Russian land before the Batu invasion. The problem of the "Mongol" invasion of Russia. Part of 2

194
The invasion of Batu. Traditional version

In 1234, the Mongol armies completed the conquest of North China. In 1235, the congress of nobles was assembled on the shores of Onon, it was decided to arrange the Great Western campaign, to reach the “last sea”. In the east, the borders of the empire were washed by the Pacific Ocean. It was necessary to reach the same border in the west. The military leader of the campaign was appointed the grandson of Genghis Khan - Batu. With him were sent several khans, who had their own military corps.

The question of the size of the army is up to date - various researchers call numbers from 30 to 500 thousand soldiers. Apparently, those who believe that the army itself had a “Mongol-Tatar” core in 30-50 thousand soldiers, as well as a significant number of less combat-ready militia from the vassal, subordinate tribes of the Juchi Ulus, are right. A significant part of them were representatives of Turkic tribes, Turkmens, Karakalpaks, Kipchaks, there were also Tajiks, soldiers of Siberian nationalities. There was a significant number of robbers, adventurers, volunteers "of all stripes that flock to the successful conquerors. Among them were even Knights Templar (which is a very interesting line).

In 1236, the avalanche knocked over a barrier of Bashkirs and Mansi, who for 13 had fought a border war with enemy troops for years. Part of their defeated units was also included in the army of Batu. Then the wave came to Volga Bulgaria. The Bulgarians-Bulgars smashed the corps of Jebe and Subedei, after the battle on the Kalka River. Now this “debt” has been paid with interest. The Bulgarians had many rich trading cities and towns, which put up stubborn resistance, but were destroyed one after another. It was captured and the capital of the state - the Great Bulgarians (Bilyar). The surviving Bulgarians fled to the forests, appeared in Nizhny Novgorod, Rostov and Vladimir.

The Grand Duke of Vladimir Yuri II knew that the "Mongols" had good reasons for hostility with the Bulgarians. And they did not come across Vladimirskaya Rus, there were no visible reasons for hostility. To stand up for someone else, and even often a hostile country, there was no point. Mstislav Udalov already stood up for Polovtsian friends, it ended very badly. It is clear that the mayhem of a neighboring state was an alarming signal. But Russia has long dealt with the "steppe". Usually, everything was done with raids on border areas, and then more or less stable relations were established, including commerce, dynastic marriages, and the twin cities of princes with steppe leaders.

Russian land before the Batu invasion. The problem of the "Mongol" invasion of Russia. Part of 2

The empire of Genghis Khan at the time of his death.

Initially, it seemed that it would be so. Having defeated Volga Bulgaria, the Batu army moved south, its part clashed with the Polovtsy. It must be said that a stubborn war with the Polovtsy will continue for several years, until their complete defeat. Then part of the Polovtsy will go to Europe, the Transcaucasus and Asia Minor. The majority of the Polovtsians will be subordinated and will constitute the bulk of the population of the Golden Horde. From the Bulgarians, the merchants who came across the Russians, Baty collected information about the Russian principalities, cities, roads. The best time to strike was winter, when, following the example of the Russians, it was possible to move along the channels of frozen rivers.

The ruin of the land of Ryazan

The Russian princes at this point with intelligence was very bad. The days when “bogatyr outposts” stood in the steppe were long gone. Thus, in Ryazan, they learned about the approach of the enemy army from the "Tatar" ambassadors themselves - two Khan officials and a certain "sorceress wife." Ambassadors calmly communicated the demands of Batyi to express their humility to the khan, and begin to pay "tithe," which included not only a tenth of wealth, livestock, horses, but also people — warriors, slaves. Ryazan princes naturally refused: "When we are no one alive, then all yours will be." Proudly, but hardly reasonable. If intelligence had been put up well, the princes should have already known about the fate of their neighbors. The tithe that the churches used to pay, or the ruin of the whole earth, the destruction of cities and thousands of dead and stolen for sale into slavery, their own destruction. What's better?

Forces to resist the army of Batu Ryazan rulers were not. "Tatar" ambassadors are not touched, missed further, in Vladimir. Ryazan began to seek help. The Ryazan prince Ingvar Ingvarevich, together with the boyar Yevpatiy Kolovrat, went to Chernigov for help. Prince Kolomna Roman Ingvarevich went to ask for troops in Vladimir. However, the prince of Vladimir at that time simply could not allocate significant forces to help Ryazan - his selected regiments went with Yaroslav to the Dnieper in 1236 and fought with Chernigov for Galich. At the same time, Yuri apparently thought it was more profitable to sit outside the walls of cities and fortresses. The enemy will destroy the neighborhood, maybe he will take one or two towns, precipitate powerful Russian cities and rush into the steppe.

