Persian sources about the Mongol Tatars

341
But you know yourself:
senseless mobile
Changeable, rebellious, superstitious,
Easily empty hope betrayed,
To instant suggestion is obedient,
For the truth is deaf and indifferent,
And she feeds on fables.
A. S. Pushkin, "Boris Godunov"


Contemporaries of the Mongols. Needless to say, our great Alexander Sergeevich was not of a very high opinion about the majority of his contemporaries, for it is clear that with his “Boris Godunov” he first of all addressed them. Much time has passed, radio, telephone, general secondary education appeared, the Internet is available for the mass citizen. But the “food fables” is still thriving and quite popular. Well, there were no Mongols, there were no Tatars, and there was no Mongol conquest either, and if somewhere someone fought with someone there, then these were the Tartars-Russ fighting with the Rus-Slavs. The chronicles are all rewritten by order of Peter the Great, Catherine the Second, or someone from Nikolaev, Rubruk - the papal agent invented everything, Marco Polo is a jester of peas ... In short, there are no sources confirming the very existence of the Mongolian state and its conquest. Not so long ago, one “expert” here, at “VO”, said so directly that why did Genghis Khan go to the West, and did not pay attention to China. And, apparently, he wrote it from ignorance, hurrying, because it was China that the Mongols conquered in the first place.




Siege of Baghdad by the Mongols in 1258. Miniature from “Jami at-tavarikh” Rashid ad-Din. (National Library of France, Paris)


Learning is light, and unlearned is darkness!


And here we must think about the following, namely: if we do not know something, this does not mean that this does not exist in nature at all. There is, but not everyone knows about it, and often content with information from available, but dubious sources. After all, let's say, water is in the puddle and in the crystal decanter. Moreover, in order to get drunk from the puddle, it is enough just to bend over, and the carafe ... Well, firstly, you need to have it, and secondly, you need to fill it, and not with water from the puddle, but you should have this water!

However, the lack of information for many is not the fault, but the misfortune of their hectic life and the consequence of their lack of systematic professional education in this area. That is why in several consecutive publications we will try to fill this gap. And we will try to acquaint the readers of “VO”, first of all, with primary, rather than secondary sources of stories the Mongols ...

Persian sources about the Mongol Tatars

“Jami at-tavarikh” Rashid ad-Din.


Here, the first article on this topic should be emphasized that one can learn the history of unwritten peoples, firstly, through archaeological excavations, and secondly, by reading about them what is written by those who possessed a written language. Thus, if the people lived quietly, peacefully, then it practically disappeared from the writing of world history. But if the neighbors pestered, everyone wrote about him. We do not know the written language of the Scythians, Huns, Alans, Avars ... But after all, the Greeks and Romans left their written testimonies about all of them to us, and we consider their reports to be reliable sources. As for the Mongols, they had their own writing. From the 13th century, the Mongolian peoples used writing systems around 10 to record their languages. One of the legends reports that when Genghis Khan defeated the Naimans in 1204, the Uygur scribe Tatatung was taken prisoner, who, by his order, adapted the Uygur alphabet to record the Mongolian speech. There are other legends, but what is important is that in this case we have two streams of information at once - internal, this is what the Mongols themselves wrote about themselves, and the external one containing what literate representatives of other nations wrote about them, which very often these same Mongols conquered by the power of the sword.


Hulaguid Power Map


Ilkhanat - the state of the Mongols on the land of Persia


One of the Eastern states that fell under the blows of the Mongols was ancient Persia. We will not talk about the Mongol campaign of Khanagu Khan (1256 — 1260) here - this is a topic for a separate article. What is important is another thing, namely, that the result of this conquest was the power of the Hulaguids, and their advance to the West was stopped only by the Egyptian Mamluks in the battle of Ain Jalut. Hulaguid Power (and Western historiography - Ilkhanat). This state existed until the 1335 year, and this was largely assisted by the assistance of its governor Ghazan Khan by his vizier, Rashid al-Din. But Rashid ad-Din was also a very educated man of his time and decided to write a voluminous historical work devoted to world history and the history of the Mongols, in particular. And Gazan Khan approved it! Yes, this “story” was written for the winners, but it is precisely by this that it is valuable. The winners do not need to flatter and embellish their actions, because they are winners, it means everything that they did excellently and simply does not need embellishment. They embellish the writings for the vanquished, in order to sweeten the bitterness of defeat, and the rulers of such a great power as the Hulaguid didn’t need it, because they were Chinggisids, their ancestor was the great Chinggis himself!

Labor Gazan Khan and his vizier ...


By the way, Gazan-khan himself knew the history of his own people well, but still he could not help but understand that it was simply beyond his power to bring together all the available information on his history - after all, he is the ruler of the kingdom, and not the historian, and he simply does not. But then he has the power and loyal servants, and among them was Rashid ad-Din, whom he was in 1300 / 1301. ordered to collect all the information relating to the history of the Mongols. So, first, the work “Ta'rikh-i Gazani” (“The Annals of Gazan”) appeared, which was presented to Olgeit Khan in 1307, and the whole work on this work, called “Jami at-tavarih” or “Collection of Chronicles” only completed in 1310 / 1311.


Hulagu and his wife Dokuz-Khatun. The manuscript "Jami at-tavarikh", XIV century. (National Library of France, Paris)

Naturally, not one Rashid ad-Din worked on this handwritten folio. He had two secretaries: the historian Abdullah Kashani, known for writing the Olgeit-Khan Story, and Ahmed Bukhari, who composed the main text. Someone Bolad, who in 1286, came to Persia from China and was involved in the work, participated in this work, because he was considered a connoisseur of the history and customs of the Mongols. Rashid ad-Din and Bolad worked together, like a teacher and a student. In any case, this is how a contemporary describes their work: one told and the other wrote down. Ghazan Khan and other Mongols also complemented the story, telling about who knew what. Information on the history of India was given by the Buddhist monk Kamalashri, in China - by two Chinese scholars, but among the informants were Rashid and Europeans, or rather one European - a Franciscan monk. After all, he also wrote about Europe.


The Battle of Homs 1281, the Manuscript of Houghton from Korikos: “Flowers of the History of the East”, 1300-1325. (National Library of Catalonia, Barcelona)


For its time, a very decent source base


In addition to the information received from history experts verbally, for writing “Jami 'at-Tavarih”, the already existing written sources were also involved: “Divan-and-lugat at-Turk” (“Collection of Turkic dialects”) by Mahmud Kashgari, the famous Turkic encyclopedist of the XI century ; "Tarih-i-Jehangush" ("History of the world-conqueror") of the Persian historian Juvayni, who also served the Ilkhan rulers; well, of course, “Altan debter” (“Golden Book”), that is, the official history of Chinggis Khan, all of his ancestors and successors, written in Mongolian and stored in the archives of Ilkhan.


Battle of Badr. The manuscript "Jami at-tavarikh", XIV century. (Topkapi Museum, Istanbul)


Later, when Rashid ad-Din fell into disgrace and was executed (and the mercies of the rulers are very short-lived!), The rights of authorship to “Ta'rich-i Gazani” were presented by his secretary Abdullah Kashani. But a comparison of the style of the Oljate-Khan Story shows that it does not resemble the style of Rashid ad-Din, who wrote very simply, avoiding the famous Persian eloquence in every possible way.

The first written manifestation of tolerance?


There were two main parts in the annals of Rashid ad-Din. The first described the actual history of the Mongols, including Hulaguid Iran. The second part was devoted to world history. And at first there was the history of the Caliphate and other Muslim states before the Mongol conquest - the Ghaznavids, Seljukids, the state of the Khorezmshahs, Gurids, Ismailis of Alamut; then followed the history of China, ancient Jews, "Franks", popes, "Roman" (that is, Germanic) emperors and India, in accordance with the level of knowledge about these countries. And the fact that all this is exactly so is very important, since it allows one to compare certain historical facts set forth in this work and thus establish their authenticity, checking with other sources.


Civil strife Illustration from the manuscript “Jami at-tavarikh”, XIV century. (State Library, Berlin)

It is interesting that in "Jami 'at-tavarih" it was directly stated that, although many peoples do not profess Islam, they still deserve to have their history written down, for it points to the boundless wisdom of Allah, who allowed them to exist, and for the faithful to convert them with their works into the true faith, but there is the idea of ​​"comparison" of different cultures was already understood by the historians of that time.


The fall of Baghdad. Illustration from the manuscript “Jami at-tavarikh”, XIV century. (State Library, Berlin)


The third part of the natural-geographical plan was also conceived for writing, in which all the trade routes of the Mongol Empire should also be described. But Rashid ad-Din either did not have time to write it, or she died after his execution in 1318, during the looting of his library in Tabriz.


Miniature from the "Collection of Chronicles" by Rashid al-Din. XIV century. Genghis Khan, surrounded by their nukers. (National Library of France, Paris)


The novelty of labor was to try to write a truly world history. Prior to that, none of the Persian historians had ever set such a task. Moreover, the whole pre-Islamic history of the Muslim peoples was considered by them only as a prehistory of Islam and no more, and the history of non-Muslim peoples was considered completely undeserving of any attention. It was Rashid ad-Din who understood that the history of both Persians and Arabs is nothing but one of the many rivers that flow into the sea of ​​world history.


Arrowheads from Tibet, XVII - XIX centuries. (Metropolitan Museum, New York)


There is a translation into Russian


The work of Rashid ad-Din and his assistants was translated into Russian as far back as 1858 — 1888. Russian orientalist I.P. Berezin, though not entirely, but partially. His work was called “Rashid-Eddin. Collection of Chronicles. The history of the Mongols. The writing of Rashid-Eddin. Introduction: On the Turkish and Mongolian tribes / Trans. from Persian, with introduction and notes by I. P. Berezin // Notes impers. Archeol. of society. 1858. T. 14; Persian text, Russian translation and notes, see: Proceedings of the Eastern Branch of the Russian Archaeological Society. 1858. T. V; 1861. T. VII; 1868. T. VIII; 1888. T. XV. In the USSR, in 1936, the Institute of Oriental Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences prepared the complete edition of this work in four volumes. But the work was delayed by the war, and besides it was so complicated that the last two volumes appeared only in 1952 and 1960.


Finds and their reconstruction from the museum Zolotarevskogo settlement near Penza.


120 pages for 850 thousand pounds!


Interestingly, in 1980, a fragment of 120 pages of one of the illustrated manuscripts “Jami 'at-Tavarih”, written in Arabic, was sold at Sotheby’s auction, where it was passed by the British Royal Asiatic Society. Bought his face, who wished to remain anonymous, for ... 850 thousand pounds sterling. This amount was first paid for the Arabic manuscript.

That is what we have in the end? Excellent source on the history of the Mongols, and correlated with many other sources in other languages. And there is his good translation into Russian, so today any literate person can take it and read it.

References:
1. Rashid ad-Din. Collection of chronicles / Trans. from Persian L. A. Khetagurov, edited and remarks by prof. A. A. Semenov. - M. - L .: Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1952. - T. 1, 2, 3.
2. Ata-Melik Juvayni. Genghis Khan. The history of the conqueror of the world (Genghis Khan: the history of the world conqueror) / Translation from the text of Mirza Mohammed Qazvini into English by J. E. Boyle, with a preface and bibliography of D. O. Morgan. Text translation from English to Russian by EE Kharitonova. - M .: Magister-Press Publishing House, 2004.
3. Stephen Turnbull. Genghis Khan & the Mongol Conquests 1190-1400 (ESSENTIAL HISTORIES 57), Osprey, 2003; Stephen Turnbull. Mongol Warrior 1200-1350 (WARRIOR 84), Osprey, 2003; Stephen Turnbull. The Mongol Invasions of Japan 1274 and 1281 (CAMPAIGN 217), Osprey, 2010; Stephen Turnbull. The Great Wall of China 221 BC – AD 1644 (FORTRESS 57), Osprey, 2007.


To be continued ...
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

341 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    25 May 2019 05: 43
    In the annals of Rashid ad-Din there were two main parts. The first described the history of the Mongols proper, the history of the Mongols, including the hulaguid Iran. The second part was devoted to world history. Moreover, the history of the caliphate and other Muslim states went on before the Mongol conquest - the Ghaznavids, Seljukids, the state of the Khorezmshahs, Gurids, Ismailis of the Alamut; then came the history of China, the ancient Jews, the "Franks", the popes, the "Roman" (that is, Germanic) emperors and India, in accordance with the level of knowledge about these countries

    And where is the Byzantine Empire and Russia? )))
    Well, it’s okay with Russia (understand-forgive), but the Byzantine Empire, to ignore it .....
    Mentioned all but the Orthodox countries .....
    I have strong doubts about the objectivity of such a source. But as they say, what we have, we have.
    1. +3
      25 May 2019 15: 39
      It is necessary to know that the "Byzantine" empire in the original (at the time) was called Romeian. And this name, perhaps, is present in the primary sources. But - in Arabic or Persian.
      Therefore, it is necessary to read at least Russian texts of the 19th century (perhaps they are not adapted).
    2. 0
      18 July 2019 09: 06
      Moreover, I am delighted by the persistence of this historian in terms of allegations of belonging of certain names to one or another people! Here we must also insert here a scientific fact, one can say, that the doctrine of races and nationalities begins to take shape at the end of the 18th century, and in the form in which we see it now, including on the political map of the world, it is more 5th century, and this, the author of this article does not at all give the right, at least, but really selects, to assert what he has piled. Moreover, regarding the Turkic language, it was originally a spoken language, and its formation into the rules took place throughout the 20th century, such as the use of the Latin alphabet or Cyrillic alphabet or the formation of belonging to one or another people ... You can also give an example related to the Ukrainian language . And the formation of all kinds of Arab countries, Syria by Turkey, and all that, it’s the end of the 20th and the whole of the 19th century, so whom the master, Saudi, Saudi Arabia, formed by the Anglo-Saxons from the Bedouins, who until then were under the control of the Ottoman khans, who had lost their power . Literally like at the end of the USSR, from which Arabs of the 20-13 centuries
  2. +8
    25 May 2019 06: 00
    Quote: lucul
    I have strong doubts about the objectivity of such a source. But as they say, what we have, we have.

    And this cannot be regarded as a source from our point of view. This is a collection of stories and messages previously painted, a kind of stream of consciousness. The good news is that it is chronologically structured. And of course, it is hardly possible to study general history using it today. But ... since we are talking about eyewitnesses of the events, since many events took place relatively recently, they are transmitted fairly reliably. And they say that the Mongols were, were strong enough to defeat Khorezm and create the Hulaguid empire. Isn't that enough? And then ... who was the "Europe" consultant! And then Russia ... and who was it bothering at that time? And I didn't bother ... then why write something ...
    1. +8
      25 May 2019 06: 10
      And this cannot be regarded as a source from our point of view

      The most developed state in Europe, at the time of the arrival of the Mongols, was the Byzantine Empire (I hope no one will argue with this). And she simply could not miss the creation of the Mongol empire, that is, not display it. Nearby, suddenly, such a strong and dangerous, and most importantly giant on the territory neighbor, appeared, like the Mongol empire, can’t be written about him.
      What is written by Byzantine historians about the Mongols?
      1. +11
        25 May 2019 06: 13
        Quote: lucul
        What is written by Byzantine historians about the Mongols?

        Good question. But ... the answer is this. Haven't read it yet! I'll get to know each other ... then "unsubscribe". Everything must be done consistently. Now I am dealing with the sources of the East and this work takes a lot of time. It is hardly worth scattering about the topic.
        1. 0
          25 May 2019 06: 14
          Everything must be done sequentially.

          I think you just won’t find it. They are simply not there.
          All references to the Mongols from Arab sources.
          1. -3
            25 May 2019 12: 23
            Quote: lucul
            And this cannot be regarded as a source from our point of view

            The most developed state in Europe, at the time of the arrival of the Mongols, was the Byzantine Empire (I hope no one will argue with this). And she simply could not miss the creation of the Mongol empire, that is, not display it. Nearby, suddenly, such a strong and dangerous, and most importantly giant on the territory neighbor, appeared, like the Mongol empire, can’t be written about him.
            What is written by Byzantine historians about the Mongols?

            Are you? Byzantium was by then gasped. What the hell is a developed state?
            1. 0
              25 May 2019 14: 45
              Quote: Usher
              Are you? Byzantium was by then gasped. What the hell is a developed state?

              Ordinary "to God" developed state Yes
            2. 0
              18 July 2019 12: 53
              Quote: Usher
              Quote: lucul
              And this cannot be regarded as a source from our point of view

              The most developed state in Europe, at the time of the arrival of the Mongols, was the Byzantine Empire (I hope no one will argue with this). And she simply could not miss the creation of the Mongol empire, that is, not display it. Nearby, suddenly, such a strong and dangerous, and most importantly giant on the territory neighbor, appeared, like the Mongol empire, can’t be written about him.
              What is written by Byzantine historians about the Mongols?

              Are you? Byzantium was by then gasped. What the hell is a developed state?

              And there was nobody who could describe these events ?!
              Or all the same, the so-called Byzantine empire and the Ottoman empire are one and the same, only in the middle of the 15th century "take power as much as you want", destroyed this empire, at least its European part, into something more or less similar to the modern political map of the world.
              T.N. official historians, if you blurt out blunders, then you at least do not break away from real history. You watch how the real empires, the British, Ottoman, Russian, and the USSR collapsed at the end, how these empires were pulled apart and who pulled them away and where. How these or other states were formed, and then write your blunders
        2. -1
          27 May 2019 09: 36
          Yes, you will not find anything there .. Before the defeat of Constantinople, the emigration of educated people to the west intensified. But it started after 1204 .. It is not known how many books and manuscripts flowed to the west. Most settled in the Vatican libraries. Who will let you go there ... Something that has flown to Russia with a dowry by Sophia Paleolog. And the others have been destroyed for several decades .. Something has been preserved in private libraries, Mauro Orbini wrote his work, Slavic Kingdom .. And the index of forbidden books is constantly replenished ...
      2. +11
        25 May 2019 08: 49
        By the time the Mongols invaded the region of the Caucasus and Asia Minor, Byzantium, as it were, was no longer there, there was a “Nicaean” empire and Trabzon that turned into small countries surrounded by active enemies.
        Trabzon was completely surrounded by Muslim states, including completely wild nomads, who, by the way, had no idea about Roma and Romans moving to Asia Minor under the pressure of the Mongols, and was preoccupied with the struggle against Shahinshakh Jalal ad-Din and the Seljuks. We learn about the many events of Trapezund from the monk de Rubrux: at first they tried to fight the Mongols who had appeared in Asia Minor, and then they recognized vassalage. Sources for this region are Armenian, Georgian, certainly Persian and Arabic, Bulgarian and certainly Byzantine, but the Mongols were of little interest to them. And for the Mongols, all Western countries, including the remnants of Byzantium, were "Franks."
        Russia, alas, found itself in the path of the Mongols as much as an ally of the fugitive "slaves and shepherds" of the Cumans - to which the Mongols and the Polovtsi counted ... I mean that they did not actually touch the Mongols, but the eastern part of the Cumans was in contact.
        1. +8
          25 May 2019 09: 06
          By the time of the invasion of the Mongols in the region of the Caucasus and Asia Minor, Byzantium was already gone, as it were, there was a "Nicene" empire and Trapezunt

          Nothing that this empire lasted another 200 years? )))
          You simply confuse Byzantium 1380 and Byzantium 1250, at the time of the arrival of the Mongols. See the map of Byzantium at 1250. All internal services (including historiography) worked properly and could well describe the Mongols.
          And while in Western Europe, at the time of the arrival of the Mongols, only monks could read and write, in the Byzantine Empire, literacy among the nobility was much more common.
          And the treacherous capture and plunder of the crusaders of Constantinople, in 1204, dealt a mortal blow to the empire, after which it was never able to recover. The arrival of the Mongols, some 30 years after the looting, could not but be reflected in the Byzantine historians.
          1. +5
            25 May 2019 09: 40
            "History of Salon and Split Archbishops" Thomas of Splits eg
            there are probably sources not translated into Russian. The Byzantines knew the Mongols and concluded treaties with them, the princesses of the Paleologists were given out as hulaguids and Golden Hordes, etc. If the Ottomans did not burn the scrolls, then there are. Only need to be translated
            1. +6
              25 May 2019 10: 26
              All sources are known, those that are of interest to Russian history have even been translated. There is nothing new or special about the Mongols there, the Byzantines of this period did not have time to write global "chronicles", the time of the "obsession", Rashid ad Din is a key monument of this period. By the way, what is there in the Russian chronicles about the Mongols of this period, is there a lot of data? Answer. Very little, very little.
              1. +3
                25 May 2019 22: 43
                All sources are known, those that are of interest to Russian history have even been translated. There is nothing new or special about the Mongols there, the Byzantines of this period did not have time to write global "chronicles", the time of "obsession", Rashid ad Din - a key monument of this period. By the way, what is there in the Russian chronicles about the Mongols of this period, is there a lot of data? Answer. Very few, very few.

                And doesn't it seem strange to you? I do not question the conquest of the Mongols; I am confused by their descriptions and deeds.
                Conquerors who conquered almost the entire civilized world, and consider the Mongol empire the largest in history and ..... there are so few sources about the description.
                That is, MUCH MUCH less significant events that occurred before the arrival of the Mongols, up to a thousand years, in the depths of centuries, are described in sufficient detail and there are no disputes over them, and here a flood of universal proportions is just one detailed source.
                This, if we draw an analogy, as about the Second World War, would only write, any Romanian historian and all - the rest would have silence.
                1. +5
                  25 May 2019 22: 49
                  Vitali, I do not think that there is something there. From the point of view of science, your analogy is beautiful, but not quite relevant. Different periods, different, sorry for the terminology, narrative monuments. It may seem to us that the campaign of the Mongols is a global event, and, to the Armenian chronicler, only an episode with the arrival of the next militant newcomers: according to our sins. That is the problem of history as a science, that one has to deal with specific material, and not with guesses, here as with a good consequence: if there is no body, there is no case.
                2. 0
                  26 May 2019 09: 48
                  The Arab world could not be conquered. If my memory serves me 8 major campaigns of the Mongols and 7 of their major defeats.
          2. +5
            25 May 2019 10: 22
            I repeat - the empire fell in 1204, there were only the stumps of the empire, Trabzon first and learned about the Mongols, these sources on the history of the Mongols are not significant, the fact that Byzantium existed in the form of the city of Constantine, its surroundings, Epirus and the island, I know, but this is the empire just by name. Byzantium was not up to the Mongols. They were interested in her as the mythical allies of 6 with which they became for example, in 1252, no more ...
      3. +1
        25 May 2019 13: 10
        lucul.read George the Monk's Time Book. Byzantine personal chronicler Bazileus.
      4. +2
        26 May 2019 09: 34
        Sure ? And then I read that after 1204 and until 1261 (if I’m not mistaken), no Byzantine empire was in general. And then what appeared later was like the empire of Justinian or Vasily Bolgaroboyets like a pig on a horse.
    2. +5
      25 May 2019 08: 45
      Rashid hell Dean, certainly the source. All literature, it is not so much, from that period is certainly the most valuable sources, because much that we know is really collected bit by bit.
      A little distracted from the topic, will give an example from Russian historical written sources, which is certainly closer to me. The library of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the NLR have a huge number of medieval bibles, it would seem, the bible and the Bible rewrote the arctic fox, and that's all, but the scribes often left comments in the margins, but this is the source: I read about the change of power in style, but “ This is how it is with us. ”
      That is, the work of the historian from the particular to the general: what the source “will say” ... and not “I have a hypothesis”, now I will begin to convince everyone. This is not the topic, but by the way ...
      And the Mongols were really interested in “step by step” opponents, or their allies reported about them, and not immediately made themselves a “map” of military operations for years, as was the case with Khorezm, it is obvious that at the beginning of the campaigns of Genghis Khan, except for “enemies” in the face of various states on the territory of modern China, the Mongols knew nothing.
    3. +3
      25 May 2019 09: 04
      As far as I know, the Koran forbids portraying people and animals. How could a publication with such illustrations appear in a Muslim country?
      1. +2
        25 May 2019 09: 49
        It did not contradict one another, secular rulers, interest in decorating texts with miniatures, and even periods of strict regulation and less strict were constantly changing. or, for example, the growth of the Persians' self-consciousness, which led to their leadership in art in the east ... In the 16 century, the language of poetry, even among the Ottomans, was Persian. There are not many images, especially in the early periods, but they were, and the closer to us, the more.
      2. +1
        26 May 2019 00: 31
        Bans appeared much later. Near Jericho recently excavated
        remnants of a 7th-century MUSLAND villa with frescoes depicting half-naked
        dancers (!). All these paranjas and restrictions are the late development of Islam.
        1. -6
          27 May 2019 02: 05
          ... The death of Pompeii occurred in 1661, and not in 31 AD It’s almost the time of Peter .. This is how history was written .. As the * master * orders - so the clergy will write .. There can’t be a Muslim villa in the 7th century by definition .. because there was paganism in those days ..
          1. +5
            27 May 2019 10: 23
            I am aware that Dmitry Donskoy is Jesus Christ. I myself am a descendant of Tsar Solomon, who lived, as is well known, in Moscow at the Garden Ring in the 17th century. He personally dug out St. Isaac's Cathedral in St. Petersburg. We will be in touch! wassat
            1. -1
              27 May 2019 11: 57
              ... there’s even an obelisk with this date ..
            2. -2
              28 May 2019 09: 26
              and how to contact you now? " Your Highness?"
        2. 0
          27 May 2019 12: 07
          https://via-midgard.com/news/article/gibel-pompei-kto-i-pochemu-skryvaet-istinnuyu.htm
    4. -9
      25 May 2019 14: 25
      Quote: kalibr
      that the Mongols were strong enough to defeat Khorezm and create an empire of the Hulaguids.

      You, Vyacheslav, confuse concepts.
      First of all, who are the Mongols?
      Mongols are not only residents of the Mongolian People's Republic. A small number of them live there. And there are much more Mongols in Asia. A huge number of them live in modern China. And the ancient name of the Mongols in Tartary, "China". At the same time, one should not confuse the "Chinese" with the "Chainas" who lived south of the Great Wall of China. And from the raids of which it was built.
      Was the ancient empire of the Mongols?
      Of course. Only now it was called (in Moscow Tartary) China (ancient). Therefore, if there was any invasion of Moscow Tartary from the east, it would be a Chinese, not a Mongol invasion.
      In fact, the movement (colonization) went in the opposite direction, from west to east. And this Great Tartaria came to the east, and not the Chinese (or even the Mongols) to Tartaria from the east.
      The metropolis of Great Tartary was Moscow Tartary.
      Those. at one time, Irmek (better known as Ermak Timofeevich) did not go to the east at random, but long ago in a well-known way.
      Could the ancient Mongols (or the Chinese, if in ancient times) have any conquests in Asia?
      Of course, why not? Persian sources write about this. But in the end, this empire also became part of Great Tartary.
      As for the Mughal-Tartar yoke, it did exist. But this concept is not secular, but religious. The fact is that when Tartaria captured Russia, this period was declared a "yoke". This was due to the fact that the Tartars (including those in Moscow) were mostly Muslims. Unlike the Orthodox Russians.
      1. +11
        25 May 2019 17: 07
        Dear, I understand that you are a supporter of the New Martyrs sect. But all your "theses" have no evidence and have been repeatedly refuted. The Mongols (or Tatars) during their captures were not Muslims, but professed the traditional Mongolian religion. What is the mass of objective archaeological evidence that your mythologized "Scaliger" could not fabricate in any way)))
        1. 0
          26 May 2019 10: 20
          Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
          But all your "theses" have no evidence and have been repeatedly refuted.

