How the Mongols changed the historical path of Rus'

249
Fight of Russian horsemen with Tatars. 1916. Hood. S. Arkhipov. Military Historical Museum of Artillery, Engineering and Signal Corps. St. Petersburg. Photo of the author.
Fight of Russian horsemen with Tatars. 1916. Hood. S. Arkhipov. Militaryhistorical museum of artillery, engineering and signal troops. Saint Petersburg. Photo of the author.


Continuation of the review of modern scientific views on the history of Rus'-Russia.



Entry


A huge number of works have been written: scientific and artistic, that “if all Russian lands were united, they would be able to resist” the Tatar-Mongols. It is difficult to argue with this "if only". The Russian land in the XNUMXth century was, in modern terms, a country of sovereign city-states with its own political ambitions, grievances, struggle with neighbors, clashes between “old” cities and “younger ones”, a struggle with Kiev. Therefore, they could not unite in any way. In such conditions, Rus' turned out to be a tributary of a stronger rival.

Who was that?


The nomadic society of the Mongols of the XNUMXth century, as the latest research shows, was potestar and exopolitan, that is, it was a nomadic society with a “consensual” structure in relation to the leader, where there was social inequality, but there were no state mechanisms of coercion and repression. In relation to the outside world, this society appears as aggressive and predatory, because it can exist only through the exploitation of societies standing outside it.

Under the conditions of the production structure of nomadic pastoralism, the appropriating mode of production based on war comes to the fore. They waged wars against communities that were not able to mobilize at lightning speed, and all sedentary and agricultural ethnic groups and states can be classified as such. The nomads did not set out to seize the lands if they were not in the steppe territory. They carried out exo-exploitation in relation to them, which was a combination of receiving tributes, periodic raids and collecting simultaneous indemnities (commemoration).

Of course, the Mongols could completely destroy the captured state. So, for irrational reasons, but completely in the spirit of the ideas of the Mongols, the Tangut state Xi Xia was destroyed in the north-west of modern China. At the same time, the Mongols had little influence on the internal structure of the subordinate countries that were outside the territory of the great steppe.

The “nomadic Mongol empire”, from Rus' to the borders of the Chinese Sun empire, existed as a single structure for no more than 20 years and collapsed in 1259. When China was finally conquered, the lands of Central and Western Asia, the Golden Horde was no longer part of the same state with the Yuan empire, which united Mongolia and China.

The Short Age of the Mongolian World-System. One of the maps that can be found on the Internet. It depicts the countries into which the short-lived "nomadic empire" of the Mongols broke up.
The Short Age of the Mongolian World-System. One of the maps that can be found on the Internet. It depicts the countries into which the short-lived "nomadic empire" of the Mongols broke up.

Some of the conquered territories that fell under the control of the Genghisids outside the Far East, for some time continued to formally submit to the Karakorum, even sent contingents of troops to conquer the Chinese empire of the Southern Sun. So in Khanbalik (Beijing), the capital of the Yuan, a detachment of the Russian Guard appeared along with other foreign guards. But from 1265, the Mongols of Central Asia began constant wars with the great and Mongol Khan and the Yuan Emperor. This ended the "nomadic Mongol empire" from the last to the first sea. This was written in detail on VO in a cycle dedicated to the war of the Mongols against the Chinese states.

Therefore, Rus' could not be part of the Mongol Empire on the territory of China, Yuan (1271-1369). She was not part of the nomadic horde of Eastern Europe, called the Golden.

Did Rus' turn off the European path?


This dispute is over two hundred years old. The idea that “the Mongols hid Europe from us” belongs to the first Russian historiographer N.M. Karamzin, which was quite consistent with the level of historical analysis of the early XNUMXth century, his arguments were criticized in the XNUMXth century, their groundlessness was shown by S.M. Solovyov, V. O. Klyuchevsky, A. E. Preselkov, etc. These conclusions were not confirmed in further historiography. In the XNUMXst century, from a professional point of view, they are the property of historical thought, and nothing more, as discussed below.

Nevertheless, there continues to be an opinion that if it were not for the Mongol invasion, then the development of Rus' would have led to a “certain European model”, and not to an “Asiatic satrapy”. This conjecture is not confirmed by anything in historical monuments. Again, the Eastern Slavs follow the same organic European path as the whole of Europe. The so-called lag is connected primarily and only with the fact that the Slavs entered the historical path much later than their kindred Western ethnic groups. In the following articles, we will see how these structures developed in our country and in Western Europe.

Immediately after the Mongol invasion, which passed like a terrible tornado through the lands of the north-east of Rus', no visible political changes occurred. All the old relationships, accounts and resentments continued to exist. On the eve of the attack on Kyiv by the Mongols for its "golden table", as if nothing had happened, the struggle of the Russian princes continues. Of course, the devastated and border volosts had no time for this.

While the regions not affected or only slightly affected by the Mongol invasion continued to fight for tribute on the borders (Smolensk, Novgorod, Polotsk, etc.), entering into a struggle between themselves and with new applicants for border tribute (German knightly orders, Lithuania). Rostov, which surrendered to the Mongols and thus preserved its community, and hence the militia, in the 40-60s. XIII century becomes the oldest city in the northeast.

Soon the princes, as representatives of Russian volosts, were forced to go to the Horde to determine the conditions of submission. It is noteworthy that the conquerors, based on their mental representations, saw in Rus' exclusively the defeated and tributaries-"slaves". And in the Russian princes they saw the same authoritarian rulers as they themselves.

The reverse side of these "journeys" was the fact that the Mongols unwittingly strengthened the power of the princes in the volosts, and the princes could now dispose of the principalities in a way that they had not previously risked and thought. This increase in the power of the princes was directly related to the tribute, which had no economic justification, but was appointed completely arbitrarily and in no way correlated with the economic capabilities of the tributaries.

Prince Yaroslav Vsevolodovich (1191–1246), who received a label or the right to rule Russia, allocated the Kievan table to his eldest son Alexander Nevsky, and to the youngest - the real, richest part of Rus', the northeast. Alexander, not interested in sitting in the ruined city, sent his governor there. Former Kiev prince Mikhail Vsevolodovich (1186-1246), who fled from Kyiv during its capture by the Mongols, settled in Chernigov. During a trip to the Horde, he, refusing to perform pagan rites, despite persuasion from the Mongols, was executed.

Even such a harsh warrior and clever politician as Daniil Romanovich of Galicia (1201-1264) was forced to personally resolve issues with the Horde. He, who had been trying to find help in the West for a long time, decided that he himself could fight the Horde, began to strengthen the Russian cities of Galich, Volyn, Kholm. But the Baskaks, who went to these lands for tribute in 1250, 1252, 1260, demanded that the fortifications of Russian cities be destroyed. Daniel's new appeal to his western neighbors ended with symbolic help, the Pope of Rome honored him with a coronation in the city of Drogichin, and he himself, albeit formally, received suzerainty over the Russian prince.

Daniel's brother, Prince Vasilko Romanovich (1203-1267) was forced to destroy the fortifications of Vladimir-Volynsky at the request of the Mongols. The prince personally burned the walls, and the townspeople dug a moat. By cunning, he was able to save the walls at Holm, deceiving the Baskak Burundai. The princes of Western Rus', who defeated the Lithuanians, Germans and imposed tribute on the Lithuanian tribes, did not have any military capabilities against the superior forces of the Tatar-Mongols. And they continued their raids for new robberies and securing the relationship they needed: receiving tribute.

In 1252, the "Nevryuev's army" defeated the Vladimir land, although this may have been a continuation of the strife between the volosts and the Russian princes at the table in Vladimir. But an attempt to count tributaries by Tatar scribes caused an uprising in Novgorod in 1257-1259, Alexander Nevsky, fearing the wrath of the Mongols, himself suppressed the rebellion.

In 1262, in the cities of Vladimir-Suzdal, Muslim tax-farmers were killed, authorized, as in Central Asia, to collect tribute. The collection of tribute entrusted to the Muslims was seen by the Russians as a desire to destroy their faith. In 1270, Novgorod not only refused to pay tribute, but expelled the collectors Yaroslav Yaroslavovich (1230–1271).

At the same time, the Mongols continued their devastating campaigns against Rus', using any excuse for this, including the traditional strife between the lands for Russians; in 1292, the so-called. "Dudenev's army". The nomads captured Suzdal, Vladimir, Yuryev, Pereslavl-Zaleski, 14 cities in total.


During the second half of the XIII century between the victorious Mongols and the defeated Russia, as we see, relations begin to build. The key in these relations was the “tribute”, this is not a tax, but a payment similar to an indemnity, but not a lump sum, but a constant one, until the tributary recognizes the power of the winner over himself.

Helmet from a Mongolian grave. Late XNUMXth–XNUMXth centuries With. Nikolaev, Oryol region GE. St. Petersburg. Photo of the author.
Helmet from a Mongolian grave. Late XNUMXth–XNUMXth centuries With. Nikolaev, Oryol region GE. Saint Petersburg. Photo of the author.

There has never been any inclusion of the lands of Rus', except for a small territory near Kyiv, into the structures or system of the "nomadic empire" or "ulus of Dzhuchev", as many publicists and historians assure us! Even the borders between the "nomadic empire" and the Russian lands were clearly delineated.

How has the system of Ancient Rus' changed?


The social system of Rus' did not change, but was weakened. With the death of cities, howls, free citizens of the volost, who form the basis of the inhabitants of the lands, also perished. This led to a significant weakening of the city or volost community, and the remaining population tried to leave for places that were safer from their point of view: from the south of Rus' to the northeast, from more significant cities, more often attacked by the Tatars, to less significant ones. After the XIII, with the beginning of the XIV century, it became obvious that the cities of Rus' were already physically unable to deal with an external threat.

The conquerors needed to establish a constant flow of income from the conquered lands with as little effort as possible. The Russian lands also needed to build relationships, protecting them from endless military raids from the steppes. To this end, the defeated representatives of the Russian lands, the Russian princes went to the Horde. Many of which die there, defending Russian interests.

Both sides, firstly, are trying to “grope” for acceptable relations, which does not change the actual state of affairs, where there are winners and losers. In this regard, it is completely untenable to talk about some kind of symbiosis between Rus' and the Horde.

Secondly, throughout the entire Tatar-Mongol yoke, these relations changed and evolved, the Horde was an unstable "steppe empire", in which its own unrest and "zamyatny" often arose.

Tribute or Horde exit was an extremely heavy and constant economic burden, assigned arbitrarily. It was accompanied by raids, emergency collections, "gifts" and lodging.

An attempt to apply in relation to Rus' the system of collecting tribute or "numbers", borrowed in Central Asia, failed.

Almost simultaneously with the beginning of the formation of a systemic collection of fees from captured or conquered agricultural societies, the collapse of the short-lived "Empire of the Mongols" began: there were no opportunities in the Middle Ages to manage such a vast territory. The Han Empire of the Southern Song (that is, China proper) was captured by the Mongols only in 1279.

Mongols on the march. A shot from the series "Genghis Khan" produced by Mongolia and China.
Mongols on the march. A shot from the Genghis Khan TV series produced in Mongolia and China.

The urban armed movement in Suzdal, Novgorod and other cities did not make it possible to collect the "number" through external collectors: first the Baskak governors, then Muslim merchants-farmers, representatives not of the Golden Horde, but of the Karakorum. Despite the repressions by the Tatars, with the forced participation of the Russian princes, these two systems could not hold out in Rus'. Thanks to the active resistance of the volosts, the collection of the Horde "exit" goes to the "local administration". The transfer of tribute collection to the Russian princes from the beginning of the XNUMXth century provided them with a financial resource. This will give them the opportunity to defend the independence of Rus' and their estates.

The Tatar-Mongol rout dealt a blow to the democratic structure of Russian cities, but did not cancel it. Throughout the XNUMXth century, veche operated in the cities, which spontaneously resolved various key issues in the life of the community and volost. The volost continues to be a single whole organism without division into town and village. When we say townspeople, people, community members (modern term) - we mean all the inhabitants of the volost, without separation. The struggle continues between the volosts - city-states for seniority in the region or for getting out of subordination.

In Rus' there were not yet antagonistic classes sharply opposed to each other: feudal lords and serfs, towns and villages. The city remains a "large village" where most of the inhabitants are related to agriculture, even if they are artisans.

But what has changed?

Firstly, the Horde collection and the raids that accompanied it seriously undermined the country's primitive agrarian economy in a difficult climatic region.

As a result of the establishment of tributary relations, the Mongol-Tatars did business with the princes and tried to determine for them the places that they were supposed to occupy in Rus', but they could not even neglect the established traditional relations, when other princes or even cities could actually challenge this appointment on the spot . However, it was more important for the Mongols to receive tribute than to change something from the northern tributaries.

It is no coincidence that the Horde khans were called "kings", by analogy with the Byzantine "kings" external to Rus' ("Caesar" until the XNUMXth century).

The fact that the Russian lands, under the pressure of an irresistible force, were forced to pay tribute to them, did not make these lands part of the "nomadic empire." It is significant that Epiphanius the Wise (d. 1420) objectively called the Khan of the Horde "an imaginary king."

The Russian princes were forced to accept certain rules of the game imposed from outside, especially those that were beneficial to them. Now it was less and less possible to reckon with the volost community, but simply “to stand on the city” with the help of the khan's label. The city community (volost) could no longer show the prince the “clear path” (expel him), and having a khan’s label, the princes could now act by force with greater confidence, including involving the Tatar-Mongol cavalry. This tactic, in a historical perspective, proved to be justified: as soon as the Russian princes built up their forces, they immediately began an open struggle with the nomads.

The khans closely watched their tributaries, tried to prevent anyone from gaining strength, played on the contradictions of the Russian princes, skillfully playing them off. And only internal strife, the struggle for power in the steppe, could distract them from control over Russia, as Prince Dmitry Donskoy wrote:

“And God will change the Horde…”

To be continued ...
Our news channels

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

249 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +7
    21 March 2023 04: 39
    Good all the time of day.
    The phrase "Mongolian yoke" appeared after the purchase in 1872 by Kafarov in Beijing of a very dubious origin of the book, which is called differently "the secret history of the Mongols", "the secret legend of the Mongols", etc.
    The book is written in Chinese characters and then translated into Russian.
    The Mongols did not have their own written language.
    The author of this article confirmed that the word "Mongol" is not found in any ancient Russian source - only a Tatar or Tatars.
    And so, the article correctly describes the events of the XIII century.
    1. +7
      21 March 2023 05: 29
      Quote: ee2100
      the word "Mongol" is not found in any ancient Russian source - only a Tatar or Tatars

      People were usually called by more familiar names. so, for example, everyone living in Russia is called Russian, and England is called English, although this is not entirely true. The Slavs call the Germans Germans, the French - Alemans, and the Finns and Estonians - Saxons. The Greeks called everyone who lived to the east and north of their range Scythians, without particularly going into ethnicity. But the Romans surpassed all of them - all those who are not Roman or Greek - that barbarian ...
      1. 0
        21 March 2023 09: 17
        The Mongols themselves call themselves Oirats sometimes Dzungars, Zungars, Dzungars, Zyungars, Zengors.
        There are Tatars in the annals, but where did the Oirats, Dzhungars (Mongols) go?
        1. +4
          21 March 2023 09: 24
          Quote: ee2100
          and where did the Oirats, Dzungars (Mongols) go?

          They became Kalmyks...
          1. +1
            21 March 2023 09: 50
            Gone to the management. drinks
            --------------------------------------------------
            1. -3
              21 March 2023 13: 08
              There it is, the day before yesterday the communists were to blame for everything, yesterday the West, and today Comrade Xi arrived and the Horde was again to blame laughing laughing laughing
            2. +2
              21 March 2023 14: 38
              Gone to the management


              In the janitors. laughing

              "I am a descendant of Khan Mamai,
              My horse is long gone.
              I sweep away from other people's trotters
              I'm dropping from the public streets.