The Grand Prince of Ryazan, Yuri Igorevich, began to form a army. Ryazan had a great experience in fighting the Polovtsy, and they believed that the “Tatars” were such steppe dwellers. Therefore, we decided to withdraw the squads towards the enemy and give battle. Stepniaks usually could not withstand the blows of well-armed and trained squads. Yuri Ryazansky, his son Fedor Yuryevich, Oleg Ingvarevich Krasny, Roman Ingvarevich, and regiments of Muromsk princes performed with the squads. Yuri tried again to enter into negotiations with the enemy and sent an embassy with his son Fedor. However, Batu reasoned that the time for talking was over. Fedor was killed. A fierce battle took place on the border river Voronezh. Some princely squads were cut to the last, others, seeing that the larger army of the enemy surrounds them, tried to retreat. Oleg Ingvarevich was captured and was released only in 1252 year. Murom princes Yury Davydovich and Oleg Yuryevich died. After this battle, the “Tatars” quite easily captured the cities of the Ryazan land, left without defenders - Pronsk, Belgorod, Izheslavets, Voronezh, Dedoslavl.

Yuri Ryazansky with the remnants of the squad was able to break through and rode into his city, organizing a defense. Roman Ingvarevich took his warriors north to join up with the Vladimir army. However, the walls of even powerful fortresses were not an obstacle to the "Mongol-Tatars". The prisoners and auxiliary troops carried out engineering work, erecting a palisade to suppress attacks, filling the moat, preparing siege machines, and wall battering. In the army there was a contingent of engineers for siege work. Initially, the auxiliary troops went to the attack, which was not sorry, Bulgars, Bashkirs, Turkmen, etc. Their death was not considered a great loss. The large number of the army, allowed to arrange one attack after another, and the rows of defenders constantly concealed, and they were not replaced. On the sixth day of the siege, 21 December 1237, the year Ryazan fell. Prince Yuri fell in battle. From Ryazan, the army of Batu on the ice of Oka moved to Kolomna.

Meanwhile, in Chernigov, the Ryazan prince Ingvar was also denied help - at that time Chernigov fought with the regiments of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich for Kiev and Galich. The prince rode back. Ahead was the boyar Evpaty Kolovrat. The picture of completely destroyed and devastated Ryazan infuriated him, and he, with a small retinue of Ryazan and Chernigov volunteers, rushed to catch up with the enemy army. Along the way, his squad replenished with local residents. Yevpaty overtook the enemy in Suzdal and a sudden blow destroyed a number of rear units: "Yevpaty beat them so mercilessly that the swords dulled, and he took Tartar swords and sacked them." Baty, surprised by an unexpected strike, sent a selective detachment headed by the bogatyr Hostovrul against Evpaty of Furious. However, this detachment was also destroyed, and Hostovrul was struck down by the hand of Evpatiy Kolovrat. Russian warriors continued their strikes and the Ryazan knight “many of the famous bogatyrs Batyov broke here ...”. According to the legend, the Baty envoy, sent to the negotiations, asked Evpatiy - “What do you want?” And received an answer - “To die!”. Batu was forced to send the main forces around the arc, and only then the Russian squad was surrounded. Russian warriors fought so fiercely, exterminating the best hundreds of Batu, that according to legend, the "Tatars" had to use stone throwers. Batu appreciated strong opponents and respecting Evpatius Kolovrat’s desperate courage and military skills, left the last defenders of the body of the hero and allowed them to bury him.

Battle of Kolomna. The ruin of the Vladimir land

At this time, Yuri II was able to gather some strength and put his son Vsevolod and voevode Yeremey Glebovich at the head of them, he sent Ryazans to help. However, they were late, near Kolomna they were met only by the squad of Prince Roman Ingvarevich. Both princes were young and brave, in the Russian tradition there was an attack, not a defense outside the walls of the city. Therefore, princes Vsevolod, Roman and voevod Eremey Glebovich sent troops to the floodplain of the Moscow River on river ice and 1 in January 1238 of the year hit the enemy vanguard.