          Let us turn to "Russian folk proverbs".
          Tired like a dog. Where did you see tired dogs?
          But sabeka, in Arabic this is the horse that came to the finish line first, can easily get tired. In this case, the term "sabek" should not be confused with the term "sabek" (this is an official word that has no meaning). These are different terms.
          Retired goat drummer. Do goats have drummers?
          But the Kazi (judges in Arabic) had a drummer. Judge's decisions were read under his shot. When the judge resigned, all his staff also resigned. And then this staff was not really hired to other places.
          Goal like a falcon. The falcon (such a bird) seems to be in feathers. If not sick deprive.
          But in Arabic, the root SKL means "to bare". And the root is GLY, "naked". Semantic repetition sounds like "ponytail". And the bird is out of business here.
          And this list of "Russian folk proverbs" (with Arabic overtones) is endless. About the "eaten dog". Or about "all the dogs hanged on people." Or about the "buried dog". And a lot more about that.
          By the way, zariat (buried) in Arabic means "reason, pretext". And visayat (hanging) is slander, slander. And "sabaka selyu mataru" (ate a dog) is an Arabic proverb that means "his deeds are ahead of his words." Well, like, a cool professional in his field.
          And sadar kaza (sidorova goat) is a verdict in Arabic, a decision of a judge. Moreover, in ancient times, corporal punishment was very common. There were almost no prisons. So they beat the guilty ones, "like sidorov goats."
          You can also see ancient engravings (they are full on the Internet). Where Moscow tsars and their retinue look, well, in a very oriental way (with robes, etc.).
          You can read Afanasy Nikitin. His "Walking ..." is written in a wonderful fusion of Old Church Slavonic and Arabic. And after all, everyone understood what was written there.
          By the way, the fact that Nikitin traveled to those parts speaks volumes. After all, those seas in those days were controlled by Arabs. And the Gentiles there, most likely, were not needed.
          And you can also go to the Kremlin Armory. And admire the weapons produced by local craftsmen (there are stamps). It is painted in Arabic script and quotations from the Quran. What is it for?
          And much more that you can see and read, it would be a desire.
          Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
          I understand that you are a supporter of the Novokhronolaz sect

          Not at all. I don’t even know very clearly what it is.
          But I clearly know that the "history of Russia" was thoroughly straightened several times:
          1. The first time after the overthrow of the Rurikovich and the seizure of power by the Romanovs. The fact is that Muscovy was baptized by the Romanovs. And the Rurikovichs (for the most part) were not Christians at all. It was even about the fact that at the temples stucco with painting (murals) stuck to the ground. And then everything was done in a new way. That culture (before the Romanovs) today can be explored only by tombstones. They were preserved in places in small quantities, although they also tried to destroy them. In particular, they made the foundations of buildings and other structures.
          It is interesting that this culture (of the Rurikovich, but after Moscow Tartaria) was no longer based on Islam. But it was not yet based on Orthodoxy.
          2. Then the "history of Russia" was very seriously straightened under the German Catherine. The Germans straightened it (their names are known) and for a very specific task. Therefore, we have the "Tatar-Mongol invasion" without the presence of Asian genes in the blood of the local population in Russia and traces of the "fabulous tribute" in Mongolia, allegedly sent there during the "Tatar-Mongol invasion". Also in the "history of Russia" there is no Great Tartary (and Moscow Tartary too), which is on many ancient maps. Well, here it is not in history, that's all.
          There were still Peter and Bolshevik straightening of history. But they were not so large.
          Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
          Mongols (or Tatars)

          Mongols (self-name Khalkha) are not Tatars. There is nothing in common between these two terms. Moreover, it is both "warm" and "soft". Generally, terms of a different plan.
          Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
          What is the mass of objective archaeological evidence,

          Yeah. We know these "proofs".
          1. 0
            27 May 2019 08: 27
            Dear, write an article about the sayings of their Arabic counterparts, I liked it very much. Personally for me "opened my eyes"
            1. 0
              28 May 2019 07: 56
              Quote: r910

              ... The fact is that Muscovy was baptized by the Romanovs. And the Rurikovichs (for the most part) were not Christians at all.
              ...

              Something you write nonsense.
              It was not Muscovy that was baptized, but Russia, long before the appearance of Moscow-Muscovy itself.
              An approximate run, at least in time, from 988 to the 15th century.
              And, Muscovy is one of the western names of the Russian state of the pre-Petrine era from the 15th to the beginning of the 18th century.
              This is if you have forgotten.
              And, on this score, there are just a ton of reliable sources.

              Although it is interesting about the Arabic words in sayings and even presented them quite logically .., but enough "pulling an owl on the globe."

              At least confirm with a brief linguistic analysis. And, then some "eyes open", taking your word for it.
              So falsifications occur.
              Some flight of their unbridled imagination and thoughts pass off as truth, while others on the blue eye pick it up.
              1. -1
                31 May 2019 18: 48
                And you can articulate something with the above articulate? You know Arabic. Or, as usual, I didn’t read it, but I condemn it.
          2. 0
            27 May 2019 13: 39
            Quote: r910
            And you can also go to the Kremlin Armory. And admire the weapons produced by local craftsmen (there are stamps). It is painted in Arabic script and quotations from the Quran. What is it for?

            Such a term as the import of weapons you apparently unknown?

            Quote: r910
            Therefore, we have the "Tatar-Mongol invasion" without the presence of Asian genes in the blood of the local population in Russia and traces of the "fabulous tribute" in Mongolia, allegedly sent there during the "Tatar-Mongol invasion".
            Oh, it's just a fairy tale, I even see in the Volga region, not to mention the Urals, people who consider themselves Russian, I see a lot of Asian genes including Mongoloid ones, so what? you have all the traces of the Mongol invasion there?
            About tribute - this shows your complete ignorance of the issue, tribute from Russia was sent not to Karokorum, but to Sarai-Batu, and just in the lower reaches of the Volga there are more than enough treasures and traces of "Russian silver".
            1. 0
              27 May 2019 14: 53
              Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
              Such a term as the import of weapons you apparently unknown?

              There is separately written about the stigma of local gunsmiths.
              Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
              I see a lot of Asian genes including Mongoloid, and so what?

              And nothing. Not the topic of approval.
              Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
              tribute from Russia was sent not to Karokorum, but to Saray-Batu

              Why not to Paris? Since it is not the Mongols, so why not the French?
              Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
              in the lower reaches of the Volga there are more than enough treasures and traces of "Russian silver".

              Can you link to the treasures with "Russian silver" found there? After all, over 240 years of silver, echelons should have accumulated. Railway, if that.
              1. 0
                28 May 2019 11: 30
                Quote: r910
                There is separately written about the stigma of local gunsmiths.

                What does the brand have to do with it? The import of weapons is the most basic explanation for the presence of the Arabic script (all the more so since the "Erichonka" type helmet is a classic Ottoman-Mamluk helmet, and the city of Jericho you know where)

                Quote: r910
                And nothing. Not the topic of approval.

                Nothing of the kind, comrade Novokhronolozets, you are talking about the absence of Asian, in particular Mongoloid genes, I have denied you with my personal observations.

                Quote: r910
                Why not to Paris? Since it is not the Mongols, so why not the French?

                First, I recommend to understand the political structure of the heritage of Genghis Khan - that is why the tribute from Russia was sent to Sarai-Batu, and not to Karakorum. Paris did not capture Russia.

                Quote: r910
                Can you link to the treasures with "Russian silver" found there? After all, echelons should have accumulated over 240 years of silver.

                The link - who is looking for, he will always find, I remember this question for a long time, I read in a special archaeological research in the Astrakhan region, now I have neither the time nor the desire to search for this literature for you again.
                Why echelons? The tribute from Russia was relatively "small" (as contemporaries-travelers write about it, the same Marco Polo), although it was a problem to collect even a few wagons of silver from all principalities with the underdevelopment of commodity production, more often the princes paid the shortage with furs and, unfortunately, " live goods ".
          3. +1
            27 May 2019 17: 27
            Every time when another adherent of "Chronology" brandishes the idea of ​​a rewritten history during the accession of the Romanovs, then he should be taken to the RGADA and hit on the head with at least a couple of scribal books, of which there is darkness. And they were all rewritten. Especially where the Tatar Murza Beshkek argues with the service Akim about which of the puddles on the road passes the border between their possessions. Or Pushechnikov informs the tsar how many carts were used for the construction of the Alatyr notch line. Do you have any idea how many documents, primarily related to the inventory of the lands of service people, the calculation of yasak and petitions to this or that Order, which contain the king's name and date, have survived? But they are only interesting to specialists in economic history, and provided that they have the skill of reading cursive writing. And they are all rewritten !!!
            1. -2
              27 May 2019 17: 57
              But what are you all writing to?
              Flood?
              1. +1
                28 May 2019 10: 20
                Quote: r910
                But what are you all writing to?

                Okay, I will explain for the dull. The list of sources on the history of Russia is much wider than it seems. It is not limited to chronicles and birch bark letters, sources are also various "financial" and other documents that have survived to this day. However, in their research, the founders and supporters of the "New Chronology" ignore them, since most of them are not adapted and can only be read by specialists who have the skills of reading "cursive". These documents often make it possible to clarify or confirm the dating of an event, etc.
          4. +1
            30 May 2019 10: 40
            I want to supplement your post with an example, I will write softly, a strange treatment of history by official historians. We take "Kirillov, V. V. History of Russia: a textbook for academic bachelor's degree / V. V. Kirillov. - 6th ed." And read: "Our land is great and abundant, and order it does not: come to reign and own us "
            .
            And then we read the source: “Our earth is large and plentiful, and outfit there isn’t in it, let’s go reign and be pleased with us. ”
            A Russian person knows that an "outfit" is a unit (usually a military one) for solving a certain task (or a contract for the performance of work, but this is already out of the context in question). But historians do not know !!! And they write "order". How can you trust them after that?
      2. -1
        27 May 2019 07: 02
        I WILL NEVER ANYTHING ANYTHING! I always write what I want to say.
        1. +1
          27 May 2019 10: 43
          Quote: kalibr
          I NEVER CONFUSE ANYTHING!

          Consciously mislead?
          Or themselves did not understand the essence of the matter?
    5. 0
      25 May 2019 15: 42
      Quote: kalibr
      And this cannot be regarded as a source from our point of view. This is a collection of stories and messages painted earlier, a kind of stream of consciousness.

      Excuse me!!!
      This is exactly the classic source!
      Moreover, the work of Rashid al-Din was created specifically as a historical
    6. 0
      April 8 2020 16: 59
      "But ... since we are talking about eyewitnesses of the events, since many events took place relatively recently, they are conveyed fairly reliably. And they say that the Mongols were, were strong enough to defeat Khorezm and create the Hulaguid empire. Is that not enough?"
      Of course, it’s not enough - we don’t have a clue Who these Mongols are, and you personally don’t have a clue how difficult it is to translate Hell Dean today because he didn’t write in the classical Arabic, known today.
  3. +5
    25 May 2019 06: 26
    It may very well be. We here have a much better expert on Byzantium E. Vashchenko. Let's ask him to start ...
  4. +5
    25 May 2019 06: 35
    An interesting coverage of the Iga issue and the movement of nomads to the West. There is also a cool source - these are Chinese chronicles. If you want to cover this issue with a number of articles, then there are very interesting particles /// and sometimes whole monoliths /// of knowledge about this issue. In general, I believe that Chinese advisers were not in vain at the rates of tummen and even in kyungans on especially important directions during especially important events. I believe that securing the Silk Road was the main goal of "walking to the sunset", as one cleverly and sophisticatedly put it. Chinese chronograph. One hieroglyph ensured the fall of the states of Middle Asia and the fate of my present country accomplished with skillful movements of the brush ...
    1. +1
      25 May 2019 06: 56
      You're right. This is the work that is underway. But the layer of information is huge ...
    2. 0
      26 May 2019 20: 02
      Quote: Thunderbolt
      Interesting coverage of the Iga issue and the movement of nomads to the West. There is another cool source --- these are Chinese chronicles.

      This state-supported chronicle has always been
      an important part of China’s spiritual life. The first and titanic in nature generalization of such everyday historiographical work belongs to the brush of the great Chinese
      historian Sima Qian (a native of a family of hereditary historiographers) at the turn of the II — I centuries. BC. The book he created "Shiji"
      (“Historical notes”, or “Notes of a historian”) is an enormous volume and deep in thought essay, which has become a kind of model, a didactic model for historical research in China. In the next two millennia, labor
      Sima Qian served as the basis for the creation of so-called dynastic stories.
      Usually, each new dynasty after its approval on
      the throne created a commission of professional historians in
      whose task was to write the history of the previous
      dynasties. In total, there are traditionally 24 such stories.
      composed by highly qualified specialists who sought to fairly objectively expound the historical events of the previous dynasty and lead the reader to conclusions that were supposed to confirm the legitimacy of the ruling
      dynasties
      History of China, edited by Meliksetov
      No, do you really believe that this dregs are only officially ruled 24 times, you need to take it differently than a collection of fables about anything? laughing
  5. 0
    25 May 2019 06: 55
    The author, if he is a real, and not a fake researcher, before embarking on a descriptive story about the Mongols, it would not be bad to determine the terminology, instead of ridiculing common sense:
    Not so long ago, a “connoisseur” here at VO said so bluntly that why did Genghis Khan go to the West, and did not pay attention to China. And, apparently, he wrote this out of ignorance, hurrying, since it was precisely the Mongols who conquered China in the first place.


    The Mongols living in present-day Mongolia have the same relation to TEM Mongols as God's gift to fried eggs. And if the author knows this, then this should be said at the very beginning. For example, like this:
    Under the term "Mongols" in the XIII - XIV centuries. In no case should real Mongoloids be taken living in the lands of present-day Mongolia. The self-name, the real ethnonym of the autochthons of present-day Mongolia is Khalkha. They did not call themselves Mongols. And they never seized China, did not reach the Caucasus, Persia-Iran, Asia Minor, the Northern Black Sea region and Russia. Khalkhu, Oirats are anthropological Mongoloids, then they were a poor nomadic community, consisting of separate genera. They were primitive shepherds and hunters who were at a very low primitive communal level of development and under no circumstances could create even the simplest proto-state education, not to mention the kingdom and empire of the global level of significance. For this, we needed a state tradition, a high level of spiritual and material culture, a developed economy capable of equipping the armies of tens of thousands of soldiers. Primitive Mongoloid tribes were at the level of the development of the then Indian tribes of the Amazon or North America. That is, even with the most fantastic luck and lucky circumstances, they could not crush China, Khorezm, the kingdom of the Caucasus, the powerful tribes of the Polovtsy and the Alans, defeat Russia and invade Europe.
    https://topwar.ru/133149-mif-o-tataro-mongolskom-ige.html
    1. +1
      25 May 2019 12: 25
      Complete obscurantism.
    2. -2
      25 May 2019 13: 03
      Quote: McAr
      The Mongols living in present-day Mongolia have the same relation to THOSE Mongols as the gift of God for fried eggs.


      Where is this taught interesting? Ah, got it. Samsonov creativity bore fruit. Honestly, I don’t even want to argue with a man who refers to Samsonov’s articles as an authoritative source. I just want to offer medicines. request
    3. 0
      25 May 2019 17: 09
      And to whom are the modern Mongols related, do not explain? What language is Yasa Genghis Khan composed in?
      1. 0
        26 May 2019 19: 30
        and in what language are the Scandinavian brecaeates written in which Russian words are read?
        want examples, I have them. read the book of Sokol-Kutylovsky "set of runic inscriptions", there is a torrent trackers, if you don't find it, I can throw it off. there everything is explained with examples, you can read everything yourself.
        1. -1
          27 May 2019 13: 41
          Quote: just explo
          and in what language are the Scandinavian brecaeates written in which Russian words are read?

          There are many borrowings from Scandinavian languages ​​in Russian, especially from Swedish, although more from Asian (mainly Turkic).
          1. 0
            27 May 2019 15: 47
            the words glory and God are also Scandinavian?
            did not know, did not know.
            Once again - I gave the name of the book, where to look for it, you won’t find it.
            there you will see that ALL brekteat are written in Russian.
  6. +4
    25 May 2019 07: 40
    Quote: McAr
    Under the term "Mongols" in the XIII - XIV centuries. In no case should real Mongoloids be taken living in the lands of present-day Mongolia. The self-name, the real ethnonym of the autochthons of present-day Mongolia is Khalkha.

    The start is good. But then ... more bad. And I don’t need to give references to articles in HE when I write them myself. The article has it all. Take open the book Rashid ad-Din, published by the Academy of Sciences of the Russian Federation and read. Then a lot more. Then begins to reach that who could, and what not. Then you can write about fakes and all that. By the way, in the material you specified there are no references to sources at all. And you want to convince me with this at least in something?
    1. -5
      25 May 2019 08: 39
      Quote: kalibr
      The beginning is good.

      I give! You can, as an epigraph in each sequel, at least in small print, as in bank (fraudulent) agreements, explain to the readers that the term "Mongol" is your homonym and has nothing to do with Mongols from Mongolia.

      Quote: kalibr
      And I don’t need to give links to articles in VO when I myself write them here.

      You take a lot on yourself - you are not alone here.

      Quote: kalibr
      Everything is in the article.

      Where in the article even a word that those Mongols and the present Mongols are generally from different songs?

      Quote: kalibr
      You take it open the book of Rashid ad-Din, published by the Academy of Sciences of the Russian Federation and read.

      Is this what every reader needs to do in order to find out that they are different Mongols? Does the circulation even coincide with the number of visitors to the resource? And what, instead of a warning phrase in the heels of the words - not about Mongols from Mongolia, do you think it is decent to send the reader for these five words to the Talmud, who still try to get hold of it? Are you out of your mind, sir?

      Quote: kalibr
      Then you can write about fakes and all that

      Did this really hurt you? Well, I'm sorry if that's the case. I didn't want to offend. The outrage was just violent. We have already got these nonsense about the "Mongol-Tatar yoke".

      Quote: kalibr
      By the way, in the material you indicated there are no references to sources at all. And you want to convince me of this at least in something?

      Exactly you? Dismiss You are a representative of the bourgeoisie, or from its servants. And I'm from the opposite class. We are historically out of the way. Your class, albeit kept invigorating, has already scored all the barns with glue for the fins. And beyond my class is the future of humanity. Well, and what is the point of convincing the one lying on his deathbed that he lived in the wrong steppe?
      1. +2
        25 May 2019 13: 09
        Quote: McAr
        Where in the article even a word that those Mongols and the present Mongols are generally from different songs?

        Tell me, why does an author have to write blatant nonsense in a normal, objective article, which, moreover, he does not share?
        This can only be done by anticipating such a thought with a phrase like "there is a delusional hypothesis", "now you can often hear such nonsense", etc.
      2. +5
        25 May 2019 13: 23
        Quote: McAr
        And behind my class is the future of humanity.

        You know, personally, I have a certain sympathy for the left-wing ideas and do not consider them completely obsolete. But listening to some of the preachers of these ideas, you, in particular, I understand that I am definitely not on the way with them. Stupidity, ignorance and aggression in one bottle is not at all something that can attract intelligent and educated people, without whom, in fact, nothing can be built, not a house, not a state.
        With your level of argumentation, if you want to benefit socialist or communist ideas, you better campaign for capitalism.
    2. 0
      26 May 2019 20: 09
      Quote: kalibr
      You take open the book of Rashid ad-Din, published by the Academy of Sciences of the Russian Federation and

      You find that Genghisides, according to hell Dean, are blue-eyed redheads. Typical Mongoloids laughing
  7. +7
    25 May 2019 07: 53
    Pictures are traditionally good.

    And the phrase: "If he pestered the neighbors, then everyone wrote" - excellent.

    "Bagheera noticed us" (c).
  8. +2
    25 May 2019 08: 40
    Vyacheslav Olegovich, great theme for Saturday morning! And as usual illustrations - I envy in a good way, so many manuscripts.
    1. 0
      25 May 2019 08: 47
      And in an amicable way, I envy your photos - "Photo by the author. Louvre". I hope to "get even" with you this summer!
      1. +1
        25 May 2019 08: 55
        Great start to the day!
  9. 0
    25 May 2019 08: 56
    Quote: McAr
    And I'm from the opposite class. That's noticeable! Culture 0, arrogance on 100%
    We are historically not on the way. Your class, although it keeps a hearty, but already with glue for flippers, all the barns are scored. The article is not about this, is it? And behind my class is the future of humanity.
    When you are replaced by robots, let's see what your future will be ...
    And now to the point. I am not at all interested in references to the works of people who have written any monographs that have not been published in any of the journals in the VAK list, so do not refer to these "works" anymore. If they are close to you, if this is your level, I am ... glad. This is the difference that ... keeps you where you are. Actually, there are only two ways left: to increase the level of information interaction with the environment or to continue dreaming of glued fins.
    1. +1
      25 May 2019 09: 16
      Quote: kalibr
      When you are replaced by robots, let's see what your future will be ...

      And I’m talking about this all the way. Under capitalism, the upcoming robotization and automation will lead to the physical death of 90-99% of humanity. Reading this - are you sure that your descendants will be in these 1-9%? And if you’re not sure, then what ... are you silent and idle?

      Quote: kalibr
      I am not at all interested in references to the works of people who have written any monographs that have not been published in any of the journals in the VAK list, so do not refer to these "works" anymore.

      VAK is a corrupt girl of imperialism! Or find in that commission at least one not from the service staff of the bourgeois class. So what can they commit there?

      Quote: kalibr
      Actually, there are only two ways: to increase the level of information interaction with the environment or to continue to dream of glued fins.

      If you don't understand that capitalism destroys itself - and this is the essence of its nature, then don't open your mouth to the topic. And then the thesis about "increasing the level of information impact with the environment" looks like advice on shoemaking from a shoemaker without boots.
      1. -1
        25 May 2019 09: 52
        I can give another. Today is Saturday. In the evening, buy half a liter, drink with the friends for the destruction of the world bourgeoisie. I got drunk tomorrow morning and on Monday with new forces again to work. Work for the benefit of world imperialism. You can, however, start making grenades from balls of bed cones (as they did in the first 1905 revolution of the year) and throw them into the bourgeoisie ... Let's see how much you can throw!
    2. 0
      25 May 2019 09: 24
      When you are replaced by robots, let's see what your future will be ...

      Well, workers have long been replaced by robots.
      Now robots are actively replacing engineers. What previously could be developed by entire design bureaus, now such CAD systems as Solidworks, for example, make these bureaus simply "superfluous". Now (today) there is an active replacement of engineers with programs.
      And what about tomorrow? Replacing officials with robots, and then the administrative (senate) apparatus of the country?
      Why then do people? )))
      1. -1
        25 May 2019 09: 30
        Quote: lucul
        Why then do people? )))

        So that's about it!

        В capitalist conditions the upcoming robotization and automation will lead to the physical destruction of 90-99% of humanity. Just think about it!

        But in communism the same robotization and automation leads to the prosperity of mankind. Again - think about it!
        1. -2
          25 May 2019 09: 49
          We already flourished in conditions of developed socialism. Before communism, there was nothing left ...
          1. +1
            25 May 2019 10: 04
            Quote: kalibr
            We already flourished in conditions of developed socialism. Before communism, there was nothing left ...

            Firstly, they prospered very well. Try to tell the young that housing, education, medicine is natural, how to breathe. I tried, there have already been those who do not believe that this is possible.

            Secondly, the bourgeois revolutions took a total of 400 years. And yet capitalism triumphed! Despite the mass of defeats. And you draw conclusions from one quarter of a century - we had 10-12 years before the Second World War and 10-12 years after, and at the same time we had achievements impossible for the capitalist formation.

            I said that you are a fake researcher? I repeat - you are a false researcher, if you make final conclusions inside, in the process of the historical era. Useless explorer, worthless. On a market day, a bundle is your price. You only rally among lemmings. Adult questions are too much for you.
            1. -2
              25 May 2019 10: 51
              In the days of my childhood - remember the golden time! - to such reprimands we usually answered: "A voice came from the garbage can!" And about lemmings ... Do you think too negatively of a large number of people on VO? Not to me ... they might find it offensive. I have something that ... I have something to prove to you, it's like hitting a child!
              1. +3
                25 May 2019 11: 02
                Quote: kalibr
                In the days of my childhood - remember the golden time! - on such reprimands

                Uh-huh, especially in your "golden childhood" you knew the word "reprimands". People's you are our ... fighter for the people.
            2. -2
              25 May 2019 16: 59
              It's always like this ... with some "comrades". When there is nothing more to say, when there are not enough arguments, and anger from their own impotence strangles, they become personal and descend to banal insults. And this never aroused respect and, moreover, was not a proof of one's own innocence.
            3. 0
              6 June 2019 14: 06
              "Did I say that you are a fake researcher? I repeat - you are a lying researcher."
              I will not write anything about the bourgeoisie and their revolution and I sang along, but for the Mongol and their yoke it is insulting and bitter!
              You in the radiance of your Proletarian ignorance do not even understand how much you blaspheme ....!
              After all, what the "mythical Mongols" did then in Russia, even a certain Shekelgruber is resting:
              entire regions were empty, cities turned into cemeteries, many crafts disappeared, the population recovered only by the 17th century - it was just a very long time ago, and not as clearly as the invasion of the nation ...
              But this is still no reason to dance on the bones of their ancestors ...
              You would have found the best, with all your fervent revolutionary frivolity, for a start, a book by professional historian A.G. Kuzmin “Moroders on the Roads of History” and would read - I’ll say right away that it is not on the Internet, only the first 45 pages can be read ...
              But even this is enough not to drive the proletarian ignorance, and not to spit in their past, on the missing graves of their ancestors! ...
              Missing because there was no one left to dig these graves!
              1. -1
                7 July 2019 09: 00
                Sensual speech ... This is not bad, it suggests that you are not indifferent person. Just not addressed said. You need to speak about blasphemy and the graves of the Ancestors to those who introduced false ideas about our past into your bright head, which have now become your beliefs.

                You used the word "ignorance" twice, but do you even know the difference between ignorance and ignorance? We are all born without knowing anything, and all that we know, all our knowledge we acquire. But some acquire them all their lives, while others stop at some stage, and considering that they know enough about everything, they do not want to know anything more.

                In this whole story with the so-called "Mongol-Tatars" I am more surprised not that many people believe in this fake, but what they still believe. What prevented all these people from finding out how things really were before, 5, 10 or 15 years ago? Not wanting to know is ignorance.

                Inquisitive, if not a burden. This is the first thing that came across a query on the topic:
                https://topwar.ru/133149-mif-o-tataro-mongolskom-ige.html
                https://death2032.livejournal.com/444886.html
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGIli69yOE8

                PS. By the way, about our beliefs. Until recently, I was convinced that dinosaurs lived hundreds of millions of years ago, until I once learned that a little more than a century ago in North America it was possible to hunt for pterodactyls. Until recently, I was convinced that mammoths lived thousands of years ago, until one day I saw a video of the 40s with a live mammoth and found out that the mining of a mammoth tusk in Yakutia has been going on for many years, almost on an industrial scale.
          2. -2
            25 May 2019 17: 04
            Vyacheslav, hello! hi
            As for communism, you are not quite right, at that time it was already ... behind the Kremlin wall. But developed socialism beyond the MKAD has not spread. laughing
            Thanks for the article and wishes to continue my favorite topic! hi
            1. +3
              25 May 2019 17: 31
              Hello to you, Konstantin! By the way, I know about communism on a "small scale"! And I'll tell you now. He worked in 1981 at the Oblono, that is, he was subordinate to Oblono! And in August I was mobilized as an inspector of Oblono to visit the "August Pedagogical Council" in one of our Penza districts. And my wife and I were bad with money. And she gave me only ten for three days! I come ... and it began! All these three days I ate for free in kindergarten, and I was served personally by the head of production and fed me ... oh. And they also hinted that there is alcohol ... I slept on a feather bed in a school hostel in a separate room! Zavraiono was personally interested in whether I have everything. At the exhibition of books, I wanted to buy new items ... and they brought them to me for free, tied with a string. After my speech at the teachers' council - Hallelujah, Hallelujah Party and Comrade Brezhnev personally, I was invited to the "cabinet for the district committee", where there was black caviar and cognac. They took me home in the car of the first secretary ... And I returned the unspent ten to my wife. And I thought that if this is how they accept some Oblono instructor in the village, then how do they receive the first and second secretaries of the OK KPSS? And others, of even higher rank ... And it became very disgusting.
              1. -1
                25 May 2019 17: 55
                Well, what can I say ... When I worked in the State Historical Museum, in the same eighties, we often through the guards from our cops, there was our own police station, we had a drink and a snack in the special department of the GUM. Do I have to write what products were there and at what price ... request
          3. +1
            25 May 2019 21: 47
            Quote: kalibr
            We have already flourished under the conditions of developed socialism.

            oha ... you still have a smell.
        2. 0
          25 May 2019 22: 52
          Maybe for a start, you yourself think about it? Almost three decades without the USSR, they could understand where robots are good for the people, and where for the "elite".
      2. +1
        25 May 2019 09: 37
        To write fairy tales. Plant trees. Listen to the wind. Go your own way.
      3. +3
        25 May 2019 22: 05
        Quote: lucul
        now CAD systems like Solidworks, for example, make these bureaus just "superfluous". Now (today) there is an active replacement of engineers with programs.