              I got a letter from the housing office
              There you turned to me,
              They offer Siberia open spaces
              Instead of taking Moscow with a fight.
              ...................................................

              But life could not seem -
              The horse trotted under me,
              And in my Asian chest -
              Asian fire was burning!" (c)

              Anatoly Ivanov's parody of the famous song by Berezhkov. good
            3. +6
              21 March 2023 14: 41
              Gone to the management

              Almost guessed it, Sasha, - Konstantin writes correctly - to the janitors - and this is without any irony
              In the cities of the Russian Empire, each owner of an apartment building was required to hire a senior janitor, who was registered with the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The duties of which were not limited to cleaning the yard and adjacent streets. In fact, he performed the functions of a commandant, who was responsible not only for sanitation in the territory entrusted to him, but also for the economy, the technical condition of the house, and even for the safety of residents. These people could be recognized by their white apron, cap and a special badge with a house number.

              At st. janitor subordinate were:
              - a junior or “handy” janitor is cleaning the yard and the street adjacent to the house, delivering firewood to apartments and performing small tasks, mainly related to the household: for example, loading and unloading furniture or courier deliveries.
              - A janitor on duty with a badge and a whistle who controlled the access control at the gates of the house and did not let peddlers, organ grinders, beggars, drunken shoppers and other troublemakers into the yard. He kept order and, as a rule, the tenants could be sure that not a single thing would be taken out of the house without his knowledge. At night, the janitor locked the gate with a key and was on duty near them in order to let in the late tenants, receiving a "penny" from them.
              For all the janitors, the householder allocated housing free of charge. While the assistants settled several people in a room, a separate janitor relied on the elder. In addition to housing from the landlord, all of them could count on gratuitous grub. At the same time, at the beginning of the 20th century, the junior janitor received 25 rubles a month from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the duty officer 35-50 rubles, and the senior one - at least XNUMX. If you add tips from residents, then at that time it was very good money.
              The profession of a janitor at that time was an honorable business of life and a serious career. As a rule, they tried to recruit retired jr. police officers and soldiers, preference was given to Tatars and Bashkirs,
              how responsible and most importantly indifferent to alcohol
              . For many of them, this profession became hereditary.
              1. +4
                21 March 2023 15: 09
                Hello Dima!
                I am very pleased that Eduard continued his series about the Mongols. Even earlier, I tortured him "will he get to our ulus or not?" Got it. Look how many indifferent!
                Naturally, I knew about the janitors in the Republic of Ingushetia.

                This is not a very positive image.
                1. +5
                  21 March 2023 16: 17
                  What can I say? Not all descendants of the Mongol-Tatars were lucky to become both an astronaut and the Minister of Defense

                  Although, to be honest, Zhugderdemidiin Gurragcha was lucky, because he conscientiously served his Motherland, and did not shake his pussy in a drunken state in front of the young ladies smile
                  1. 0
                    21 March 2023 21: 19
                    Lady, are you aware of the monkeys that the United States launched into space, and not only?
              2. +1
                21 March 2023 22: 42
                May get banned, but today this material is the best in many weeks.
                Edward is cautious, but he is not afraid to go against the grain.
                We all know that history is a science directed by pror..
                1. 0
                  21 March 2023 22: 46
                  Everything was cut off. Maybe for the better drinks hi laughing am hi
                  --yyyyyyy¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡
        2. +5
          21 March 2023 09: 45
          The Mongols themselves call themselves Oirats sometimes Dzungars, Zungars, Dzungars, Zyungars, Zengors.

          The Mongol tribe was the tribe of Genghis Khan, it united other Mongol tribes, such as the Oirats, and scattered the Tatars. The Tatars had previously been the dominant tribe among the Mongols.
          After the death of the Yuan, the Uriankhians, Mongolodzhians, and Oirats periodically became dominant in the Mongolian steppe, but everyone knew that the Genghisites were only from the Mongols.
          And yet, we know the clear state of the Great Mongols, the more traditional name of the Great Mughals. At the head, all the same Mongols of Central Asia.
          1. +5
            21 March 2023 09: 57
            Edward! Neither I nor anyone present here speaks out against the invasion of the Tatars, but many people, including myself, consider the term "Mongols" unacceptable.
            The Mongol is not equal to the Mogul. Just like a Nenets is not equal to a German.
            The Mughal Empire, also known as the Timurid Empire, was formed by the ruler of India and Afghanistan, Zahir ad-din Muhammad Babur, the founder of the Baburid dynasty, in 1526 and formally existed until the middle of the XNUMXth century.
          2. 0
            29 March 2023 15: 31
            Your knowledge is also the same. So - a long time ago, about a thousand years ago, there were two brothers, Duva sohor and Dobun mergen. Duva sohor, the elder brother, was the head of the tribe and he had 4 sons. Dobun mergen was the youngest, and he was the ancestor of Genghis Khan. After the death of Duva Sohor, Dobun Mergen becomes the head of the tribe. The sons of Duva sohor do not agree with this and leave the tribe. They go to the territory of the modern Irkutsk region and create the Derbet tribe (Durbyn - four, Four brothers) consisting of the Choros, Hoyt, Elut, and Batuut clans. The tribes surrounding them call them Oirats - the northern forest people (Mongols). When Genghis Khan began to gather the Mongol-speaking tribes under his own hand, he sent the eldest son Jochi to conquer them, but the Derbets, led by Kuduka beks, came to him themselves. Genghis Khan attached great importance to this fact, since the Derbets and he had a common ancestor. And unlike other clans and tribes, he did not divide and crush them. Shortly before this, Genghis Khan defeated the Naimans and assigned their deserted lands to Derbets. These are present-day western Mongolia and northern Xinjiang. In the same way, Genghis Khan determined the place for the Derbets in the general ranks of the Mongol army - the left hand (Zuun gar). Over time, this transformed into Dzhungar (Dzungaria). Thus, Derbets, Oirats and Zungars (Dzungars) are one people. In the 14th century, the Choros and Khoyts separated into a separate tribe under the Zungar name, and at the turn of the 14th and 15th centuries, together with the Derbets themselves and the Mongol tribes of Torguds and Khoshuts that joined them, they created the Union of Oirat tribes - Durben Oirat. By that time, the Mongol Empire had finally collapsed, the descendants of the grandson of Genghis Khan Kublai, expelled from China, tried to subjugate the Oirats, but they were told that "we have our own khans." This ended the reign of the Genghisides and the history of Dzungaria began. In 1635, a council of the heads of the Oirat tribes was held, at which a decision was made to move the Torguds to the Volga, Khoshuts to the south, to Lake Kukunor. On the territory of Dzungaria there remained the native Oirats proper - Zungars and Derbets. Some time later, after the capture of China by the Manchus, the struggle between Dzungaria and China escalates. And despite the fact that the Dzungar Khanate is considered the last nomadic empire, everything ends with the death of Dzungaria in 1756-58. It was destroyed, died of disease and starvation, captured about 90% of the population of the state. The survivors partly went to the Torguds (Kalmyks), partly to the territory of the present Irkutsk region, partly remained in place. That's all. The Tatars were not the dominant tribe among the Mongols and were destroyed by Genghis Khan himself even before the unification of the Mongol-speaking tribes, as they poisoned his father Yesugei Bator. There were many births among the Mongols, some are remembered, some are not
        3. 0
          29 March 2023 14: 49
          Your statements are primitive. Just like you yourself....
    2. -7
      21 March 2023 07: 45
      One came up with, while others repeat, and even after the research of geneticists, they do not calm down by composing the Mongols and Tatars who captured half the world.
      1. +4
        21 March 2023 15: 36
        even after research, geneticists do not calm down writing the Mongols and Tatars who captured half the world.



        You are talking about pulling an owl on a globe that everyone should have "Mongolian genes" because the Mongols raped all women, but this most likely says that those who spread or believe these nonsense have never dealt with women.
    3. +12
      21 March 2023 09: 10
      The Mongols did not have their own written language.

      Alexander,
      Good afternoon,
      The Mongols had a written language. In the XIII century. No, they wrote in Uighur. But from the fifteenth century was.
      We know a huge number of works of the 14th - XNUMXth centuries, many have been translated into Russian. In the old Mongolian language: "Golden Legend", "Precious Vault", "Precious Rosary", "Crystal Mirror", already in XNUMX volumes! etc.
      1. +5
        21 March 2023 09: 20
        Edward!
        Good afternoon!
        I read that it is believed that the Mongols wrote in Uighur. They spoke Mongolian, but wrote in Uighur letters?
        1. +6
          21 March 2023 09: 23
          They spoke Mongolian, but wrote in Uighur letters?

          Yes, in the thirteenth century. - of course, it was Uighur. But later, its own written language was formed.
          hi
          1. +5
            21 March 2023 10: 02
            The Mongols speak the Khalkha dialect. And the modern Mongolian language began to take shape only in the XNUMXth century.
      2. 0
        29 March 2023 15: 39
        The writing of the Mongols was created during the life of Genghis Khan, in the 13th century. Based on the Uighur script. It is written from top to bottom, right to left. It is still used in Mongolia
    4. -2
      21 March 2023 10: 07
      The author, just don’t make the Mongols benefactors for Russia laughing
    5. 0
      21 March 2023 10: 10
      Quote: ee2100
      Good all the time of day.
      The phrase "Mongolian yoke" appeared after the purchase in 1872 by Kafarov in Beijing of a very dubious origin of the book, which is called differently "the secret history of the Mongols", "the secret legend of the Mongols", etc.
      The book is written in Chinese characters and then translated into Russian.
      The Mongols did not have their own written language.
      The author of this article confirmed that the word "Mongol" is not found in any ancient Russian source - only a Tatar or Tatars.
      And so, the article correctly describes the events of the XIII century.

      Not certainly in that way. Jan Dlugosh in 1479 called the time of the existence of the Golden Horde.
    6. +7
      21 March 2023 10: 25
      Hi Sasha.
      Quote: ee2100
      The book is written in Chinese characters.

      Uighur. This is the Mongolian script. Written by the way, in the Middle Mongolian language.
      Quote: ee2100
      the word "Mongol" is not found in any ancient Russian source

      In the sources of the XIV - XV centuries. expressions like "Mungalian steppes" are encountered.
      1. +4
        21 March 2023 10: 50
        Misha, hello!
        We've been through this with you more than once. drinks
        Let's stay with our opinion. Specifically with you. hi
    7. +3
      22 March 2023 00: 05
      Karamzin was not a historian, he was a "writer" like V. Pikul, and it is incorrect to consider his writings as a historical work. Further, we really know NOTHING reliably about the world events of ancient centuries, since there are very few written sources, and one can only guess what exactly they describe, because. the system of chronology in different "states" of those times did not coincide ...
    8. 0
      29 March 2023 15: 40
      The writing of the Mongols was created during the life of Genghis Khan, in the 13th century. Based on the Uighur script. Not Uyghur script, but based on Uyghur. It is written from top to bottom, right to left. It is still used in Mongolia
  2. +7
    21 March 2023 04: 41
    Thank you Edward! Glad to see.

    What happened to the death of Mikhail Chernigov? Love for your Faith? The stubbornness that manifested itself in refusing to walk between the fires?

    Or was fate already predetermined, and then they made it an image? And they just didn’t forgive him Kalka?
    1. +7
      21 March 2023 08: 28
      Sergei mutually.
      My opinion is stubbornness. The chronicle clearly states that others went through cleansing by fire and nothing. If all the Russian princes did this, they would all be killed.
      again, the Mongols, as the Chronicle writes, remembered that he killed the ambassadors.
      They tried to dissuade him for a long time, go through the fire and okay.
      But... it happened the way it did.
      Mikhail Chernigovsky was, judging by his behavior, a little odd.
      hi
      1. +7
        21 March 2023 08: 55
        Ritualism was then more than fundamental. And from that, and from the other side.

        Probably not isolate one of the factors. Just like everywhere else in our lives.
        1. +7
          21 March 2023 09: 13
          Probably not isolate one of the factors. Just like everywhere else in our lives.

          I agree that mentality is an important factor in medieval life.
      2. 0
        29 March 2023 15: 43
        Purification by fire is still used by the Mongols. Especially before the New Year. There is a special shamanic rite... Thoughts, consciousness, soul are cleansed....
    2. +9
      21 March 2023 11: 04
      Quote from Korsar4
      fate was already sealed

      The site has an article about Mikhail Chernigovsky, written many years ago by a certain Mikhail Luzhsky. smile
      In short - in my opinion he was doomed. In addition to Kalki, he had another sin - he executed the envoys of Khan Mongke in Kyiv in 1240.
      Well, besides, it was the worst enemy of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, who by that time had already found a common language with the Mongols. And although Yaroslav himself was in Karakorum at that time and could not personally influence the events at Batu's headquarters, I think Batu could act in his interests on his own initiative. In short, no one needed Mikhail, but he interfered with everyone. Yes, and he gave an iron reason for the execution.
      1. +2
        21 March 2023 21: 22
        Misha, you are a flatterer! Misha Luzhsky! drinks
        ---------------------------------
      2. +1
        21 March 2023 21: 29
        "this was the worst enemy of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, who by that time had already found a common language with the Mongols. And although Yaroslav himself was in Karakorum at that time and could not personally influence the events at Batu's headquarters, I think Batu could act in his interests on his own cause" (c)
        Anton is my friend, but you explain your passage.
  3. +9
    21 March 2023 05: 28
    The Russian land in the XNUMXth century was, in modern terms, a country of sovereign city-states with its own political ambitions, grievances, struggle with neighbors, clashes between “old” cities and “younger ones”, a struggle with Kiev.
    More precisely, it was not a struggle with Kiev, but for the throne of Kiev.
  4. +2
    21 March 2023 06: 07
    Karamzin did not use the phrase Tatar-Mongols. Karamzin has either Tatars or Mongols.
    But the term "yoke" is Karamzin's invention of the Poles transferred to the historiography of Russia, who invented this term "yoke" about a hundred years after the end of the invasion. Karamzin transferred this term to the historiography of Russia and it turned out the same as with the term Kievan Rus, which the Poles also "invented", and Karamzin transferred the term Kievan Rus to the History of Russia. And the term Ukraine was also "invented" by the Poles, from the Polish words "u kraja", that is, at the border of the Polish kingdom.
    The term "yoke" in relation to Russia of those times is already erroneous in that the word "yoke" implies the existence of a certain single state space that would be conquered and enslaved by the interventionists and with whom a stubborn and constant liberation war is being waged. And this is about Russia of that time, well, just nonsense ..
    So Karamzin is more of a writer than a historian. And Karamzin used History as a hanger in the wardrobe and historical events, like clothes in the wardrobe, hung up at his own discretion ...
    1. +2
      21 March 2023 06: 23
      Quote: north 2
      And Karamzin used History as a hanger in the wardrobe and historical events, like clothes in the wardrobe, hung up at his own discretion ...

      I think that's what all historians do... wink
    2. +9
      21 March 2023 06: 33
      And the term Ukraine was also "invented" by the Poles

      This term is used in Russian chronicles, in relation to the border regions: "in our Ukraine", emphasis on "a". For example.
      Rather, the Poles borrowed than vice versa.
      1. 0
        21 March 2023 06: 53
        Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
        This term is used in Russian chronicles, in relation to the border regions: "in our Ukraine"

        How can the term "Ukraine" be applied to the "mother of Russian cities" - Kyiv? For Muscovite Rus, Ukraine can in no way be some kind of outskirts. Rather, Ukraine is the outskirts and periphery of Poland, so it would be more logical ...
        1. +8
          21 March 2023 07: 07
          For Muscovite Rus, Ukraine can in no way be some kind of outskirts. Rather, Ukraine is the outskirts and periphery of Poland, so it would be more logical ...