Russian heavy squads broke through the front of the enemy, many notable "Tatars" fell in battle, including the younger son of Genghis Khan Kyulkan. The battle was stubborn and lasted three days. Batu pulled the main forces, the Russian regiments were forced to retreat to the walls of the city and into the fortress itself. Prince Roman and voivode Yeremey laid down their heads in battle. Vsevolod with a small squad could break through from the environment and retreated to Vladimir.

Moscow’s turn came over Kolomna, it was defended by the younger son of Vladimir, Prince Yuri of Vladimir, and Voivode Philip Nyanka. 20 January 1238 after the 5 day siege, the fortress fell. Along Yauza and Klyazma, Batu's army moved to the capital of the grand duchy. Grand Duke Yuri II was in a difficult position. He sent all the available forces with Vsevolod to the people of Ryazan, to gather a new militia it took time, which was not there. The messengers to the people of Novgorod, and to Kiev to brother Yaroslav, were sent. But Novgorod and Kiev are far away, and the enemy regiments were moving rapidly. As a result, he left the sons of Vsevolod and Mstislav to protect the capital city, while he himself went to the Upper Volga to collect shelves. In general, the plan was not stupid. Such a maneuver could bring success if Vladimir withstood a long-term siege. At this time, the Grand Duke could gather fighters in the fist, militia from cities and graveyards, to receive reinforcements. There would be a serious threat to the rear of the Batu army, forcing him to lift the siege. However, for this it was necessary that Vladimir kept.

February 2 Vladimir appeared "Tatar" groups, showed the citizens of the captured prince Vladimir in Moscow. They did not immediately go to the assault, they surrounded the city with a tyn. Confusion and despair reigned in the city. Vsevolod and Mstislav, they wanted to go outside the walls and die "with honor", especially they were eager to fight, when Vladimir Yuryevich was killed in front of his mother and brothers, then they asked Bishop Mitrofan to get Schema in his hair with their wives and boyars. Voevoda Peter Oslyadyukovich dissuaded them from the attack, offered to defend themselves from the walls. In general, there was no single solid hand that would be able to organize the multitude of people crowded into the city. Someone went to the walls, getting ready to fight to the last, others only prayed and waited for the end.

The “Mongolian” command, having understood that there was no fierce battle here, as it was near the walls of Kolomna, was calm. Batu even sent part of the army to take Suzdal to replenish supplies. Suzdal fell quickly, from there they drove a big one full. Vladimir took on the same schedule as Ryazan. First built around the city tyn, then siege machines were collected, on the sixth day a general assault began. Vsevolod and Mstislav with personal squads tried to break through, but the ring was tight, everyone died (according to other data, they tried to negotiate and were killed in the Batu headquarters). February 7 "Tatars" broke into the city and lit it. Vladimir fell, the whole family of the Grand Duke died. According to another source, the enemy broke only through the first line of defense, in the city itself, battles were fought until February 10.

After the fall of Vladimir, Batu established himself in the thought that the resistance was broken. The army was divided, so it was easier to feed the soldiers and horses. One corps went along the Volga to Gorodets, Galich, the second made to Pereyaslavl, the third to Rostov. In total, 14 cities were occupied in February. Almost all of them were taken without a fight. People ran through the forests. Resistance was provided only by Pereyaslavl-Zalessky. In addition, the residents of Torzhok fought for two weeks, until the last moment its residents were waiting for help from Veliky Novgorod. The townspeople fought back attacks, made forays. But Novgorod, who had recently declared war for Torzhok to the Prince of Vladimir, now behaved differently. Collected Veche. We discussed the situation, argued and decided not to send the soldiers, to prepare Novgorod for defense. In addition, another question is whether the enemy will reach Veliky Novgorod. 5 March 1238, the heroic Torzhok fell.

The day before his fall, on March 4, in a battle on the River Sit, the troops of Yury Vsevolodovich were destroyed. He set up a camp in the Volga forests on the river. Sit (northwest of the Yaroslavl region). Brother Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich from Yuriev-Polsky, Yaroslavl Prince Vsevolod Konstantinovich, nephews of Vasilko and Vladimir Konstantinovich, lords of Rostov and Uglich came to his call. The corps of Burundi was able to defeat the Russian army with a sudden blow. Yuri Vsevolodovich and Vsevolod Konstantinovich fell in battle, Vasilko was captured and executed. Svyatoslav and Vladimir were able to leave.