        Solidworks, like other CAM systems, are tools that in no way replace a person. A hammer and an ax facilitate the work of a carpenter, but they cannot replace him. I know people who can work in such serious programs as NX, but at the same time designers from them ... to put it mildly, none.
        Here there can be no question of replacing the labor of engineers, but only of making it easier. Progress in this area is moving in a slightly different direction. Indeed, manual development of design documentation (drawings) took a lot of time, so they tried to squeeze out the maximum from one finished drawing - tens of thousands of product units. Now, with the advent of CAD, there is a tendency towards "custom tailoring" - for each small batch of products, drawings (3D models) can be changed. At the maximum, each product has its own drawing.
        1. 0
          25 May 2019 22: 25
          Solidworks, like other CAM systems, are tools that in no way replace a person

          I will give a simple example.
          I watched somehow the program about the Minsk Automobile Plant (MAZ).
          So, there was cited as an example the digitalization of production. Previously, for example, a design bureau could develop a MAZ cabin for more than a year. Well, there are calculations for shear, torsion, and so on. And now, CAD does it in 20 minutes, just set the geometric dimensions.
          That is, all the calculations that the engineer used to do, all the compromise - become unnecessary, the computer does all this faster and cheaper.
          This is already a reality.
          1. +2
            25 May 2019 22: 42
            Quote: lucul
            computer does it all faster and cheaper

            With this I just do not argue.
            Quote: lucul
            just set the geometric dimensions.

            You see, just setting the dimensions does not work, you still have to construct it.
            In general - yes, the computer significantly speeds up the work. But the work of the designer itself does not cancel. If MAZs had been produced with the same cabin for decades, now it can be changed once a year, for example, or for each series. This is where progress has been made, and not in replacing people with computers.
            True, once upon a time there were still draftsmen. There were several of them for one designer. Those. these were "draftsmen" who did not develop anything themselves, but only translated the design idea onto paper. Well, yes, the computer has replaced them. Only these positions were abolished much earlier than the first CAD systems appeared.
            1. 0
              25 May 2019 22: 50
              But the work of the designer itself does not cancel

              Google about computer simulation of physical processes.
              If automation out of 100 previously working workers leaves 1-2, now CAD out of 100 previously working engineers also leaves 1-2.
              1. +1
                25 May 2019 22: 56
                Quote: lucul
                Google about computer simulation of physical processes.

                I don’t need to google, because I myself am an engineer, and I work in CAD. I know the situation, so to speak, from the inside.
                And about 1-2% of the "remaining" - this is greatly exaggerated.
                1. 0
                  25 May 2019 23: 31
                  and work in CAD.

                  These paid libraries (modeling) are there - they cost a lot of money ($ 20 for one, and there are a lot of them), not every company can buy them for themselves.
                  Well, free CAD ....., yes there, nowhere without an engineer))
                  1. 0
                    25 May 2019 23: 37
                    Quote: lucul
                    There are these paid libraries (modeling) - they cost a lot of money ($ 20 for one, and there are a lot of them)

                    Prices are probably probably overpriced. But a large set of libraries is needed only by large corporations, and then they are not used in one department. And for small enterprises, those that are included in the basic package are enough, plus one or two additional ones.
        2. +3
          25 May 2019 22: 54
          I know people who can work in such serious programs as NX, but at the same time designers from them ... to put it mildly, none.
          To the point - many people master the programs brilliantly, but CAD design does not replace design insights.
    3. 0
      31 May 2019 21: 10
      When you are replaced by robots, let's see what your future will be ...
      And who will collect the robots? Ah, I realized other robots! And the others are third! And the fourth robots will mine ore, the fifth will melt, no words.
  10. +3
    25 May 2019 09: 03
    = ... as for the Mongols, then they just had their own written language. Since the 10th century, the Mongolian peoples used about 1204 writing systems to write their languages. One legend says that when Genghis Khan defeated the Naimans in XNUMX, he was captured by the Uyghur scribe Tatatunga, who, on his orders, adapted the Uyghur alphabet to record Mongolian speech. There are other legends =
    The entire article is based on legends. From which the author draws profound conclusions. Forgetting to add - "these are just my idle reflections."
    = This state lasted until 1335, and to a large extent this was helped by the assistance of its ruler, Gazan Khan, from his vizier Rashid al-Din. =
    I wonder who told the author about such details? It turns out that Rashid helped save the state (by what?) Through his actions (what?), But for this Ghazan executed him (?)
    Rashid was born 20 years after the death of Chinggis, i.e. did he write the history of Chinggis' conquests from eyewitness accounts? And they were definitely eyewitnesses? Why am I asking this question? Because Rashid began writing "history" not earlier than his thirtieth birthday, that is, The participants in Chinggis's campaigns are no longer alive, taking into account the average life expectancy at that time.
    We know that if the narrator himself writes down information about the event, then this is one interpretation of real events, and if someone writes down from the words of someone, then these are two interpretations, etc. All according to the laws of a child’s game of damaged telephone.
    Actually, the conversation was about the existence - not the existence of the Golden Horde, and the author, in evidence, proposes to us the existence (?) Of a certain power of the Hulaguids. What is it - the power of the Hulaguids?
    No one called the power of the Romanovs to our state.
    And since there was no proper name for the power, was there a power?
    I do not deny everything said by the author, I am just talking about the weak evidence base of his statements. I am not interested in the "history of the Hulaguids state", not because it is not interesting at all, but because, first of all, I am interested in the history of my Fatherland. I am not interested in the "history of the Hulaguid state" also because I am not a historian and I am interested, in addition to the history of my Motherland, in other things. "Nobody will embrace the immense" and "Spit in the eyes of those who say that you can embrace the immense" Kozma Prutkov.
    1. +1
      25 May 2019 09: 49
      ulus Khulagu it was called
  11. +3
    25 May 2019 09: 31
    Too bad the traditional story.
    It is a pity because he himself at one time received a high-quality, still Soviet, historical education.
    But, the traditional historical concept is collapsing.
    And it's not about Nosovsky and Fomenko ...
    As a rule, people with a liberal education created the traditional version.
    But, as soon as people with technical education began to check the traditional positions, then everything fell down ...
    1. +7
      25 May 2019 10: 00
      The problem of “traditional history” is not that some people with technical education check it, but the fact (I’m talking about the main issues) is often difficult to convey the whole range of conclusions to the general reader, and sometimes it is not physically possible: they do not publish. One thing monograph, another thing for the general reader.
      In all other respects, nothing has changed: the rules are simple: you must read in the source language and know historiography, roughly speaking, who said what about your topic and how your controversial points are translated into your modern language (in our case) Russian. That would not get into a puddle with their theories.
      If the researcher does not possess this knowledge, then he is anyone on a specific topic, but not a historian.
      What can people with “technical education” check by reading the Laurentian or 1 Novgorod Chronicle? For a start, they will not read it, if they master it, they will not translate it.
      Once in a dispute about tanks I read the argument of "experts" - I read the World History of Tanks, sorry, but for a historian, not an argument - if I had studied the archival documents in the MO, then yes ...
      It's just that everyone understands football and history ...
      Just thoughts…
      1. +3
        25 May 2019 12: 21
        In second place after football is medicine. Unfortunately, historical issues are of interest to a narrower circle of people.

        But the plane is rarely taken by himself to design.
    2. 0
      25 May 2019 22: 56
      All versions of the story were created in favor of certain rulers.
  12. +1
    25 May 2019 09: 45
    Quote: ignoto
    But, as soon as people with technical education began to check the traditional positions, then everything fell down ...

    Who is it that you so deceived?
  13. +2
    25 May 2019 09: 47
    Quote: Krasnoyarsk
    The whole article is based on legends.

    Are you blind? There even the cover of the book of the RAS edition is given, which is a translation of the Persian text written by eyewitnesses of what is happening ...
    1. 0
      25 May 2019 10: 02
      Quote: kalibr
      Quote: Krasnoyarsk
      The whole article is based on legends.

      Are you blind? There even the cover of the book of the RAS edition is given, which is a translation of the Persian text written by eyewitnesses of what is happening ...

      Have you carefully read my post? I explained in detail why I consider this book as well, including a legend, a reality, but not a historical fact.
    2. +3
      25 May 2019 10: 03
      And we have no other sources. And the whole history of the Mongols, is it written on this?
      Or do we have some secret sources that are not known to the Russian Academy of Sciences and "traditional historians"?
  14. +1
    25 May 2019 09: 47
    Quote: lucul
    Why then do people? )))

    Stupid man really why?
  15. +1
    25 May 2019 09: 48
    Quote: Krasnoyarsk
    No one called the power of the Romanovs to our state.

    Really?
    1. +1
      25 May 2019 10: 05
      Quote: kalibr
      Quote: Krasnoyarsk
      No one called the power of the Romanovs to our state.

      Really?

      Evidence in the studio !!!
      Only the fact of the established name "State of the Romanovs", and not the fact that someone once said so, will count as only evidence.
      1. +3
        25 May 2019 10: 29
        Is it possible without phrases from TV? By the way, the "State of the Romanovs" and the state of the Romanovs are different things.
        1. +1
          25 May 2019 10: 37
          [quote = kalibr] And without phrases from TV is it possible? [/ quote]
          Of course you can.
          [quote = kalibr] By the way, the "State of the Romanovs" and the state of the Romanovs are different things.
          When there is no evidence, from the word at all, it is worthless - blah blah blah.
  16. +1
    25 May 2019 10: 00
    Vyacheslav, thanks for the topic. An excellent and proper undertaking. I ran a short article, once, in the evening I’ll sit thoroughly behind the monitor, and yes it’s time to finally deal with this issue exactly as you do it.
  17. +1
    25 May 2019 10: 45
    Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
    It's just that everyone understands football and history ...

    And it is very sad!
  18. +1
    25 May 2019 12: 26
    Quote: McAr
    The author, if he is a real, and not a fake researcher, before embarking on a descriptive story about the Mongols, it would not be bad to determine the terminology, instead of ridiculing common sense:
    Not so long ago, a “connoisseur” here at VO said so bluntly that why did Genghis Khan go to the West, and did not pay attention to China. And, apparently, he wrote this out of ignorance, hurrying, since it was precisely the Mongols who conquered China in the first place.


    The Mongols living in present-day Mongolia have the same relation to TEM Mongols as God's gift to fried eggs. And if the author knows this, then this should be said at the very beginning. For example, like this:
    Under the term "Mongols" in the XIII - XIV centuries. In no case should real Mongoloids be taken living in the lands of present-day Mongolia. The self-name, the real ethnonym of the autochthons of present-day Mongolia is Khalkha. They did not call themselves Mongols. And they never seized China, did not reach the Caucasus, Persia-Iran, Asia Minor, the Northern Black Sea region and Russia. Khalkhu, Oirats are anthropological Mongoloids, then they were a poor nomadic community, consisting of separate genera. They were primitive shepherds and hunters who were at a very low primitive communal level of development and under no circumstances could create even the simplest proto-state education, not to mention the kingdom and empire of the global level of significance. For this, we needed a state tradition, a high level of spiritual and material culture, a developed economy capable of equipping the armies of tens of thousands of soldiers. Primitive Mongoloid tribes were at the level of the development of the then Indian tribes of the Amazon or North America. That is, even with the most fantastic luck and lucky circumstances, they could not crush China, Khorezm, the kingdom of the Caucasus, the powerful tribes of the Polovtsy and the Alans, defeat Russia and invade Europe.
    https://topwar.ru/133149-mif-o-tataro-mongolskom-ige.html

    Find out first, and then fart in the water, ok?
  19. +1
    25 May 2019 13: 33
    and of course, “Altan Debter” (“The Golden Book”), that is, the official history of Genghis Khan, all his ancestors and successors, written in Mongolian and stored in the archive of Ilkhan.


    That's downright "Mongolian"? But Rashid ad-Din says that those who called themselves "Mongols" were Turks. What kind of Mongolian language? And what about the book itself? Where is she? Who saw her? Nobody. As well as the "Secret Legend of the Mongols", which was first found in the 19th century in Chinese, but, of course, everyone believes that in fact it is very ancient and was previously in some other language. Which, however, do not know.
    This is all to the fact that neither the Mongols as an ethnic community, nor the Mongolian language was not, according to Rashid ad-Din. And to cite its text as a confirmation of the existence of precisely the ethnic Mongol empire is clearly incorrect. In my opinion.
    There were Tatars, a bunch of other tribes were. But the "Mongols" appeared as a kind of supra-ethnic community of the Golden Horde. As a "Soviet people", rude.
    1. +1
      25 May 2019 15: 11
      As far as the basic tribes understood, the troops of Shyngyskhan Naiman, Kerey, Jalair, Konrat, Kiyat. Today, they exist among the Nogais, Karakalpaks, Kazakhs, Uzbeks (descendants of nomadic Uzbeks), I don’t know about the Kyrgyz and Bashkirs. Are these tribes part of the modern Mongols? If the site has Kalmyks or Mongols, Bashkirs, Kyrgyz, enlighten?
      1. +2
        25 May 2019 16: 09
        Rashid ad-Din, Collection of Chronicles: "Concerning those Türkic tribes that are now called Mongols, but in ancient times each of these tribes separately bore a special nickname and name; each had a chief and an emir; from each originated branches and tribes like peoples Jalair, Oirats, Tatars and others, as it will be shown in detail in this chapter "
        1. 0
          25 May 2019 17: 55
          Interestingly, Rashid ad Din writes that "regarding those Turkic tribes which are now called Mongols". In the Soviet school, I was taught that the Mongols were Turkicized in Kazakhstan and Central Asia after the capture of these territories, and the medieval historian directly writes that they were originally Turks. It turns out Batukhan's campaign to Russia and Europe, as well as Khulagu's campaign to the lands of the Persians and Arabs is a continuation of the Shyngyskhan's campaign against China and Khorezm. How to sew today's Khalkha Mongols into this business?
          1. +1
            26 May 2019 11: 57
            Quote: Semurg
            How to sew today's Mongols of the Khalkha to this matter?


            You do not.
      2. -1
        27 May 2019 13: 48
        Quote: Semurg
        As far as the base tribes of the Shyngyshkhan troops understood, the Naimans, the Kerei, the Jalairas, the Conrats, the Kyiyats. Today they exist among the Nogais, Karakalpaks, Kazakhs, Uzbeks (descendants of nomadic Uzbeks),

        These are not tribes, they are, so to speak, "honorable clans" - named according to the scheme of the arriving conquerors. To accurately identify the attitude towards the Mongols, it is necessary to conduct a massive genetic study, but so far there are none.

        Moreover, the ethnogenesis of all the peoples listed above is completely different (the same Karakalpaks are a unique relict people, a fragment of which swept across the Great Steppe to Kievan Rus in the 11th century - the famous nomadic federates "black hoods").
        1. 0
          27 May 2019 18: 34
          No, these are precisely tribes, some even had their own states, for example, the Naiman had a Naiman khanate, the Kerei had their own Khanate. Karakalpaks say about themselves that they are a fragment of the Nogai Khanate. At the expense of genetics, the Turks in their genes have the so-called Mongolian, Semitic, Caucasian, Aryan genes in different proportions.
          1. 0
            28 May 2019 11: 34
            Quote: Semurg
            No, it was the tribes, some even had their own states, for example, the Naiman had the Naiman khanate, the Kerei their khanate. Karakalpaks say about themselves that they are a fragment of the Nogai Khanate.

            Once again - you are somewhat confusing the chronology, the "honorable clans" of the conquerors spread to the conquered tribes in the 12-13 centuries. And already at this place in the 15-17 centuries. various khanates appeared.

            About Karakalpaks, it’s a pity - for them both genetics and the Western written tradition confirm their existence as a tribal education (in the form of the khanate, apparently, what else) at least in 10-11 centuries, and they apparently only since the leg.
            1. 0
              28 May 2019 13: 43
              No, I don’t agree. Naimans had their khanate to Shyngyskhan and live mainly on the same lands and today they are mostly near Altai, it is eastern Kazakhstan, western Mongolia, XUAR of China. Next to them, and Kerei, konraty strongly moved to the middle course of the Syr Darya. At the expense of the Karakalpaks and black hoods, I once read that these are two different peoples and that they are identified only by the self-name Karakalpak and the fact that in Kievan Rus one of the Confederates was called black hoods. The clan composition of Kazakhs and Karakalpaks is one to one, as with the legs and nomadic Uzbeks (not modern Uzbeks), and the names of clans, tamgas, and uraniums often coincide. With other Turkic peoples, such coincidences are much less.
    2. 0
      27 May 2019 02: 55
      Do not be confused. Found and put into scientific use in cases involving sources - not the same thing.
  20. -1
    25 May 2019 14: 20
    Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
    What can people with “technical education” check by reading the Laurentian or 1 Novgorod Chronicle?

    People with science education first study the objective facts of radiocarbon, genetic and isotopic analysis, then material artifacts and only at the end written sources (chronicles, chronicles, sagas, etc.)

    The humanities do the opposite - they first read the subjective sources, and then try to fit the objective facts into them.

    See the erroneous localization of the Battle on the Ice on the ice of Lake Peipsi (and not on the shore) and the Battle of Kulikovo at the mouth (and not at the source) of the Nepryadva River. And these are only the main, approximate in time, milestones in Russian history; what happened to the humanitarian approach to other, more distant key events can be guessed from the 400-year-old "historical" pulling of an owl on the globe in the question of the origin of the Rus tribe.
    1. +1
      25 May 2019 22: 18
      Andrey, written sources are primary, the methods of analysis that you have listed have been used in historical science (interdisciplinary disciplines) for almost 70 years, but they were secondary and remained. It is enough to work in archaeological expeditions, and "traditional" historical training provides for this. About the Battle on the Ice - how did people with technical education help here? The dispute within the framework of historical science, between professional historians, not a single techie. For example the latest historiography on the subject. And on the issue of the Battle of Kulikovo, not techies, not non-techies cannot help from a word - at all. There is no clear information in written historians - that's it.
      I repeat, if a specialist does not know the language of the source, especially for ancient periods, he is anyone, but not a specialist. When the one who talks about the "Mongols and Ancient Rus" learns to read the semi-ustavs, then you can talk, and before that, empty chatter. Archeology and hydrocarbon analysis won't help here.
      1. -3
        25 May 2019 23: 11
        I'm not talking about techies, but about the natural science education of physicists, chemists, engineers, etc., which is based on a strict causal approach to any object of study like:
        - if it is written in black and white "on the grass" in the annals, it means that only from a big hangover one can look for traces of the Battle on the Ice at the bottom of the lake;
        - if it is written in the chronicles in black and white at the mouth (up to the 17 century the source of the river was called) Imperfect, then only from a big hangover can you look for traces of the Kulikovo battle at the mouth of the river;
        - if it is written in the chronicles in black and white that the Rus tribe does not in any way belong to agla, nor to the Saxons, nor to the light, nor the norms, nor to the Danes, then only the Scandinavians can be attributed only to the big hangover.

        Another thing is if the third point (for example) would have been alternative records in chronicles or sagas about the Scandinavians rusah and their horse Hrirekre, who founded Novgorod, created the Russian state and conceived the Hrerikrev dynasty, then only could one assume (only) a fake of a manuscript - but in no chronicle or saga there is no alternative record from the word at all.

        However, the valiant humanitarians-historians wanted to spit on the cause-and-effect approach, and for 400 years, from an absolutely empty place, they organized a public pulling of an owl on a globe called "Normanism" genetic or isotope analysis - how could it be otherwise if the objective data of the analysis contradict the speculative "data" of historians.

        Therefore, physicists, chemists and engineers look at historians as insane, for which you need an eye and an eye. laughing
        1. -1
          26 May 2019 00: 34
          Quote: Operator
          - if it is written in black and white "on the grass" in the annals, it means that only from a big hangover one can look for traces of the Battle on the Ice at the bottom of the lake;


          Here are the texts of the annals:

          “In the summer of 6750. Go prince Oleksandr from Novgorodtsi and with his brother Andrei and from Nizovtsi to the Chyadsky land on Nemtsi and all the way to Pskov. And drive out Prince Pskov, seized Nemtsi and Chyud, and, having fettered, sweat to Novgorod, and you will go to Chyud. And like being on the earth, let the regiment go into prosperity, and Domash Tverdislavich and Kerbet were in the runway, and I sat down Nemtsn and Chyud at the bridge, and that one. And you kill that Domash, the brother of the posadnik, the husband is honest, and you and I beat him, and you took the hands of him and you resorted to the prince to the prince. The prince, however, climbed up to the lake, while Nemtsi and Chyud went about them. Uzrev was Prince Oleksandr and Novgorodtsp, having set up a regiment on Lake Chyudskoye, on Uzmen, at Voronya Kameni. And we rode to the regiment Nemtsi and Chyud, and wounding a pig through the regiment. And fast that slash is great Germans and Miracles. God and St. Sophia and the holy martyr Boris and Gleb, for her sake, for the sake of Novgorod, shed his blood, those holy saints with great prayers, help God to Prince Alexander. But Nemtsi is that scum, and Chyuda gives a shoulder; and, hurriedly, beating them 7 versts on the ice to the Subolichsky shore. And Pade Chyudy beschnsla, and Nemets 400, and 50 hands Yasha and Nrnvedosha in Novgorod. And with a month of April 5, the memory of the holy martyr Claudius, the praise of the Holy Virgin, and the Sabbath. ”
          Novgorod 1st annals of the elder.


          “In the summer of 6750. Prince Alexander came and beat German in the city of Pskov, and deliver the city of Pskov from the godless German, with the help of the holy trinity.And hanging out with them on the ice; and allowances to God Prince Alexander and the husband Novogorodets and Pskovich; ova hack and ova tying barefoot lead on the ice. This battle is the speed of the month of April on 1 day; and speed in the city of Pskov is the joy of greatness. And the prince Alexander’s speech: “About Pskovitch’s husband, I’ll also tell you: who else will finally come to my nephew (a) or who will come running in sorrow or tacos to live in the city of Pskov, and you will not accept him and will not honor him, and you will accuse the second Zhndova »
          Pskov 1st Anniversary
          (according to Tikhanovsky list)


          (02241.) die Rûßen hatten schutzen vil, (63) (02241) The Russians had many shooters (63),
          (02242.) die hûben dô daß êrste spil (64) (02242) who courageously accepted the first onslaught (64),
          (02243.) menlîch vor des kuniges schar. (02243) [being] in front of the prince's squad (vor der kuniges schar).
          (02244.) man sach der brûder banier (65) dar (02244) It was visible as a detachment (65) of the knight brothers
          (02245.) die schutzen underdringen, (02245) defeated (65a) shooters;
          (02246.) man hôrte swert dâ clingen (02246) the sound of swords was heard there
          (02247.) und sach helme schrôten. (02247) and it was visible how helmets were cut.
          (02248.) an beider sît die tôten (02248) Slain on both sides
          (02249.) vielen nider ûf daß gras. (66) (02249) fell on the grass (66)
          (02250.) wer in der brûdere her was (02250) Those who were in the army of the knight brothers,
          (02251.) die wurden ummeringet gar..... (02251) were surrounded by......
          Elder Livonian Rhymed Chronicle

          I suggest you call your Big Bodun and determine, only on the basis of these texts: "on the ice", or still "on the grass". laughing
          1. -2
            26 May 2019 01: 20
            You are exactly a historian.

            The battle with the Germans and the Chudi was on the shore ("from both sides the dead fell on the grass"), and the pursuit of the Chudi ("Chud dasha splash; and, chasing them, seven miles along the ice to the Subolichi coast") - on the ice lakes.

            Big bodun awaits you laughing
            1. +1
              26 May 2019 10: 45
              Operator, you are writing nonsense again. I guess I should get used to it already, but still your natural stupidity, multiplied by technical snobbery and expressed with utterly vile aplomb, makes me answer you time after time.
              Hack it on any part of your body: in the German literary tradition, "falling on the grass" means "perishing." They fell on the grass in the Battle of the Ice, and in the Battle of Rakovor in deep winter, and in many other battles. This is just a literary cliché, no more, like, for example, the beloved ratio of 1:60 by the Germans, in which they took literally all the battles of the XNUMXth century.
              And it would be nice if you still learned that the word "mouth" in Russian was the place where water streams join each other or with a larger body of water. The channel flows out of the lake - the mouth, flows into it - also the mouth, two channels merge - again the mouth. Some straits and bays were also called estuaries.
              And the source remained in the Russian language as the source. A place where something from something expires. So if you try to name the springs from which, for example, the Volga flows, you will simply once again demonstrate fierce illiteracy, although you are not used to it.
              Do not disgrace, stop writing in this section, and if history really interests you, read silently and absorb what intelligent people write here.
              1. -5
                26 May 2019 12: 00
                The location of the Battle on the Shore is confirmed by two independent written sources that I quoted: German (grass) and Russian (chud dasha dancing).

                As a Tatar, you are forgiven for not knowing that the original meaning of the Russian word "mouth" (mouth of a person) is the source of a river. The meaning changed to the opposite only in the 17th century.

                PS You will indicate in Tatarstan.
                1. -1
                  26 May 2019 14: 10
                  Even I "as a Tatar" know that a person's mouth (mouth) is designed to put something into it, that is, this is an entrance hole. In order for something to flow out of the body, other holes are intended. Apparently, your metabolism is built in a slightly different way, in the opposite direction, which is why we have such disagreements. Try to put yourself in the place of a normal person who eats with his mouth, and uses other natural openings intended for this by nature to excrete, and then, perhaps, the essence of the concepts "mouth", "mouth" will become somewhat different for you. wink
                  Now about the "Tatar" laughing ... Since you so easily took the word of your like-minded Nazi, who is now acting under the truly Russian pseudonym "Bar Kokhba", ask him for the source of this information and its details. We discussed this issue with him when he was still Flavius ​​in Latin script.
                  By the way, you didn't say anything at all about your nationality and ancestry. Also, apparently, there is something to hide? No, do not misunderstand me, I am far from thinking that there were Jews in your family, your mental abilities do not allow you to make such an assumption. Here is the current Bar Kokhba — yes, that’s quite enough for a real Jew, you’re not. However, the predominance of Russian roots in your pedigree causes me a reasonable doubt. The fact is that, historically, Russianism has always been alien to the Russian people, since the Russians have always been able to coexist peacefully with other peoples, without any serious consequences including them in their ethnic group. The fact that you demonstrate with your epistols indicates, rather, your belonging to some small, but very proud and equally insulting people, such as the Poles, for example.
                  Make it clear? laughing
                  1. +1
                    27 May 2019 15: 00
                    Quote: Trilobite Master
                    The fact is that, historically, Russian man was always foreign to nationalism, since Russians always knew how to coexist peacefully with other peoples, painlessly including them in their ethnic group

                    I was recently in Kazan and heard a story from the Tatars that Ivan the Terrible, after the capture of this city, expelled all Tatars from it and accordingly removed them all from the administrative apparatus.
                    If this is one of the many examples of the peaceful coexistence of Russians with other peoples, then I take off my hat and urge to coexist in the same spirit. laughing
                    1. -1
                      27 May 2019 15: 11
                      Quote: Sveneld
                      Ivan the Terrible after the seizure of this city drove out of him all the Tatars

                      And after the capture of Novgorod, Ivan III in general sent all the more or less wealthy Novgorodians to the central part of his state and replaced all landowners with his Moscow landowners. So what? This is just normal political practice. At school, teachers do this - sit talkers at different ends of the class so that the working atmosphere is not spoiled.
                      And as the Russian princes in respect of compatriots acted during civil strife - I generally keep quiet, so as not to upset you. Ask yourself if interested.
                      So with the Tatars of Kazan, Ivan acted quite in the spirit of his time, even gently, I would say.
                      And by the way, with the nobles expelled from Kazan, what did they do? Can you tell me? Okay, I'll tell you. They gave the estate in Russia. To become Russified and serve further both themselves and in the descendants of their Mother Russia on common grounds.
                      That is what I call peaceful coexistence.
                      1. -1
                        27 May 2019 15: 21
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        And after the capture of Novgorod, Ivan III generally expelled all the less or less wealthy Novgorodians

                        There is some significant difference between "all more or less wealthy" and all. And the destruction of all mosques. Good coexistence.
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        And by the way, with the nobles deported from Kazan, what did they do? Do not tell me?

                        One of the main goals of the capture of Kazan was not the Russification of the Tatar nobles, but the squeezing of their land fund in favor of the Moscow noble children, who formed the basis of the army. And the fact that there was something compensated for a small fraction of the Tatars, yes - the purely humanity of Ivan Vasilyevich.
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        So with the Tatars of Kazan, Ivan acted quite in the spirit of his time, even gently, I would say.

                        The fact of the matter is that Russian tsars acted with foreigners, respectively, throughout all centuries, up to the Soviet regime.
                        And babbling about peaceful coexistence is ridiculous.
                      2. -2
                        27 May 2019 16: 55
                        Quote: Sveneld
                        And babbling about peaceful coexistence is ridiculous.