          What does "logically" mean here?
          Here is the text of the annals of Sophia 1 and Sophia II and Postnikovskaya:
          “Summer 7020 ... The same summer, the Crimean princes, Men-Gireev children, Akhmat-Kiriy and Burnash, unknown with many people, came to the Grand Duke of Ukraine, to Belevsky and Odoevsky, and to Vorotyn places, and to Oleksin, and Burnash to Ryazan ... Toe In the fall, news came to the Grand Duke that the King was bringing Crimean princes to the Grand Duke of Ukraine. (PSRL T.34 S.11.)
          1. +1
            21 March 2023 08: 11
            Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
            Here is the text of the annals of Sophia 1 and Sophia II

            The places indicated in the annals belong to the territory of Muscovite Rus' and were developed much later. It can be assumed that the unknown author of these chronicles lived somewhere in Lithuania, because the places marked by the chronicler for him are actually the outskirts (Ukraine)
        2. -6
          21 March 2023 07: 49
          Firstly, Kyiv has never been the mother of Russian cities, just as it was not a Russian city. Kyiv was recaptured from the Khazars and was actually originally a suburb, and only after Rus' was revived this provincial town all the more became the outskirts of a great empire.
          1. +2
            21 March 2023 08: 15
            Quote: Victor Sergeev
            Kiev...
            ... and really was originally the outskirts

            For whom was it originally a suburb? Specify?
          2. +9
            21 March 2023 11: 00
            Firstly, Kyiv has never been the mother of Russian cities, just as it was not a Russian city.

            Why are you feeding on all sorts of crap and trying to feed it to others?
            This is a semi-marginal version from Vernadsky-Pritsak.
            Archeology fully confirms the "Slavism" of Kyiv.
        3. 0
          29 March 2023 15: 47
          For the Muscovite state of the 15th and 16th centuries, Little Russia was quite a suburb. Even with Kiev, which then was not in any comparison with Moscow
      2. +9
        21 March 2023 08: 47
        Edward, thanks for the real work! To be honest, after reading the title, I almost refused to open the article - I thought that it was another “kitch” of pseudo-historians.
        From the first lines I recognized your "handwriting", thanks again!
        1. +7
          21 March 2023 09: 01
          Vladislav good afternoon!
          Thank you.
          I'm already posting the sequel.
          hi
      3. +7
        21 March 2023 09: 48
        Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
        This term is used in Russian chronicles, in relation to the border regions: "in our Ukraine", emphasis on "a"

        Good afternoon, Edward!
        I remember "Pskov Ukraine", "Ryazan Ukraine", "Oka Ukraine", etc. hi
        Rather, the Poles borrowed than vice versa.

        It seems to me that, nevertheless, in this particular case, rather from the Poles, they also had the concept of "Ukraine / outskirts" and they kind of started calling these lands "Ukraine" earlier, which from their point of view was quite logical. For Russians, however, it remained for quite a long time, although for a long time the purely mythical concept of Kyiv as the "center of the Russian land" and only in the 17th century began to be called that, most likely borrowed from the Poles. If we recall the concept of Little Russia, then it most likely comes from the same root with the concept of "small homeland" that has survived to this day.
        1. +3
          21 March 2023 10: 18
          Sergey, welcome!
          I remember "Pskov Ukraine", "Ryazan Ukraine", "Oka Ukraine"

          All this was invented by Lenin in the eighteenth year.
          drinks
          1. +4
            21 March 2023 10: 25
            Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
            All this was invented by Lenin in the eighteenth year.

            "He spoke, wringing his hands, rhetoric and troublemaker
            About the impotence of science ....." wassat
      4. +7
        21 March 2023 11: 05
        Greetings, Edward hi
        In Poland, the word "Ukraine" began to be used only after 1569, when the Union of Lublin was created - a state union between the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Kingdom of Poland. But in the "Russian-speaking" ON, this concept was in wide use. In the XV - the first half of the XVI century in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania "Ukraine" was called all the border lands, including those that were in contact with the Steppe - the territory of modern Ukraine and southern Russia. The inhabitants of these places were called "Ukrainian people" or "Ukrainians".

        In 1500, the Grand Duke of Lithuania, in a message addressed to the Crimean ruler Khan Mengli-Gerai, under "our" Ukrainians "
        1. +5
          21 March 2023 11: 21
          Good-hearted day!!!
          I have already quoted the Russian chronicle on this subject here.
          hi
        2. +5
          21 March 2023 11: 49
          Some kind of failure. I will continue
          In Poland, the word "Ukraine" began to be used only after 1569, when the Union of Lublin was created - a state union between the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Kingdom of Poland. But in the "Russian-speaking" ON, this concept was in wide use. In the XV - the first half of the XVI century in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania "Ukraine" was called all the border lands.
          In 1500, the Grand Duke of Lithuania Alexander Jagiellon, in a message addressed to the Crimean ruler Khan Mengli-Gerai, under "our" Ukraine "names all the border lands, including those that were in contact with the Steppe (the territory of modern Ukraine and Russia) and German Ukraine - on the border with the Livonian Order in the Baltic states and Sweden, and Lithuanian Ukraine - on the border with Lithuania (Belarus). He calls the inhabitants of these places
          "Ukrainian people" or "our Ukrainians".

          It is not difficult to understand where this concept came from in the "Russian-speaking" GDL - In general, the word "Ukraine", in such variations as "oukraina" and "ukraina", is first found in Rus' in the writings of the 1187th century. In the Kiev Chronicle of the Ipatiev Code of the XII-XIV centuries, in the chapter describing the year XNUMX, in the Khlebnikov list there is a note related to the death of Vladimir Glebovich, for whom not only the whole of Pereyaslavl, but also the land bordering it, wept: “about ... him oUkraine is a lot of poston.
          In the “Word about idols”, which tells about Slavic paganism, “Ukrainians” were called areas where people, despite the adoption of Christianity, continued to secretly celebrate the cult of polytheism:
          "... and now in their Ukraine they pray to their accursed god Perun, Khors and Mokosh and pitchforks, but they do like ottay."

          Thus, initially "Ukraine" in Rus' was called all the external territories surrounding this or that principality. That is why historical documents record “Ryazan Ukraine”, “Mesher Ukraine”, “Oka Ukraine”, “Pskov Ukraine”, as well as “Tula Ukraine”, which was appointed in 1635 by the founder of the Russian hussars, Christopher Rylsky:
          "...stand on Tula to protect the sovereign Ukraine from the Crimean and Nogai people and from the Cherkasy."
        3. 0
          21 March 2023 20: 40
          Dima, hello again!
          The topic that Vashchenko touched upon is very interesting for me.
          I write directly, without looking back.
          My firm opinion of the Mongols in the European part of the USSR and the near western foreign was not at all.
          Neither sources, nor archeology, nor genetics (which is very important) nor linguistics confirm this. There is one document that you wanted to discuss in your home circle and that's it.
          I respect E. Vvshchenko for his unbiased position towards history.
          But pay attention to the title picture of this article. Russians and Tatars! Whose helmet is Russian or spepchak? The author writes - Mongolian! This is his position, he was taught that way.
          There is no Mongolian gene on our territory from the word at all.

          And the most interesting thing is that he is dominant.
          Officials write that after the rape, the victim was killed?! There are no links.
          The graves of the Mongols were buried in a secret place and herds of horses were passed through it. There are no Mongolian words in Russian. Well, in general, you understand that I am categorically against the concept of the "Mongol yoke".
          Foreshadowing Edward's next article, I will say that Russia needed the Mongol-Tatar yoke as an excuse for its lagging behind the West in technical and not only development.
    3. +9
      21 March 2023 06: 44
      So Karamzin is more of a writer than a historian.

      I'll say a few words in defense of Karamzin, I didn't think so.
      Without Karamzin, the reading public would not have known anything about the history of Russia. I would read the deceptions of both Richadson and Rousseau.
      He literally opened his eyes to her. Everyone who was interested in history, for example Pushkin, would not have learned anything at that time without Karamzin. And we would not have "Boris Godunov" or "Songs about the prophetic Oleg."
      Yes, criticism of N.M. Karamzin, from the outside, only appeared "professional" historians, began immediately.
      But Karamzin is deservedly considered "the first Russian historiographer", although there were other historians before him.
      But the phenomenon of Karamzin in "Perestroika" is difficult to explain.
      hi
      1. +4
        21 March 2023 07: 24
        Bravo! And the phenomenon of perestroika interest in Karamzin is simply explained: Everyone is sick of the methodology of studying history through the prism of Marxist-Leninist ideology with the obligatory dominant role of the working class or, at worst, the oppressed masses of working people, if such (the working class) was not found in historical retrospective. Karamzin did not suffer from such symptoms.
        1. +6
          21 March 2023 07: 47
          Everyone is sick of the methodology of studying history through the prism of Marxist-Leninist ideology with the obligatory dominant role of the working class

          A fair statement!
          It remains to add, to all the descendants of the oppressed class of peasants ostobrydla story where they said they were oppressed, they became closer to the "history" of the oppressors laughing
          During the life of N.M. Karamzin nobles made up 1% of the total population.
      2. +4
        21 March 2023 08: 04
        Agree. Now it is fashionable to find errors and contradictions in his writings. But he did not have such an array of information as now. YouTube with "actually ...". Ren TV did not yet broadcast to Moscow. Thank God, Fomenko was not even planned). Geneticists did not have time to prepare genotypes by that time.
      3. +3
        21 March 2023 09: 00
        In defense of Karamzin!
        You can love or dislike his work, but you won't be able to remain indifferent! He was the first to give the Patriotic History to the masses and society appreciated it!
        The following thesis will probably be the key one before the first volume of the History of the State of the Russian Patriotic Clio was loved one by one, after - EVERYTHING!
      4. +2
        21 March 2023 09: 53
        it has now been reliably proven that Dmitry really died by accident. And Pushkin offered us the role of Godunov in the death of Dmitry and the very death of Dmitry, to read according to Karamzin's version of the story. That there are, to put it mildly, two opposite differences. It is hard to believe that Karamzin accidentally turned the History of Russia in such a way that under Karamzin the term "yoke" appeared in Russia, although the chroniclers who lived during the invasion of the Tatars did not remind of any yoke. Only after Ivan the Terrible began to hang up the boyar lobby that had sold out to Poland and Lithuania, only then did the Poles and Lithuanians catch on and began to find fault with people from the East, whom Grozny brought closer to himself and even began to turn all of Russia to face the East. From that, the Poles came up with the yoke, they say, the East rotted you into a yoke, you are not on your way with them, and only Poland and Lithuania helped you overcome this yoke, and only Poland and Lithuania will lead you to the West that saves you. Yes, it would be nice to give up the Orthodox faith, because it is also of the Eastern Rite ...
        Okay, there Pushkin unconsciously believed Karamzin. But for a completely Western project in Russia called the Decembrists, the faith of the pro-Western Decembrists in the pro-Western Karamzin was like faith in a sacred icon!
        1. +4
          21 March 2023 11: 25
          has now been proven

          It has not been proven by anyone, and even more so "reliably". There is an official version of the investigation, which cannot be verified. that's all
      5. +1
        21 March 2023 10: 54
        Karamzin is quite a historian by the standards of the 19th century.
        But the phenomenon of Karamzin in "Perestroika" is difficult to explain.

        What's so difficult.? Already wrote. Survey work on the history of Russia, starting from Rurik, was simply not mastered by Soviet historiography.
        1. +4
          21 March 2023 11: 36
          Denis,
          good day.
          Survey work on the history of Russia, starting from Rurik, was simply not mastered by Soviet historiography.

          I didn’t master it, but didn’t consider it necessary to write. The same textbook by Pavlenko, for universities, is a cut above, and even edited by B.A. Rybakov.
          And the reading public of the “most readable country in the world” wanted only pulp fiction: about bedding, conspiracies and deceit, they were looking for this in world literature, which was fantastically accessible, they are ours and in Karamzin: who killed whom, with whom he slept, poisoned, strangled, and bled. About tyrants, tyrants and stupid rulers: the monarchy is always good, but there are abnormal and excellent kings.
          It just came at once, just like "vote with your hearts", "Russia cannot be understood with the mind" and so on and so forth.
          1. +3
            21 March 2023 12: 05
            good afternoon
            I didn’t consider it necessary, I didn’t master it either.
            They did nothing to popularize history, but for the hundred and fifty-hundredth time Normanists and neo-Normanists poked each other with a stick. With zero results.
            Karamzin did not write about bedding, he should not be confused with Ryzhov. His work has stood the test of time. A kind of our answer to Gibbon.
            1. +2
              21 March 2023 12: 22
              Quote: Engineer
              His work has stood the test of time.

              And what are you actually going to study according to Karamzin now?
              The ethnogenesis of the Slavs? The formation of feudal relations? The formation of a centralized state?
              In what modern scientific research can you apply it? Except, of course, a mention in the historiographical section, which is mandatory.
              but for the hundred and fifty times Normanists and neo-Normanists poked each other with sticks.
              It blossomed "violent color" actually in the 90s.
              1. +1
                21 March 2023 12: 27
                Not to study, but to learn. I spoke quite clearly about promotion.
                If it comes to that, then the ethnogenesis of the Slavs according to the works of the same Rybakov is definitely not worth studying.
                1. +1
                  21 March 2023 12: 35
                  Quote: Engineer
                  I spoke quite clearly about promotion.

                  For reading in middle school age to "excite" the interest of history - there are no questions., We can only recommend.
                  then the ethnogenesis of the Slavs according to the works of the same Rybakov is definitely not worth studying.

                  On this issue, almost all historiography before the 80s is currently outdated.
                  1. +2
                    21 March 2023 13: 11
                    On this issue, almost all historiography before the 80s is currently outdated.

                    Rybakov and in the 80s quite moved his biased crap
                    1. +1
                      21 March 2023 13: 21
                      Quote: Engineer
                      Rybakov and in the 80s quite moved his biased crap

                      Rybakov and then not particularly seriously considered.
                      Nobody is going to challenge his achievements as an archaeologist. But here he was minding his own business.
                      1. +2
                        21 March 2023 13: 38
                        He was just doing his job and the multi-volume Archeology of the USSR was published under his editorship.
                        That's just the exhaust was specific.
                        In general, an amazing picture emerges. Rybakov is an archaeologist and party functionary, while archaeologists are forced to maneuver between the party line and their own vision.
                        At the same time, the documents of the Second World War and the works of foreign historians on WWII that were not allowed to be published in the USSR were in the special depositories. Many people got acquainted with them, but did not have the slightest opportunity to share their findings except in a narrow circle.
                        Here is such a Soviet bipolar woman in Russian historiography.
                      2. +6
                        21 March 2023 14: 33
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Here is such a Soviet bipolar woman in Russian historiography.

