there is a lot of literature of any kind, whether this is the destruction and cleansing of history. And where the Ivan the Terrible’s library is surely everything will be laid out on shelves, but not either not found, or those distant are silent and hide the henchmen. They say that Ruriks from the Normans went. It’s also beneficial for someone in Russia to cut off the thousand-year history, and right now, according to the Rus calendar, we don’t know about 8 thousand or some year (I don’t remember) from the Creation of the World in the star temple, and only a few centuries ago switched to the calculation from the Nativity of Christ. That somehow we were immediately cut off from the history of the past. And many engravings and pictures of history are 50 to 50 linden and you need to impartially and meticulously examine everything and look for the primary sources, and not copies of them. You won’t get to the Vatican’s library at all, and there’s certainly a lot. And so, if you believe what the West and officially Russian historians feed us, then we will soon forget the Second World War and it turns out that we lost it, and the purely Aryan forces, having joined forces with the Slovyansky, went back to Berlin after the feuds and threw off Hitler’s undemocratic regime.
    If there is any doubt about something, then there should be a clear explanation, but if there is no clear explanation, then there is a muddy whirlpool. We believe in the steadfastness and supposedly authoritativeness of sources from the past, and we write history on their basis, and the authenticity of the sources, as it were, is not (lost) no one really checks because it is somehow taboo and not accepted (they’ll laugh and empty).
  26. vkrav
    vkrav 22 September 2013 14: 08
    +1
    Quote: Irokez
    The most interesting thing is that most of the sources from which the story is told are copies taken from the originals, and where are the originals?

    In the 70s, an inventory and cataloging of existing old manuscripts was carried out ... Almost everything turned out to be copies (most likely "improved and supplemented") of the times of the late Peter I. A huge number of manuscripts - including the largest collection of apocryphal at that time - were kept in The library of the Solovetsky Monastery burned down during a fire set by drunkenness by the inhabitants of the "old world reserve" in 23 AD ... The library burned for several days until it burned out completely ... In the premises, according to eyewitnesses, there were ashes as tall as a man ...
  27. Irokez
    Irokez 22 September 2013 14: 46
    +1
    Quote: vkrav
    In the 70s, an inventory and cataloging of available ancient manuscripts was carried out ... Almost everything turned out to be copies (most likely "improved and supplemented") of the times of the late Peter I

    It is interesting to find out after that, and when were the copies taken from the already burnt originals or did you know in advance that the originals would be burned and the copies were made? If there is no original, then the copy is more incorrect and appended, rewritten by those who benefit.

    Regarding Tartaria, if anyone is interested. http://chelovechnost.narod.ru/Karty/1684-Du-Val-le-Grand-Continent.jpg
  28. Bakht
    Bakht 23 September 2013 01: 10
    +1
    Quote: Mairos
    The Ryazan prince was for Mamai, but did not participate in the battle .. and that’s it. Count how many princes were with Dmitry


    Shakhmagonov has an original version of those events. The article was titled "The Secret Mission of the Ryazan Prince". Interesting reading. Considering the author's biography, the hypothesis is more than interesting :-)
  29. Bakht
    Bakht 23 September 2013 04: 05
    0
    Quote: Corneli
    Quote: Jogan-64
    Have you ever wondered what ancient peoples called Hell Tartarus? In what region did they live and at what times? And was the word "Tartar" in common use among the Russians?

    In general, it kills me, as alternatives, in attempts to prove that there was no "Mongol-Tatars" at all, but there was a super-duper ancient MEGO-civilization Russia (which is Scythia, and Tartary, and Cymeria, and Aria), trying the Greek word, definition Hell in other Greek. to stick in mythology as a self-name (or, for another reason, add it). Moreover, many of the same alternatives prove that there were no ancient Greeks either, but their language (in terms of the word tartar) is for some reason a proof ... well, it looks like laughing In general, they are still somehow ready to come to terms with the ancient Greeks ... but the Tatars certainly weren’t! fellow

    As a "Tatar" :-), I can say that once we were all called Tatars (for example, "Caucasian Tatars"). Then we became Türks, then Azerbaijanis. Now they are pushing me hard again into the Turkic community. I don’t like it very much. It is more comfortable for me to remain an Azerbaijani. There was a very good (again, in my opinion) work by Sumbatzadeh "Azerbaijanis - ethnogenesis and the origin of the people." So there is almost nothing said about the Tatars. Although my grandfather, according to the documents, seemed to be a "Caucasian Tatar".

    About Great Tartaria. What was this state? When did it exist? What is the capital? Governing bodies? Enlighten the foolish Tatar :-). I don’t know anything about this. I know that there were various state entities on the territory of the Great Steppe. Including with the Turkic language. But to unite them all in one state seems to me wrong.

    PS It seems to me that we have all moved away from the initial topic. But everything in this world is so interconnected that this is hardly a big sin. And I am not an "alternative". The conservative model of history is somehow closer to me. Therefore, I do not recognize the "new chronology" and I hate the Kulikovo field in Moscow.
  30. Irokez
    Irokez 23 September 2013 18: 03
    +1
    The fact of the matter is that there is very little information about Tartaria because it was and it was drawn from history or was not, but then what a powerful state was in Siberia. And by the way, yes - it was not my culture or nationality - it was most likely an empire or an alliance of many peoples such as the USSR, in our own and naturally strong and with the Tarar cavalry and the Slavs and Asians were there, but all this disappeared somewhere.
    Time will show and judge where, what and who what. And the name seems to be from the names Tar and Tara
  31. Sunscorpion
    Sunscorpion 25 September 2013 05: 23
    +1
    Quote: ROA
    Excuse me, where are the Russians from the Tatar-Mongol? All Russian lands rose to this battle with the conqueror.