                        Babbling about Russian nationalism is even more ridiculous. The fact that the seizures of new territories is accompanied by violence is well known to all. But I didn’t hear something about the Russians arranging reservations, destroying people with whole populations, forcibly converting to Orthodoxy. They built their churches, yes. They built fortresses for garrisons - yes. Trading points - yes. Schools - yes. Prisons, reservations and concentration camps - no.
                        Changed the top management to a more loyal - yes. But the common people were always allowed to live as they lived - only the direction of financial flows changed, no more. Therefore, when it was required in one line with the Russians, the Tatars, Kalmyks, and Buryats fought, and everyone else, starting with Chingizids in the service of Russians princes.
                        The development of nationalism in the country is a sign of its decline.
                        Nationalist beliefs are especially popular in the petty-bourgeois (leaders) and marginal (rank and file) environment. They lead to self-isolation of the state on an international scale (who wants to cooperate with someone who thinks he is above the others), mutual isolation of regions, and, as a result, decay and bloody disintegration of the state into minimal components.
                        The great world empires collapsed immediately after nationalist ideas began to be proclaimed in them. The last example is the USSR.
                        A fat-willed landowner with a no less fat-ass priest and bare-ass, the most skinny, lazy and angry peasants in the village, instead of working in the field, following the call of the same landowner with a priest to smash the already poor shop of a local Jew (because otherwise, if you don’t tell them that the Jew is to blame, it can be understood before them that the landowner with the priest is to blame) - these are your nationalists.
                        You personally, to whom do you rank yourself? To narrow-minded, stupid, eternally hungry, half-animate animals, ready, on orders, to rob and kill foreigners or fat, cunning scoundrels, sending them to such murders?
                      3. 0
                        28 May 2019 08: 41
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        You personally, to whom do you rank yourself? To narrow-minded, stupid, eternally hungry, half-animate animals, ready, on orders, to rob and kill foreigners or fat, cunning scoundrels, sending them to such murders?

                        This is a great example of leftist speeches, with the help of which the Bronstein and Apfelbaum stupefied the head of a Russian man and safely perched on his ridge in the seventeenth and to this day.
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        A fat-willed landowner with a no less fat-ass priest and bare-ass, the most skinny, lazy and angry peasants in the village, instead of working in the field, following the call of the same landowner with a priest to smash the already poor shop of a local Jew (because otherwise, if you don’t tell them that the Jew is to blame, it can be understood before them that the landowner with the priest is to blame) - these are your nationalists.

                        Foreigners in Europe were smashed and defeated in their rights for two thousand years, and nothing - empires were built, new lands were opened, science progressed. But when they started talking about equality and fraternity, that someone has the right there, everything went in different directions - great states collapsed, morality cracked at the seams, men turned into women, women into men, Jews and other foreigners got into all the media and banking sectors, etc.
                        So I consider myself to be normal white people, to whom all this tramp is alien, and on whom morality, morality and productive forces of a healthy society have been based since Christmas.
                      4. 0
                        28 May 2019 11: 42
                        Quote: Sveneld
                        This is a great example of leftist speeches,

                        And what are they wrong? Or do you want to say that the landowners and priests took away from the Russian people (exploited it) less than the Jews? Obrok, serfdom, tithes ... Yes, no alien on such a scale of robbery Russian and never dreamed of.
                        Quote: Sveneld
                        Foreigners in Europe have been smashed and amazed for two thousand years

                        Yes, there are all other foreigners because of this steel. All divided into small pieces of shreds cut. However, this was not always the case. The Roman and Byzantine empires were sufficiently tolerant and therefore managed for a decent time to unite large territories and to preserve for posterity many of their own achievements in science, culture and art.
                        Quote: Sveneld
                        So I consider myself to be normal white people,

                        Well, look, "a normal white man" from the outside on himself and on his like-minded people and supporters. Who you are? A loser in life, who was inspired that it was not he himself who was to blame for all his failures, but some "foreigners"? Or, on the contrary, a person who has something to lose, who eats satisfyingly and sleeps softly, who has amassed his fortune in hard years and is afraid that they will come for him? Look around, there are simply no others among you, and the latter do not particularly share your ideas, although they diligently cultivate and support them.
                        The scheme for the emergence of radical nationalism is both simple and complex at the same time. It appears and flourishes where there are significant and insoluble contradictions between the elite and the people in society, and the elite needs the image of an enemy in order to "play off" the excessive pressure caused by the seething among the masses. The fact that nationalism leads to the collapse of the state even suits the elite - it is easier to survive in troubled waters, and perhaps it will even turn out to lead one of the fragments of the collapsed whole and be there already a sovereign owner, continuing to eat and drink hard.
                        Try to think what will happen if you are able, with the help of some incredible chance, to start implementing your nationalist ideas across Russia. For example, look at Ukraine, and after all Russia will be more abrupt in terms of territory, number of languages, peoples and cultures.
                        However, I think that you are no longer able to think adequately. In your brain, affected by the bacillus of radical nationalism, everything is transformed into an ugly, distorted picture, which is dominated by a complex of your own inferiority caused by the disparity of your personal self-esteem with what you see in reality. So I have no illusions about you.
                      5. -1
                        28 May 2019 12: 25
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        And what are they wrong about?

                        In something, and a lot of what, they are right. But with the same success it can be stated - it’s bad that a person has two hands - let's sew another 10. It’s bad that the Siberian rivers flow to the north, but it would be good to go south.
                        It’s bad that you, for example, have an apartment, and a Tajik guest is huddled in a change house. Can rightly make a communal apartment out of your hut? The Bolsheviks you respect would have made it easy.
                        There is, you see, the natural course of things that has evolved over centuries and millennia. It is consecrated by tradition and history. It can and should be changed, but with surgical accuracy and responsibility. The leftists have neither one nor the other, since they are for the most part throaty and loafers.
                        Or do you want to say that landowners and priests took away from the Russian people (exploited it) less than the Jews?

                        Naturally more, since the Russian authorities kept a very short rein on the Jews as another example of peaceful coexistence. And where the bridle was weakened, there the people groaned from the Jewish tenants. And the authorities again had to intervene.
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        Roman and Byzantine empires were sufficiently tolerant.

                        The Roman Empire equalized all its citizens only during the time of Diocletian, when he forced, in fact, the Romans to pay taxes. Before that, Rome did not pay them. Universal citizenship was given only 50 years earlier. Those. Roman society became tolerant just before death, when the brains were already softened.
                        Byzantium is yes, a unique education. You look and hardly understand what the soul kept there for so many years. God pulled out.
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        Well, look, "a normal white man" from the outside on himself and on his associates and supporters. Who you are? A loser in life

                        Why do you think so? laughing I have everything - money, work, and more. I'm generally happy with everything. I do not complain about Putin or America’s intrigues. Nobody owes me anything. It’s for you, from a stereotyped Soviet habit, that you want to think that all Black Hundreds are embittered and booming apprentices. But I don’t drink and I see the truth well.
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        For example, look at Ukraine

                        I look and see the next result of the activity of the leftist bastard, when in 1917 a fair chunk of the Russian people was fooled by their tales and turned into traitors.
                        Your brethren will not take up anything.
                      6. 0
                        28 May 2019 13: 46
                        Quote: Sveneld
                        Neither one nor the other leftists do not have, because they are in the mass roars and loafers.

                        The same, and perhaps with even greater certainty, can be said about the nationalists. Two extremes. Some people put class relationships at the forefront, ignoring everything else, others, like you, are of genetic origin. The latter, by the way, is even more stupid, since the origin matters only in the context of birth and further residence within a certain ethnos. Carry a purely Russian child in the United States and grow it there - will grow an absolute American, do not look at any genes. I saw it myself.
                        Quote: Sveneld
                        Jews as a regular example of peaceful coexistence, the Russian government kept on a very short rein

                        The next complexes? If the Jews are not restrained artificially, will they seize and enslave the whole world? As you are not tired of singing this song, I do not know. Themselves and sign in their own inferiority, "white people".
                        Quote: Sveneld
                        The Roman Empire equalized all its citizens only in the time of Diocletian,

                        Finally equalized. This is the end of the process. Before that, if you look closely at the development of the Roman Republic and later the Empire, there were several stages of such an equation. And as soon as the next one ended, Rome made a leap forward, a period of expansion began, a period of victories and "victories over the enemies" - the victory over Carthage after the creation of the Italian Union, the capture of Gaul after the allied wars and generally continuous expansion with the beginning of a new era after the reforms of Julius Caesar.
                        And the reforms of Diocletian also gave impetus to the development of Rome as a state - after all, the "golden age" came after numerous internal conflicts. By the way, he himself was by no means a Roman, in the sense of a Latin, by birth.
                        Quote: Sveneld
                        Byzantium is yes, the most unique education. You look and hardly understand what the soul has been holding there for so many years.

                        It is difficult to understand with your concepts. On that and kept, as in Rome - on the expediency and practicality. If a person can be useful, then he doesn’t care what nationality he is - Greek, Jewish or Armenian. Appointed to the post and work. Typical imperial approach.
                        Quote: Sveneld
                        Why do you think so?

                        No need to pull the quote out of context. I did not claim that you are a loser. A suggested you look at yourself and your like-minded people - are you not so. It is difficult to explain radical nationalist views just for other reasons besides the inferiority complex of its own.
                      7. -1
                        28 May 2019 17: 11
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        Or do you want to say that the landowners and priests took away from the Russian people (exploited it) less than the Jews? Dumps, corvee, tithes ...
                        We will make amendments for the clarity of the 2 picture - dues, barshins and tithes ended with the abolition of serfdom right in the 1861 year. So to say, non-economic coercion for the Russian peasantry ended in 55 years before 1917.

                        The first Jewish pogrom by Russians (and even more by Ukrainians) "for economic reasons", and also because of the murder of Alexander III, took place only 20 years later, in 1881 (the previous pogroms were based solely on "blood libel" and took place in "Pale of Settlement").
                        The pogroms in 1862 in Akkerman and in 1871 in Odessa were initiated and carried out exclusively by Greek merchants, who were unhappy that the Jews, who received relative equality and the right to freedom of movement, strongly pressed them in trade and banking.

                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        Roman and Byzantine empires were sufficiently tolerant.
                        I generally applaud standing up! good Such tolerant ancient Romans were so tolerant to galls, Carthaginians, Hellenes, Dalmatians, Numidians, etc., that their states were destroyed, the populations were reduced several times, and the cultures were completely destroyed. It turns out that Hitler is also an outstanding tolerant player? fellow
                      8. -1
                        28 May 2019 17: 37
                        Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
                        their states were destroyed, the populations were reduced by several times, and the cultures were completely destroyed.

                        Oh?
                        After all, it can be said differently: the states absorbed, having included in the empire as autonomous provinces, the population romanized itself (this happens when it comes into contact with a more developed culture smile ), and this process was by no means quick, we just know its results well.
                        As for the reduction of populations, something I do not remember any acts of genocide by the Romans, massacres in their performance, the facts of the total destruction of the population of the conquered countries ... On the battlefield, yes, there they slaughtered everyone and prisoners could not take. But after behaving quite differently.
                        They came to where they started to build churches, roads, schools, streamlined management, imposed laws, handed out citizenship so that everyone could see: if you were obedient, you would be praised. Under Rome, ordinary people were better off than with their ever-fighting princelings.
                        Well, as for the Greeks (Greeks), it still needs to be closely watched whose culture eventually triumphed. Militarily, Rome won unconditionally, but culturally, its victory is more than debatable. And, by the way, any conquered country, depending on the cultural level, contributed its share to the Roman culture. They were susceptible to all the good, advanced that they saw with their neighbors. That was their success, in many respects.
                        So they were tolerant. Very, very.
                      9. 0
                        28 May 2019 23: 30
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        After all, it can be said otherwise: the states swallowed up, having included in the empire as autonomous provinces, the population romanized itself

                        Autonomous provinces?!? Read about this status as "dedication"! "Friends and allies of the Roman people" became autonomous provinces - allied kingdoms received autonomy, not conquered ones.

                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        As for the reduction of populations, then I don’t remember any acts of genocide by the Romans, massacres in their performance, facts of total annihilation of the population of the conquered countries ...
                        The list can be started from the city-kingdom of Veii - the population is partly cut out, a part is sold into slavery. Of the major episodes - Carthage - not just a state, but a different civilization was destroyed under the ROOT, a number of the largest cities were PREATOR and DRAWN (the population was cut out, the rest of the survivors were sold into slavery). The Celts - Y. Caesar himself reported with a hint of regret about the death of approximately 1 million galls as a result of his conquests. Culture and customs are destroyed, the remnants of the people romanized. The list of this is huge.

                        Adoption of foreign cultures and tolerance of the Romans began to show approximately from 2 century AD, in 217, in general, they gave rights to all free and proclaimed the equivalence of cults except for some particularly odious, i.e. when until the collapse of the empire of the West remained 200 years.

                        As for the advanced, what could the conquered conquered Romans, who ALREADY owned advanced industrial technologies, advanced army, advanced architecture, give? Nothing The only exception is the Hellenes with their culture.
                      10. -1
                        28 May 2019 16: 57
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        The development of nationalism in the country is a sign of its decline.
                        I do not agree. Let's move away from Russia, let's move on to England. Absolute British nationalism did not prevent Britain from building the greatest of the colonial empires of the world.

                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        They lead to self-isolation of the state on an international scale (who wants to cooperate with someone who thinks he is above others),

                        This is even funnier - answer above. Cooperated all who wanted to trade; those who did not want to trade, but wanted to fight, were forced by force.

                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        Therefore, when it was required in the same ranks with the Russians, both Tatars, Kalmyks, and Buryats, and all the others fought, starting with Chingizids in the service of the Russian princes.
                        Which were subdued by force and "kept in check." Slightly weakened the reins - and away we go - Central Asia cut out the local Russian population 2 times in the 20th century, if that.

                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        The great world empires collapsed immediately after nationalist ideas began to be proclaimed in them. The last example is the USSR.
                        Again, a finger to the sky, I'm sorry. Take the British again. Under what slogans did they build the largest colonial empire on the planet? peace, friendship, chewing gum and India-Rus bhai bhai? laughing
                      11. -1
                        28 May 2019 17: 19
                        The British Empire in the form in which you imagine it and existed for nothing - a little over a hundred years. You yourself know what its specificity was, you wrote "colonial empire" - the maximum permissible autonomy of the colonies. Small territories on the coast, ruled directly by the British and vast territories ruled by the natives, whose elite depended on and was controlled by the metropolis. And in the end, what ended this empire? That's right - the national liberation movements.
                        At the same time, manifestations of their nationalism were limited to third world countries: with the Germans, French, and Russians, they somehow moderated their ambitions.
                        So the British Empire, in general, also only confirms the general rule. Given its specifics.
                      12. -1
                        28 May 2019 23: 11
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        You yourself know what its specificity was; you wrote "colonial empire" - the maximum permissible autonomy of the colonies.

                        Well, do not be so, I already choked. laughing What is the autonomy of the colonies, eh? Even the closely related territory of New England was not given "much autonomy" (which they actually asked for initially). "Freedom and self-government of the colonies" is a later influence that began in the 20th century and continued until 1947.

                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        And in the end with this empire that ended? That's right - the national liberation movements.
                        Oh my God! When they needed it, the British suppressed the national liberation movement even more! (one "Great Mutiny" is worth something). And no Gandhi could do anything (like many leaders before him).

                        And it ended the British Empire in its form, in which it existed 300 years, - economic inexpediency. The British simply had no sense to contain it. And yes, the British Empire does exist ... only in a different form and on different bases.
                    2. 0
                      28 May 2019 10: 08
                      ... Volga Bulgars only in 1922 became the Tatars through the efforts of Ulyanov = Lenin - he re-baptized them into such a national entity ..
                      1. -2
                        28 May 2019 17: 18
                        Quote: ver_
                        Volga Bulgars only in 1922 year became the Tatars thanks to Ulyanov = Lenin

                        Let's just say, nevertheless, the Volga Bulgars became Volga Tatars soon after they were conquered by the armies of Baty. Even the anthropological component has changed greatly.
                      2. +1
                        30 May 2019 08: 45
                        Then the Russians became Moscow Tatars after their conquest by the Mongol-Tatars.
                        Many Bulgars still remember that they are not Tatars, but Bulgars.
                2. 0
                  27 May 2019 10: 18
                  Quote: Operator
                  You as a Tatar are excusable not to know
                  ... PS You will indicate in your Tatarstan.

                  Well said laughing
                  1. 0
                    28 May 2019 14: 34
                    .. they know this very well - under Shaimiev there was a debate about the need to return the old name ..
              2. +1
                27 May 2019 13: 57
                Quote: Trilobite Master
                Hack it on any part of your body: in the German literary tradition, "falling on the grass" means "perishing." They fell on the grass in the Battle of the Ice, and in the Battle of Rakovor in deep winter, and in many other battles. It's just a literary cliché, nothing more

                How to say. The simple fact is that when in the course of a battle in the winter on the field, which previously seemed white, the snow is trampled down and loosened under the hooves of horses and people, then withered grass appears under it. Never seen? it's a pity ... Such a cliche - but it turns out to be an ordinary realistic observation.
                1. -1
                  27 May 2019 14: 56
                  Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
                  Such a cliche - but it turns out to be an ordinary realistic observation.

                  Livonian rhymed chronicle, from which the Operator draws his inspiration - a work, first of all, poetic. It was compiled not to convey information, but to raise the morale of members of the Order; it was read in the fireplace room during meetings of the brethren. For history, the usual chronicle was written, which is, for example, "The Chronicle of Henry of Latvia".
                  In the rhymed chronicle, literary devices were widely used in order to embellish the narrative, to emphasize the valor of the knight brothers, even to the detriment of the actual content. "Falling on the Grass" is truly a literary cliché that was used regardless of the location and time of year. In German, the idiomatic expression "in das Gras beißen" - "to bite the grass", that is, "to die on the battlefield" is still preserved.
                  So no this is not a realistic observation, but simply a poetic metaphor.
                  If you believe LRH word for word, then probably it should be done in all or clearly explain your selectivity. Why we believe in terms of grass and absolutely do not believe in terms of the correlation of forces 1: 60 or the five-thousandth team of Prince Dmitry under Racovor, I do not understand. And why we believe the Germans and do not believe our chronicles, I also do not understand.
                  1. 0
                    28 May 2019 11: 37
                    Quote: Trilobite Master
                    Why do we believe in terms of grass and absolutely do not believe in terms of the ratio of forces 1: 60

                    By the way, as it has already been repeatedly sorted out in similar topics, this is the only exact preserved value of the number of sides - only on the Russian side the entire army was taken, and from the German side only “knight brothers” were taken for counting without taking into account the “half brothers”, “order bollards "(foot and mounted" sergeants "), as well as mercenary, vassal and allied contingents.
                    1. -1
                      28 May 2019 14: 03
                      Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
                      the only exact remaining number of sides

                      Same for all battles? But for the Germans, it wanders from one description to another ... No, this is also just a poetic cliche.
                      Well, if you believe, then let's believe to the end. It turns out, the specific Pereyaslavl Prince Dmitry Alexandrovich through 30 years after the defeat by the Mongols of Russia and through 15 years after the Nevryueva ratification, which ruined his principality in smoke, was able to put the squad into 5000 soldiers and bring it under Racovor. I wonder how much all the combined Vladimir-Suzdal land in 1238 near Kolomna could put up then? I think the Mongols, seeing such an army, would have turned back to their steppes and went to cry from helplessness and humiliation.
                      1. 0
                        28 May 2019 17: 23
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        Same for all battles? And the Germans, it wanders from one description to another ...

                        Why so? as I know, this ratio is found in the German chronicles exclusively for the battle at Peypussee.

                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        It turns out, the specific Pereyaslavl Prince Dmitry Alexandrovich through 30 years after the defeat by the Mongols of Russia and through 15 years after the Nevryueva ratification, which ruined his principality in smoke, was able to put the squad into 5000 soldiers and bring it under Racovor.

                        Well, there is clearly an extra zero. A squad of 200-300 horsemen is the norm for a prince in Russia, "good" princes fielded just 400-500, the strongest, such as the Grand Duke of Kiev - "700 youths".
                        The most "thin" or "weak" princes had a half-squadron of 50-70-100 riders.

                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        I wonder how much all the combined Vladimir-Suzdal land in 1238 near Kolomna could put up then?

                        And who knows, there is no Russian data, no more. BUT MANY QUALITATIVE WARRIORS - because "the slaughter was fierce", and according to Mongolian-Chinese data, noble military leaders died in it, which means they were on the verge of defeat and the blow of the "forged army" of the Rus reached the Khan's headquarters.
                      2. -1
                        28 May 2019 17: 57
                        Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
                        Well, there is clearly a little extra.

                        Yes, only these numbers were written in words. That is, the poet-chronicler was lying? No, I didn’t lie, if we take it as a cliché, as well as about grass. A Russian, for example, could say: "there is their darkness", but that would simply mean a lot, not count, and not 10000 at all, that is, tumen.
                        The Russians also have enough of such cliches: about seven miles of persecution, for example, is also repeated from time to time. You don’t think that each time they pursued and stopped exactly seven miles. We also have an idiomatic expression "seven versts of kissel to slurp", which simply means "far away." So you don't have to cling to the German text, reading it literally. Dmitry did not have five thousand soldiers, the Russians did not have a sixty-fold superiority in forces, and there was no grass. There was no obligatory seven miles of pursuit.
                        As for Kolomna, if we assume that
                        Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
                        Brigade in 200-300 riders - the norm for the prince in Russia
                        and so, most likely, it was, then the total number of the Kolomna army, taking into account the Kolomna and Moscow militia, the city regiments of Vladimir, Suzdal, etc. it was hardly less than five and more than ten thousand. The principality was then populous and strong. Unfortunately, we are unlikely to ever know the exact numbers, but this army could well have given the Mongols a two-day battle and with a "knightly" spear attack topple and break at least one tumen, rolling along the path of the Chingizid Khan.
            2. 0
              26 May 2019 12: 32
              Quote: Operator
              The battle with the Germans and the Chudi was on the shore ("from both sides the dead fell on the grass"), and the pursuit of the Chudi ("Chud dasha splash; and, chasing them, seven miles along the ice to the Subolichi coast") - on the ice lakes.

              You, Mr. Operator, it is obvious that in the eyes do not pour - all the dew of God!
              You categorically claimed:
              Quote: Operator
              - if it is written in black and white in the annals "on the grass" ...

              Although in the chronicles "black and white" - three options:
              1. Drove on the ice. (Novgorod)
              2. Fought on the ice. (Pskov)
              3. Fell on the grass. (Livonian)
              But you prefer not to notice such trifles ... Why? Do cockroaches in your head like "grass", but "ice" doesn't?
              Here is another excerpt from the Senior Livonian Rhymed Chronicle about the same Battle of the Ice (suddenly you did not read):
              (02252) The Russians had such a military (schar),
              (02253) that every German attacked,
              (02254) perhaps sixty people (67)
              (02255) The Knight Brothers resisted stubbornly enough,
              (02256) but they were defeated there.

              Note, it is also "written in the annals" and also "in black and white"! What will you do? Is it holy to believe?
              1. 0
                26 May 2019 15: 03
                You are clearly a humanist - cavalry (especially heavily armed) looks on the ice (the more April April melted from above) worse than the classic cow on the ice.

                The Germans began the battle on the shore and immediately surrendered after the defeat, because they understood what a retreat on the ice was fraught with. Only lightly armed foot soldiers of the Chudi ran out on the ice, who as a result of their pursuit drove into a fatal place with a large number of underwater keys and, accordingly, thin ice where Chud sank without a trace — for 7 years under water bones, cloth and skin rotted , iron tips spears and arrows oxidized and crumbled.

                The remnants of metal weapons and ammunition found only on land around a genuine Raven stone.
                1. -1
                  28 May 2019 17: 26
                  Quote: Operator
                  You are clearly a humanist - cavalry (especially heavily armed) looks on the ice (the more April April melted from above) worse than the classic cow on the ice.

                  Andrey, here I am also a humanitarian, but I will tell you a simple fact - you probably do not know at all that there were different types of horseshoes? in particular, for winter crossings, even on the ice of rivers and lakes, special "winter" horseshoes with spikes were actively used - an absolute analogue of the "winter" rubber of our cars. In Europe. In Asia, this was not practiced, there the absolute majority of horses were generally used barefoot (although it is very likely that Batu decided to shoe horses for a "winter campaign" to Russia).

                  Accordingly, the Ice Battle could be on the ice, there is nothing critical in it. Although I myself believe that the battle was just on the eastern edge of the lake - ours were on land, and the Germans attacked over the ice (at the edge of the same ice thinner and closer to the water - this could play the role of moats with water as in the battle of Curtre).
                  1. +2
                    28 May 2019 18: 45
                    There are no ice horseshoes - there is a so-called. winter, which differ from the summer large size heads of thorns, which horseshoes nailed to the hooves of horses. Spikes are made of hard hardened steel so that they do not wear out under load (which all falls on the heads of the spikes when moving on frozen ground or ice). The horseshoes themselves are made of soft, non-hardened steel to repeat the relief of the lower surface of the hoof.

                    Winter horseshoes do not have any miraculous properties - when moving on ice, a rider on a horse should still take into account a much lower grip of horseshoes with ice compared to frozen ground and not allow an abrupt change in direction or speed of movement, i.e. combat maneuvers are excluded.

                    The Germans were the attacker, so they could choose the site on the ground for the battle, and it was clearly the shore, not the ice of the lake, because otherwise professional knights would have to be recognized as inexperienced amateurs.

                    And the ice carnage after the battle really was - in the process of pursuing the walking chud on the ice of Lake Peipsi. We chased the 7 versts to the opposite shore until the ice broke through the place where the underwater keys were beaten.
                    1. -1
                      28 May 2019 23: 04
                      Quote: Operator
                      Winter horseshoes do not have any miraculous properties - when moving on ice, a rider on a horse should still take into account a much lower grip of horseshoes with ice compared to frozen ground and not allow an abrupt change in direction or speed of movement, i.e. combat maneuvers are excluded.
                      And no complicated maneuvers were needed - a swift united attack and that's it. And the effectiveness of winter horseshoes is evidenced, for example, by the fact that the Livonian "brothers" quite successfully made winter trips to frozen rivers and lakes, and even along ice-covered sea bays.

                      Quote: Operator
                      The Germans were the attacker, so they could choose the site on the ground for the battle, and it was clearly the shore, not the ice of the lake,
                      Sorry, but the tactical position is always chosen by the DEFENSE side (and it was Rusich and partially Baltic Finns), and the Livonians (or rather, who was there, from the Germans and Danes to the Kursh, the Estonians and the Livs) in the position where he stood.

                      No, the orders were not burdocks, just Alexander Nevsky obviously hid the cavalry in an ambush, setting up a foot regiment, probably covered by ravines near the coast and, possibly, having a sled carriage in the rear, into which the pests retreated. The Livonians just saw the formation of infantry on the shore and that's it. To attack a simple infantry "wall" covered in front by archers, nothing better than hitting with a horse wedge (or three wedges) with foot support in 1-3 battles behind the riders and you can't think of.
              2. -1
                26 May 2019 22: 40
                With regard to the localization of the site of the Battle of the Ice, then disputes over this matter are still going on. Criticism of the hypothesis according to which the Crowstone is identified with Crow Island in the southern part of Lake Peipsi has recently intensified and, in general, seems quite reasonable.
                There is no doubt that the battle took place on the ice. But the specific location remains the subject of debate. I personally think that the most reasonable hypothesis is that the battle took place in the area of ​​the villages of Pnevo - Chudskaya Rudnitsa (from which, in fact, the name of the latter). If we take into account that the water level in the lakes, as suggested by climatologists, was somewhat higher at that time, and given that the shores in this place are low and marshy, the real coastline could be shifted from a few hundred meters to a couple of kilometers. east of existing. And, of course, in these places the lake, whose depth did not exceed half a meter-meter, froze to the bottom.
                In the same area, by the way, in the XIX century. according to legends, peasants found rusty pieces of iron resembling ancient weapons. Now it is in this area (a few kilometers from the present coast) that the battle is being sought.
                As for the impossibility for heavy cavalry to act on the ice - this is of course complete nonsense. Special horseshoes with spikes were used. Any engineer should understand this. And the historian will add that in addition, in addition to the ice battle, there were also battles on the ice, including, for example, the Battle of Karus (Karuzin) 1270, where the same Germans did not interfere with dissecting the ice of the Baltic Sea on their horses.
        2. +1
          28 May 2019 10: 25
          Bravo, Operator, I agree with every word. History suffers from a shortage of objective data, mainly based on sources such as Jami at-tavarih. Even a simple analysis of how such a manuscript could have been written puts it on a par with the writings of modern high school students in terms of reliability.
          All that is written is the result of the author’s compilation of disparate information without due verification of its reliability. WITHOUT verification, as there simply was no way to verify it. As it was not possible for the author himself to participate in all the events due to their territorial and temporary deployment, and the need to learn letters and participate in the palace process to take up the position of court chronicler, and most importantly - and the respected Caliber himself emphasizes this, Rashid ad Din had time little for manuscript writing. To the most painfully perceived opinions of naturally-educated physicists, chemists, engineers, I would add economists, agronomists, veterinarians, forensic scientists and many others who, considering the works of historians, see obvious contradictions with objective reality in the very details that historians consider secondary, in which the devil lies precisely, destroying the faith in the impeccability of official historical science.
    2. +1
      27 May 2019 13: 55
      Quote: Operator
      People with science education first study the objective facts of radiocarbon, genetic and isotopic analysis, then material artifacts and only at the end written sources (chronicles, chronicles, sagas, etc.)