                        You have some strange idea of ​​​​Soviet historiography, a feeling that it was inspired by the "gulag archipelago", but oh well: this is a joke.
                        As for the archeology of the USSR, I don’t understand at all what claims to it: in fact, thanks to Soviet archeology, excavations from the Paleolithic to the Middle Ages were carried out in the shortest possible time and at the highest scientific level, the materials were processed and introduced into scientific circulation, and in the shortest possible time ( 40-50 years). At the pace at which they are "digging" now, one would have to wait another 300 years.
                        Thanks to primarily Soviet archeology, we can now draw adequate conclusions about the ethnogenesis of the Slavs, Scythians, Sarmatians, Goths (Chernyakhovtsy), Paleolithic, Neolithic (the same Tripoli) and much, much, much more. By the 80s, thousands, even tens of thousands of archaeological sites from different eras had been processed, thanks to which the entire modern history is being built (I mean the part that is built on archeology).
                        By the way, they say that since the 80s there has been a mass of archaeological material that has not been introduced into scientific circulation, it has been excavated, but has not been processed and published: the 90s have burst.
                        And I wouldn’t find fault too much with Rybakov or Sedov either: it was necessary to study the ethnogenesis of the Slavs - it was necessary, they were doing it, for the same 60-70s nothing was clear at all, only massive archaeological material began to accumulate and something then it became clear. Yes, there were mistakes, but it is normal that some theories become outdated and are revised over time.
            2. +3
              21 March 2023 12: 27
              Quote: Engineer
              They didn't do anything to promote history.

              Unfortunately. Historical scientific pop was practically absent, despite a certain demand. And there were so many gaps in the school curriculum ...
              For example, I learned about such a thing as the "Grand Duchy of Lithuania" ... (drum roll) in the process of preparing for the entrance exams after graduation, when I took a history textbook for universities from the library. smile
              Although I knew about Olgerd and Keistut from a novel by Yuri Loshchits, which I read, in my opinion, in a novel-newspaper.
              Yes, Fomenko had a place to frolic. The mental space for him was left simply unmeasured.
              1. 0
                21 March 2023 13: 27
                and, Fomenko had a place to frolic.

                I have already written about this in detail.
                In the history of the Second World War was just a disaster. From there, a rush demand arose for the Mansteins, Hartmans and Rudels, who seemed like just a breath of fresh air after the Soviet "works" for decades chewing on the same formulations.
            3. +3
              21 March 2023 12: 38
              A kind of our answer to Gibbon.

              The Gibbon has stood the test of time. Karazin is not even close.
              After him there were collected works of historians, where V.O. Klyuchevsky, where is Karamzin. Or Presnyakov, and Solovyov. Yes, and M.N. Pokrovsky with his humor, and B.D. Greeks.
              A.A. Zimin, for the reading public, the full cycle of the formation of the Moscow state, R.G. Skrynnikov - Terrible and Troubles.
              Pre-Mongolian Rus - yes, although BV and B.A. Rybakov. I'm in popularity, not scientific importance.
              And there were more than enough global scientific works, which only the Agrarian history of northwestern Rus' is worth. Yes, and in your favorite archeology: collection Archeology of the USSR, etc. and so on.
              It's not about Soviet historians, but about the mentality of the reading public. And so far: in history they are looking for either "sweet" or "mean", no one is interested in patterns.
              hi
              1. +3
                21 March 2023 12: 59
                Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
                It's not about Soviet historians

                Reading scientific papers requires preparation. It is not worth demanding from an ordinary citizen the presence of such training. An intermediate link is needed - the transition from fiction to scientific literature, that is, popular science literature. It was this sector that was completely neglected in the USSR. And without it, the transition of the "reading public" from historical novels to scientific monographs was very difficult.
                Fomenko, the bastard, later Klyosov, no less a bastard, and the rest of the figures from this deck, felt this very subtly and took advantage of this gap. Their "works" just have the form of popular science literature. Well, the substance rushed through the pipes ...
                1. +4
                  21 March 2023 13: 16
                  An intermediate link is needed - the transition from fiction to scientific literature, that is, popular science literature. It was this sector that was completely neglected in the USSR.

                  Michael,
                  not this way. "Science" had a whole series, I remember it now: Kargalov "On the steppe border", S.A. Pletnev "Polovtsy".
                  Do I still have an illustrated History of the USSR 1982 or 1983? Flurry of pictures.
                  It could certainly have been much more, I agree.
                  Well, now, attention, the question is: what has changed in 30 years?

                  YOU yourself understand: it is much more difficult for historians than for a nuclear physicist to "translate" a super complex process into ordinary language.
                  As soon as you do this, you become the same, rewrites Wikipedia.
                  I myself got here for the language of science good

                  But Karamzin, my God! Of course, you can read, who wants to, but raise it to the absolute ???
                  hi
                  1. +3
                    21 March 2023 13: 35
                    Now Gorsky has published a book about Yan Vyshatich. Maybe, of course, it seems to me, but it is sustained precisely in the popular science style, as I imagine it.
                    There is a hero, there is his life, his destiny, there are extensive historical scenery, there are lengthy quotations from the annals with translation and comments.
                    It would be possible, of course, to write this book more "popularly", but this is already a matter of taste.
                    As for Karamzin, I won't throw a stone at him. In any case, he is better than Fomenko.
              2. +3
                21 March 2023 13: 19
                The Gibbon has stood the test of time. Karazin is not even close.

                Completely withstood. Reissues 100+ years later
                IN. Klyuchevsky

                Didn't write a general work
                Solovyov

                Wrote four times more voluminous essay than Karamzin. Dry boring language to boot.
                Zimin, Skrynnikov specialized in a narrow historical period.
                B.A. Rybakov

                They sailed, to set Karamzin as an example of Rybakov.
                collection Archeology of the USSR

                Edited by Rybakov. Przeworsk culture is Slavic, Chernyakhov is also Slavic and comes from Przeworsk. laughing

                It's not about Soviet historians, but about the mentality of the reading public.

                Everything is much easier. A person either knows how to write or they don't. Karamzin knew how to write, and knew history better than 99% of his critics.
            4. +1
              21 March 2023 19: 24
              Valishevsky. It was published quite actively during the “perestroika”. Here he illuminated different aspects of the life of kings.
    4. +4
      21 March 2023 10: 30
      Quote: north 2
      And the term Ukraine was also "invented" by the Poles

      Ukraine is just a place remote from the capital at a considerable distance. In the XI century. "Ukraine" was called the Volga-Oka interfluve. In the XIV century. "Ukraine" for Rus' has already become the land of Kiev.
    5. +1
      21 March 2023 13: 37
      And the term Ukraine was also "invented" by the Poles
      Even so be it, the Poles invented and ..... what follows from this? The term Little Russia was introduced by the Byzantine churchmen ... What is the point? Because of this, Rus' split into two parts? Southwest and northeast?
  5. +1
    21 March 2023 07: 19
    Frame from the series "Genghis Khan" pleased. What Mongols there are clean and beautiful! Well, think for yourself, do not get off your horses for years, having traveled all over Eurasia, having met an abundance of water only in the north-west of the continent, will you be clean and not lousy? In addition, the Mongols, like the Europeans, did not wash all their lives, in this they are similar.
    1. +6
      21 March 2023 07: 21
      In addition, the Mongols, like the Europeans, did not wash all their lives, in this they are similar.

      And they didn’t clean their ears with teeth, didn’t comb them, etc. laughing
      1. -3
        21 March 2023 07: 41
        Europe looked after the hair, but this courtship consisted in cutting the beards of men and the construction of unthinkable "tower" hairstyles from dirty hair for women (lousy "skyscrapers").
      2. +3
        21 March 2023 12: 05
        In addition, the Mongols, like the Europeans, did not wash all their lives, in this they are similar.

        Mongol-Tatars are often presented as a horde of wild, dirty barbarians who drink blood and are generally alien to human culture. This is a profound misconception: Mongolian warriors drank horse blood only in case of extreme need, when they could not find water for several days, while they had deep military traditions. As for "dirty" - to debunk this myth, it is enough to mention the fact that the first found toothbrush belongs to the Mongol-Tatars and dates back to the 10th century.
        Rossiyskaya Gazeta correspondent Nikolai Grishchenko, in his article “Azov archaeologists found a 500-year-old toothbrush”, which was published on June 11, 2015, described an interesting discovery made by scientists. On Sevastopolskaya Street in the city of Azov, during the excavations, one of the oldest toothbrushes was discovered, which was used by a certain representative of the Mongol-Tatar army in the XNUMXth century.
        “This find indicates that in the western region of the Golden Horde city of Azak (as Azov was called in the Middle Ages) there lived a population with non-trivial cultural habits for that time,” Andrey Maslovsky emphasized.
        Judging by the bone handle with holes for the bristles, which have not survived over the past centuries, the Mongol-Tatar invaders followed the health of the oral cavity in much the same way as modern people.

        Andrey Maslovsky, head of the archeology department of the Azov Museum-Reserve, explained to the journalist that, contrary to popular belief, the first toothbrushes appeared not in China in the XNUMXth century, but on the territory of modern Mongolia back in the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries.
        1. +1
          21 March 2023 21: 08
          Write to me in a personal about it in more detail. Thanks in advance
          1. 0
            21 March 2023 22: 39
            Alexander, I fulfill your request - I post it here, it will not work in a personal because of the photo.
            About the Azak toothbrush from the excavations in Azov, which is 500 years old, there are a lot of materials on the Internet.
            But about the Chintolgoy-Balgas X-XI centuries. posting exclusively for you


            This is a photo of a brush found on the territory of the Khitan city of Chintolgoi-balgas in a pit in square g'-21 in sector IIA of excavation 3, XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries. archaeological expedition of S. A. Kotenkov
            very interesting grave...
            Woman. During her lifetime, she was rather wealthy, for she was buried with a bronze mirror, a vessel made of red clay, an iron knife and even iron scissors. And also with this item. The item is made of bone. You see the dimensions in the photo (total length 21 cm, if anything). Hole diameter - 2,5 mm, depth - 3,5-4 mm. They are not end-to-end, more precisely, not completely, and not all of them are end-to-end. Some, up to about the middle of their diameter, go into a cut that runs in the middle of the head.
            On the bottom of the handle is a hook facing the "front" side.
            Very similar, almost identical objects were also found in Kazakhstan, in the settlement of Kastek, dating from the XNUMXth century, in Karakorum, in the layers of the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries. XXI Century.
            Most archaeologists are now inclined to the version that they were ... Toothbrushes. All found toothbrushes clearly fit into the time range of the X-XIV century.
            By the way, the remains of smelting furnaces for iron ore and traces of the active use of charcoal in the process of metalworking were also found on the territory of Mongolia. Already in the X century. And you tell me that the Mongols did not have iron and could not have ...))
            source: 1. "Peoples and Religions of Eurasia. Volume 27. Altai State University Publishing House. Toothbrush from the Mayachny Hill-1 Soil Burial Ground (Historical and Archaeological Aspect and Reconstruction)", S. A. Kotenkov, S. A. Pilipenko, K. Yu Popov.
            1. 0
              21 March 2023 23: 05
              Dima, debatable, but it's like 50/50
              They followed the teeth - this is 10000%.
              And it cannot be tied to one culture.
              What we used to have ".... a guarantee of health"
    2. +5
      21 March 2023 08: 51
      Quote: Just_Kvasha
      Well, think for yourself, do not get off your horses for years, having traveled all over Eurasia, having met an abundance of water only in the north-west of the continent, will you be clean and not lousy?

      In fact, despite the Gobi Desert, Mongolia has on its territory considerable water reserves (rivers and lakes).
      It seems that during this period of the Middle Ages, Europeans also did not take a shower every day or visit the baths, and in Rus' the baths were not heated every day either ...
    3. 0
      25 March 2023 13: 27
      Was there no water? What did the horses eat?
      ..............
  6. -7
    21 March 2023 07: 44
    True, there have never been any Mongols in Rus', but they changed us beyond recognition. The author, before writing nonsense about the Mongols and other Asians, read the studies of geneticists, in terms of the genotype of Russians and the same Tatars in the context of the Crimean and Volga regions, you will learn a lot of interesting things.
    1. +6
      21 March 2023 08: 02
      The author, before writing nonsense about the Mongols and other Asians, read the studies of genetics


      "Genetics are crazy about genes and chromosomes"
      wassat
      1. +6
        21 March 2023 09: 12
        Quote: Victor Sergeev
        True, there have never been any Mongols in Rus', but they changed us beyond recognition. The author, before writing nonsense about the Mongols and other Asians, read the studies of geneticists, in terms of the genotype of Russians and the same Tatars in the context of the Crimean and Volga regions, you will learn a lot of interesting things.

        Wow, can you name one?
        Yesterday I was talking to a Nagaybak (a baptized Bashkir), a patched up local passed by (I won't name the nationality). The Bashkir nods to me, “these, unlike us (Russians), don’t know how to drink at all!” Stop curtain...
        Tumens of the "Mongols" consisted of the peoples they conquered. However, how are the proto-state formations of the “horde” themselves!
        It seems a common truth, but so incomprehensible to pseudo-historians.
    2. +9
      21 March 2023 10: 34
      You personally from me minus and advice:
      Quote: Victor Sergeev
      before writing nonsense

      better think and do not write. fool
  7. The comment was deleted.
    1. +11
      21 March 2023 08: 16
      The author brings such a blizzard. What are the Mongols? What are the Tatars. Learn non-official history.

      Better go to school ... it seems that they skipped everything
    2. +7
      21 March 2023 09: 41
      Quote from Lukas
      The author brings such a blizzard. What are the Mongols? What are the Tatars. Learn non-official history.

      Uh-huh, take an example from the neighbors - “in the year 3000 of the star temple, the archetypals of Hyperborea got on bicycles ... continue to continue?
      Yes, the most important thing is that history should be loved, not taught!
    3. +9
      21 March 2023 10: 42
      Quote from Lukas
      The author brings such a blizzard.

      Another folkhistorian. Minus from me and a little clarification. There is no official and unofficial history, there is a history - science and history - a bike. Someone is studying science, someone is having fun with stories. But if you prefer to have fun, then at least do not open your mouth at those who study history as a science. You can be understood, as you can understand a legless invalid who is angry at the basketball team, you, too, apparently, are a kind of invalid, but if you are angry, then do it, as quietly as possible. Then fewer people will know about your intellectual wretchedness.
      1. +6
        21 March 2023 11: 49
        Another folkhistorian.
        Not this way..
        - Ah! Are you a folkhistorian? asked the Master of the Trilobite.
        - I am a folkhistorian, - confirmed Lukas and added to the village or to the city: - Today there is an interesting story at VO! hi laughing laughing
        1. +6
          21 March 2023 12: 06
          Will they cut off my head in the evening? Folhistorians got on my trail and Annushka already bought oil? laughing
          1. +5
            21 March 2023 12: 42
            Will they cut off my head in the evening? Folhistorians are on my trail

            Why cut? Just blow up with their comments laughing
            Greetings Michael hi
            1. +5
              21 March 2023 13: 04
              My respect, Dmitry.
              Comments - please. laughing
              We all giggle together, and even laugh out loud.
              I'm more afraid that these villains will come to St. Petersburg, they will wait for me somewhere and, in the process of waiting, they will shit all the gates, because they can't do anything except to shit. Unpleasant.
              smile
              1. +5
                21 March 2023 13: 09
                Quote: Trilobite Master
                that these villains will come to St. Petersburg,

                Mikhail, they will take you prisoner and force you to re-read all 80 volumes of Fomenko. laughing
                1. +3
                  21 March 2023 13: 20
                  I hope you take me away from them?
                  I really don’t want to read Fomenko ....
                  1. +5
                    21 March 2023 13: 30
                    Quote: Trilobite Master
                    I hope you take me away from them?
                    I really don’t want to read Fomenko ....

                    We will take them prisoner and force them to re-read the complete works of Lenin. hi
                    1. +2
                      21 March 2023 13: 52
                      Quote: Mihaylov
                      reread the complete works of Lenin

                      They didn't read it to reread it.
                      Better we take them prisoner and force them to build a bathhouse at Nikolai's site. And we ourselves will take turns reading Karamzin aloud to them. Or Solovyov. Or Rybakov. smile
                2. +5
                  21 March 2023 16: 48
                  Mikhail, they will take you prisoner and force you to re-read all 80 volumes of Fomenko.