    Excuse me, I even put five, and with a plus. You have perfectly mastered the "material" from the "history" textbooks. Oh, sorry, what kind of textbooks? Times of the USSR? Or already new? What new ones? And, so to speak, this is the last edition, the next and supplemented. Where was it published? And then in Germany there is one "story", in Ukraine now it is different, but in the Baltic States it is generally the third. And what in the US - I'm just afraid to mention.
    Have you ever wondered: Where did this term come from - Tatar-Mongols? And what does "all Russian lands" mean?
    To begin with, you should start thinking in terms of that time, take into account that the peoples lived in completely different places, people had different values ​​and priorities, and then connect all the complementary sciences operating with accurate data of physical and chemical quantities, plus philology, geology, anthropology, toponomy ( especially hydronyms) and so on ... Textbooks are written by people. And to order. And the orders reflect only the political and economic situation in power at that time. They also burn books. This, if you are not aware, happens when the new government writes a new "history". Now their truth is no longer banned or not published, or "littered". Progress, however.
    Now, to the point of the question: There were several Tatar tribes at that time in the Great Steppe, but their number did not exceed several tens of thousands of people (the data is not difficult to find - work yourself). The same applies to the "Mongols". Now the news - there were no Mongols or Tatars. The word Mongol is a distorted temporary form of MOGOL - great, it meant a category, not a tribe. Tatars - distorted from tartars. In the epic of the Mongols (now of the people) there is not a single mention of the fact that they, it turns out, captured half the world. Such is the funny little thing. As for Tartaria, there are dozens of FOREIGN maps with the designation of this area up to the end of the 17th, beginning of the 18th century, i.e. to Peter. Another funny little thing. This territory occupied only the region from the Urals (Yaik, Ripeyskie mountains) to Kamchatka, and from the Northern Arctic to the "Kiy-Thai" wall. This is for you to think about: And where was Kitay-Gorod in Moscow? There were no Chinatowns then. The meaning of the word "cue", I think, does not need to be explained, the word "tay" means "place". Kiy-tai is a fenced-in place. Hence Altai, or rather correctly Alatay. Ala - gold, literally "place of gold". Now you will understand where the words "secret" and "hidden" in Russian come from, as well as where the Alatyr stone came from. The word "tyrit" used to have the opposite meaning to it today, like many other words. Now about Genghis Khan mentioned further in the comments - in the descriptions of the people who saw him, he was blue-eyed, red-beard and broad-shouldered. A typical mogul.
    All Russian lands have risen? An interesting version. More like a civil war for the possibility of full autonomy from the center, which was not achieved then (the so-called "yoke" continued for more than a hundred years), but seriously weakened the Federal Center. As a result, Muscovy appeared. The military-political formation of the Horde (NATO bloc or the Warsaw Pact countries of that time) has sunk into oblivion, eventually breaking up into various dynasties throughout Asia (Asia). See that.
    Nothing changes. Personal wool is always closer than state ...
    1. victor50
      victor50 28 March 2018 16: 24
      0
      What do you teach so confidently? Are you a historian? No, it seems. They only read more (or more varied) books, and, judging by some remarks, they were by no means fiction-historical, but fiction, sometimes written by pseudo-scientists, for the sake of sensation. And the influence of Nosovsky-Fomenko is felt very clearly, well, maybe even their followers were revered.
  32. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 30 September 2013 00: 28
    +1
    The river on which the city of Moscow stands today was also not called the Moscow River.

    In my opinion far-fetched. The article itself says that hydronyms are of the oldest origin. The Slavs, starting to move east, were the first to meet the Finno-Ugric tribes and assimilate them (Solovyov also speaks about this). This, incidentally, fuels modern Ukrainian nationalism (they took our mov and began to be called Russian). And the names Moscow, Nepryatva, Protva are of Ugro-Finnish origin (something like water), i.e. the names were before the arrival of the Slavs. Well, in accordance with the laws of logic, conclusions based on incorrect statements are incorrect.
  33. Alex
    Alex 29 January 2014 18: 24
    +1
    I started reading with interest, but as soon as I got to Fomenko-Nosovskiy, I immediately felt sad. And when I saw that everything in the article was a rehash of already chewed, chewed, and in general the mood dropped to "0". Complete nothing.
  34. mehmeh
    mehmeh 7 December 2014 14: 26
    0
    The article is idiotic,)) such insanity is a complete separation from reality)))))
  35. victor50
    victor50 28 March 2018 16: 17
    0
    I don’t understand, does Fomenko and Nosovsky have any kind of anniversary? What suddenly pulled them out?
    Interesting evidence is given: the Battle of Moscow, because there are Kulishki, and Nepryadva is Yauza, the Moscow River is the Don, and Dmitry Donskoy is Tokhtamysh (they have it!)
    Meanwhile, in the Zadonshchina there are some descriptions of how troops moved to the place of battle with an indication of the duration of movement. This is all ignored. Contemptuous - several tips - on 25 hectares just enrages. How many years have passed since the battle. Should the field be dotted with helmets, shields and chain mail? Or maybe there at every step ammunition from the Great Patriotic War found?
    If, on the whole, the theory of Nosovsky and Fomenko can be read for the first time - an approach is curious, then all that is connected with the Battle of Kulikovo is a blatant juggling with the goal of creating a sensation! Everything that does not fit into their version is completely ignored, hushed up, and the level of fact fitting has shown above.