      I will say this - the fact is that the radiocarbon method, to put it mildly, is far from perfect and often shows different dates on the same subject, or, for example, it gives 2 a million years dating on a live snail. It is strange not to know.

      Genetic analysis is more accurate - but ... in the modern world, the conclusions of geneticists are even more politicized than the data from written sources, and in some places it is forbidden obediently or not at all.

      Quote: Operator
      The humanities do the opposite - they first read the subjective sources, and then try to fit the objective facts into them.
      You are strongly wrong - written sources contain orders of magnitude more information, this time, and they often have much more historical details and facts than "natural scientific" methods can give.
      As an example, the same Scythian cities of Herodotus - data about them were preserved for 2000 years in the text of the ancient author, and then were found by archaeologists. I am generally silent about the Bible - for 3000 years, it has stored data on such forgotten states as the Hittite Empire, Assyria, "the peoples of the sea", etc. - and all this was considered a fairy tale by rationalistic scientists ... until from the middle of the 19th century, thanks to the activities of archaeologists, scientific discoveries rained down, which proved the reality of biblical data.
  21. -1
    25 May 2019 15: 32
    Vyacheslav, what about religion in Ilkhanat?
    1. The comment was deleted.
  22. +2
    25 May 2019 15: 33
    Thank you so much!
    Especially for pointing to lit. sources - for fans it is very important.
  23. +1
    25 May 2019 16: 27
    Anton Yu (Anton) And what about religion? What exactly?
    1. -1
      25 May 2019 16: 58
      and what is written on my picture?
  24. 0
    25 May 2019 16: 55
    Quote: 41 REGION
    Quote: Usher
    Are you? Byzantium was by then gasped. What the hell is a developed state?

    Ordinary "to God" developed state Yes

    There is no God, and by the time of the western campaign of the Mongol, Byzantium did not exist, it broke up, so that later it would appear and disappear forever. So do not hang noodles on everyone’s ears here.
    1. 0
      27 May 2019 14: 00
      Quote: Usher
      There is no God, but by the time of the Western campaign of Mongol, Byzantium did not exist, it broke up, so that later would appear again and disappear forever.

      Did he tell you about it himself or do you have evidence to the contrary? or, if He is not, then why talk about this fact at all, eh?

      For the rest I will correct you - during the Mongol invasion of the West, Byzantium existed as much as FOUR (and each ruled by the emperor - 3 Orthodox fragments of the former empire and 1 under the rule of the "Latins"). Which gradually reunited by 1261.
  25. +1
    25 May 2019 17: 14
    Wow, and then it turns out to be a reserve of well-fed Fomenkoids, channeling to the proletarians of intellectual labor))) Torn-off students who skipped classes at school ... They are talking about algebra, and they don’t know arithmetic. Can write a note, how Fomenkonosovsky dismantled. )))
  26. +5
    25 May 2019 17: 26
    Quote: Semurg
    How much did the basic tribes of Shyngyskhan n understand?

    In Russian, it is customary to speak Genghis Khan. In your own - Kazakh or Kyrgyz - you can speak whatever you want. Do not impose YOUR language norms on us!
  27. -1
    25 May 2019 17: 34
    Quote: Arkon
    That's downright "Mongolian"?

    It is impossible every time to clarify and rush in the presentation. We talk about sources - we write about well-established terms. Will go about vocabulary - will be about the features of the language.
  28. -3
    25 May 2019 17: 37
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    Wow, and here comes the reserve of fed-up fomencids, plunging under the proletarians of intellectual labor))) Rivalians, who skipped school lessons ...

    And you did not know? Here, find out, read ... This reserve goblins, God forgive me, although many are quite adequate. But ... it cannot be said that there was 80% to 20% of which 20 are not goblins. That would be ok. But ... alas, what is not, is not!
    1. +2
      25 May 2019 18: 18
      Well, I thought that the historical nihilism-relativism launched in the 90 years, the purpose of which was to undermine the Russian historical identity, has now proved its delusional nature. Then the Fomenonosovites “liberals” were given enormous resources, their opuses were published in insane circulations. But now, this foam would seem to have come off ...
  29. 0
    25 May 2019 17: 39
    Quote: Operator
    See the erroneous localization of the Ice Battle on the ice of Lake Peipsi (and not on the shore)

    Did I support it?
    1. 0
      25 May 2019 19: 25
      You are not, but I did not answer you.
  30. 0
    25 May 2019 17: 40
    Quote: Krasnoyarsk
    The "state of the Romanovs" and the state of the Romanovs are different things.

    Think about it and can understand what the point is.
  31. +4
    25 May 2019 17: 47
    Quote: Semurg
    As far as the basic tribes understood, the troops of Shyngyskhan Naiman, Kerey, Jalair, Konrat, Kiyat. Today, they exist among the Nogais, Karakalpaks, Kazakhs, Uzbeks (descendants of nomadic Uzbeks), I don’t know about the Kyrgyz and Bashkirs. Are these tribes part of the modern Mongols? If the site has Kalmyks or Mongols, Bashkirs, Kyrgyz, enlighten?


    A typical thesis of modern Turkic chauvinism. Like, since the Mongols had hired, and now they are from the Kazakhs, Uzbeks, etc., and in modern Mongolia they are not, so historical Mongols are Türks (the option is Kazakhs). And the power of Genghis Khan - then it turns out the ancient Kazakhstan ....)))))

    Moreover, the obvious picture of how the Mongol tribes and clan groups moved west, and here they eventually disappeared into the conquered local Türks, transferring their ethnonyms as conquerors (since the local clan aristocracy was usually exterminated) does not occur to them. Or he comes, but leaves, because he does not like it.
    Yes, and here’s the trouble, not only Kazakhs have naiman. How do you “share” them with other Turks? )))
    1. 0
      25 May 2019 18: 17
      Digging fine. Ancient Kazakhstan is not the empire of Shyngyskhan, it is the Turkic Khaganates laughing . Why should I share the Shyngyskhan Turk with other Turks? The Shyngyskhan Turks became a part of the majority of today's Turkic peoples.
      1. +1
        26 May 2019 19: 53
        I was always touched by the attempt to translate Chingiz (s) - like the vast Sea-Okiyan. laughing This is how much it was necessary to be stubborn. In fact, Shyngys is anyone who knows at least some Turkic and (possibly) Mongolian language, confirms, means nothing more than - Senior, First. Even now, when they call the first born son in the family: Shyngysom - it does not mean that he is some kind of personification of the Sea-Okiyanichny (Ichthyander is straight). This status only meant that it was adopted (selected on the Kurultai) among his group as the First Leader.
    2. 0
      26 May 2019 19: 48
      I do not in any way deny the existence of these tribes and groups among the modern Mongolian peoples and nationalities. The presence of Naimans, Konyrat (Kongirat), Kerey (Kereyt), Zhalayr, etc. in the composition of several peoples of the Turkic-speaking and Mongolian group is well known. Only among the Kazakhs - these same Naimanov, Kereev, Konyratov and Zhalayyrov are more than in all the other "Khalkha" peoples combined. For example, even officially only in Kazakhstan there are about half a million. And if we take in general, among all the Kazakhs, of whom there will be quite a few outside the historical homeland, then I think about 2 million people. And compare with the same Mongolian peoples, where there are 2-2.5. thousands of people for the whole ethnic group. Do not find in this any definite inconsistency with yours:
      At the same time, the obvious picture of how the Mongol tribes and tribal groups moved to the west, and here, as a result, disappeared into the conquered local Türks, transferring their ethnonyms as conquerors (since the local tribal aristocracy was usually exterminated) does not occur to them.

      After all, following your logic, if they were assimilated by subjugated tribes, then, accordingly, they should not have kept their self-name, tribal tamga, uranium and history. Right? For example, as it was with the early Yuan and Hulagu. I remember even the Golden Horde refused to help the Yuan and the Mongols who were there, saying that they are already Chinese. And here, as it were, on the contrary, there are autochthonous Kipchaks, Sary-Usuni, Dulaty on the one hand, and the newcomers Zhalaiyr and Konyrat on the other. And nothing, nobody assimilated anyone. Everyone knew and remembered what, where and where))
      Sorry, you have exaggerated and circumvented such important things as the symbiosis of tribes and tribal groups in certain state entities, in this case, Ulus Zhosha. With its further transformation into a centralized state in the Horde. And then the collapse of the state, followed by the process of active ethnic formation. It is just from newcomers and locals that such a nation as Kazakhs was formed. And the decay of a single state served as a catalyst for this. As always and almost everywhere. Still so simple.)).
  32. -1
    25 May 2019 17: 49
    briefly on the topic
  33. 0
    25 May 2019 18: 27
    Quote: Semurg
    Digging fine. Ancient Kazakhstan is not the empire of Shyngyskhan, it is the Turkic Khaganates laughing . Why should I share the Shyngyskhan Turk with other Turks? The Shyngyskhan Turks became a part of the majority of today's Turkic peoples.

    Take it higher, Kazakhs are synanthropes.

    Do you continue to distort the Russian language from your own cultural inferiority?
    1. +1
      25 May 2019 18: 30
      Based on your chauvinistic logic, then the Slavs built the Parthenon. For the Slavs and Greeks are Indo-Europeans, that is, they have a common ancestor)))
      1. 0
        25 May 2019 19: 46
        Maybe the Slavs or their ancestors participated in the construction of the Parthenon, because in ancient Greece slave labor was very common. And the Turks are certainly synanthropes. laughing. Shyngyskhan I consider the correct spelling of the name of a historical person
  34. +1
    25 May 2019 18: 32
    Quote: lucul
    And this cannot be regarded as a source from our point of view

    The most developed state in Europe, at the time of the arrival of the Mongols, was the Byzantine Empire (I hope no one will argue with this). And she simply could not miss the creation of the Mongol empire, that is, not display it. Nearby, suddenly, such a strong and dangerous, and most importantly giant on the territory neighbor, appeared, like the Mongol empire, can’t be written about him.
    What is written by Byzantine historians about the Mongols?

    Just this was the time of the practical absence on the world stage of the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine). In 1204, Constantinople was taken by the Crusaders and Venetians, plundered, and the Latin Empire was established, which existed for about 50 years, after which it was no longer necessary to speak of its former glory and power. Also, several fragments existed in the form of separate states in the Balkans, there were attempts to unite, but ... that empire of the Romans, which, albeit losing influence, was indeed the most civilizational center, a powerful and vast state, with their own satellites and an active foreign policy. It was.
    It was a decline - complete and in everything, down to such things that Catholicism was introduced in the Orthodox Empire (a kind of tomosgate of that time).
    What useful did that empire have done - to give Sophia Paleolog for the Grand Duke of Moscow.
  35. The comment was deleted.
  36. +4
    25 May 2019 18: 42
    Mongol-lingualism and the Mongolian ethno-cultural appearance of the elite of the power of Genghis Khan, at least until the beginning and the middle of the 14th century, are many times archaeologically proven fact.
  37. +4
    25 May 2019 19: 01
    Quote: Semurg
    As far as the basic tribes understood, the troops of Shyngyskhan Naiman, Kerey, Jalair, Konrat, Kiyat. Today, they exist among the Nogais, Karakalpaks, Kazakhs, Uzbeks (descendants of nomadic Uzbeks), I don’t know about the Kyrgyz and Bashkirs. Are these tribes part of the modern Mongols? If the site has Kalmyks or Mongols, Bashkirs, Kyrgyz, enlighten?


    Russians can enlighten as well. Or do you divide science into "Turkic" (that is, racially "correct" and the rest?
    So.
    1) Jalaiirs in modern Mongolia are living in Khingan.
    2) "konrats" (this is Turkism, the Mongolian ethnonym - Khunkirats) live in Mongolia in Bairin-Tszotsi, Bairin-Yu, Bulgan and Khuvsgal, and they are also part of the Buryats in Transbaikalia.
    3) Kerei - almost all of them went west and then Turkized, their last genera were noted among the Oirot Mongols.
    4) Naiman - also live in Mongolia in several khoshuns.
    5) Kiyats - in Mongolia, a huge number of births. Currently, representatives of the Chiad (Kiyat), Hyad-Borzhigin (Kiyat-Borjigin) clans live in Mongolia as part of the Khalkha-Mongols and other Mongolian ethnic groups, as well as in the territory of Inner Mongolia

    By the way, all these tribal ethnonyms are of Mongolian origin.
    1. -3
      25 May 2019 19: 45
      Turkic languages ​​are based on the Tungus language.

      Ethnic connections of Turkic-speaking peoples:
      Tungus - Mongols
      Tungus - Huns - Kazakhs
      Huns - Sogdians - Uzbeks
      Huns - Celts - Bashkirs
      Huns - Celts - Turkmen
      Huns - Aryans - Kirghiz
      Huns - Iranians - Tajiks
      Huns - Ugrofinns - Tatars
    2. -1
      25 May 2019 20: 15
      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack


      By the way, all these tribal ethnonyms are of Mongolian origin.

      So Rashid ad Din was wrong to write "regarding those Turkic tribes which are now called Mongols", or maybe it was not the Mongols who came to Central Asia and Kazakhstan and became Turkicized, as Russian historians claim, but the remnants of the Turks in Mongolia became Mongolized.
      1. 0
        26 May 2019 20: 05
        This was also said by Jean-Paul Roux - one of the most prominent experts who studied thoroughly the history of the Turkic-Mongol tribes. wink
  38. Quote: lucul
    And this cannot be regarded as a source from our point of view

    The most developed state in Europe, at the time of the arrival of the Mongols, was the Byzantine Empire (I hope no one will argue with this). And she simply could not miss the creation of the Mongol empire, that is, not display it. Nearby, suddenly, such a strong and dangerous, and most importantly giant on the territory neighbor, appeared, like the Mongol empire, can’t be written about him.
    What is written by Byzantine historians about the Mongols?

    ***
    Byzantine-Mongolian Relations in the Context of Political and Military Conflicts in the Mongol Empire in the 60s. XIII B.E.A. Bump (Belgorod)
    [media=[media=https://vk.com/doc273170162_488584050?hash=0595e18e47309a6473&dl=0662dc5d285b117072]]
  39. Quote: Nick_R
    As far as I know, the Koran forbids portraying people and animals. How could a publication with such illustrations appear in a Muslim country?

    ***
    The period of enlightened Islam with its inheritance of knowledge of the Greco-Roman ancient East (astrology and astronomy, mathematics, medicine, poetry, etc.) was replaced by obscurantism, which continues to this day in some Muslim countries. Nevertheless, the drawings and poetry of the dubious from the point of view of Islam was in the libraries of the powerful of this world, for what is possible for Jupiter is not for the bull.

    In our hands is the cup, the Qur'an
    Righteousness is closer to us, then deceit.
    So we live in our sublunary world
    Polugiaurov, half-Muslims.
    Omar Khayyam

    Also, Europe was screwed into Christian obscurantism before the Renaissance.
  40. Quote: r019
    Quote: kalibr
    that the Mongols were strong enough to defeat Khorezm and create an empire of the Hulaguids.

    You, Vyacheslav, confuse concepts.
    First of all, who are the Mongols?
    Mongols are not only residents of the Mongolian People's Republic. A small number of them live there. And there are much more Mongols in Asia. A huge number of them live in modern China. And the ancient name of the Mongols in Tartary, "China". At the same time, one should not confuse the "Chinese" with the "Chainas" who lived south of the Great Wall of China. And from the raids of which it was built.
    Was the ancient empire of the Mongols?
    Of course. Only now it was called (in Moscow Tartary) China (ancient). Therefore, if there was any invasion of Moscow Tartary from the east, it would be a Chinese, not a Mongol invasion.
    In fact, the movement (colonization) went in the opposite direction, from west to east. And this Great Tartaria came to the east, and not the Chinese (or even the Mongols) to Tartaria from the east.
    The metropolis of Great Tartary was Moscow Tartary.
    Those. at one time, Irmek (better known as Ermak Timofeevich) did not go to the east at random, but long ago in a well-known way.
    Could the ancient Mongols (or the Chinese, if in ancient times) have any conquests in Asia?
    Of course, why not? Persian sources write about this. But in the end, this empire also became part of Great Tartary.
    As for the Mughal-Tartar yoke, it did exist. But this concept is not secular, but religious. The fact is that when Tartaria captured Russia, this period was declared a "yoke". This was due to the fact that the Tartars (including those in Moscow) were mostly Muslims. Unlike the Orthodox Russians.

    ***
    Get this Tartaria out of your head ... it is tantamount to the India that was discovered instead of India.
    Tartaria was named by analogy of the Moguls-Mongols, Tartars-Tatars, in the European languages ​​Tataria and sounds like Tartaria. Tartaria, synonym - Tataria (Latin: Tartaria, French. Tartarie, English. Tartary, German. Tartarei) - a geographical term used in Western European literature and cartography in relation to vast areas from the Caspian to the Pacific Ocean and to the borders of China and India. The emergence of the term "tartars" is associated with the formation of the empire of Genghis Khan at the beginning of the XIII century. The names “Tartaria” and “Tartars” come from the ethnonym Tatars, by which in ancient times Europeans understood all Turkic and Mongolian peoples, without distinguishing them too much by their languages ​​and nationalities. Europe learned about the Tatars during the invasions of the troops of Genghis Khan and his descendants, but until the 1846th century in Europe, information about them (Mongol Tatars) and their states remained extremely scarce and fragmentary. For Western Europeans, the term has become “Tartars” due to contamination with Tartarus. The latter in the Middle Ages meant both the deepest areas of hell and the far unknown regions of the Earth, from where, as it seemed to the Europeans, the “wild” hordes of nomads came. As it is more picturesquely said in the Russian academic edition of XNUMX (!!!) of the year *: "In the understanding of Europeans," Tartars "are a people that carries horrors and the end of the world, and the form of this word has become common, hinting at the origin of the enemies of Christianity from pagan Tartarus."
    * Pocketbook for lovers of geography. - St. Petersburg: Imperial Russian Geographical Society, 1848. - S. 255—256.
    You, you see, are at the level of those European historians and geographers of past centuries, if you believe in the anti-scientific nonsense of "neohistorians"
    1. +1
      25 May 2019 20: 43
      And then from the Dutch this "Tartary" passed to the Japanese.

      It is interesting to watch how myths are created.
      But it's good when I'm sitting high.
    2. -2
      26 May 2019 10: 21
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
      Get this Tartaria out of your head

      Why should I get my ancestors homeland out of my head? Moreover, a great homeland?
      I am neither Ivan, who does not remember kinship. And I am really proud of the homeland of my ancestors, the Great Tartaria. And I don’t care what religion they professed. I see no reason to be ashamed of the fact that they professed Islam.
      This Katka German saw such grounds (marked in the Empress of the Third Rome, but also did not burn out). But she is a newcomer, tumbleweed. Therefore, I lost my way over the history of my homeland, as I wanted.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
      it is equivalent to that of India, which was discovered instead of India.

      Your feedback is very important to us …
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
      in relation to vast areas from the Caspian to the Pacific Ocean and to the borders of China and India.

      Did they just take the "vast areas" and call them Tartaria? Yes, and Great? Moreover, they did not forget to allocate Moscow Tartary within the borders of Great Tartary?
      What else did they just do?
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
      The emergence of the term "tartars" is associated with the formation of the empire of Genghis Khan at the beginning of the XIII century.

      Blah blah blah.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
      The names "Tartaria" and "Tartars" comes from the ethnonym Tatars

      In fact, the opposite is true; this population of the former Great Tartary, remaining after its collapse in Islam, was called Tartars, and later, Tatars.
      There are many Tatars, from Crimea through the Volga to China (inclusive). And these are all different nations.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
      but until the XNUMXth century in Europe, information about them (the Mongol Tatars) and about their states remained extremely scarce and fragmentary.

      Blah blah blah. Again the mysterious Tatar-Mongols, who for some reason did not leave their genes in Moscow Tartaria. Yes, and a giant tribute, collected over several centuries, in Mongolia somehow could not be found.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
      For Western Europeans, the term has become “Tartars” due to contamination with Tartarus.

      Cool with contamination. Only Europeans are not brainless burdocks. And somehow they could write the name of a huge empire without errors.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
      The latter in the Middle Ages meant both the deepest areas of hell and the far unknown regions of the Earth, from where, as it seemed to the Europeans, the “wild” hordes of nomads came.

      Did you come up with the "distant" ones yourself?
      By the way, the proverb about tartaras is a proverb of the inhabitants of Holy (i.e., the whole way of the Orthodox) Rus, and not Moscow tartars (later Muscovites, Great Russians, etc.).
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
      "In the understanding of Europeans," tartars "are a people that brings horrors and the end of the world, and the form of this word has become common, hinting at the origin of the enemies of Christianity from pagan Tartarus"

      Pagan (professed its own religion, now lost) Muscovy was already after Muscovite Tartaria (they mainly professed Islam). When Rurikovich, to the Romanovs. But the Romanovs of Muscovy were baptized. In Orthodoxy.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
      * Pocketbook for lovers of geography. - St. Petersburg: Imperial Russian Geographical Society, 1848. - S. 255—256.

      And I think what kind of "source of information" is so funny.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
      You, you see, are at the level of those European historians and geographers of past centuries, if you believe in the anti-scientific nonsense of "neohistorians"

      No, just unlike you, I know the history of my homeland. And I'm proud of her.
      True, not all periods, unfortunately. The 20th century (almost the entire) Russia completely ruined. And again, unfortunately.
  41. +1
    25 May 2019 20: 18
    Are there any real primary sources? Or just work 15-16 centuries, with links to the source?
  42. +4
    25 May 2019 20: 19
    Quote: Semurg
    Maybe the Slavs or their ancestors participated in the construction of the Parthenon, because in ancient Greece slave labor was very common. And the Turks are certainly synanthropes. laughing. Shyngyskhan I consider the correct spelling of the name of a historical person


    Hamite? Well, what else remains for you ... the former Mongolian mulets, controlled by a torus not from Kazakh families :)))
    What do you personally think - we Russians do not care. And do not meddle with your edits in our Russian language. Your inferiority complexes do not bother us, let's rather switch to the Latin alphabet.

    For the information of everyone else, in modern practice in Kazakhstan, an attempt is widely used to introduce into Russian scientific terminology instead of Russian, the Kazakh version of the pronunciation of a number of personal names and ethnonyms. Genghis Khan is written as "Shyngyskhan", Jochi - as "Shoshi", etc. For what? And in order to introduce into the mass consciousness, first of all, of Russians, the idea that Genghis Khan is a Kazakh, and the territory of his state is Kazakh. In the Great Russian Encyclopedia - "CHINGISKHAN, proper name Temujin, Temuchin".
    Chauvinism, and nothing more.
    1. -1
      25 May 2019 23: 23
      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
      in modern practice in Kazakhstan, an attempt is widely used to introduce the Russian version of the pronunciation of a number of personal and ethnonyms into the Russian scientific terminology instead of the Russian one.

      I would never have thought that I would object in such cases, but you are not quite right.
      Once it was the other way around - Kazakh names were given to personal and ethnonyms sound convenient for pronunciation in Russian. Now, in some cases, just the Kazakh pronunciation is simply restored. And personally, I don’t see anything reprehensible in, for example, that Chimkent became Shymkent, even though I was initially opposed to all kinds of renaming.
      There was also a "return", of course, which deserves condemnation. I just can't agree that naming the city of Semey instead of Semipalatinsk is the right decision.
  43. Quote: Arkon
    Unread

    ***
    I think that Rashid ad-Din was wrong, because he considered the Turks who joined the army of Genghis the basis of the Mongol people. The number of those joining (voluntarily and forcibly) exceeded the Mongolian component.
    1. 0
      26 May 2019 12: 24
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      I think that Rashid ad-Din was wrong, because he considered the Turks who joined the army of Genghis the basis of the Mongol people.


      Good. And then who was NOT wrong? Why did you get this version? Based on what sources?
    2. 0
      28 May 2019 10: 28
      ... in the 13th century, the Scythians controlled the Great Wall - burials in the * Scythian mounds * indicate this and when the desertification began they had to leave this territory ... As for the * Mongols * their numbers in China were very low and the Chinese were cruelly suppressing their discontent ..
  44. 0
    25 May 2019 21: 30
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    For what?

    The Kazakhs have an inferiority complex - they are mestizos, so everything is borrowed from them:
    the language is Tungus;
    Mongolian culture;
    religion is arab laughing
  45. +1
    25 May 2019 21: 56

    about the Mongol-Tatar yoke
  46. 0
    25 May 2019 22: 43
    There are many beautiful pictures, as well as words, but the history of the Tatar-Mongols does not become true from this.
  47. +3
    25 May 2019 23: 37
    Quote: Polymer
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    in modern practice in Kazakhstan, an attempt is widely used to introduce the Russian version of the pronunciation of a number of personal and ethnonyms into the Russian scientific terminology instead of the Russian one.

    I would never have thought that I would object in such cases, but you are not quite right.
    Once it was the other way around - Kazakh names were given to personal and ethnonyms sound convenient for pronunciation in Russian. Now, in some cases, just the Kazakh pronunciation is simply restored. And personally, I don’t see anything reprehensible in, for example, that Chimkent became Shymkent, even though I was initially opposed to all kinds of renaming.
    There was also a "return", of course, which deserves condemnation. I just can't agree that naming the city of Semey instead of Semipalatinsk is the right decision.


    I apologize, you either did not understand or you were joking. Yes, they speak Kazakh, even if it is convenient for them, or how the language is turned, so they pronounce it.
    No, they are about something else. They want to change the norm of the Russian language. So that we can pronounce some words in Kazakh. "Genghis Khan" and "Jochi" have nothing to do with Kazakh names. And in relation to them, no Kazakh pronunciation is restored. In those days, the Kazakhs as an ethnic group did not exist, and the Kazakh language did not exist.
    In Russian science, in Orientalism, the forms that I mentioned are accepted. And they should be used in Russian. For example, the same Indians who speak English cannot even imagine to indicate which norms of the English language are correct and which are incorrect. No, of course, you can dabble in Tarabar Pidgin English, but it will not be English.
    All these delights are not random whims of some blogger, they are politics. Pay attention - Estonians force us to write Talinnnnnn, Kazakhs - to say "Shyngys" (although there is a rule in our language - "zhi" - "shi" we write with "and"). These are attempts at cultural bending. Speaking Kazakh, we implicitly admit the correctness of their chauvinistic nonsense.
    1. +4
      25 May 2019 23: 44
      About renaming cities in Kazakhstan - do you really think that the city of Guryev (founded by merchants of the same name from scratch in the 200th century) was renamed by the Kazakhs to Atyrau because it is easier for them to pronounce it))) By the way, on the old maps "Atyrau" is located 2 versts to east of Guryev, in the lower reaches of the Emba. Renamed to de-Russify toponyms in order to "Kazakhize" geography and uproot traces of previous history. Read how the authorities have officially created a whole program for historians to create a "national history". About "sacred Kazakh statehood" at least 3-XNUMX thousand years ...))))
    2. +2
      25 May 2019 23: 56
      At the same time, the Estonians themselves call Russians "vene" for some reason. Proceeding from Estonian and other similar logic, do we also need to demand from them to call Russians the way we like them? By the way, on the Estonian and Finnish maps of Russia, geographical objects are given 2 names - common and in their language. The Finns do not write Vyborg, but Viipuri. So we must, as Nazarbayev rightly said, become familiar with world culture and Latin graphics, therefore, write "Atyrau (Guryev)" on Russian maps. And let them write what they want on Kazakh maps.
  48. -2
    26 May 2019 08: 39
    Where is the Mongolian gallogroup in Russia? There is none, but this cannot be. Once there was a yoke, then there were rape and the birth of children. So there was no yoke. But Asia and China were constantly hollowed, only there were 10 tribes there, including the Mongols ...
    1. 0
      26 May 2019 10: 33
      Quote: Dzafdet
      Where is the Mongolian gallogroup in Russia? There is none, but this cannot be. Once there was a yoke, then there were rape and the birth of children. So there was no yoke.

      It is useless to explain this to them. In the Soviet history textbook it was written that the yoke was. So it was. And the point.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      there were only 10 tribes there, including the Mongols ...