                  Serious threat. belay Misha, you, like Assange, urgently need to apply for political asylum. The best place where they can't get you is St. Petersburg Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences smile
                  1. +3
                    21 March 2023 17: 00
                    No, I'll go to the pub with my friends. If they find it, don't worry. smile
              2. +4
                21 March 2023 16: 02
                they will wait for me somewhere and, in the process of waiting, they will shit all the gates,

                Everything, Misha! Well, you definitely got it! wassat laughing
          2. +3
            21 March 2023 13: 08
            Folhistorians got on my trail and Annushka already bought oil?
            "Annushek", something is not there today laughing And the Folhistorians, took the trail, roam ... laughing
            1. +3
              21 March 2023 13: 19
              Quote: kor1vet1974
              Folhistorians, took the trail, roam

              Can you give me parabellum? laughing
              1. +3
                21 March 2023 13: 31
                Quote: Trilobite Master
                Can you give me parabellum?

                Falchion! drinks
                1. +1
                  21 March 2023 13: 53
                  I have a falchion. You need parabellum. smile
              2. +3
                21 March 2023 15: 18
                What is your political credo, Mikhail?
                1. +1
                  21 March 2023 15: 31
                  Quote: ee2100
                  What is your political credo, Mikhail?

                  My political credo is "Don't wait!" laughing
                  1. +2
                    21 March 2023 20: 48
                    Yes, Misha can get to know the classics better

                    It's clear that it's not your creed, but now it's relevant
              3. +4
                21 March 2023 16: 06
                Can you give me parabellum?

                With pleasure! Very helpful from folkhistorians.
                "Naval Model" 1904. smile
                1. +2
                  21 March 2023 16: 36
                  Thank you, Uncle Kostya! fellow
                  Now I'll fight back. I certainly won't give up alive. laughing
                2. +2
                  21 March 2023 18: 12
                  "Walking at night, in between times,
                  Carry Parabellum with you smile

  8. +4
    21 March 2023 08: 26
    Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
    But Karamzin is deservedly considered "the first Russian historiographer", although there were other historians before him.


    Not everyone. The first real Russian historiographer was Lomonosov. The works of which in the author's edition have not reached us, unfortunately.
    1. +6
      21 March 2023 08: 36
      Not everyone.

      What does not all mean?
      The first Russian historiographer is a generally accepted opinion in scientific historiography.
      Although, as I wrote, in the XVIII century. there were a number of well-known historians, Lomonosov is far from the first in this series. Yes, and next to Karamzin there were enough of them, very professional. What is Ever, Miller, Kachenovsky, Belyaev worth. But the general public does not even know about them. Yes, probably not necessary. For this, there is such a thing as "professionalism" and "profession".
      1. +3
        21 March 2023 10: 46
        Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
        Belyaev.

        Is this the one who wrote the history of Novgorod? Ivan, in my opinion... Read, read... An amusing pamphlet on authoritarian power. It was funny to read - such a naive and touching faith in the power and correctness of democracy and veche democracy, and this in the XNUMXth century. smile
        1. +2
          21 March 2023 11: 39
          Is this the one who wrote the history of Novgorod? Ivan I think...

          Yes, I.A. Belyaev Zemsky system in Rus'. He "jumped" from sources, and not from Nikolai Palkin. hi
          1. +2
            21 March 2023 12: 11
            The pro-princely grouping in Novgorod is called nothing more than "Suzdalshchintsy". Even Kazimir of Lithuania was ready to give Novgorod away, if only not to the "Suzdalites". And Marfa Boretskaya is his hero-heroine. And the reasons for the defeat of Novgorod in the fight against Ivan III are so vague - the people of Suzdal are to blame, they corrupted, plundered the Novgorod volyushka ...
            No, for the XNUMXth century, it seems to me, already too naive. smile
            And how did the autocratic government tolerate him, such a "populist"? However, she is generally patient with us ...
    2. +5
      21 March 2023 10: 37
      The first real Russian historiographer was Lomonosov. whose works in the author's edition

      Why not V. Tatishchev, or if in Miller's version, then it doesn't count?
      1. +4
        21 March 2023 10: 40
        Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
        The first real Russian historiographer was Lomonosov. whose works in the author's edition

        Why not V. Tatishchev, or if in Miller's version, then it doesn't count?

        Good afternoon Vladislav!
        this is the case when I heard the ringing ..... hi
  9. +4
    21 March 2023 08: 29
    Quote: Luminman
    How can the term "Ukraine" be applied to the "mother of Russian cities" - Kyiv? For Muscovite Rus, Ukraine can in no way be some kind of outskirts.


    Maybe, maybe. Kyiv by that time had become an ordinary provincial town, nothing more.
    The center of power left Kyiv for Vladimir before the rise of Moscow.
    1. +1
      21 March 2023 08: 32
      Quote: Illanatol
      Kyiv by that time had become an ordinary provincial city, no more

      Maybe he did, but the memory remained! It's like Jerusalem or Rome - they still remember ...
  10. +5
    21 March 2023 08: 33
    Quote: ee2100
    The author of this article confirmed that the word "Mongol" is not found in any ancient Russian source - only a Tatar or Tatars.


    Considering that the Mongols themselves did not call themselves Mongols, like the Chinese, they do not call themselves Chinese.
    1. +8
      21 March 2023 08: 49
      Considering that the Mongols themselves did not call themselves Mongols, like the Chinese, they do not call themselves Chinese.

      Exactly. Germans don't call themselves Germans. The French think why the Alemans call themselves Deutsches? Why do Italians think that Tedesci call themselves Deutsches? Estonians also think about the Germans.
      And the Finns think why the veins call themselves Russian?
      "Erema Again" Please see my article "Tatars or Mongols: who attacked Rus'": https://topwar.ru/192224-tatary-ili-mongoly-kto-na-samom-dele-napal-na-rus.html
      1. +4
        21 March 2023 09: 47
        Why does someone call someone this or that, and the other calls himself completely different. It's really interesting!
        But back to our territory.
        We do not even know exactly where the word Russian came from.
        Our ancestors clearly differentiated neighboring peoples. Svei, Chud, Ladoga, Tatars. Mongols are not among them.
        Regarding the Finns, venelainen is Russian or someone who lives in the neighboring territory and speaks Russian.
        My guess is that vend is a brother, that is, they are a brotherly people. Even now we often hear "brother, help!" etc.
        1. +4
          21 March 2023 13: 13
          Greetings, Sasha hi
          Even now we often hear "brother, help!"

          A sincere and good person does good, and since he does good “just like that”, then there are a lot of people to get something “just like that”. ... Therefore, he often receives a "full tub" of evil for his good.
          1. +3
            21 March 2023 15: 21
            No good deed goes unpunished!
    2. +4
      21 March 2023 09: 34
      A book that was translated into Russian in 1876 in Chinese 元秘史 - translated as the secret history of the yuan
      1. +4
        21 March 2023 17: 02
        The book, which was translated into Russian in 1876. translates as the secret history of the yuan

        Azochen Way! What a pleasant title for the merchant's ear! Will definitely have to read with Sarah smile
  11. +3
    21 March 2023 09: 09
    I'm more interested in the influence of Rus' on the Mongol. It is hardly studied. How Islam appeared in the steppe. Although one of the Mongol tribes even under Genghis Khan were Christians.
    And most importantly, why did the Siberian voivode write to Moscow about the Mongolian tribe of Oirats, when they asked for Russian citizenship: "An unknown tribe."
    1. +6
      21 March 2023 09: 35
      I'm more interested in the influence of Rus' on the Mongol. It is hardly studied.

      Why don't they study? This here is a popular science article, but written on the basis of the works of 50 scientific.
      The historiography of this issue is 200 years old. How do they not study?
      It's just that people don't read, and not everyone has access to scientific papers. About the Nestorian Tatars, everything is written rewritten, even I wrote here in the VO in the cycle about the Mongols and China.
      When did the voivode write about the Oirats about the unknown people? Where is that written?
      Oirats, western Mongol tribes, are found in the first sources about the Mongols. These are the Kalmyks of our time, who came to the present territories, in modern Russia, in the XNUMXth century. But in the XNUMXth century I had full contact with them.
      hi
  12. +4
    21 March 2023 09: 58
    Thank you, we look forward to continuing, there are minor flaws, scanty, but you are the author, hold on, your article will be carried away "scraps, along the back streets" laughing
    1. +6
      21 March 2023 10: 16
      You are the author, hold on, they will rush from your article "scraps, along the back streets"

      Thank you. I'm holding on.
      The continuation is even more burning ...
      hi
  13. +2
    21 March 2023 10: 05
    The so-called lag is connected primarily and only with the fact that the Slavs entered the historical path much later than their kindred Western ethnic groups.

    The backlog is caused purely by climate and soil fertility. If in Italy a plot of less than a hectare is suitable for feeding a family, then in Russia - 10 hectares.
    So try to process it without a tractor. There was no time to carve statues - to devour to get, but to be saved from the cold.
  14. +7
    21 March 2023 10: 22
    Oh, surprise... Eduard hasn't been with us for a long time. smile
    Well, I'm glad to have my esteemed colleague back, my respect, Eduard. hi
    First on the article, then I will read the comments.
    The content of the article was amazing. Even if we omit, shall we say, "unforced errors" like
    The former prince of Kiev and brother of Yaroslav, Mikhail Vsevolodovich (1186–1246), who fled from Kyiv during its capture by the Mongols, settled in Chernigov.

    then there are many controversial points, I am even surprised how differently we look at the relationship between the Mongols and Russia.
    The author has divided the article into three parts, marked by three questions.
    By the Mongols. The fact that their state was potestary, I will not dispute. But what is meant by this term? Lack of law or lack of state institutions inherent in a developed state? If the first, then yes, probably potestary, although "Yass of Genghis Khan" has already taken place. If the latter, then I strongly disagree. By the time of Genghis Khan's death, the Mongols already had all the necessary institutions inherent in a normal medieval state. There was a developed system of tax collection, a system of coercion, a well-organized administration, and, of course, an army.
    I agree with the author that the very system of state structure of the empire of Genghis Khan implied constant expansion, without which its economy could not feed the state.
    Next.
    The “nomadic Mongol empire”, from Rus' to the borders of the Chinese Sun empire, existed as a single structure for no more than 20 years and collapsed in 1259.

    Rus' and could not be part of the Mongol Empire in China, Yuan (1271-1369). She was not part of the nomadic horde of Eastern Europe, called the Golden.

    Genghis Khan (Temujin) was elected Great Khan in 1206. At the same time, the creation of the Mongol Empire was proclaimed. Even if we consider the earliest date of its collapse - 1259, then it turns out to be more than forty years. Rus' de facto and de jure became part of this empire presumably in 1243, that is, it was in its composition for at least sixteen years until its collapse.
    But why, according to the author, Rus' was not part of the Golden Horde, is completely incomprehensible to me.
    The princes received labels for reigning, deducted money, participated in military enterprises - how do such relations differ, for example, from the relations of the French king with his vassals, such as the Duke of Normandy, Burgundy or Breton? If Rus' is considered independent under such conditions, then the enumerated duchies should also be considered sovereign states. Rus' enjoyed even less independence and was under tighter control, since in some cities there were permanent representations of the Mongols.
    More about the "European way".
    The path that Rus' stubbornly followed before the Mongols, in my opinion, was quite European and would certainly lead to the same thing that Europe came to - the creation on its territory of several sovereign states, three of which (Polotsk-Lithuanian, Galicia-Volyn and Suzdal-Novgorod) had already taken shape by that time. Smolensk, Chernigov and Kiev lands would most likely fall prey to one of these formations. The Mongols interrupted this process, but did not stop it, but only slowed it down and corrected it in some way (more on that below). That is, Rus' did not turn off the "European path", but only slowed down its movement along it.
    About the social system.
    A difficult question and extremely controversial. Only one thing is absolutely clear - the aristocracy, the highest stratum of pre-Mongolian society, was almost completely knocked out. The cities were depopulated, and as the author rightly noted, in those cities through which the Mongols passed, the veche system was destroyed and was no longer restored. All this, of course, contributed to the establishment of princely autocracy in individual cities and lands to the detriment of "people's" rule, which was the very "correction" that I spoke about. Maybe this is not so significant (although for some) difference from the "European" path, but it affected then, affects, in my opinion, and still does.
    Well, some particulars that resonated with me.
    I have already noted one - Mikhail Vsevolodovich Chernigovskiy and Yaroslav Vsevolodovich Pereyaslavskiy were not brothers. Their common ancestor is Yaroslav the Wise.
    I would also like to note that the Mongol campaigns against Rus' after the invasion were always directed against some princes in the interests of others.
    The destruction of the Baskaks on the territory of Vladimir Rus, with a high degree of probability, was an episode of the struggle of the rulers of the Jochi ulus with the central, imperial government, as they say, "for independence." It was the imperial Baskaks who were beaten, which played into the hands of Berke, the then ruler of the Jochi ulus. In exchange for this "service", the Russian princes were allowed to collect tribute on their own.
    1. +4
      21 March 2023 10: 33
      Michael,
      welcome
      thanks for
      "I have already noted one thing - Mikhail Vsevolodovich Chernigovskiy and Yaroslav Vsevolodovich Pereyaslavskiy were not brothers."

      My mistake, I'll fix it.
      hi
      1. +2
        21 March 2023 13: 31
        My mistake, I'll fix it.

        Well, is it Ochepyatka?
        Recently, in the "history" section, one Author in her article, in all seriousness, wrote such that at least stand, at least fall laughing wassat
        Ivan Vasilyevich the Terrible and Andrei Ivanovich Staritsky, although they were brothers, had different surnames (like N. Mikhalkov and A. Konchalovsky). It was customary for the Moscow tsars then
    2. +4
      21 March 2023 10: 42
      Quote: Trilobite Master
      Rus' did not turn off the "European path", but only slowed down its movement along it.

      What if it accelerated? hi
      Greetings Michael!
      1. +5
        21 March 2023 10: 51
        I think it's slowed down. smile
        Slowed down and backed off a bit. Maybe to cut a hook off-road? smile
        1. +3
          21 March 2023 10: 57
          Slowed down and backed off a bit. Maybe to cut a hook off-road?

          To be continued hi
          1. +5
            21 March 2023 11: 02
            Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
            To be continued

            Then let's wait! hi
            PS as in the film "Office Romance": "And I will develop this topic in my next letter ..." wassat
        2. +3
          21 March 2023 11: 28
          The Tatar invasion in no way could affect the vector of development of Rus'.
          The Russian Orthodox Church applied all its forces to the turn from the west.
          And the reason is simple - influence and money.
      2. +4
        21 March 2023 11: 08
        Didn't speed it up at all.
        There are simply no full-fledged "Westerners" between Daniil Galitsky and Alexei Mikhalych-Pyotr Alekseevich.
        The turn to face the West was only under Ivan No. 3. Before him stood sideways
    3. +5
      21 March 2023 11: 15
      But why, according to the author, Rus' was not part of the Golden Horde, is completely incomprehensible to me.
      Probably because the garrisons were not located in Russian cities, there was no Mongol administration either. foreign policy, somewhat different from the foreign policy of the Golden Horde.
      1. +4
        21 March 2023 11: 37
        Quote: kor1vet1974
        garrisons were not located in Russian cities, there was also no Mongolian administration.

        Normal practice for feudal states.
        Quote: kor1vet1974
        pursued their own foreign policy, somewhat different from the foreign policy of the Golden Horde.

        Until the end of the XIV century. it is not expressed at all. Rus' began to pursue a completely independent policy only under Ivan III.
        1. +4
          21 March 2023 13: 01
          Misha, here it is:
          the aristocracy, the highest stratum of pre-Mongolian society, was almost completely knocked out. The cities were depopulated, and as the author rightly noted, in those cities through which the Mongols passed, the veche system was destroyed and was no longer restored. All this, of course, contributed to the establishment of princely autocracy in individual cities and lands to the detriment of "people's" rule, which was the very "correction" that I spoke about. Maybe this is not so significant (although for some) difference from the "European" path, but it affected then, affects, in my opinion, and still does.

          This is what I was looking for. I instinctively felt that it was so, and I had to disentangle it with a full spoon.
          Who did it? When?
          Out of ignorance, she sinned against Peter. You have explained everything.
          1. +2
            21 March 2023 13: 14
            There is such a historian - Boris Kipnis. He specializes more in the XNUMXth century, but there is also a series of lectures on the Russian Middle Ages. You can find it on his YouTube channel.
            I do not share all his thoughts, but some of his views are clear and close to me. The idea of ​​the aristocracy knocked out by the Mongols and the veche self-government demolished by them - the prototype of urban communal management, which had already begun to take shape at that time in Europe - is from his lectures.
            This is me in case you want to learn more about these ideas from the author. I, as usual, changed everything in my own way, in accordance with my understanding of the issue. smile
            1. +3
              21 March 2023 13: 47
              Michael,
              sorry for repeating:
              aristocracy, the highest stratum of pre-Mongolian society

              At least look with a lantern, you won’t find such in Ancient Rus'.
              YOU know as well as I do, some of the princes with their squads fled like cockroaches. Well, or go for help. And then they returned ... Daniil and Vasilko Romanovichi, the same Mikhail Chernigovskiy, Yaroslavichi. The defense of Kyiv was headed by ... a thousand!
              What is the aristocracy in the period of the territorial community? "Strong men", like princely servants, boyars, that's the whole "aristocracy".
              But it will begin to form just at the time of the collapse of the territorial community, when the land becomes a value. Aristocracy appeared - the community collapsed laughing
              About this sequel hi
              PS Kipnis tells an interesting story, but he is terribly far from the text of the Russian chronicle, and the historiography of Ancient Rus'.
          2. +4
            21 March 2023 13: 28
            Good afternoon Lyudmila Yakovlevna,
            aristocracy, the highest stratum of pre-Mongolian society

            At least look with a lantern, you won’t find such in Ancient Rus'.
            The proto-aristocracy began to take shape along with the process when land appeared as property. Those. just after in the XIV-XV centuries, which I will write about in the sequel. All known genera, all from post-Mongolian times. This is natural.
            hi
            1. +4
              21 March 2023 13: 44
              All known genera, all from post-Mongolian times. This is natural.

              Edward, I'll be waiting. The question of the national aristocracy, its properties, occupies me very much. A comparative analysis, say, with English is desirable.
              1. +1
                21 March 2023 14: 01
                Edward, I'll be waiting. The question of the national aristocracy, its properties, occupies me very much. A comparative analysis, say, with English is desirable.

                Lyudmila Yakovlevna, in order not to wait, find on the net a book by Alexander Alexandrovich Zimin "Formation of the boyar aristocracy in Russia in the second half of the XNUMXth - first third of the XNUMXth century."
                As for comparative analysis, insurmountable problems may arise here, since you will not find Russian-language literature on the issue. That is, without knowledge of the "enemy language" it is not realistic to get acquainted with the process of the formation of the English aristocracy.
                1. +4
                  21 March 2023 15: 03
                  book by Alexander Aleksaandrovich Zimin "Formation of the boyar aristocracy in Russia in the second half of the XNUMXth - first third of the XNUMXth century".

                  Thanks! )))
                  I have already found it, I'm reading it, while a long, as usual, introduction. But already from it it is clear that the direct descendants are becoming smaller. Apparently, they began to "overwrite" them, so as not to interfere with the formation of the state with their ambitions, or something else ... In general, I read.
                  1. +3
                    21 March 2023 15: 35
                    direct descendants become smaller.
                    "So many years stood as in a book,
                    I'm over a precipice in the rye
                    Only all my kids
                    Gone to sour in the garages "(C)
                    1. +3
                      21 March 2023 16: 46
                      Only all my kids
                      Gone to sour in the garages "

                      Poor Salinger, bad luck... request
            2. +2
              21 March 2023 13: 55
              Don't pick on terms, Edward. smile
              It was necessary to write "retinue aristocracy" - such and such, I hope, was there? smile
              1. +3
                21 March 2023 14: 19
                It was necessary to write "retinue aristocracy" - such and such, I hope, was there?

                good
                There were senior and junior combatants. But not yet aristocrats. laughing
            3. +3
              21 March 2023 17: 21
              What aristocracy? The proto-aristocracy began to take shape along with the process when land appeared as property. Those. just after in the XIV-XV centuries, which I will write about in the sequel. All known genera, all from post-Mongolian times. At least look with a lantern, you won’t find such in Ancient Rus'.

              That's what a professional historian means! He even has sayings - "historical" Yes . Hats off, Edward hi
              According to legend, the Greek Cynic philosopher Diogenes (400-323 BC) walked around in the crowd of people during the day with a lit lantern in his hands and, when asked what he was looking for, answered: "I'm looking for a man!"
              1. +5
                21 March 2023 17: 37
                Quote: Richard
                That's what a professional historian means! He even has sayings - "historical". Hats off, Edward

                It remains only to find out what kind of lantern Edward had in mind?
                Gas? Kerosene? Under the eye? Or what else were there in Ancient Rus'? laughing
                1. +3
                  21 March 2023 17: 52
                  Of course, gas.
                  Do you dream of finding an aristocrat in Rus' in the XNUMXth century? Gazprom! Dreams Come True...

                  smile
                  1. +5
                    21 March 2023 18: 01
                    Sergey's version of how Diogenes, with a lantern under his eye and a gas key in his hand, walked around in a crowd of people looking for an offender, is also the place to be. I authoritatively declare this to you, as a specialist (a person who watched "Experts are investigating" in childhood) Yes fellow smile
                  2. +4
                    21 March 2023 18: 17
                    Quote: Trilobite Master
                    Of course, gas.

                    Anton, says that one is called "Swede": here a Scandinavian trace is clearly visible. wassat
                    1. +2
                      21 March 2023 18: 32
                      Swedish is Swedish. ABBA had two. You won’t find an aristocrat with a Swedish woman, unless you make something new.
                    2. +2
                      21 March 2023 18: 32
                      Swedish is Swedish. ABBA had two. You won’t find an aristocrat with a Swedish woman, unless you make something new.
                      1. +4
                        21 March 2023 19: 12
                        Anni-Frid Lingstad is half German, half Norwegian.
                      2. +5
                        21 March 2023 20: 59
                        Hey Toha!
                        Showed up late!
                        The topic, for me, is lethal with Misha, I don’t want to “get involved”, because. I know all his moves.
                        Respect to Edward for raising the topic.
                        Little is decided in the dispute, but nonetheless.
                        Raise his rating over 200!
                      3. +1
                        21 March 2023 21: 05
                        Hi Sasha!
                        The theme, of course, is "killer", but not mine. That's why I showed up late.
        2. +5
          21 March 2023 13: 18
          Until the end of the XIV century. it is not expressed at all.
          But they were not completely in line with the policy of the Golden Horde. Therefore, one can say that the lands of Rus' fell under vassal dependence, but were not an integral part of the Golden Horde.
          1. +2
            21 March 2023 13: 46
            Quote: kor1vet1974
            But they were not completely in line with the policy of the Golden Horde.

            Precisely, which is completely, in any case, up to Metropolitan Alexy. And then they didn’t really show off - there was no strength, no desire. And so - fussing among themselves, complaints to the owner - this is the normal right of a normal vassal at all times.
            Some Ed IV Duke of Burgundy from the senior Burgundian house was much more independent in terms of foreign policy, and in all respects, than his contemporary Ivan Kalita, who was forced to reckon in all matters with the opinion of the Horde Baskak, who permanently lived in Moscow.
            1. +3
              21 March 2023 15: 16
              Precisely, which is completely, in any case, up to Metropolitan Alexy.
              And what is this term? Years 50? But these 50 years, we will not name "completely"? Therefore, the author is right when he writes that Rus' was not part of the Golden Horde, but you and I came to the conclusion that we can talk about the vassal dependence of Rus' on the Golden Horde. Or do you still think that Rus' was part of the Golden Horde?
              1. +3
                21 March 2023 15: 59
                Yes, I believe that Rus' was part of the Golden Horde, although with the rights of autonomy, so to speak. It seems that if the Mongols would have slaughtered all the Rurikoviches and put Chingizides on the Russian tables instead - on the same conditions! - then no one would have the slightest doubt that this is one state. That is, the only difference is that in Rus' the Mongols decided to leave the local dynasty, or, more simply, in the nationality of the rulers. But you understand that this is completely irrelevant.
                The first attempts to pursue an independent foreign policy should probably be attributed to the third quarter of the XNUMXth century, when Moscow began to clash with Lithuania. But even there, Moscow looked like a defending side, although it indirectly provoked active hostilities by arresting Mikhail Tverskoy in Moscow. Prior to this, it is not necessary to reliably talk about any foreign policy actions. Or can you give some example?
                I mean the example of contacts with lands not related to Rus'
  15. +4
    21 March 2023 10: 25
    The classic medieval feudal relations are described. With some specifics of the steppe.
    So what to fence then?
    As long as the khans are stronger, they are kings. They are paid taxes, obeyed, etc.
    How is fragmentation there, but here the strengthening of the Moscow Principality - they are already kings so, formally.
    And Ivan the Terrible - already the tsar himself - and rakes up small pieces of the horde for himself
  16. +4
    21 March 2023 11: 13

    Helmet type IV according to the typology of A.N.Kirpichnikov. 'Steppe and Russian Principalities, late XNUMXth - XNUMXth centuries' Found near the village of Nikolsky, the former Oryol province. Helmets of this type were common both among the steppe nomads and in the Russian principalities.
  17. +3
    21 March 2023 12: 23
    Now the sect of deniers of the Mongols will catch up!
    1. +4
      21 March 2023 13: 12
      Is that all you can say in defense of the Mongolian theory?
      Not much.. laughing
      1. +3
        21 March 2023 13: 22
        Quote: ee2100
        Is that all you can say in defense of the Mongolian theory?

        Sasha, be a man, don't provoke. smile
        1. +3
          21 March 2023 13: 34
          Misha, this is not for you.
          Maybe I'll hear something new
          1. +2
            21 March 2023 13: 56
            Okay, okay, I'm shutting up. smile
            Maybe I'll hear something new, I'll take it into service, if anything. smile
  18. +2
    21 March 2023 13: 01
    In 1252 "Nevruдeva army "

    I'm sorry, is this a typo or one of the possible spellings?
    1. +2
      21 March 2023 13: 29
      a typo or one of the possible spellings?

      Thank you!!!! Ochepyatka. hi
  19. +2
    21 March 2023 13: 30
    It seems to be a serious platform for the exchange of opinions, but it just continues, and here the baby talk about the Mongols and the yoke, which was not there. Well, how much can you procrastinate the same thing?
    All this is similar to assumptions like "if my grandmother had this, then she would be a grandfather" ...
  20. +1
    21 March 2023 13: 34
    Quote: Luminman

    Maybe he did, but the memory remained! It's like Jerusalem or Rome - they still remember ...


    Where's the memory here?
    Rome retained its importance after the collapse of the Roman Empire - still the residence of the Pope.
    And Kyiv - so ... outskirts and no more.
    And what to remember about its former greatness to the descendants of those who took this very Kyiv on a shield and brought it to such a status?
    1. +2
      21 March 2023 14: 25
      Quote: Illanatol
      Where's the memory here?

      An icon to which they pray...

      Quote: Illanatol
      Rome retained its importance after the collapse of the Roman Empire

      Except that sacred...
  21. +1
    21 March 2023 13: 43
    Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
    Exactly. Germans don't call themselves Germans. The French think why the Alemans call themselves Deutsches? Why do Italians think that Tedesci call themselves Deutsches? Estonians also think about the Germans.
    And the Finns think why the veins call themselves Russian?


    Let them think what they want. Everyone is free to call himself whatever he wants.
    But here's what's interesting: the great and subjective peoples acquire the naming that they have chosen for themselves. The French themselves began to call themselves that, and everyone began to call them that in official sources. The Russians themselves have chosen that they are Russians and this is quite official (back in the Middle Ages they began to call us Ruthenians-Rusen in Europe).
    But peoples and tribes that do not have historical subjectivity in the full world often took the forced name that others chose for them. Like North American Indians or the same Mongols.
  22. +1
    21 March 2023 13: 50
    Quote: Trilobite Master
    The Mongols interrupted this process, but did not stop it, but only slowed it down and corrected it in some way (more on that below). That is, Rus' did not turn off the "European path", but only slowed down its movement along it.


    It remains to find out what kind of crap is this - the "European way" and why Russia needs it.
    Initially, Russia is not a European country, but a Eurasian one. Any attempt to fit our country to the European template using fashionable European ideology naturally ended in failure.
    As you know, the Western Russian lands managed to get out of the influence of the Horde and became part of the completely European Commonwealth. Well, how did the successes of these territories in terms of development “in a European way”, with what did they come to the 20th century and the 21st century? Maybe it's enough to indulge yourself with the illusions of a "European choice"?

    "Only this pineapple is not made for us..." laughing
    1. +4
      21 March 2023 14: 22
      Initially, Russia is not a European country, but a Eurasian one. Any attempt to fit our country to the European template using fashionable European ideology naturally ended in failure.

      Where is it written? In what textbook, sorry.
      Even geographically until the end of the XVI century. Rus' was not present in Asia.
      What kind of historical institutions in Rus' are Eurasian or Asian?
      hi
    2. +4
      21 March 2023 16: 08
      Rus', of course, was a European country, albeit with its own specifics, well, everyone had it - this specificity. As for the European path, I never said anywhere that I consider it preferable and did not demand that European values ​​be instilled in us.
      Just a fact: we followed this path with a lag of a couple of centuries, the Mongols forced us to turn a little and therefore slow down in this movement. But all the same, we are going, whether you like it or not, in that original direction, following Europe. Although there was, in my opinion, quite a good attempt to overtake the whole world at the turn, I mean the building of socialism.
      1. -3
        21 March 2023 21: 46
        Was the Roman Empire a European country or an Asian one? Or did the Arabs turn? And Byzantium was late for a couple of centuries
      2. -2
        21 March 2023 21: 57
        Rus' was a European country ... only the rulers were called kagan
    3. 0
      29 March 2023 20: 13
      This crap, namely the "European way", allowed the countries of Europe to get ahead and dominate other parts of the world - Asia, Europe, America. And these countries had to, willy-nilly, Europeanize in order to defend their independence
  23. 0
    21 March 2023 13: 53
    Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
    Why not V. Tatishchev, or if in Miller's version, then it doesn't count?