      There were no Mongols in ancient times at all. Mongols, this is not a self-name, it is a fairly young (from the time of the German Katka) European term. And this is very characteristic - first they came up with the "necessary story", and then they found characters for it.
      By the way, the Mongols in ancient times in Russia and in Muscovy were called China. And their country, later the province of Great Tartary, by China. The southern border of ancient China, and the Great Tartary, ran along the Great Wall of China. To her south lived the teahouses (another nation).
    2. -1
      26 May 2019 11: 01
      There was a good article on "opinions" recently on this topic.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      Where is the Mongolian glorgroup in Russia?
  49. 0
    26 May 2019 09: 20
    Great! We look forward to continuing and the main indication of the source (where you can download books!)
  50. -1
    26 May 2019 12: 09
    Quote: r910
    Why should I throw out of my mind the homeland of my ancestors?

    You do not need to throw out your (not ours) Tatar ancestors from your Tatar head. laughing
    1. -1
      26 May 2019 12: 49
      Quote: Operator
      You do not need to throw out of your Tatar head

      Russian head. Moscow Tartars are the ancestors of the Russians. By historical standards, not so far.
      Quote: Operator
      the homeland of your (not ours) Tatar ancestors

      Moscow tartars are not the ancestors of the Tatars (any). Maybe with some rare exceptions.
      1. 0
        26 May 2019 15: 18
        The ancestors of more than half of the Russians are the Aryans (R1a), who first broke into Eastern Slavic tribes (Antes, Slovenes, Kryvichi, Vyatichi, Polyana, Drevlyans, etc.), and then united under the leadership of the West Slavic tribe of Rus.

        15% of Russians have as their ancestors the indigenous inhabitants of Europe - Illyrians (I1 and I2), 14% - alien Ugrofinns (N1c1), 5% - Celts, the rest (Caucasians G, Northern Semites J2, Mongols C2, etc.) - on level 1-2%.

        The native language of Russians is the dialect of the Aryan language (Sanskrit), as well as all Slavic languages ​​without exception. With Türkic (Tungus) language tartar / Tatars, the Russian language has nothing in common.
        1. -2
          26 May 2019 16: 36
          Quote: Operator
          The ancestors of more than half of the Russians are the Aryans (R1a), who first broke into Eastern Slavic tribes (Antes, Slovenes, Kryvichi, Vyatichi, Polyana, Drevlyans, etc.), and then united under the leadership of the West Slavic tribe of Rus.

          Did you understand what you wrote?
          The East Slavic tribes were united by the West Slavic tribes. In principle, theoretically, this is possible. But the Rus (Rusichs) do not pull on the Western Slavic tribe.
          -----
          In fact, the ancient Slavs, and not the Aryans, in ancient centuries were divided into Western and Eastern Slavs. At the same time, it is not entirely clear whether the Western Slavs moved from the places of traditional habitat to the west, or whether the Eastern Slavs moved to the east. Most likely the first.
          Southern Slavs also exist, but they have nothing in common (genetically) with Western and Eastern Slavs. Southern Slavs are genetically different peoples. The similarity there is culturological, and, moreover, only with the Eastern Slavs.
          A little later, from the Rus, one of the branches of the Eastern Slavs, the inhabitants of the Moscow (and several others) principality stood out. These people at some historical moment converted to Islam and began to be called Tartars. And their state formation, Moscow Tartary.
          Then there was the flowering of Moscow Tartary and its transformation into the Great Tartary (it was larger than the USSR). At the same time, the Great Tartary captured the Holy (from the time of Vladimir, Orthodox all the way) Russia. Those. the second part of Ancient Rus, the state of the ancient Russians. Because of the conflict of belief in the church language, this was called the "yoke".
          Then there was the fall of Great Tartary and the transformation of Moscow Tartary into Muscovy (religion was replaced from Islam to pagan, today information about it is very scarce). The population of the former Great Tartaria that remained in Islam, regardless of nationality, was called first Tartars, and later Tatars. There were many of them - Karachais (Highland Tatars), Azerbaijanis (Transcaucasian Tatars), Kumyks (Dagestan Tatars), Khakasses (Abakan Tatars), etc.
          Then there was the seizure of power by the Romanovs, the baptism of Muscovy into Orthodoxy and its transformation into the Russian Empire. With a secondary advance to the east, but already noticeably more modest than during the time of Great Tartary. Then the Russian Empire again annexed to itself first Ukraine (part of Holy Russia). And then all Holy Russia. And even later, even part of the West Slavic Polish lands.
          It should be noted that already starting from Peter III (January 1762) the surname "Romanovs" became rather a pseudonym. In fact, Russia was ruled by the dukes of the Holstein-Gottorp dynasty.
          Then followed the collapse of the Russian Empire and the departure of its main part into paganism (called Marxism-Leninism). And the state of such pagans began to be called the USSR.
          During this period, the USSR again went to the Pacific Ocean, but in the west it did not reach the size of the Russian Empire.
          This was followed by the collapse of the USSR. Well, then you already know.
          Quote: Operator
          The native language of Russians is the dialect of the Aryan language (Sanskrit), as well as all Slavic languages ​​without exception.

          The Russian language is quite significantly different from the languages ​​of other West and East Slavic peoples. And this is no accident.
          Quote: Operator
          Russian has nothing to do with the Turkic (Tungus) Tartar / Tatars language.

          What kind of Tatars? Tatars (historically called) in the world a lot. And they have quite different languages. The Crimean Tatars of Kazan (Volga Bulgars) most often do not really understand.
          In addition, who said that the Russian language has something in common with the languages ​​of the Turkic group?
          1. +2
            26 May 2019 21: 56
            The first arius, the carrier of the R1 haplogroup mutation, originated from its father, the ancestor carrier R1 22000, years ago in Altai. During the 10000 years, his descendants moved along the Altai – Central Asia – Asia Minor – Balkans route.

            In Europe, arias spread throughout the 5000 years to the west to the Rhine and to the north to the Karelian Isthmus. In Western Europe, arias are a minority (from 1 / 4 to 1 / 5) among the indigenous people of Illyrians (I1 and I2), in Eastern Europe, the majority (9 / 10) in relation to the same migrants from Altai are Celts (R1b).

            In Europe, the Aryans were divided into three groups - subclades R1a: Western, Eastern and Black Sea.

            Almost all Celts 6000 years ago left Europe through the Caucasus to the Middle East, then returned to North Africa and the Strait of Gibraltar 4500 years ago to Europe, cut out the vast majority of northern Illyrians and Western Aryans, and their remnants were driven into the Scandinavian peninsula. Eastern arias stopped the Celtic aggression at the turn of Laba - Ore Mountains - Danube. Southern Illyrians stopped the Celtic aggression at the Danube-Adriatic line.

            4000 years ago, the Black Sea arias migrated to Northern China, Central Asia, India, Asia Minor, Iran, the Middle East and Western Europe (Holshtat), mixing with the local population in proportion from 1 / 20 (Arabian Peninsula and Northern China) to 1 / 10 (India, Iran, Asia Minor). In some regions, the proportion of descendants of the Black Sea Aryans is now 55% (Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan).

            Among the Asiatic Ugrofinans (Tatars, Altaians, Tuvans and Uigurs), the proportion of descendants of the Black Sea Aryans is 25%.

            Volga Tatars are mestizos: 30% consist of descendants of Asian Ugrofinns, 25% - of descendants of the Black Sea Aryans, and 15% - of descendants of the Tungus and Mongols (С2). In the Volga Tatars practically there is not a drop of Eastern Aryans (and even more so Western).

            Russian and all other Slavs are more than half of the descendants of the eastern Aryans, the share of the Black Sea Aryans is less than 1%. Therefore, one can always distinguish a Slav (Eastern subclade R1a) from the Scandinavian (Western subclause R1a) or Tatar, Kirghiz, Tajik, Uighur, Altai, Tuvan, Manchu, Uzbek, Turk, Persian, Indian, Saudi, Tuyin, Manchu, Uzbek, Turk, Persian, Indian, Saudi, Tyumen, Manchu, Uzbek, Turkish, Persian, Indian, Saudi, Tyumen, Manchu, Uzbek, Turkish, Persian, Indian, Saudi, Tyumen, Manchu, Uzbek, Turkish, Persian, Indian, Saudi, or Manchurian, Uzbek, Turkish, Persian, Indian, Saudi, or Manchurian
            1. -1
              26 May 2019 23: 23
              Quote: Operator
              Therefore, one can always distinguish a Slav (eastern subclade R1a) from Scandinavian (western subclade R1a)

              Even I, far from being a geneticist, remember perfectly well that the Scandinavians have never once R1a. In general, the R1a arial is limited to Poland, the Czech Republic in the west and Russia in the east. Even the Balts have never R1a.
              https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Haplogroups_europe.png?uselang=ru
              Drawn quite clumsily. But, for clarity, R1a, these are the Slavs.
              At the same time, R-M458, it is the Western Slavs.
              And the R-Z280 is the eastern Slavs.
            2. 0
              26 May 2019 23: 33
              Quote: Operator
              The first aria, the carrier of the mutation of haplogroup R1a, descended from its father, the carrier of the ancestral R1 22000 years ago in Altai

              I may not be very good at geography. But judging by the map, this is not Altai, but the Pamir.
              https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/7/75/20160913075902%21Distribution_Haplogroup_R1a_Y-DNA.svg
              However, this is me about the Slavs. Arias somehow do not interest me at all.
  51. +2
    26 May 2019 13: 53
    Author!!! You would rather remain silent than such a half-truth...
  52. +2
    26 May 2019 14: 45
    Quote: Trilobite Master
    you are talking about your nationality and ancestry

    I sign my articles on VO with my last name - unlike you.

    My pedigree is simple - my father is from Vladimir, my mother is from Tula. Judging by the middle names on both sides of grandfathers, great-grandfathers, great-great-grandfathers, etc. (Vladimir, Vasily, Ivan, Leonty, Gregory, etc.) they were all Orthodox.
  53. Quote: Arkon
    Unread

    Those who know for sure that the Mongols are not Turks were not mistaken: geneticists, linguists, historians, ethnographers.
    1. +1
      28 May 2019 19: 23
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      Those who know for sure that the Mongols are not Turks were not mistaken: geneticists, linguists, historians, ethnographers.


      I understand. You are not strong in sources.
  54. Quote: Dzafdet
    Where is the Mongolian gallogroup in Russia? There is none, but this cannot be. Once there was a yoke, then there were rape and the birth of children. So there was no yoke. But Asia and China were constantly hollowed, only there were 10 tribes there, including the Mongols ...

    ***
    Haplogroup C (RPS4Y=M130) is a DNA haplogroup of the Y chromosome. Among the Mongols, Buryats, Kalmyks and Hazaras, subgroup C2 (previously designated as C3) reaches a high concentration.
    Known representatives of haplogroup C
    Chingizids C2a3-F4002
    Qing Dynasty C2 (C-M217)
    Princes Gantimurov C2b1b (C-L1372)
    Kalmykia and Buryatia, Evenkia in Russia. Today, the highest concentration of haplogroup C is observed among the indigenous populations of Mongolia, the Russian Far East, Polynesia, and the aborigines of Australia. Haplogroup C dominates among the Buryats, Evenks and Yukaghirs, reaching frequencies of 61,3%, 69,2% and 80%, respectively.
  55. -1
    26 May 2019 16: 03
    Quote: Dzafdet
    Where is the Mongolian glorgroup in Russia?

    But power is not transferred through...!
  56. Quote: r910
    Why should I get my ancestors homeland out of my head? Moreover, a great homeland?
    I am neither Ivan, who does not remember kinship. And I am really proud of the homeland of my ancestors, the Great Tartaria. And I don’t care what religion they professed. I see no reason to be ashamed of the fact that they professed Islam.
    This Katka German saw such grounds (marked in the Empress of the Third Rome, but also did not burn out). But she is a newcomer, tumbleweed. Therefore, I lost my way over the history of my homeland, as I wanted.
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
    it is equivalent to that of India, which was discovered instead of India.

    Your feedback is very important to us …
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
    in relation to vast areas from the Caspian to the Pacific Ocean and to the borders of China and India.

    Did they just take the "vast areas" and call them Tartaria? Yes, and Great? Moreover, they did not forget to allocate Moscow Tartary within the borders of Great Tartary?
    What else did they just do?
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
    The emergence of the term "tartars" is associated with the formation of the empire of Genghis Khan at the beginning of the XIII century.

    Blah blah blah.
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
    The names "Tartaria" and "Tartars" comes from the ethnonym Tatars

    In fact, the opposite is true; this population of the former Great Tartary, remaining after its collapse in Islam, was called Tartars, and later, Tatars.
    There are many Tatars, from Crimea through the Volga to China (inclusive). And these are all different nations.
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
    but until the XNUMXth century in Europe, information about them (the Mongol Tatars) and about their states remained extremely scarce and fragmentary.

    Blah blah blah. Again the mysterious Tatar-Mongols, who for some reason did not leave their genes in Moscow Tartaria. Yes, and a giant tribute, collected over several centuries, in Mongolia somehow could not be found.
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
    For Western Europeans, the term has become “Tartars” due to contamination with Tartarus.

    Cool with contamination. Only Europeans are not brainless burdocks. And somehow they could write the name of a huge empire without errors.
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
    The latter in the Middle Ages meant both the deepest areas of hell and the far unknown regions of the Earth, from where, as it seemed to the Europeans, the “wild” hordes of nomads came.

    Did you come up with the "distant" ones yourself?
    By the way, the proverb about tartaras is a proverb of the inhabitants of Holy (i.e., the whole way of the Orthodox) Rus, and not Moscow tartars (later Muscovites, Great Russians, etc.).
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
    "In the understanding of Europeans," tartars "are a people that brings horrors and the end of the world, and the form of this word has become common, hinting at the origin of the enemies of Christianity from pagan Tartarus"

    Pagan (professed its own religion, now lost) Muscovy was already after Muscovite Tartaria (they mainly professed Islam). When Rurikovich, to the Romanovs. But the Romanovs of Muscovy were baptized. In Orthodoxy.
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
    * Pocketbook for lovers of geography. - St. Petersburg: Imperial Russian Geographical Society, 1848. - S. 255—256.

    And I think what kind of "source of information" is so funny.
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
    You, you see, are at the level of those European historians and geographers of past centuries, if you believe in the anti-scientific nonsense of "neohistorians"

    No, just unlike you, I know the history of my homeland. And I'm proud of her.
    True, not all periods, unfortunately. The 20th century (almost the entire) Russia completely ruined. And again, unfortunately.

    1) Why should I throw the Motherland of my ancestors out of my head? Moreover, the Great Motherland?
    Answer: Be proud!
    2) And I don’t care what religion they professed. I see no reason to be ashamed that they professed Islam.
    Answer: Is someone shaming you?
    3) It was German Katka who saw such reasons (she aimed to be the Empress of the Third Rome, but it also did not work out).
    Answer: I am not aware of the persecution of Islam by Catherine II.
    In contrast to the persecution of Judaism.
    4) That’s why I scoffed at the history of my Motherland as I wanted.
    Question: How did she get rid of herself?
    5) Just like that, they took and called “vast areas” Tartary? And even Great?
    Answer: Yes, they just took it and called America the West Indies. Because they understood the same in relation to these territories as in relation to Tartary. By the way, we were also looking for the country of Eldorado there... in the West Indies. Still looking...
    6) Did you remember to highlight Moscow Tartary within the boundaries of Great Tartary?
    Answer: Who are they? Misguided geographers of that time? They also believed in mythical countries: Atlantis, Aztlan, Hyperborea, Hypernot, Gunnaland, Kokanye, Saguenay, Lemuria, Lukomorye, the Unknown Southern Land, Nidavellir, Ophir, Paititi, Pacifida, Seven Cities of Gold, Tamoanchan, Tollan, Thule (the legendary island) , Havilah, Shambhala, Eldorado... etc. I can name several dozen more.
    7) Blah blah blah.
    Answer: Unmanned aerial vehicles?
    8) In fact, it’s the other way around, this population of the former Great Tartaria, remaining after its collapse in Islam, was called Tartars, and later, Tatars.
    Answer: The entire population of North and South America can be called Americans. This did not make them a single people.
    9) There are many Tatars, from Crimea through the Volga and to China (inclusive). And these are all different peoples.
    Answer: And what follows from this?
    10) Again the mysterious Tatar-Mongols, who for some reason did not leave their genes in Moscow Tartaria.
    Answer: because they didn’t leave it because there simply never was any Moscow Tartaria as a state. There was Muscovy and other Russian principalities as a vassal to the Genghisid Empire.
    11) And somehow it was not possible to find a gigantic tribute collected over several centuries in Mongolia.
    Answer: A gigantic tribute, depending on what you compare it to...
    The population of other countries captured by Genghis Khan, his children and grandchildren - the state of the Khorezmshahs, which included Central Asia and modern Iran, was inhabited by about 20 million, and the population of all of China, then divided into several states and empires (Xi-Xia, Jin, Song), successively captured by the Mongols already exceeded 100 million.
    In general, the ancient Russian lands during the period of the “Batu invasion” from Novgorod to Kyiv, from Vladimir-Volynsky in the west of the future Ukraine to Vladimir-Zalessky in the center of the future Muscovy, numbered about 5-7 million inhabitants.
    As soon as you tell me where the huge reserves of the collapsed empires are: Greek. Egyptian, Babylonian, Roman, German, Italian, Ottoman, Russian, Austro-Hungarian and others, so I will answer you where the reserves of the plunder of the Mongol empires are.
    12) Did you come up with this about “distant”?
    Answer: No. You will find confirmation on the internet.
    13) Pocket book for lovers of geology. - St. Petersburg: Imperial Russian Geographical Society, 1848. - P. 255-256.
    Answer: Look who the author is and compare with yourself in terms of education.
    14) No, just unlike you, I know the history of my Motherland. And I'm proud of her.
    True, not all periods, unfortunately. The 20th century (almost the entire) Russia completely ruined. And again, unfortunately.
    Answer: The history of my Motherland is confirmed by World history: by the great civilizations of the past that left real artifacts: the Pyramid of Cheops, the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, the Statue of Zeus in Olympia, the Temple of Artemis in Ephesus, the Mausoleum in Halicarnassus, the Colossus of Rhodes, the Lighthouse of Alexandria, Petra, the idols of Easter Island , Monument Valley and many many millions more artifacts throughout the globe and in the territory of my homeland.
    Where are the artifacts about Great Tartaria? Blah blah blah! (according to your tradition!)
    15) Why do you seem to me like a horseman on a horse with a tablet in his hand?
    1. -1
      26 May 2019 17: 11
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      Answer: Be proud!

      What, aren’t you Russian?
      Or maybe you are one of those for whom the history of Russia began in October 1917?
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      Answer: I am not aware of the persecution of Islam by Catherine II.

      Well, actually, Orthodox Christians and foreigners lived in the Russian Empire. Those. RI was a theocratic state. Based on Orthodoxy.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      Question: How did she get rid of herself?

      She rewrote the history of the country the way she needed it. In accordance with her purely selfish goals.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      Yes, they just took it and called America the West Indies.

      Don't confuse your penis with your finger. There was a simple mistake there.
      Tell me another Tartaria with which the Great Tartaria could be confused. Moscow? So it’s on these maps too. Just as part of the Great Tartaria.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      This did not make them a single people.

      You will probably be surprised, but all historical Tatars are also not a single people.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      There was Muscovy and other Russian principalities as a vassal to the Genghisid Empire.

      And once again for those who do not understand - where are the Mongolian genes? Or do they become vassals just for the hell of it?
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      Answer: A gigantic tribute, depending on what you compare it to...

      Actually, the “yoke” (according to church terminology) was 240 years old. Do you think that nothing has come into the bins in 240 years? Why then do we need such vassals?
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      so I will answer you where the reserves of the plunder of the Mongol empires are.

      Those. You are not able to explain the absence in the east of even primitive ancient ceramics (which cost a lot of money in ancient times and, in fact, is what archaeologists work on).
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      and the population of all of China, then divided into several states and empires (Xi-Xia, Jin, Song), successively captured by the Mongols, already exceeded 100 million.

      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      and the population of all of China, then divided into several states and empires (Xi-Xia, Jin, Song), successively captured by the Mongols, already exceeded 100 million.

      Why did you write this?
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      Answer: Look who the author is and compare with yourself in terms of education.

      I think I will be much more educated. So I'll be fine with the comparison.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      Answer: The history of my Motherland is confirmed by World history: by the great civilizations of the past that left real artifacts: the Pyramid of Cheops, the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, the Statue of Zeus in Olympia, the Temple of Artemis in Ephesus, the Mausoleum in Halicarnassus, the Colossus of Rhodes, the Lighthouse of Alexandria, Petra, the idols of Easter Island , Monument Valley and many many millions more artifacts throughout the globe and in the territory of my homeland.

      This means that Petra told you something about the history of Russia. It's funny.
      Weren't the pyramids moved from near Voronezh to Egypt?
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      Where are the artifacts about Great Tartaria?

      How is this where? Well, you're strange. They are everywhere. You just need to wipe your glasses.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      15) Why do you seem to me like a horseman on a horse with a tablet in his hand?

      Dzhigit, this is an Islamic tradition. I'm not a Muslim.
      1. 1) What, aren’t you Russian?
        Answer: I am the most Russian of all Russians. How you are the most Tartarian of all Tartarians.
        But I am not a citizen of Russia - the heiress of a certain Tartaria. I am a citizen of Russia - Russian Federation.
        2) Or maybe you are one of those for whom the history of Russia began in October 1917?
        Answer: in 1917, the history of the state, the USSR, began.
        According to all legal standards, the USSR was not the Republic of Ingushetia, just as the Russian Federation is not the USSR and the Republic of Ingushetia.
        These are three different states.
        For me, history began with the emergence of the Earth 4 billion 540 million years ago.
        3) Well, actually, Orthodox Christians and foreigners lived in the Russian Empire. Those. RI was a theocratic state. Based on Orthodoxy.
        Answer: I asked about the persecution of Muslims specifically on the part of Catherine II.
        I am more familiar with the persecution of Muslims in pre-Catherine times, from Ivan the Terrible to Peter the Great inclusive. With the accession of Empress Catherine II to the Russian throne in 1762, the authorities came to understand the need to take into account the interests of Muslim subjects, the number of which increased significantly with the annexation of new territories. The persecution stopped.
        4) Rewrote the history of the country the way it needed it. In accordance with her purely selfish goals.
        Answer: All rulers have always done this.
        What exactly did Catherine 2 rewrite?
        5) Name me another Tartaria with which the Great Tartaria could be confused.
        Answer: I gave you an example of historical and geographical misconceptions, for example, Atlantis, which is just as mythical. And it’s also on the maps. Sannikov land. Buyan Island. Lilliput, Blefuscu, Brobdingnag, Laputa, Balnibarbi, Luggnagg, Glabbdobbrib, Houyhnhnm.
        6) You will probably be surprised, but all historical Tatars are also not a single people.
        Answer: I knew from school that the Tatars are not a single people. Crimean and Kazan Tatars studied with me in the class. It was obvious.
        7) Actually, the “yoke” (according to church terminology) was 240 years old. Do you think that nothing has come into the bins in 240 years? Why then do we need such vassals?
        Answer: The empire collapsed, the wealth was divided, taken away and dissolved among the descendants, among those who took it. Where is the gold of the CPSU?
        8) That is You are not able to explain the absence in the east of even primitive ancient ceramics (which cost a lot of money in ancient times and, in fact, is what archaeologists work on).
        Answer: Full of artifacts.
        9) So, Petra told you something about the history of Russia. It's funny.
        Answer: Is it funny that civilizations leave material traces, unlike mythical ones like Tartary?
        10) Where is it? Well, you're strange. They are everywhere. You just need to wipe your glasses.
        Answer: If you have wiped it, then please tell me where the artifacts of certain Taratars are: Great and Moscow. Are these states? This means, for example, coins, seals, documents, monuments, buildings, etc.
        11) “Information about Siberia and the route to China, collected by the missionary F. Avril in Moscow in 1686”: “We were also told that the Chinese call the Tatars Tatai, because their language does not have the sound “R”. I don’t know why we call the Tatars Tartars, because the Poles, Muscovites (!!!) and the Tatars themselves all unanimously say: Tatar, not Tartarus.”
        12) Pocket book for lovers of geology. - St. Petersburg: Imperial Russian Geographical Society, 1848. - P. 255-256
        Answer: Please look again at who the author of this book is.
        13) Dzhigit, this is an Islamic tradition. I'm not a Muslim.
        Answer: You still introduce yourself as a horseman on a horse with a tablet in his hand...
        "14th century neo-historian with a tablet, riding a horse with a tablet in his hand on a flat earth"
        1. +1
          26 May 2019 18: 37
          Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
          Answer: Is it funny that civilizations leave material traces, unlike mythical ones like Tartary?

          Strange.
          You claim that there was an alleged “Tatar-Mongol yoke.” But at the same time, you deny the existence of the country (Great Tartaria, which is on many ancient maps), which carried out that very “yoke”. Replacing this country with Mongolia, which, even in principle, was not capable of such acts that official history attributes to it. Even starting from the name, the Mongols are not actually Mongols by their self-name at all.
          Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
          where are the artifacts of certain Taratars: Great and Moscow.

          Are ancient maps not enough?
          What will be enough?
          Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
          This means, for example, coins, seals, documents, monuments, buildings, etc.

          And the fact that under the Romanovs everything was destroyed, including frescoes in churches, doesn’t mean anything to you?
          And the fact that under Catherine, under pain of the DEATH PENALTY, everyone was forced to hand over to the state (forever) all ancient literature (all of it, no matter what media), doesn’t tell you anything?
          If you do not understand, then I repeat, the history of Russia was completely rewritten twice. And it was rewritten many times not so thoroughly. There is little left of the real history of Russia now. And in schools they teach stories that were invented during the time of Catherine. Germans with famous surnames.
          Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
          F. Avril in Moscow in 1686": “We were also told that the Chinese call the Tatars Tatai, because their language does not have the sound “R”. I don’t know why we call the Tatars Tartars, because the Poles, Muscovites ( !!!) and the Tatars themselves, everyone unanimously says: Tatar, not Tartarus"

          Have you decided to play along with me?
          Well, thank you.
          In 1686 Tartary no longer existed. Neither the Great nor the Moscow. But Europeans habitually called the Tatars tartars. However, the Tatars themselves (residents of Great Tartaria who remained in Islam) and their neighbors by that time already called themselves Tatars.
          I have already written to you about this before. But you, apparently, decided to support my words with a historical source.
          Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
          Answer: Please look again at who the author of this book is.

          Russian Geographical Society. So what?
          1. 1) There was a Mongol-Tatar yoke. This is confirmed by historical, archaeological documentary research based on hundreds of thousands, if not millions of artifacts.
            2) At the time under discussion, it was no longer Mongolia, but the Empire of Genghis Khan. Open the map and see its dimensions. Hence the military capabilities of this empire.
            3) In addition to maps, there must be hundreds of thousands of artifacts. Maps were redrawn from each other. Even if a lot of things were destroyed under Catherine, ARCHAEOLOGICAL science mainly made its discoveries in the centuries following Catherine. Even if much had been destroyed during her time, much would have been revealed later.
            4) Wow, there are Scythian, Mongolian, Kazan, Volga, Crimean Tatars and other artifacts, but there are no purely Tartarian ones.
            5) What kind of formation is Tarataria without khans-kings-emperors, documents, coins, seals, capitals, cities and artifacts, in general?
            1. 0
              26 May 2019 20: 12
              Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
              There was a Mongol-Tatar yoke. This is confirmed by historical, archaeological documentary research based on hundreds of thousands, if not millions of artifacts.

              Which ones?
              "Yoke" is an ecclesiastical (not secular) term. What “artifacts” confirm the presence of the “yoke” in Rus'?
              And even “MoNgolo-Tatar”?
              Yes, the conquest of Holy Rus' by Tartaria took place, no one argues with that.
              Yes, there was probably also a “yoke” (as a church term) due to the conflict of religions.
              But what are “artifacts”?
              There are no Asian genes, and this is an indestructible main counterargument.
              In addition, the inhabitants of the Mongolian People's Republic at the time of the arrival of the Republic of Ingushetia there were almost in a primitive state. They couldn’t travel 100 km, let alone ride a horse to Europe. Fables are all about Mongols.
              I know only one real “artifact”, this is the attachment of the descendants of the inhabitants of Holy Rus' to pork. The Tartars were Muslims, so pork was not taken from the Russians.
              And here’s another thing: the Greeks called Tartars Mughals (without the “N”). One of the meanings of this word is tall (long).
              Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
              At the time under discussion, it was no longer Mongolia, but the Empire of Genghis Khan.