    Ugh, it doesn't count.
    A Russian historian in the German edition ... let these Russophobes go through the forest with their nonsense.
  24. +1
    21 March 2023 13: 58
    Quote: Engineer
    The turn to face the West was only under Ivan No. 3. Before him stood sideways


    There was no turning point under Ivan the Third. Although the Catholics counted heavily on this, slipping a Byzantine princess on Ivan.
    The real turn to the West, which the West itself would arrange, would be expressed in the adoption of Catholicism (as an option later - the Protestant branch of Christianity).
    It did not grow together, and therefore they remained strangers for the West, "orcs".
    Peter the Great is no more a Westernizer than Joseph Stalin.
    "We will take from Europe everything that is useful to us, and then we will turn our backs on it."
    Albeit with a great delay, but Russia is beginning to make such a maneuver ...
  25. 0
    21 March 2023 14: 01
    Quote: ee2100
    My guess is vend is a brother


    Rather, "Wends", and possibly "Vyatichi".
    1. +1
      21 March 2023 17: 44
      May be. Those. must the Finns and Estonians border on the Wends?
      In the Latvian language, the Russian krievu valoda is a direct reference to the Krivichi tribe, which is understandable.
  26. +2
    21 March 2023 14: 05
    Quote: kor1vet1974
    Probably because the garrisons were not located in Russian cities, there was also no Mongolian administration.


    Starting from the beginning of the 14th century, the Horde murzas with servants began to switch to the service of Russian princes, mostly Moscow ones.
    Approximately 20% of the nobles in tsarist Russia were of "Tatar" origin. Why does the historian Karamzin have such a surname? Is it not because he is descended from a certain Kara-Murza?
    So the trace should have remained, and it is. It just has nothing to do with the Mongols that live in Mongolia. Either the Russians are the same, or the Turks (which are the Tatars and Kazan and Crimean).
    1. -1
      21 March 2023 14: 30
      Quote: Illanatol
      Turks (which are Tatars and Kazan and Crimean)

      I won’t say anything about the Crimean Tatars, I don’t know, but the Kazan Tatars are Finno-Ugric peoples who converted to Islam and spoke Turkic dialects ...
      1. +4
        21 March 2023 18: 42
        A new word in the history of "Ugric-Finns-Kazan Tatars"!
        Personally, I read that the Kazan Tatars are the former Volga Bulgars. They are Astrakhan Tatars.
    2. +2
      21 March 2023 18: 06
      Tatars are divided into three haplogroups: Siberian, Volga and Crimean.
      They are not genetically related.
      The word "Tatar" is a self-name.
      They are impoverished by language, culture and partly by faith.
      1. 0
        22 March 2023 11: 19
        However, Crimean Tatars do not call themselves Tatars.
        1. 0
          22 March 2023 13: 31
          I was wrong, I admit. To be more precise, there are disagreements among them. Some recognize this name, others believe that it is more correct to call them Crimeans. By the way, among the Kazan Tatars there is a small group of Bulgarists who believe that their people should be called Bulgars.
  27. 0
    21 March 2023 14: 19
    Quote: Trilobite Master
    All this, of course, contributed to the establishment of princely autocracy in individual cities and lands to the detriment of "people's" rule, which was the very "correction" that I spoke about.


    Hi, we've arrived. But what about the Norman theory, with the origin of statehood from the Varangians, supposedly Scandinavians?
    Or were the Viking Normans great democrats, adored people's self-government, considered the bonder peasants in their native Scandinavia (I will keep silent about the natives from the "low lands") equal to the free Vikings?
    And in Europe, presumably, the feudal lords (often descended from the same Normans) really honored "people's rule", got along well with free cities with their "Magdeburg law"?
    They got along so well that they were forced to live in well-fortified castles, while the Russian princes, even in the era of the Yoke, did not build personal castles for some reason?

    Princely autocracy in Rus' is a pale shadow of the power of Western European feudal lords over their serfs-colons. After the conquest of England by the Normans, the conquerors gave the locals such a "taiazh" that any "yoke" (even Tatar, even Saracen) would modestly smoke on the sidelines.

    "European Way", uh-huh... no thanks.
    1. +4
      21 March 2023 16: 25
      Well, the mess is in your head ... But full knowledge is not enough. Everything is somehow fragmentary and in a heap - the Mongols, the Normans, William the Conqueror, besides, all this is heavily projected onto modern realities ... How do you live with this? request
      You can imagine - yes, the Scandinavians were the bearers of the principles of military democracy, when the leader constantly consulted with the retinue and this very retinue limited the leader in his Wishlist or, on the contrary, forced him to tear his butt off the feather bed and sit in a longship.
      And now the descendants of precisely these combatants who came with the first princes, who retained this original spirit of the "military brotherhood" of the first squads, people who could say "no" to their prince, for the most part died near Kolomna, in the City and in other places. Those who took their place no longer had such social weight, ancestral memory, a succession of glorious ancestors, pride and independence, if it is clearer. And they could no longer say "no" to the prince, even if they wanted to.
      1. +4
        21 March 2023 16: 33
        Quote: Trilobite Master
        Those who took their place no longer had such social weight.

        The process of transforming the squad into the yard. hi
      2. +3
        21 March 2023 18: 17
        hi Eh, Mikhail, Mikhail, you don’t understand that the “problems of shamanism” have not yet been completely eliminated in the ranks of commentators ....... how do you personally feel about the problem of shamanism in certain regions of the North? or "how does philosophy now define the concept of weightlessness? (c) V. Shukshin. story" Cut ". smile
  28. +3
    21 March 2023 14: 38
    I didn’t specifically write a comment immediately after reading the article, I paused, I was convinced. which is not right. Discussion of such topics on such resources within the framework of at least some semblance of a full-fledged discussion is practically impossible, the emergence of the so-called "srach" is inevitable.
    Especially on such fundamental issues, on which the direction of the geopolitical choice really depends. After all, if we admit that the Mongols had a significant impact on the further development of the Russian state and law, then it can be fully called an Asian power. And vice versa - recognizing the influence of the yoke as insignificant, Russia can be considered a European country.
    In this regard, the author's categorical statement about the influence of the "Mongol-Tatar yoke" on the development of Russian statehood
    These conclusions were not confirmed in further historiography. In the XNUMXst century, from a professional point of view, they are the property of historical thought, and no more,

    reflects nothing more than the point of view of this particular author.
    For example, we can recall the confrontation on this topic of such serious people as A.A. Gorsky and I.Ya Froyanov.
    Of course, it would be interesting if there was an author (just not "a la Samsonov") who would write a normal, full-fledged article outlining the opposite point of view.
    1. +6
      21 March 2023 14: 58
      Quote: sergej_84
      After all, if we admit that the Mongols had a significant impact on the further development of the Russian state and law, then it can be fully called an Asian power. And vice versa - recognizing the influence of the yoke as insignificant, Russia can be considered a European country.

      I would call this a "stamped" formulation of the question: with such a formulation, nothing but the "second Normandy question" will work: "srach" is meaningless and merciless for three hundred years. And absolutely not intersny.
      1. +3
        21 March 2023 15: 17
        I would call it a "stamp" statement of the question

        Actually - and I'm almost about the same. The question is whether there is an author who will raise the question "not stamped". Although in this case, I think. "srach" is inevitable.
        1. +4
          21 March 2023 15: 23
          Quote: sergej_84
          Actually - and I'm almost about the same. The question is whether there is an author who will raise the question "not stamped". Although in this case, I think. "srach" is inevitable.

          This inevitably raises the question of the genesis of the state as such, and this is an extremely complex question, to which there are still no clear answers, although now we can say much more about this than the same Karamzin.
          1. +4
            21 March 2023 15: 41
            This inevitably raises the question of the genesis of the state as such, and this is a daunting question.

            And "arch-ideologized". Even despite the declared "lack of ideology."
    2. +1
      21 March 2023 16: 33
      Quote: sergej_84
      if we admit that the Mongols had a significant impact on the further development of the Russian state and law, then it can be fully called an Asian power. And vice versa - recognizing the influence of the yoke as insignificant, Russia can be considered a European country.

      And we only have two positions - "on" and "off"? smile
      I think we can recognize the presence of this influence and start discussing its extent. And with or without srachs - it already depends on the participants themselves, and only on them.
    3. 0
      21 March 2023 20: 23
      For example, we can recall the confrontation on this topic of such serious people as A.A. Gorsky and I.Ya Froyanov.

      This is not a VO format, this is already a historiographic work, it is of little interest to the general public.
      Therefore, I give general conclusions and key conclusions. By showing that there is no evidence in the sources to the contrary: none. All extensive literature and links to it are outside the scope of the article.
      You are not the first, you are not the last who asks: where does it come from? I repeat, the links are Oshchitinin's article, but this is not a VO format.
      PS. By the way, Igor Yakovlevich Froyanov was my supervisor from the 1st year, and under his guidance I defended my Ph.D.
      hi
      I recommend writing a 10-page article yourself on some "relevant" topic, for example, neutral, "Problems of the Northern War among modern historians": intelligibly and without scientific phraseology, immediately turn into an article from Yandex.zen.
      1. -2
        21 March 2023 22: 36
        This is not a VO format, this is already a historiographic work, it is of little interest to the general public.

        I did not urge you to write an article like "Gorsky vs. Froyanov", I just gave an example to confirm the existence of different points of view on the topic of the article.
        By the way, Igor Yakovlevich Froyanov was my supervisor from the 1st year, and under his guidance I defended my Ph.D.

        It's clear. If Gorsky had been the leader, the topic of the article today would have been exactly the opposite.
  29. +1
    21 March 2023 15: 16
    Thanks to the author. On a par with V.O. I always read your articles with interest. Up to the point that I climb and the Internet and look for. I really want to discuss, but alas, there is not enough time even to read.
  30. 0
    21 March 2023 18: 50
    After the words
    "The nomadic society of the Mongols of the XNUMXth century, as the latest research shows, was potestarnoe and exopolitan, that is, it was a nomadic society with a "consensual" structure in relation to the leader, where there was social inequality, but there were no state mechanisms of coercion and repression."

    I didn’t read it, because with such clever words (but not understandable to a simple layman), as usual, any trash is hidden.
    After these words, I looked at the current picture and FSE is clear - the author wrote a lot of things in the style of HELL-TV
    1. Fat
      +4
      21 March 2023 19: 44
      hi
      Quote from Victor
      After the words
      "The nomadic society of the Mongols of the XNUMXth century, as the latest research shows, was potestarnoe and exopolitan, that is, it was a nomadic society with a "consensual" structure in relation to the leader, where there was social inequality, but there were no state mechanisms of coercion and repression."

      I didn’t read it, because with such clever words (but not understandable to a simple layman), as usual, any trash is hidden.
      After these words, I looked at the current picture and FSE is clear - the author wrote a lot of things in the style of HELL-TV

      Ah.. Well, yes. The author obviously did not count on such "simple inhabitants" as you.
      You did everything right, except for one thing.
      It wasn't worth commenting.

      Burning mystical books. Illustration of their magazine "Niva"
      1. +7
        21 March 2023 20: 07
        "Long words upset Winnie the Pooh." (WITH)
        Hello Borisych!
        1. +2
          21 March 2023 20: 20
          hi Good evening, Anton! The phrase, "how does philosophy now define the concept of weightlessness?" Is immortal smile
  31. 0
    21 March 2023 21: 48
    The article is more like "custom-made nonsense." If not custom-made, then just nonsense of an inflamed imagination and fantasy. Behind the "smart" phrases is complete emptiness and nothing more. No supporting facts and serious substantiation of the conclusions are given AT ALL.
    Here the author writes:In such conditions, Rus' turned out to be a tributary of a stronger rival.»
    And what is meant by the word "Rus"? What it is? United state? A set of disparate principalities? What? What does the author unite under the unifying name Rus? And how and on what basis?

    Further, here I will give a whole paragraph - as the author expresses himself very scientifically: “The nomadic society of the Mongols of the XNUMXth century, as the latest research shows, was potestar and exopolitan, that is, it was a nomadic society with a “consensual” structure in relation to the leader, where there was social inequality, but there were no state mechanisms of coercion and repression. In relation to the outside world, this society appears as aggressive and predatory, because it can exist only through the exploitation of societies standing outside it.. "

    Translated from “smart” into Russian, the author tries to assert that the nomadic tribes did not have a developed statehood, that is, again translating, wild tribes are some kind of incomprehensible “society”. And wild tribes, in principle, can unite, and not squabble among themselves?
    Complete nonsense!
    It, at least, should have been a developed state and nothing else. At the same time, not even anyhow, but the most developed at that time, including with the strongest economy, advanced (for its time) production, otherwise it is impossible to explain the presence of a large highly organized army and its equipment. We look at the Mongols - the author uses EXACTLY this term of ethnic identification. Is this the ethnic group that we today call the Mongols? And the Mongols, until the second decade of the last century, for some reason, did not know anything about this. How so?! And in general, not a single people or ethnic group of Southern Siberia, and indeed of the entire southeast Asian region, knows nothing about this. There is nothing in written sources, or in oral, or in the epic.
    Real Mongolia and mythical "Mongol-Tatars"
    wakeupnow.info/en/one-menu-facts-opinion/2079-realnaya-mongoliya-i-mificheskie-mongolo-tatary

    Look further: "In the conditions of the production structure of nomadic pastoralism, the appropriating mode of production based on war comes to the fore.. "

    Well, name at least one more example from history where nomadic tribes would have such opportunities and achieve at least something significant? Basmachi of Central Asia at the beginning of the last century? So these were small gangs kept and financed mainly by the British. This is translated into our modern understanding - the progenitors of the modern Taliban, who also have modern "mother / father-breadwinners." And again the Anglo-Saxons.
    Who are you Kazakh? Brother, friend or...
    wakeupnow.info/ru/one-menu-facts-opinion/2847-kto-ty-kazakh-brat-drug-ili-5

    The author writes: "Immediately after the Mongol invasion, which passed like a terrible tornado through the lands of the north-east of Rus', no visible political changes occurred.».
    When was it and what are these lands of the "north-east of Rus'"? Are we guessing again? But didn’t the author think that history develops in a spiral and that most events repeat themselves, but at a more modern level of their time? For example: and if you look at the "Batu invasion" as a special operation of that time?
    Special operations on the territory of medieval Rus' and Europe
    wakeupnow.info/ru/one-menu-facts-opinion/3246-spetsoperatsii-na-territorii-srednevekovoj-rusi-i-evropy

    And like a “cherry on a cake” - the author suddenly “lit up with the thought” that “It is noteworthy that the conquerors, based on their mental representations, saw in Rus' exclusively the defeated and tributary "slaves".».
    Did they, the conquerors, tell the author about this themselves? Another resuscitation of the idea of ​​the "Tatar-Mongol yoke"?

    I no longer want to disassemble all this fantasy nonsense and stupidity.

    If "Продолжение следует ...", then ... it's better not to. True, you should not bother.
  32. 0
    22 March 2023 10: 07
    Quote: Trilobite Master
    Well, the mess is in your head ... But full knowledge is not enough. Everything is somehow fragmentary and in a heap - the Mongols, the Normans, William the Conqueror, besides, all this is heavily projected onto modern realities ... How do you live with this? request
    You can imagine - yes, the Scandinavians were the bearers of the principles of military democracy, when the leader constantly consulted with the retinue and this very retinue limited the leader in his Wishlist or, on the contrary, forced him to tear his butt off the feather bed and sit in a longship.
    And now the descendants of precisely these combatants who came with the first princes, who retained this original spirit of the "military brotherhood" of the first squads, people who could say "no" to their prince, for the most part died near Kolomna, in the City and in other places. Those who took their place no longer had such social weight, ancestral memory, a succession of glorious ancestors, pride and independence, if it is clearer. And they could no longer say "no" to the prince, even if they wanted to.


    No one has complete knowledge and cannot be. Since there is not and cannot be completeness of information about the events that happened so long ago, and information about them was repeatedly distorted to please the "general lines".
    Imagine, in real history everything was "in a bunch". Only comrade scientists, who often do not see the forest for the trees, lay out on the shelves.

    What does the Scandinavian military democracy have to do with it?
    Firstly, similar principles worked not only for them, and long before the Vikings even appeared. This was a general rule, and in Asia too.
    The bogatyr Rustam from "Shah-Nameh" was such a "democrat" in relation to Shah Kavus that any Viking would envy.
    The code of chivalry first appeared in the East, and not at all among the Scandinavians or the Franks.

    Secondly, it was not about the model of relations within the squads (a Scandinavian word or still Russian), but about the relationship of the Normans with those whom they managed to subdue. It didn't even smell of democracy here. The Scandinavians treated their "tralls" very harshly.

    Third. I am forced to disappoint, but the "retinue democracy" in Rus' began to die off even before the Yoke and not because of the Yoke. The transformation of combatants into nobles did not occur under the influence of the "Mongol-Tatars" (who also had elements of military democracy), but thanks to the spiritual influence of Byzantium and the adoption of Christianity (this religion in a specific form denied democratic principles and absolutized the power "There is one God in Heaven, in earthly inheritance - one Autocrat - Autocrator").

    The pagan prince Svyatoslav and his retinue dined from the same cauldron. At the feast of the Grand Duke of Vladimir at the beginning of the 13th century, up to 70 cutlery was used (we, contemporaries of space flights and the Internet, do not use even 20).
  33. +1
    22 March 2023 10: 24
    Quote: sergej_84
    After all, if we admit that the Mongols had a significant impact on the further development of the Russian state and law, then it can be fully called an Asian power. And vice versa - recognizing the influence of the yoke as insignificant, Russia can be considered a European country.


    The Imperial Academy of Sciences of the Russian Empire at the end of the 19th century did not find traces of the Mongolian ones, although they searched very diligently.
    In general, it should be recognized that the Horde had a generally positive impact on the formation of Russian statehood, accelerating its formation and significantly helping to overcome "feudal fragmentation."
    Firstly, the Horde buried the so-called. "ladder right", the right to inherit power and the title of the Grand Duke from the elder brother to the younger. Because of what, in Rus', uncles constantly clashed with nephews (sons of an older brother).
    Secondly, the Horde blocked the separatism of the outlying principalities, which, in a different scenario, could leave Rus' and become part of other powers (which, alas, happened to the lands of the Galicia-Volyn principality, and this brought little benefit to the locals).
    Thirdly ... isn't it strange that those princes and principalities that could play the role of the center of the unification of all Rus' received the label for the Great Principality? "Tatars" clearly worked against the principle of "divide and conquer." It is characteristic that those who coped poorly with such a role were put out of the brackets (like Vladimir and Tver). The favorites of the Horde were the princes of Moscow, who were destined to unite Rus'.
    It turns out that the Horde worked for the benefit of Rus', accelerating its political maturation.

    And yes ... even if we consider that the Horde are pure Asians, then these are clearly not the first Asians who contributed to the development of the Russian nation and statehood. Before that, there were the Huns (with whom our ancestors entered into a kind of "union state") and the Turks (primarily the Volga Bulgars).

    So we are originally a Eurasian power. I don’t like the current coat of arms, but it conveys the essence exactly ...
  34. +1
    22 March 2023 10: 32
    Quote: Luminman
    I won’t say anything about the Crimean Tatars, I don’t know, but the Kazan Tatars are Finno-Ugric peoples who converted to Islam and spoke Turkic dialects ...


    Ничего подобного.
    The Bulgars originally lived near the Black Sea. Then, under external pressure, the people were divided into three parts. One part remained in the same place, went into the shadows, then came out under the name "Crimean Tatars". The other - went to the Balkans, assimilated with the local Slavs, forming Bulgaria.
    The third part - went to the Volga region, forming the Volga Bulgaria, possibly including the locals (including the Finno-Ugric peoples) in its composition.
    Volga Bulgaria was a highly developed state, and it arose and developed rapidly, which hints at the role of alien elements. She had close relations with Russia, it is possible that the Slavs also lived in Bulgaria.

    Turkic is their native language, basically.
  35. -1
    22 March 2023 13: 21
    Quote: ee2100
    May be. Those. must the Finns and Estonians border on the Wends?
    In the Latvian language, the Russian krievu valoda is a direct reference to the Krivichi tribe, which is understandable.


    Why not? Although whether the Wends or Vyatichi were originally the names of tribes or certain social groups / estates (similar to the Vikings and Varangians) is unknown.
    At a later time, the expression "higher people" was used, probably the same as the Vyatichi.
    Maybe a synonym for "noble" or "aristocrat".
  36. -1
    22 March 2023 13: 30
    Quote: ee2100
    Tatars are divided into three haplogroups: Siberian, Volga and Crimean.
    They are not genetically related.
    The word "Tatar" is a self-name.
    They are impoverished by language, culture and partly by faith.


    Don't you see the contradiction in your statement?
    If they are not genetically related, where did the linguistic and cultural commonality of peoples come from that lived at a fair distance from each other? Maybe there were common roots?

    The method based on haplogroups should not be overestimated. Moreover, a less numerous, but more developed ethnic group is able to adjust the more numerous ethnic group for itself. Haplogroups - based on the frequency of distribution are identified.
    As happened in Hungary, for example. Most of the population there is of originally Slavic origin, but statehood and culture are from the newcomer Magyar-Ugrians, who consider themselves descendants of the Huns.
    Well, Bulgaria is the same. Slavs at the core, but the name is from the alien Bulgars of Khan Asparuh.
  37. 0
    22 March 2023 13: 47
    Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
    Where is it written? In what textbook, sorry.
    Even geographically until the end of the XVI century. Rus' was not present in Asia.
    What kind of historical institutions in Rus' are Eurasian or Asian?


    It depends on what to call Asia. The borders of Asia then were somewhat different. For example, Khazaria or the Polovtsian Khanate - European powers?
    Rus' was in many ways a student of Byzantium. Is Byzantium a purely European state? The possessions of the basileus - were they located exclusively in Europe? Are political traditions exclusively European? And the subjects - also entirely Europeans or Asians were present?
    Oh yes, it's part of the Roman Empire. But nothing that the Roman Empire was formed when Europe simply did not yet exist as a kind of political association and united in its composition the lands, both European and Asian and even African?
    And the Romans worshiped not only their relatives Jupiter, Mars and Ceres, but also Cybele and Astarte at the decline of their empire.
    From which we can conclude that both the First Rome and the Second Rome were not purely European powers.
    And since we have the Third Rome, then so are we. Europe is cramped for us, aha, this miserable appendix of the continent.
    But Eurasia - just right. Give Heartland with a short name - Rus'!

    A political institution, Asian in origin (according, by the way, to official historians, not Fomenko) - KING!
    Since initially it was the rulers of the Horde who were called that, which is reflected in the Russian chronicles. In Rus', this title began to be used only from the time of Ivan the Terrible.

    The king is "sar". Sar-kel, Sar-ai...
    1. 0
      23 March 2023 09: 36
      What is a heartland? Russian Rome did not imply the creation of a country, it meant a religious context! That Rus' is holy, and not imperialism! Rus' became an empire under the German queens! The Russian peoples did not conquer and slavery did not flourish in Rus'! Themselves from the hardships of slavery under the Mongols, they understood that it was worthless to enslave others! Until the nemchura Romanovs began to develop imperialism! This must be clearly understood, the Russian conquests of other nations fell precisely during the reign of the Nemchura! This is nothing to be proud of! The Russian people are not invaders!
  38. 0
    22 March 2023 17: 55
    The ways of Russia have always been changed by princes and tsars. On the backs of Russian poor fellows. Finally they did it again. They even went to war. This does not bite the king and princes.
  39. -1
    22 March 2023 19: 20
    To go rob someone, you must first know your neighbors well, what, where it lies and how it is guarded. Otherwise, it might turn out oops with gravy. There were no Mongols. And for the slanted Asians on horsebacks, Kalmyk tribes are very suitable. Which is consistent with the short trips to the horde of Russian princes (yeah, they went to Ulaanbaatar in a couple of months), and the absence of Russian artifacts in general in modern Mongolia.
    1. 0
      23 March 2023 09: 28
      My friend, the Kalmyks are the Mongols and they speak Mongolian! These are the remnants of the Dzungars in Russia. And the golden horde, that is, the Ulug ulus, is the territory of present-day Kazakhstan, and the horde spoke Nogai Turkic, which is spoken by the Kazakhs. In fact, it was the Kazakhs, under the chairmanship of the Genghisides, who were those Tatars. Because the Tatars also spoke Nogai Turkic. It’s just that none of the Russians knew the steppe nomads, unlike the Polovtsian Tatars. And since the steppes spoke the same language as the Tatars, they were called Tatars!
  40. 0
    23 March 2023 09: 21
    The attitude of the author is strange, as if a yoke and as if not very, as if a tribute, but not quite, an attempt to verbally soften the atrocities of the Mongols, does not change the essence of history, thanks to the Asians, Rus', as it was barbaric in the eyes of Europe, remained the East, and not the west! So thanks to the supastats, all this European gayness bypassed Rus', otherwise they would now hold parades of a different type on Red Square!))) They say there would be no happiness ...
  41. 0
    23 March 2023 09: 53
    Many here write it is not clear what about the Tatars! The first Mongolian Tatars are the Mongolian tribe of Toguz-Tatars! They were destroyed by Genghis Khan, the Tatars in Rus', these are the Bulgars, Polovtsy, whom the Russians originally called Tat, that is, the enemy! Later, when both the Polovtsy and the Bulgars were beaten by the Mongols, part of the Bulgars fled to where Bulgaria part remained in the Crimea and in the Kazan Khanate under the Genghisides! And the Mongol Tatars, these are the Mongols and the tribes of the Great Steppe, like the Tatars they spoke Turkic, so the Russians thought they were Tatars! In fact, the Tatars later joined them! The Golden Horde, aka Ulug Ulus, is the territory of present-day Kazakhstan, that is, the ancestors of the Kazakhs, replaced the Mongol Empire and, under the leadership of the Mongols, kept Rus' in tributaries. There was nothing strange in this, for tribute they put up an army to reinforce the Russians, helped in any way they could and did not forget about their pocket. In fact, Rus' has always paid the steppes so as not to have a ruin! And it still pays. They are such Asians, they like to receive payment for friendship! East is a delicate matter!
    1. 0
      29 March 2023 15: 59
      The designation in Rus' and Europe, as well as in Central Asia, Persia and the Arab East, of the Mongols during the time of the Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan as Tatars came from the fact that all knowledge about the Mongols in those days went through merchants merchants through China along the Silk Road. That is from the Chinese. For the Chinese, all the nomads living north of China were called Tatars, after the name of the Tatar tribe who lived closest to China and with whom there was the greatest communication. These Tatars were called by the Chinese White Tatars, and all those who lived further and about whom there was less information - Black Tatars. With the unification of the Mongol-speaking tribes by Genghis Khan, they did not become Mongols in the eyes of the outside world, even after the destruction of the Tatars themselves, and were called as before - Tatars
  42. 0
    23 March 2023 14: 28
    Quote from Jose
    What is a heartland? Russian Rome did not imply the creation of a country, it meant a religious context! That Rus' is holy, and not imperialism!


    What does "heartland" mean - you can look in the dictionary. In principle, it can be translated as "middle" or "central" power. Not China, but Russia - the real "Middle Empire".
    Holiness... why can't it correlate with sovereign power?
    I see no reason to oppose them.
    How holy the first two Romes were can be argued, but that they were powerful powers is foolish to argue.

    "God is not in power, but in truth"? And what is God, if not the absolute of power and authority? Who needs a powerless God?
  43. +2
    24 March 2023 09: 43
    The nomadic society of the Mongols in the XNUMXth century, as shown latest research,

    I wonder what they found and began to "investigate", and even on the basis of this "research" they made some new conclusions ?? After all, there is nothing new! And it may appear.
    But the concept has already begun to be revised. Apparently, the 2007 film Genghis Khan was the last film with the participation of Chinese capital, in which Genghis Khan is shown as a person not in the service of the Chinese emperor. The Chinese won't let that happen again.
  44. +2
    24 March 2023 11: 16
    Quote: ee2100
    And so, the article correctly describes the events of the XIII century.
    I'm curious, on what basis did you draw this conclusion? Or according to the method of Edward Gibbon?
  45. 0
    25 March 2023 17: 19
    MONGOLS AGAIN??? Not tired yet? Find at least one Mongol west of the Urals - then compose your fairy tales.
  46. -1
    29 March 2023 12: 36
    In history, the same people were often called by different names. There were Pechenegs, Khazars, Polovtsians, then they all disappeared somewhere at once, Tatars appeared, and earlier Bulgars, etc. Mongol-Tatars is one of the myths, such as the illiad. It was just Rus' with a center in Novgorod, Kyiv, and then with a center in Kazan, then in Moscow (and in the middle, Vladimir Rus', vassal Kazan), that's all the yoke.
  47. +1
    29 March 2023 15: 49
    Quote: Victor Sergeev
    Kyiv was conquered from the Khazars
    this is what the Jews say now, in order to claim Ukraine as the land of the Jews, the descendants of the Khazars
  48. 0
    30 March 2023 08: 01
    Our history is unpredictable, in my personal opinion, the Mongol invasion shortened our path from feudal fragmentation to an absolutist state.
    If not for the Mongols, Rus' would have been consolidated on the basis of Catholic states.
    And in fact, we created an empire on the matrix of Orthodoxy before Germany ended the period of fragmentation.
    This is neither good nor bad, it just happened historically.
  49. 0
    30 March 2023 08: 10
    Quote: Roman Efremov
    MONGOLS AGAIN??? Not tired yet? Find at least one Mongol west of the Urals - then compose your fairy tales.

    Mongolian is also not a stamp in the passport.
    Tribes from the eastern part of the Great Steppe migrated west to Genghis Khan. It’s just that the very name of the Mongols is rather late, and generalizes different tribes. And so, they grew there, like colonies of bacteria in a Petri dish. Excess protein (mutton), lack of carbohydrates, growth in numbers, greater muscle strength and a constant feeling of hunger.
    The Huns came from there, then the Avars, the Pechenegs, the last Kalmyks pulled themselves up.
    Another thing is that the mechanism of such invasions is similar to the rolling of a snowball - the original core takes on more and more new members.
    As soon as a great leader appears, the mechanism of obedience (the leader in a wolf pack) immediately works, internecine squabbles stop, the mechanism for regulating population growth disappears, and the Invasion begins.
  50. 0
    April 7 2023 16: 14
    Quote from Kuziming
    The Huns came from there, then the Avars, the Pechenegs, the last Kalmyks pulled themselves up.

    The so-called "academic history" does not at all identify the European Huns with the Far Eastern "Xiongnu" or "Xiongnu".
    Avars?? Excavations of burials that were classified as "Avar" show that the Avar population was anthropologically heterogeneous and mostly characterized by Caucasoid type with brachycephalic and dolichocephalic variations.
    Pechenegs? The so-called "academic history" has never located the Pechenegs east of the Aral Sea. Only to the west.
  51. -1
    1 May 2023 22: 21
    Yes, there is no need for a continuation... How tired you are with your “Mongol-Tatars” who NEVER EXISTED. Is the author by any chance Mongolian by nationality? (No offense - I’m just interested in understanding why it suddenly happened)
    Who and why spoke about the Tatar-Mongol yoke. Alexander Pyzhikov

    Alexander Pyzhikov Who invented the Tatar Mongol yoke

    Alexander Pyzhikov What kind of Tatar Mongols are in Russian epics

    Our father... Genghis Khan! Dmitry Belousov. Part 1
  52. The comment was deleted.

"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"