              Oh. Who lived there, Martians?
              Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
              Open the map and see its dimensions.

              Why look at funny pictures?
              Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
              In addition to maps, there must be hundreds of thousands of artifacts.

              Look on my profile. There are enough of them there. I won’t rewrite it a hundred times.
              Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
              Even if much had been destroyed during her time, much would have been revealed later.

              It depends on how you destroy it.
              Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
              but there are no purely Tartarian ones.

              Why? And there are plenty of them. They are only interpreted in line with official history. And if it doesn’t work out, then they are not interpreted at all. In particular, Arabic script and quotations from the Koran on the weapons of Moscow craftsmen from the time of Moscow Tartary.
              Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
              What kind of formation is Tarataria without khans-kings-emperors, documents, coins, seals, capitals, cities and artifacts, in general?

              To go nuts!
              What about Genghis Khan?
              And Batu?
              And Mamai?
              Who do you think this is?
              It's amazing, he doesn't see the Tartarian khans.
  57. 0
    26 May 2019 18: 55
    ]
    Quote: r910
    Are ancient maps not enough?

    No, not enough. It was like this: someone who didn’t care about these savages from distant countries, and he wrote... as he heard. I also make mistakes in words and even in names. VO readers know this. Then... someone copied it, then again and... away we go. That's all. Where do the deeds of the Mongols come from in the books of Persian, Byzantine, Chinese, Japanese and other authors? This is all the machinations, right... who?
    1. 0
      26 May 2019 20: 14
      Quote: kalibr
      No, not enough.

      Take a look at my profile then. Maybe you will find something for yourself. I don’t want to repeat the same thing 100 times.
      Quote: kalibr
      Where do the deeds of the Mongols come from in the books of Persian, Byzantine, Chinese, Japanese and other authors?

      And I already wrote to you about this. Read it again. Everything is written there.
  58. -1
    26 May 2019 19: 03
    Quote: r910
    It was written in the Soviet history textbook that there was a yoke. So it was. And period.

    Soviet history textbooks, for all their defectiveness, politicization and praise of communism, were not the worst in everything else.
    1. 0
      26 May 2019 20: 17
      Quote: kalibr
      Soviet history textbooks, for all their defectiveness, politicization and praise of communism, were not the worst in everything else.

      The textbooks were rubbish. And in general, science was bad in the USSR, even basic science, very bad. It was an underdeveloped country. Uncompetitive. That's why it collapsed.
      And displays like the beeping horned ball, Belka, Strelka and Gagarin did not solve anything. The general level of technical and technological development of the country is not determined by show. And the level of the most mass production.
  59. -1
    26 May 2019 19: 43
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
    What kind of formation is Tarataria without khans-kings-emperors, documents, coins, seals, capitals, cities and artifacts, in general?

    The capital is Novosibirsk!
  60. Quote: r910
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
    There was a Mongol-Tatar yoke. This is confirmed by historical, archaeological documentary research based on hundreds of thousands, if not millions of artifacts.

    Which ones?
    "Yoke" is an ecclesiastical (not secular) term. What “artifacts” confirm the presence of the “yoke” in Rus'?
    And even “MoNgolo-Tatar”?
    Yes, the conquest of Holy Rus' by Tartaria took place, no one argues with that.
    Yes, there was probably also a “yoke” (as a church term) due to the conflict of religions.
    But what are “artifacts”?
    There are no Asian genes, and this is an indestructible main counterargument.
    In addition, the inhabitants of the Mongolian People's Republic at the time of the arrival of the Republic of Ingushetia there were almost in a primitive state. They couldn’t travel 100 km, let alone ride a horse to Europe. Fables are all about Mongols.
    I know only one real “artifact”, this is the attachment of the descendants of the inhabitants of Holy Rus' to pork. The Tartars were Muslims, so pork was not taken from the Russians.
    And here’s another thing: the Greeks called Tartars Mughals (without the “N”). One of the meanings of this word is tall (long).
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
    At the time under discussion, it was no longer Mongolia, but the Empire of Genghis Khan.

    Oh. Who lived there, Martians?
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
    Open the map and see its dimensions.

    Why look at funny pictures?
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
    In addition to maps, there must be hundreds of thousands of artifacts.

    Look on my profile. There are enough of them there. I won’t rewrite it a hundred times.
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
    Even if much had been destroyed during her time, much would have been revealed later.

    It depends on how you destroy it.
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
    but there are no purely Tartarian ones.

    Why? And there are plenty of them. They are only interpreted in line with official history. And if it doesn’t work out, then they are not interpreted at all. In particular, Arabic script and quotations from the Koran on the weapons of Moscow craftsmen from the time of Moscow Tartary.
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
    What kind of formation is Tarataria without khans-kings-emperors, documents, coins, seals, capitals, cities and artifacts, in general?

    To go nuts!
    What about Genghis Khan?
    And Batu?
    And Mamai?
    Who do you think this is?
    It's amazing, he doesn't see the Tartarian khans.

    ***
    Here's who:
    You now completely identify Tartary with the Empire of Genghis Khan and its fragments, then continue to identify it. You are stuck in the delusions of the 15th and 16th centuries, you are comfortable there, stay there.
    What about Genghis Khan? Great Khan of the Mongol Empire, not Tartary
    And Batu? Ruler of the Jochi ulus of the Mongol Empire, not Tartary
    And Mamai? Beklyarbek and temnik Jochi of the Mongol Empire, not Tartary

    Source:
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BA_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B9_%D0%9C%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B8
    List of rulers of the Mongol Empire:
    1. Great Khans and Regents of the Mongol Empire:
    Genghis Khan - founder of the Mongol Empire and its first great khan (1206-1227)
    Tolui - regent of the Mongol Empire (1227-1229)
    Ogedei - Great Khan of the Mongol Empire (1229-1241);
    Doregene Khatun - regent of the Mongol Empire (1241-1246);
    Guyuk - Great Khan of the Mongol Empire (1246-1248);
    Ogul-Gaymysh - regent of the Mongol Empire (1248-1251);
    Munke - Great Khan of the Mongol Empire (1251-1259);
    Arig-Buga - regent of the Mongol Empire (1259-1260); Great Khan of the Mongol Empire (1260-1264), (at the same time as Kublai);
    Kublai - Great Khan of the Mongol Empire (1260-1271);
    The title of Great Khan was inherited by the rulers of the Yuan dynasty.
    2. Mongolian Great Khans of the Yuan Dynasty (see the link for yourself)
    3. Great Mongol khans of the Northern Yuan dynasty (see the link for yourself)
    4. Mongolia as part of the Qing Empire (see the link for yourself)
    5. Mongolian independent monarchy in the XNUMXth century. (see for yourself at the link)

    Not a single title of Khan of Tartary! From 1206 to 1945!

    This list was made not by Catherine II, not by some Germans, but by the Mongolian historian Chuluun Dalai.
    Chuluuny Dalai (Mongolian Shangas ovogt Chuluuny Dalai; 1930 - June 12, 2009) - Mongolian scientist, historian.
    Born in 1930 in the Zereg soum of the Kobdo aimag. In 1950, after graduating from high school at the aimak center, he entered the history department of Peking University. After graduation, he worked as a history teacher at MonSU, then became an academic secretary at the Institute of History of the Moscow Academy of Sciences, and later its director, secretary at the first MPR embassy in the PRC, academic secretary of the Institute for the Study of the Far East, director of the Center for Southeast Asian Studies, director of the Institute of International research. In 1970, for the study “Mongolia in the Yuan Period”, he received the title of Candidate of Historical Sciences, and in 1986 he defended his doctoral dissertation on the topic “Mongol-Chinese relations (1949-1984).” Died due to illness on June 12, 2009.
    Did he also rewrite history for you at the direction of Catherine 2?
    1. -3
      26 May 2019 21: 54
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      What about Genghis Khan? Great Khan of the Mongol Empire, not Tartary
      And Batu? Ruler of the Jochi ulus of the Mongol Empire, not Tartary
      And Mamai? Beklyarbek and temnik Jochi of the Mongol Empire, not Tartary

      Fima, I really see that you have a problem with understanding. How many times do you need to write that these are the khans of the Great Tartaria for you to finally understand this? All the “Mongol khans” who appeared in Russian chronicles are actually Tartars.
      At the same time, one should not confuse the khans of Great Tartaria with the Mongols (although they did not call themselves that before), better known to us as the “Chinese emperors.” These are different figures. And the “Chinese emperors” were vassals of the khans of Great Tartaria. And these were representatives of different nations.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
      Chuluuny Dalai (Mongolian Shangas ovogt Chuluuny Dalai; 1930 - June 12, 2009) - Mongolian scientist, historian.

      This list will also give you the wrong list. Business, nothing personal.
      At the same time, in the Khalkha epic there is no mention of such fabulous exploits of their ancestors. They only learned about this from the Russians. And much later.
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
      Did he also rewrite history for you at the direction of Catherine 2?

      Fima, I'm amazed. It turns out you don’t know when the German Katka lived.
  61. Quote: kalibr
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
    What kind of formation is Tarataria without khans-kings-emperors, documents, coins, seals, capitals, cities and artifacts, in general?

    The capital is Novosibirsk!

    And who lived there?
  62. +1
    26 May 2019 22: 11
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
    Polynesia, Aboriginal Australia

    Australian Aborigines, New Guineans, Polynesians and other Pacific Islanders have haplogroup C1.
  63. -1
    26 May 2019 23: 41
    And this list of “Russian folk proverbs” (with Arabic overtones) can be continued endlessly.
    Yeah. I also had to write about where Makar chased the calves, about Kuzka’s mother and Yoshka’s cat. I love the nonsense that the Tartarists and Novochrons spout. Otherwise, the official history is such boring reading. lol
    1. 0
      27 May 2019 00: 18
      Quote: Sertorius
      I love the nonsense that the Tartarists and Novochrons spout.

      Love, who's stopping you?
      Quote: Sertorius
      I also had to write about where Makar chased the calves, about Kuzka’s mother and Yoshka’s cat.

      Write?
      Showing Kuzka's mother means I'll kill you.
      Kaza - kill, finish off.
      And mate, you could have guessed it yourself. In chess, the meaning of this term is the same, death (of the check, i.e. of the king). The game is oriental.
      But the Arabic phrase “hidi nahiyya” means “step aside.”
      1. 0
        27 May 2019 02: 43
        Keep burning! Stronger insanity - more humor! The topic with Yoshkin the cat and Makar has not yet been revealed.
      2. +1
        27 May 2019 03: 31
        Kaza is not to kill. You use Vashkevich for your Arabic idioms. So at least quote it correctly. What do these idioms prove? What did we contact with the Arabs? So this is not a discovery.
        1. 0
          27 May 2019 10: 55
          Quote: Sertorius
          Kaza is not to kill.

          And checkmate, not death?
          Quote: Sertorius
          You use Vashkevich for your Arabic idioms.

          Did Vashkevich invent chess?
          Quote: Sertorius
          What do these idioms prove? What did we contact with the Arabs? So this is not a discovery.

          For borrowing of this scale, simple contacts are not enough. It is necessary that part of the population, and a very influential one, communicate in this language. I think these were the clergy (of Islam) of Moscow Tartaria. Well, then, simply - religious educational institutions, schools attached to them, etc. So we got such a wonderful linguistic fusion.
  64. 0
    27 May 2019 06: 03
    Quote: r910
    This Katka German saw such grounds (marked in the Empress of the Third Rome, but also did not burn out). But she is a newcomer, tumbleweed. Therefore, I lost my way over the history of my homeland, as I wanted.

    Poor you, our Tartarian... I looked at the map and immediately became proud. How amazing!
    1. -1
      27 May 2019 10: 58
      Quote: kalibr
      Poor you, our Tartarian...

      I wouldn't say poor.
      Quote: kalibr
      I looked at the map and immediately became proud. How amazing!

      Pavlov’s dog has such primitive reflexes. I don't base my views on reflexes.
  65. 0
    27 May 2019 06: 13
    Quote: r910
    The textbooks were rubbish. And in general, science was bad in the USSR, even basic science, very bad. It was an underdeveloped country. Uncompetitive. That's why it collapsed.
    And displays like the beeping horned ball, Belka, Strelka and Gagarin did not solve anything. The general level of technical and technological development of the country is not determined by show. And the level of the most mass production.

    It's like that! But among this disgrace there were not only “balls”, but also many other things. Archaeologists dug and conducted research, copied petroglyphs and translated ancient books. Yes, at the beginning it was necessary to say that “Stalin’s genius illuminated the world,” but then they could write whatever they wanted, if not against the authorities. But the shards did not threaten. So a huge base of factual material was created. And a very good base. There is a magazine called "Soviet Archeology". It's not for the faint of heart, but it's an interesting read...
    1. -1
      27 May 2019 11: 12
      Quote: kalibr
      but then you could write whatever you wanted, as long as you didn’t go against the authorities.

      “Write whatever you want” and “conduct scientific research” are two different things.
      Quote: kalibr
      So a huge base of factual material was created. And a very good base.

      And also a very good material and technical base of socialism.
      Can you tell me how it all ended?
      Quote: kalibr
      There is a magazine called "Soviet Archeology". It's not for the faint of heart, but it's an interesting read...

      Many Soviet magazines are interesting to read. Can you tell me any Soviet Nobel laureates in the field of archaeology?
      You see, Vyacheslav, you are proceeding from the Soviet dogma that science flourished in the USSR (about technology, and this is an even sadder conversation, I’ll keep silent for now). However, this is not so; there was no development of science in the USSR. And in general, it was a rather backward state in all areas. Which is generally typical for authoritarian and even more so for totalitarian regimes.
      No freedom, no development. This was not noticed by me and not said by me.
      PS. So what about genes? In your opinion, there was a Tatar-Mongol invasion (which lasted centuries), but Russians do not have Mongol genes.
      How did this happen? The Mongols had "the most honest rules"? "The Shape of Morality"?
      Somehow I don’t really believe in such miracles. But you seem to believe.
  66. -1
    27 May 2019 06: 15
    Quote: r910
    Why look at funny pictures?

    You are looking at Tartar cards...
    1. +1
      27 May 2019 10: 38
      Quote: kalibr
      You are looking at Tartar cards...

      I don't consider Tartar cards.
      Me, in short:
      1. I give a simple and logical explanation of what the Tartar-Mogul (without “N”) yoke in Holy Rus' actually was. I am not presenting nonsense about slanting Mongols on shaggy horses in Europe (which is not confirmed by modern DNA tests), but I am clearly explaining who the Tartars were and why, in the opinion of the Russians of Holy Rus', it was a “yoke.”
      2. I conduct a quick analysis of the Russian language and show the reasons why it is quite distant from other Slavic languages. And it stands apart, as it were.
      3. I give an explanation why the majority of Little Russians do not want to live in the same state with the Great Russians. After all, it would seem that this is nonsense, the roots are the same, the predominant religion is the same. They cannot help but want to live together, there is no reason. And in this case there should not be any Little Russians and Great Russians, everything coincides, one people.
      But it turns out there are reasons. And they are buried in quite hoary antiquity. And they act on a subconscious level, like muscle memory. And why Little Russians and Great Russians have different languages, this also explains.
      4. I give an explanation of the peculiarities of the mentality of the non-Muslim population of Russia.
      5. I give an explanation of the origin of the term “Tatars”.
      And to confirm this, I cite ancient maps, engravings and weapons from the Kremlin Armory.
      So far I have not seen a single argument against what I wrote. Except for arguments like “but that’s not what the textbooks say.”
      As for ancient Persian sources and the like, I doubt, Vyacheslav, that you read in ancient Persian. And the fact is that you saw these sources with your own eyes.
      You are retelling the statements of local experts. Which broadcast in accordance with the generally accepted (consensus) picture of the development of the world. In which there are many inconsistencies that are largely ignored. Simply because they go beyond the consensus.
      The world cannot agree even on the interpretation of the events of the very recent 20th century. And there are many versions of “how it really happened.” What can we say about more ancient times?
  67. Quote: r910
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
    What about Genghis Khan? Great Khan of the Mongol Empire, not Tartary
    And Batu? Ruler of the Jochi ulus of the Mongol Empire, not Tartary
    And Mamai? Beklyarbek and temnik Jochi of the Mongol Empire, not Tartary

    Fima, I really see that you have a problem with understanding. How many times do you need to write that these are the khans of the Great Tartaria for you to finally understand this? All the “Mongol khans” who appeared in Russian chronicles are actually Tartars.
    At the same time, one should not confuse the khans of Great Tartaria with the Mongols (although they did not call themselves that before), better known to us as the “Chinese emperors.” These are different figures. And the “Chinese emperors” were vassals of the khans of Great Tartaria. And these were representatives of different nations.
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
    Chuluuny Dalai (Mongolian Shangas ovogt Chuluuny Dalai; 1930 - June 12, 2009) - Mongolian scientist, historian.

    This list will also give you the wrong list. Business, nothing personal.
    At the same time, in the Khalkha epic there is no mention of such fabulous exploits of their ancestors. They only learned about this from the Russians. And much later.
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
    Did he also rewrite history for you at the direction of Catherine 2?

    Fima, I'm amazed. It turns out you don’t know when the German Katka lived.

    ***
    Everything's clear with you. Stay like the main Tartarin in the 15-16th centuries. Further discussion is pointless, because any authorities of any country in the field of the history of the Empire of Genghis Khan will be declared bribed by you to hide the mythical Tartary. I don't think there's any point in continuing the debate. Good luck and happiness in your life... in Tartary!
    1. 0
      27 May 2019 11: 18
      Quote: Lieutenant Colonel USSR Air Force in stock
      for any authorities of any country in the field of the history of the Empire of Genghis Khan will be declared by you to have been bribed in order to hide the mythical Tartaria.

      Fima, I'm not in it for the money. I'm for genes.
      Where, Fima, did the genes go? They cannot but exist, since the Mongol invasion took place (as you claim) and it lasted for centuries. But there are none. And this is a scientific fact.
      Oh, Fima, I feel sorry for you. You really have a break in the pattern. So you slipped into the hole.
      1. -1
        27 May 2019 12: 47
        They don’t exist because there was no joy in suffering from filth. It was a shame, a stigma. But it was also difficult to bear a child: Russian women of that time were for the most part either already pregnant or nursing (and feeding for a long time), but during the lactation period they did not become pregnant, or having carried a child from a Tatar and given birth to a narrow-eyed one... they got rid of him. A stone on the neck and into the water. “Don’t feel sorry for the filthy child!” Often the disgraced mother also went there. There was no tolerance for the filthy in Rus', there was none.
        1. +1
          27 May 2019 13: 44
          Quote: kalibr
          They don’t exist because there was no joy in suffering from filth. It was a shame, a stigma.

          Did women take birth control pills? Or did they require the use of condoms?
          Do not make me laugh.
          Quote: kalibr
          Russian women of that time were for the most part either already pregnant or nursing (and nursing for a long time)

          All 240 years “were pregnant and nursing”?
          Quote: kalibr
          having carried the Tatar and given birth to a narrow-eyed one... they got rid of him. A stone on the neck and into the water.

          Vyacheslav, I didn’t expect such nonsense from you. I'm not kidding.
          Quote: kalibr
          There was no tolerance for the filthy in Rus', there was none.

          Since what other business has this not happened? Why wasn't it?
          You are just describing to us some kind of unbending Bolsheviks, not women in Rus' in the Middle Ages.
          You should stop with these dogmas already. People are just people. And they simply live, and do not “fight for a bright future.” Unless, of course, there is a warden standing behind you.
          1. 0
            27 May 2019 16: 36
            Quote: r910

            All 240 years “were pregnant and nursing”?

            You have a unique idea of ​​the “yoke”. It was mainly in the form of paying tribute and appointing princes as khans. All this was done by local “governors” from among the Slavs, but 99% of the population had never seen a “living” Mongol
            1. +1
              27 May 2019 16: 56
              Quote: Town Hall
              All this was done by local “governors” from among the Slavs, but 99% of the population did not even see the “living” Mongol

              So where have they been for 240 years, these mysterious Mongols?
              If 99% of them haven’t seen them?
              Wow. For 240 years they paid tribute, but to whom they did not see. They just paid him that way, he had an excess of consciousness. And the Mongol garrisons did not strengthen this consciousness.
              And what kind of “yoke” was this then, since there was no oppression from the Mongols? And there were no Mongols in Rus'. As they paid taxes to the local prince, they paid them. Nothing changed. What was the “yoke”?
              Do you believe this story yourself?
              But what about the proverb “an uninvited guest is worse than Tartary”? Not a Mongol, I note, but a Tartar.
              It turns out that the Russians saw Tartar during the period of the “yoke”. And they saw it so often that they even created a proverb about it. And meeting them (the Tartars) was not considered lucky.
              1. 0
                27 May 2019 17: 07
                To pay tribute, the threat of a raid is enough. Do you pay taxes with a pistol to your head? Or is the awareness of unpleasant consequences enough?)
                1. +1
                  27 May 2019 17: 25
                  Quote: Town Hall
                  Or is awareness of the unpleasant consequences enough?

                  In order for princes to “realize unpleasant consequences,” they must see power. Preferably every day. It’s like an ordinary policeman’s uncle, only, given that the princes have squads, they are larger in number. Otherwise, their motivation to share will disappear very quickly. Man is greedy by nature.
                  Keeping Holy Rus' (millions of people) in check for 240 years cannot be done with paper soldiers.
                  1. 0
                    27 May 2019 17: 39
                    Quote: r910
                    Quote: Town Hall
                    Or is awareness of the unpleasant consequences enough?

                    In order for princes to “realize unpleasant consequences,” they must see power. Preferably every day. It’s like an ordinary policeman’s uncle, only, given that the princes have squads, they are larger in number. Otherwise, their motivation to share will disappear very quickly. Man is greedy by nature.
                    Keeping Holy Rus' (millions of people) in check for 240 years cannot be done with paper soldiers.

                    They saw it. There was a lot of competition among the princes). there were not so many raids during this period
                    1. +1
                      27 May 2019 17: 56
                      Quote: Town Hall
                      there were not so many purely Tatar raids during this period

                      I'm tired of proving to you that 240 years is a long time.
                      1. -1
                        27 May 2019 18: 08
                        Much compared to what? At that time, wars lasted for 30 years and 100 years. Empires even lived to be a thousand years old. Vassal relations were the norm. And they also lasted for centuries. Compare with the slightly later Porte. And much more documented. Also for 300-400 years, peoples and there were countries under their “yoke”, both Greeks and Bulgarians and Serbs, and they retained their gene pool)
              2. +1
                28 May 2019 10: 49
                ... obcheto Tatar = Khazarin = Khozak = Cossack - mounted warrior... An uninvited guest is worse than a Tatar tax collector.. The tribute was collected and taken away by mounted warriors...
        2. -1
          27 May 2019 16: 30
          The Italians have good research on this topic (why there are no “barbarian” genes). It concerns the inhabitants of Italy after the fall of the Republic of Ingushetia. Short-term raids could not “leave” such traces a priori. The population of the Apennines at that time was approximately 5 million. And the raids were carried out by tribes of about several tens of thousands maximum. Moreover, these tribes are not gangs of men, but with families, children and wives. And no mass rape. This is an exception to the rule.
          And for those who inhabited the territory for a long time (for example, the Longobards), due to this small number, they had the opposite problem. Namely, not to “dissolve” among the “natives.” Therefore, they married almost exclusively fellow tribesmen, etc., etc.
  68. +1
    27 May 2019 12: 55
    Quote: r910
    You are retelling the statements of local experts.

    Why are they bad? And what’s wrong with the mountains of documents from the West and the East, where there are Mongols who reached Croatia and corresponded with the popes, but there are no Tartars. Thousands of documents and thousands of researchers. And everyone is wrong? And the truth was revealed to you alone. Funny. Engravings and weapons from the Armory against piles of documents? Even funnier. Besides, do any weapons from the chamber bear the mark “Emperor of Tartary”? No! So what are you talking about? These neophytes to whom “the truth was revealed” are funny to me. You’d better tell me the published sources of your Tartarianism...
    1. +2
      27 May 2019 14: 32
      Quote: kalibr
      Why are they bad?

      Because it's not original. And the fact that these statements are adapted to the consensus picture of “world development.”
      Quote: kalibr
      where are the Mongols

      These were not Mongols. These were people who in consensus historiography are usually called “MoNgols”.
      I’m trying to convey to you the fact that these “Mongols” have nothing to do with the Far Eastern Mongols.
      Quote: kalibr
      Thousands of documents and thousands of researchers. And everyone is wrong?

      See above.
      Quote: kalibr
      And the truth was revealed to you alone. Funny.

      This happens all the time. And it's not funny. There is even a special word for this, “discovery.”
      Quote: kalibr
      Engravings and weapons from the Armory against piles of documents? Even funnier.

      What kind of laughter can there be from ancient engravings and ancient weapons? This is quite documentary evidence.
      Quote: kalibr
      Besides, do any weapons from the chamber bear the mark “Emperor of Tartary”?

      Why "emperor"? Khan.
      Chinggis, Batu, etc. You know them all from official history.
      Yes, and here's another. One of the meanings of the word Mogul (without the “N”) is great. The well-known phrase “Great Mogul” is simply a combination of translation with original sound. Great Tartaria, translated as “Mogolo-Tartaria”. And its inhabitants are “Mogolo-Tartars”.
      Is the hint clear?
      Moving on.
      Where are Mongolia and the Mongols located?
      Where are the historical Tatars?
      What the hell could "Tatar-Mongols" be like? What do the (historical) Tatars have in common with the Far Eastern Mongols?
      Quote: kalibr
      These neophytes to whom “the truth was revealed” are funny to me.

      And Einstein is funny? By the way, the truth was also revealed to him. And D. Bruno. And G. Galileo.
      Are they all funny?
      Quote: kalibr
      You’d better tell me the published sources of your Tartarianism...

      Do you only accept the retelling of other people's thoughts?
      1. +1
        28 May 2019 14: 50
        ..in ancient times, different peoples called Rus' differently - Mogolia, the country of the Gardariks, Scythia, Tartary... (there were many of them - White Tartary (Belarus), Moscow Tartary, Piebald Tartary...
      2. -2
        28 May 2019 17: 31
        Quote: r910
        By the way, the truth was also revealed to him. And D. Bruno.

        Please clarify what great scientific truths were revealed to Jor. Bruno, I somehow forgot. I heard that he was nothing more than a philosopher and a satirist, a lover of talk and criticism, a person very far from science.
  69. 0
    27 May 2019 15: 45
    Quote: Dzafdet
    there were rapes and the birth of children

    The first was, but the second was not! To give birth to a "filthy" child was worse than death... and it came very quickly to the descendants of the filthy, and even to their mothers in labor!
    1. +1
      27 May 2019 16: 02
      Quote: kalibr
      but there was no second one! To give birth to a "filthy" child was worse than death... and it came very quickly to the descendants of the filthy, and even to their mothers in labor!

      Vyacheslav, your stories about medieval genocide are, of course, impressive.
      But still the story about the drowning of babies by mothers was the coolest of all.
      Just one question, doesn’t it bother you that these mothers ALLEGEDLY drowned their own children? Do you have children? Could you drown them on an “ideological basis”?
      Don't think. Those mothers didn’t even think about drowning their children. And they didn’t drown. Rus' is not a madhouse. Even medieval.
  70. 0
    27 May 2019 15: 50
    I asked you about the sources of your thoughts. And he expressed himself in a way that was quite understandable. There is no need to convince me with a stream of consciousness. Sources please. Or did a revelation come to you from heaven? And one more thing - where is the mark “Emperor of Tartaria” on the weapons from the Chamber? The weapon itself is not a very valuable source!
    1. +1
      27 May 2019 16: 04
      Quote: kalibr
      Or did a revelation come to you from heaven?

      Why from heaven? Can’t get it out of your head? Only from heaven or from a book?
      Quote: kalibr
      And one more thing - where is the mark “Emperor of Tartaria” on the weapons from the Chamber?

      It’s already in my craw. Why did the weapon have to have such a mark?
      Quote: kalibr
      The weapon itself is not a very valuable source!

      May be. But the place of its production and the way it is decorated are valuable. In a complex, so to speak.
      Now it wouldn’t even occur to you to paint something in Arabic script and quotes from the Koran. And then they painted it. What is it for?
  71. -1
    27 May 2019 15: 54
    Quote: r910
    Since what other business has this not happened? Why wasn't it?

    Because they are “filthy”!
    1. +1
      27 May 2019 16: 10
      Quote: kalibr
      Because they are “filthy”!

      Vyacheslav, stop talking already. At first it seemed funny. Now it doesn’t seem like it anymore.
      Holy Rus', this is not a madhouse. Normal people lived there. But normal people will not drown their children, as you claim. Not under any pretext. How could such a thing be imagined!
  72. -1
    27 May 2019 16: 01
    Quote: r910
    You see, Vyacheslav, you are proceeding from the Soviet dogma that science flourished in the USSR (about technology, and this is an even sadder conversation, I’ll keep silent for now). However, this is not so; there was no development of science in the USSR. And in general, it was a rather backward state in all areas. Which is generally typical for authoritarian and even more so for totalitarian regimes.

    Who told you this? Did you get a degree in history during the Soviet era? Yes or no? A direct question - a direct answer. If not, then...how can you know how it was from the inside. And I know, I received my degree right then and worked a lot for this. And I know whether science developed or not. And yes - backward, but... with a number of nuances. It’s impossible to generalize 100% like this. That is, trees also grew on the stones, although they were crooked and not palm trees.
    1. +3
      27 May 2019 17: 39
      Quote: kalibr
      If not, then... where from?

      From there. Is that okay?
      Why should I write you a treatise on this subject?
      Quote: kalibr
      And I know, I received my degree right then and worked a lot for this.

      Sorry, but in my opinion a "degree in history" is nothing.
      Simply because there is no such science as history.
      "Science history" does not have the signs of science. And this is generally a well-known fact.
      “Science history” is one of the subsections of “ideological education of the masses.” Application tool. But not science.
      Quote: kalibr
      And I know whether science developed or not.

      Yes? Where?
      Quote: kalibr
      It’s impossible to generalize 100% like this.

      Why not?
      I wrote about the USSR. We all know what this USSR was. This is a virtual picture that has nothing to do with reality. The collapse of the USSR threw all the husks of Soviet propaganda and history aside. And it turned out that the king was naked.
      There is no industry other than mining.
      Science, no. But this was known to understanding people even earlier, by the number of Nobel laureates.
      Agricultural, no. But understanding people knew this even earlier, after visiting stores.
      Armed forces, no. But this was known to understanding people even earlier, analyzing the beginning and course of the Second World War and WW2, as well as subsequent wars. And, of course, personal experience of “serving in the SA” was capable of instilling horror on this topic.
      Etc.
  73. -1
    27 May 2019 17: 32
    Quote: r910
    Can you tell me any Soviet Nobel laureates in the field of archaeology?

    Can you name NON-SOVIET ones?
    1. +1
      27 May 2019 17: 52
      Quote: kalibr
      Can you name NON-SOVIET ones?

      W. Libby, for example, in 1960 received the Prize in the section “chemistry”. But his chemical methods work in archaeology.
  74. -1
    27 May 2019 17: 37
    Quote: r910
    And they didn’t drown. Rus' is not a madhouse. Even medieval.

    Read the book “The Life of “Ivan” by Semenova Tien-Shanskaya about a much later time... Don’t compare our time with that!
    1. +1
      27 May 2019 17: 54
      Quote: kalibr
      Don't compare our time with that!

      Vyacheslav, your description of the morals of Holy Rus' degrades the Nazis to the level of some petty naughty people.
      I don't think you're right about this. I mean the morals that reign in Holy Rus'.
  75. 0
    27 May 2019 17: 43
    Quote: r910
    Holy Rus', this is not a madhouse. Normal people lived there. But normal people will not drown their children, as you claim. Not under any pretext. How could such a thing be imagined!

    Read the chronicles... The princes strangled, crushed, poisoned each other... and the common people were not at all embarrassed. They fornicated with goats, had sexual intercourse, unfaithful wives were harnessed to sleighs and beaten with whips, and driven out naked into the cold. The last one... back in 1910... in 1917, sugar in the birth canal was used to lure a baby out..."Normal people."
    1. +2
      27 May 2019 18: 06
      Quote: kalibr
      The last one... back in 1910... in 1917, sugar in the birth canal was used to lure a baby out..."Normal people."

      Remind you how very literate, advanced and educated “citizens of the former USSR” near their televisions “charged” cans of water, and then drank this water in portions and in small sips?
      1. -1
        27 May 2019 18: 15
        Quote: r910
        Remind you how very literate, advanced and educated “citizens of the former USSR” near their televisions “charged” cans of water, and then drank this water in portions and in small sips?

        And what does this prove? That the degree of ignorance of 80% of people does not change? So I constantly write about this in my articles. But there is no need to answer off-topic. This is a bad way to conduct a discussion. There is no list of sources that led to serious discoveries in your mind.
        1. 0
          27 May 2019 18: 30
          Quote: kalibr
          There is no list of sources that led to serious discoveries in your mind.

          No, and you're right about that. I can’t list for you, or even just remember, all the mass of literature that prompted me to such conclusions.
  76. -1
    27 May 2019 17: 43
    Quote: r910
    And they didn’t drown. Rus' is not a madhouse. Even medieval.

    Read the book “The Life of “Ivan” by Semenova Tien-Shanskaya about a much later time... Don’t compare our time with that!
  77. 0
    27 May 2019 18: 01
    No need to distort. You asked to name Nobel laureates in archeology. No need for chemists. We have laureates in physics whose methods also work in archeology! Name the ARCHAEOLOGISTS! Your Libi is not an example. ARCHAEOLOGISTS!
    1. +1
      27 May 2019 18: 21
      Quote: kalibr
      We have laureates in physics whose methods also work in archeology!

      For example?
      Quote: kalibr
      Name the ARCHAEOLOGISTS! Your Libi is not an example. ARCHAEOLOGISTS!

      Those. method of determining age by carbon analysis, does this have anything to do with archeology?
  78. 0
    27 May 2019 18: 01
    No need to distort. You asked to name Nobel laureates in archeology. No need for chemists. We have laureates in physics whose methods also work in archeology! Name the ARCHAEOLOGISTS! Your Libi is not an example. ARCHAEOLOGISTS!
    1. -1
      27 May 2019 19: 07
      Physicists Nikolai Gennadievich Basov, Alexander Mikhailovich Prokhorov are directly related to atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) and atomic emission spectroscopy (AES). Methods of archaeological research of artifacts.
  79. -1
    27 May 2019 19: 10
    Quote: r910
    but in my opinion

    It's inexpensive!
  80. Quote: kalibr
    They don’t exist because there was no joy in suffering from filth. It was a shame, a stigma. But it was also difficult to bear a child: Russian women of that time were for the most part either already pregnant or nursing (and feeding for a long time), but during the lactation period they did not become pregnant, or having carried a child from a Tatar and given birth to a narrow-eyed one... they got rid of him. A stone on the neck and into the water. “Don’t feel sorry for the filthy child!” Often the disgraced mother also went there. There was no tolerance for the filthy in Rus', there was none.

    ***
    It is useless to argue with flat-earthers - theoreticians - Tartarians.
    1) There is not a single coin, seal, or document signed by the Khans of Great Tartary and the Khans of Moscow Tartary.
    2) Regarding genetics:
    The Mongol-Tatar raids were aimed at intimidation. Raids were not so frequent. The fate of women could be:
    2.1.) taken into slavery for sale or own use as slaves, or
    2.2.) be raped, killed, or both at the same time.
    There is no doubt that in case 2.2) the unwanted child was either disposed of using “home” methods before or after birth.
    In those days, the concept of humanity was very unique.
    Spoiled women, even at the beginning of the 20th century in Russia, were actually persecuted by society, and the stigma of being illegitimate was not welcomed even in Soviet times....
    They did not stand on ceremony with their own children, and even more so with those who were forcibly conceived. Extra mouths, especially girls, were not really needed. Russian and European fairy tales about children taken to the forest are an example of this. In India and China, until recently, newborn girls were killed.
    1. +2
      28 May 2019 04: 33
      It is useless to argue with flat-earthers - theoreticians - Tartarians.
      It is a fact. Because they believe in what they carry. Doubt is the natural state of a person engaged in the study of history. A tartarist has a conviction that he is right.
    2. +1
      28 May 2019 04: 58
      The Mongol-Tatar raids were aimed at intimidating
      .
      Penzev convincingly proved ten years ago that Tatar raids were a rare phenomenon and most often the Tatars were dragged to Rus' by their own princes for internecine squabbles. I think that many sensible people here, including you, Lieutenant Colonel, have fallen for the claims of local tartarists about the absence of Mongolian genes, etc. This approach is a way of manipulating the not yet obsolete idea of ​​the yoke, which in the minds of the masses is associated with “oppression.” At the same time, facts are missed that testify to the usual rules of vassalage between Russia and the Horde in the Middle Ages, which implies a certain respect for the rights and responsibilities of each other.
      Gumilyov also missed the information given; I don’t remember verbatim that the number of “Mongols” did not exceed 3 thousand in Batu’s troops, that is, 1/10 of the total number. The rest were recruited from the completely Caucasian peoples of the Jochi ulus.
      It is forgotten that, regardless of the era, the key to successful wars is discipline, and not indulgence in violence and robbery. And the discipline of Genghis’s army is in all textbooks.. And why destroy and brutalize against yourself territories that, after conquest, will become your resource base?
      One of the Tartarists thought about this. No. Even now, after reading this, they will fall down in particular - Batu had 30 thousand or 100 thousand, Batu is the great Tartararian commander Batya, etc.
      1. 0
        28 May 2019 15: 03
        Horde is a military association of territorial military forces..
  81. +2
    27 May 2019 20: 11
    Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
    non-techies and non-techies cannot help

    I’m not talking about help - I’m talking about an approach: in the natural sciences it is accepted that if the collected set of objective facts clearly indicates something, then whether you are Newton or Einstein, your opinion is ignored until new objective facts confirm that you are right.

    Examples of a natural scientific approach to collecting objective facts about historical events:
    - the absence of genetic Scandinavians in burials of the 9th-10th centuries throughout the entire territory from the Ladoga region to the Dnieper region, including the settlement of Staraya Ladoga, where the concentration of Rus for several years before their resettlement to Novgorod was close to 100%;
    - the absence of remains of metal weapons at the bottom of Lake Peipus, despite more than 50 years of searching for it, including the use of diving equipment, and the presence of remains of metal weapons on the shore of the lake in the area of ​​​​the original Raven Stone (changes in the level of the lake are completely correlated with changes in the level surrounding land for 800 years).

    In addition, in the natural sciences, the unity of methodology is at the forefront, an example from the practice of humanists - if one historical event is interpreted by ignoring written sources (records in the PVL about the membership of the Rus tribe, which has no alternatives in sagas and chronicles), then an attempt to interpret another a historical event, through the use of written sources (chronicles and chronicles about the Battle of the Ice) in the natural sciences, is recognized as a gross methodological error, after which those who like to “make mistakes” in this way are forced to apply the same methodological approach in both cases or stop communicating with it as with a scientist.

    Ignoring the requirement for unity of methodology leads to the spread in historical science of types like the local “Tatar historian”, who first tries to prove one event by ignoring Russian chronicles (like they are falsified with respect to German chronicles), and then blindly tries to prove another event by following the Russian ones chronicles (like they are more accurate than any German chronicles).

    Neglect of the natural-scientific approach in historical science leads to the massive spread of Fomenkovites, Normanists, Great Russians, Tartarians, Sumeroids, Volkov fans and other alternativeists.
    1. 0
      28 May 2019 00: 28
      Quote: Operator
      Examples of a natural scientific approach to collecting objective facts about historical events:

      - The presence of a huge number of Scandinavian burials of the XNUMXth - XNUMXth centuries. on the territory of the Volga region, Upper Volga region and the Dnieper region (Ladoga, Novgorod, Smolensk, Rostov).
      - the presence of Scandinavian buildings on the same territory, dating from the same period and containing a huge number of finds in the form of household items, jewelry and labor tools, including blacksmith tools, made according to the Scandinavian model.
      - Scandinavian names of the first Russian rulers.
      - Conducting and analyzing the results of genetic studies of people who consider themselves descendants of Rurik, which clearly showed the origin of the majority of Rurikites from a common ancestor who had a Scandinavian subclade of haplogroup N1c, the highest concentration of which is in the region of Central Sweden.
      - historical linguistic research by world-famous professional linguists, which unequivocally proved the Scandinavian origin of the word “Rus”.
      All this data allows us to clearly ignore the delusional ideas of various science freaks and the die-hard Nazis who support them, who, mind you, hide their national roots. laughing
      The ongoing search for the site of the Battle of the Ice in the light of criticism of the hypothesis of identifying the Crow Stone with Crow Island, which some have not heard of and do not want to hear, also speaks of a constant movement in classical historical science towards criticism and revision of outdated historical concepts.
      And by the way, you will decide whether I am a Jew or a Tatar. Otherwise, in front of my Russian grandfathers Pavel Grigorievich, whom some Nazi arbitrarily identified as a Tatar, and Ivan Petrovich, who is probably a Jew, it’s somehow awkward - they both look at you from the other world and don’t understand who should start laughing first.
  82. 0
    27 May 2019 21: 03
    [quote = Operator]Ignoring the requirement of unity of methodology leads to the spread in historical science of types like the local “Tatar historian”, who first tries to prove one event by ignoring Russian chronicles (like they are falsified with respect to German chronicles), and then blindly tries to prove another event by following Russian chronicles (like they are more accurate than any German chronicles).

    Neglect of the natural-scientific approach in historical science leads to the massive spread of Fomenkovites, Normanists, Great Russians, Tartarians, Sumeroids, Volkov fans and other alternativeists.
    You said this very well, or rather wrote it!
  83. 0
    27 May 2019 21: 08
    Quote: r910
    Why should I write you a treatise on this subject?

    Should not! Your diarrhea of ​​words is not needed. Enough - no, I didn’t receive it. And that's it.
  84. +2
    28 May 2019 00: 53
    Quote: Semurg
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack


    By the way, all these tribal ethnonyms are of Mongolian origin.

    So Rashid ad Din was wrong to write "regarding those Turkic tribes which are now called Mongols", or maybe it was not the Mongols who came to Central Asia and Kazakhstan and became Turkicized, as Russian historians claim, but the remnants of the Turks in Mongolia became Mongolized.


    What kind of tricks do the Turkic chauvinists indulge in?)))))) At first they self-confidently declare one thing, and when their nose is poked into the facts, they begin frantically trying to come up with new fantasies instead of the refuted ones. There was no resettlement of Turks to Mongolia and these Mongolian clans do not have a Turkic substrate. But Mongolian elements are revealed even in the Golden Horde - archaeologically, epigraphically, anthropologically.
    You don't understand Rashid al-Din. Alas, this takes a long time to learn, read a lot, write dissertations and articles. This phrase means the following: the Turkic tribes are now called Mongols by their citizenship, inclusion in the Mongol state.
  85. 0
    28 May 2019 00: 57
    Quote: kalibr
    Quote: r910
    Why should I write you a treatise on this subject?

    Should not! Your diarrhea of ​​words is not needed. Enough - no, I didn’t receive it. And that's it.


    Uh kalibr, I’m surprised at your patience. This is some kind of panopticon.... God forgive me.
    Judging by the site, the archaization of mass consciousness is in full swing. Folkhistory, combined with uncritical aggressive sectarianism, washes away rational knowledge. The dispute between scientific knowledge and faith is pointless))))
    1. +1
      28 May 2019 00: 59
      They will now remember the “chronicle” of Iman Bakhshi))))
  86. +1
    28 May 2019 01: 23
    Quote: r91

    Sorry, but in my opinion a "degree in history" is nothing.
    Simply because there is no such science as history.
    "Science history" does not have the signs of science. And this is generally a well-known fact.
    “Science history” is one of the subsections of “ideological education of the masses.” Application tool. But not science.


    You are confusing facts and statements. “There is no history” is a statement. The coin of Emperor Hadrian, the stratigraphy of this find in situ and the radiocarbon analysis of the age of the wood of the structure, all together confirming the traditional chronology and leaving no stone unturned from Fomenkonosovsky’s fantasies - this is a fact.
    But for the sake of discussion, let's accept your assumption. If there is no science, but only ideology, then what kind of ideology and why is Fomenkonosov’s imposed on us? And does the theory of set topology, which Fomenko has actually been studying all his life, belong to science? Does it have signs of science? If so, which ones?
    1. -1
      28 May 2019 01: 33
      Fomenko studied Lie algebras. This is a completely abstract theory that has no applied value, is based on arbitrarily given logical assumptions and is not verifiable. Is this science? Or ideology? This is definitely not an “applied tool”. Fomenko's doctoral dissertation on such abstract bullshit is also “nothing”?
  87. +1
    28 May 2019 01: 49
    Quote: r910
    Quote: kalibr
    There is no list of sources that led to serious discoveries in your mind.

    No, and you're right about that. I can’t list for you, or even just remember, all the mass of literature that prompted me to such conclusions.


    )))) the patient does not understand the difference between a source and historiography (aka literature). What do Fomenkonosovsky’s writings refer to?
    Overall a great answer!!! I supposedly know and read so much that I forgot everything)))
    Once upon a time, a student asked me during an exam - well, at least roughly show the location of the Hittite power on a map - and answered: I studied the history of the ancient world so diligently that I forgot all the modern names.
  88. +1
    28 May 2019 11: 15
    “Jami at-tavarikh” Rashid ad-Din.
    But take the same Rashid. There is not a single administrative document either on his behalf or in relation to him on behalf of the ruling khan (king, king, shah). Oh yes, there are Rashid's "letters". But have mercy, official history states that Rashid ad-Din’s correspondence consists of 53 letters, including 4 letters to Rashid ad-Din from different persons, the rest are letters addressed to their sons, various Muslim clerics, military and civilian officials. The style of the letters is heterogeneous; perhaps some of them were written by the vizier's secretaries.
    It’s interesting to write: “some part consists of.” What kind of thing is this? 10 % ? 20 % ? 50 % ? 90%? 99%? Let's figure it out, has the handwriting of Rashid ad-Din been established at all?
    The answer is no, it is not installed!! Then maybe all the letters were not written by him? And it's possible!!
    But what do we even know about Jami' at-Tawarikh, except that Jami' al-Tawarikh (World History) - a rare medieval illustrated work by the Persian historian Rashid ad-din Fadlallah Hamadani (1247-1318) was registered in the UNESCO International Memory of the World Register. And also that this book is kept in the library of the Tehran Museum, located in the picturesque Golestan Palace, as Farhad Nazari, head of the organization of cultural heritage, tourism and folk crafts of Iran, told the ISNA press service.
    Historians admit that the work of “Rashid,” so to speak, is not historical in the modern sense of the word, since “the editor of the “Collection of Chronicles” had no idea about the tasks of historical criticism... His goal was to present the traditions of each people as they are told representatives of this people." That is, it is recognized that “Jami' at-Tawarikh” may be just a Collection of legends of the peoples of the world: Muslims, Mongols, Chinese, Franks and Indians. Moreover, it goes without saying that Rashid ad-Din did not reach China and Mongolia. Didn't even make it to India.
    Further. Let's look at what came down to historically reliable times from this work.
    It is admitted that “this work has not survived to this day in its entirety.”
    The surviving parts amount to about 400 pages, which are available in two versions - in Persian and Arabic. It is believed that about 20 illustrated copies were made during the life of Rashid al-Din, of which only a part is available today, and the full text has not survived.
    But “it is believed that about 20 illustrated copies were made during the life of Rashid ad-Din” does not mean that “it is proven that about 20 illustrated copies were made during the life of Rashid ad-Din.”
    The oldest known copy of the book is an Arabic version, half of which has been lost, but part of it is now in the collection of the Anglo-Iranian collector Nasser Khalili, and the other part belongs to the library of the University of Edinburgh.
    So what ?

    Let's still work with DOCUMENTS. Oh yes, the trouble is, they don’t exist.
    1. -1
      28 May 2019 17: 46
      Quote: Seal
      Let's still work with DOCUMENTS. Oh yes, the trouble is, they don’t exist.

      Ok, let's take a break from "Jami at-Tawarikh" (and WHY DID YOU TAKE THIS name to mean "World History"?!? it means "Collection of Chronicles" in Arabic, if literally word for word - "Perfect Work", "Highest image") - although I don’t understand what’s so bad? The oldest SURVIVING ORIGINAL manuscript is from 1314. What’s the problem?

      Let's take Marco Polo's travel book. An outstanding man, he traveled all over Eurasia, did not notice ANY TARTARY, but described various Mongol kingdoms, including the main one led by Kublai Khan. By the way, he knows Russia quite well. The oldest surviving manuscript is manuscript F - the end of the 13th or the very beginning of the 14th century (1298-1305), written jointly by Rusticiano and Polo, or copied from the original DURING THE LIFE OF Marco Polo himself. What could be a problem for novochronologists here?

      How come there are no documents?
  89. 0
    28 May 2019 11: 17
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    answered: I studied the history of the ancient world so diligently that I forgot all the modern names.
    One could answer like this.
    I wanted to immerse myself in history so much that I taught everything from history textbooks from the 18th century to the first half of the 19th century. And in them there is not a single mention of any Hittite power.
    hi
  90. -1
    28 May 2019 11: 25
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    Emperor Hadrian's coin, the in situ stratigraphy of this find, and the carbon dating of the structure's wood all come together
    The age of the coin has not been determined using chemical and physical methods. Yes, this is impossible. Isotope analysis of the metal that makes up the coin was not carried out. Well, yes, otherwise it suddenly turns out that the metal contains silver from the mines of Potosi. hi
    the stratigraphy of this find in situ - yeah, after all, they found a fairly modern Swiss watch in the “ancient Chinese tomb”. hi
    Radiocarbon analysis is so approximate that it can only be used conditionally. The RU method does not take into account soil carbon, does not take into account the proximity of the tree to the sea (to salt water or salt in general), etc. and so on. It is believed that the RU method is corrected for cosmic radiation, but who can say what it was like, this is cosmic radiation in “that period,” if they began to measure this radiation only in the 20th century.
  91. +2
    28 May 2019 11: 48
    Quote: Lieutenant Colonel of the USSRF Air Force in reserve
    Mongol-Tatar raids
    What is a "Mongol-Tatar raid"? Who actually ran? "Mongols" or "Tatars"? Or mestizos?
    And what did they run on? Okay, the Tatars from Crimea also ran at us on their rather tall, fast and most importantly, able to run at a gait such as an amble.
    And what horses did the Mongols “run” on??? What, also in Tatar?
  92. -1
    28 May 2019 16: 15
    Quote: Seal
    And what horses did the Mongols “run” on??? What, also in Tatar?

    Described by Rubruk and many others...
  93. +1
    28 May 2019 18: 26
    Quote: Seal
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    Emperor Hadrian's coin, the in situ stratigraphy of this find, and the carbon dating of the structure's wood all come together
    The age of the coin has not been determined using chemical and physical methods. Yes, this is impossible. Isotope analysis of the metal that makes up the coin was not carried out. Well, yes, otherwise it suddenly turns out that the metal contains silver from the mines of Potosi. hi
    the stratigraphy of this find in situ - yeah, after all, they found a fairly modern Swiss watch in the “ancient Chinese tomb”. hi
    Radiocarbon analysis is so approximate that it can only be used conditionally. The RU method does not take into account soil carbon, does not take into account the proximity of the tree to the sea (to salt water or salt in general), etc. and so on. It is believed that the RU method is corrected for cosmic radiation, but who can say what it was like, this is cosmic radiation in “that period,” if they began to measure this radiation only in the 20th century.


    I am always amused by the comments of Fomenkolozh residents! I'm afraid their gurus would not have withstood even a hundredth part of such pressure of criticism regarding their theories)))
    So, let's sort it out.

    1. Why is there no study of alloy coins? It’s very well done, it’s already a routine procedure. A comprehensive analysis of Roman coins has long been carried out; even the places of silver extraction and the time of operation of the mines have been established. Let me give you an example - in Smekalova’s doctoral thesis, for example, the results of the analysis of almost 13 thousand coins of the Northern Black Sea region are summarized. So the hint of American silver is gone!

    2. A detailed classification has been created for Roman coins; for mints there is even a sequence for replacing worn-out stamps (based on microtracing of traces). Mass finds and the sequence of release of coins into circulation are also reconstructed. It seems to an amateur that there is a coin - that’s all. And professionals for each type of denarius have at their disposal databases of finds throughout the Empire, including those more or less reliably dated using accompanying stratigraphy and ceramics (thermoluminescent and other methods). Coinage from the early Empire is superbly preserved in Pompeii, Stabiae, Herculaneum, etc. and reliably dated. These datings are fully consistent with the chronological scheme, proving its correctness for both earlier and later periods.

    3. An example about some Swiss watch - this is just blah blah, not relevant to the point. You obviously don’t understand what archaeological stratigraphy is (including why it is impossible to counterfeit and scatter Roman coins under the eruption layer at Herculaneum and Pompeii, or at the foundation of the Roman fort on Hadrian’s Wall in such a way as not to disturb the stratigraphic layers).

    4. Reliability of radiocarbon dating. Of course, there are a number of different technical difficulties, but the methods themselves are improving very quickly. On the time interval of the decay of carbon and potassium-argon (where Rome falls), they are already quite accurate. For those interested, I advise you to see the article by E.P. Zazovskaya on the current state of radiocarbon dating (Bulletin of Archaeology, Anthropology and Ethnography. 2016. No. 1 (32). But even with all the maximum allowances for calibration errors, according to the ancient era, they do not leave stone unturned on all “theories” Fomenkonosovsky.

    5. In Europe, there are other natural history methods - for example, dendrochronological (series of dendrological oak scales, including Roman times), sequences of ceramic types, synchronistic tables of archaeological equipment (brooches, etc.).

    Well, in conclusion. The amateur is looking for a “magical single method,” while the professional uses a combination of them. Each method has its own pros and cons, its own errors and limitations. But their totality and complementarity are the basis of historical knowledge.
  94. Quote: Trilobite Master
    The fact is that historically, nationalism has always been alien to Russian people

    ***
    But what about the contemptuous attitude towards foreigners? Are their nicknames derogatory? Pogroms? Nationalists on the Internet? Nationalists on this site? Open RUSSIAN ORTHODOX FASCISM on YOUTUBE....
    To feel Russian nationalism you need to be non-Russian... or Russian attentive to this phenomenon.
  95. Quote: Trilobite Master
    Unread

    Oh, father, you have played with some historical misconceptions...
    The conquests of the Urals, Siberia, Bashkiria, Central Asia, the Caucasus, Poland lasted 100 and 200 years, accompanied by the greatest blood and the greatest atrocities on all sides. And all this under the slogans of the fight against infidels (from Muslims to Europeans).
    Is the state nationalism of Nicholas II the Black Hundred and his Union of the Russian People a fairy tale or something?
  96. 0
    28 May 2019 23: 08
    Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
    Livonian “brothers” quite successfully made winter trips to frozen rivers and lakes, and even along ice-covered sea bays

    Horse riding and horse fighting are not the same thing.

    No matter how the Russian detachment was positioned relative to the lake, it could always be attacked from four sides: from the front, rear and two flanks - at least three of the four sides are in no way connected with the lake.

    In any case, it is necessary to be guided by the German chronicle, which indicates the battle area - on the grass (the Russian semantic analogue is on the ground). Plus the remains of metal weapons found on the shore, and not at the bottom.
  97. 0
    28 May 2019 23: 57
    Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
    The list of this is huge

    Including Dacia: most of the Dacians were slaughtered by the Romans, a massive resettlement of colonists from the Apennine Peninsula was organized into the deserted territory - the result was modern Romania.
  98. 0
    29 May 2019 17: 35
    The fight has begun, first decide on the dates. Take 1000 years off the price tag, this is the first, secondly, Tartary was destroyed in the 18th century, there is a lot of evidence of this, starting from round lakes, trees whose age does not exceed two hundred years, and ending with cities, during the reconstruction of which underground floors are found on depth of 5 meters. As for falsifying history, there’s nothing to do...
  99. 0
    29 May 2019 20: 10
    Quote: Dzafdet
    The fight has begun, first decide on the dates. Take 1000 years off the price tag, this is the first, secondly, Tartary was destroyed in the 18th century, there is a lot of evidence of this, starting from round lakes, trees whose age does not exceed two hundred years, and ending with cities, during the reconstruction of which underground floors are found on depth of 5 meters. As for falsifying history, there’s nothing to do...

    To add to your collection of evidence, data has been preserved about the great khan of Tartaria named Tartaren from Tarascon. Despite all the efforts of the Scaligerians, the memory of this great warrior miraculously escaped falsification. The epic about this ruler proves that
    Great Tartaria at a certain time owned part of Africa.
    1. 0
      29 May 2019 20: 14
      Tarascon is Saraton. There was a simple rearrangement of letters, which was common for that era. Saraton is Saratov.
  100. -2
    29 May 2019 22: 15
    Quote: Dzafdet
    starting from round lakes, trees whose age does not exceed two hundred years, and ending with cities, during the reconstruction of which underground floors are found at a depth of 5 meters.

    It seems that spring, when mental illnesses worsen, has already ended?

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"