It should be noted a very interesting fact. Batu's actions clearly contradict the myth of the "Tatar-Mongol" invasion. We were inspired from school, they love to show artistic works, like popular works of V. Yang, with this rich colors, that the cruel "Mongols" walked through Russia with fire and sword, destroying everything in their path. All Russians who were not killed were naturally enslaved and then sold. All Russian cities destroyed and burned. A sort of SS and Sonderkommando sample 13 century. However, if you take a closer look at the invasion. So you can pay attention to the fact that many cities survived. In particular, the rich and crowded Rostov, Yaroslavl, Uglich and other cities entered into negotiations with the "Mongols". In negotiations with those who allegedly destroyed everything in their path! They paid the required tribute, gave food, fodder, horses, people in carts, and survived. A very interesting situation would have happened if the Ryazan princes and Yuri Vsevolodovich were less proud.

Another fact about total "terror" from the "Tatar-Mongolian troops" - while moving back (Baty's army turned back, before reaching 100 versts Novgorod), Khan's soldiers stumbled upon the "evil city" - Kozelsk. Batu during the siege of Kozelsk forbade the ruin of the surrounding villages, on the contrary, he was merciful to the common people, receiving provisions and fodder. By the way, the siege of Kozelsk, as well as Torzhok, are also very interesting facts that violate the “slender” picture of the omnipotent, sweeping away all the “Mongolian” hordes. The capitals of the great principalities — Ryazan and Vladimir — took several days, and small towns, in fact villages with defensive fortifications, fought for weeks.



Very interesting and the behavior of the remaining princes in this terrible time. It seemed that at such a time - the invasion of unknown "Tatars", sweeping away everything in their path, they should forget their old quarrels, join forces, actively prepare for a battle with the invaders. “Get up is a huge country, get up for a mortal combat?” But no! All behaved as if the events in North-Eastern Russia do not concern them. The reaction was such as the usual princely strife, and not the invasion of an unknown enemy.

Moreover, there was no reaction to the invasion of the Batu army. Russian princes at this time continued to fight with enthusiasm with each other! It turns out that the “Tatar” invasion was not an event for them that went beyond the traditional policy of the region ?! Mikhail of Chernigov still firmly sat in Galicia. To withstand the onslaught of Yaroslav, he made an alliance with the Hungarian king White IV. Engaged the son of Rostislav with the daughter of the Hungarian monarch. Daniel, who actually embroiled Yuri II and Yaroslav into the war with the prince of Chernigov, turned out to be an ally of frivolous and unreliable. When he realized that the Vladimir regiments did not frighten the Chernigov Prince Michael and did not force him to cede Galich, Daniel entered negotiations with the enemy. The Volyn prince agreed to a separate peace, having received Przemysl for it. Now Mikhail of Chernigov could concentrate all his forces in order to recapture Kiev and Chernigov. In Galicia, he left Rostislav.

Yaroslav Vsevolodovich prepared to meet the troops of the Chernigov sovereign. However, here came the heavy and confused news that the "Tatars" destroy the city of Vladimir Russia. The messages were formidable and obscure, capable of overwhelming anyone. The mighty and crowded Vladimirskaya Rus collapsed in just a month. Jaroslav summoned the shelves and moved home. Mikhail of Chernigov triumphantly occupied Kiev. He took the title of Grand Duke of Kiev. Chernigov he handed over to cousin Mstislav Glebovich. His son Rostislav immediately spat on a contract with Daniel and seized Przemysl from him. But the quarrel with Daniel was a very reckless step. When Rostislav went on a campaign against the Lithuanian tribes, Daniel suddenly appeared at Galich. The common people, despite the resistance of the boyars, immediately recognized him as their prince and opened the gates. Znati nothing left, how to go to the prince to bow. He has forgiven the traitors again. Rostislav rushed to ask for help in Hungary.

To be continued ...
194 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +11
    11 February 2013 09: 15
    We were inspired from the school bench, they like to show artwork with rich colors, like the popular works of V. Yan, that cruel “Mongols” went through Russia with fire and sword, destroying everything in their path. All Russians who were not killed were naturally enslaved and then sold. All Russian cities were destroyed and burned. A sort of SS and Sonderkommandy sample of the 13th century. However, if you look closely at the invasion. Then you can pay attention to the fact that many cities have survived.
    In the last sentence - the whole point! While still in school, while reading Yan’s books (in an artistic sense, magnificent works), he wondered what sense it was to ruin and destroy everything with such fierceness, if a) it was still necessary to somehow feed the army and b) collect supposedly tribute, and which tribute ashes?
    1. Yoshkin Kot
      +1
      11 February 2013 12: 02
      the problem is that under the Uzbeks, the Horde became different, and then the raids were accompanied by total robberies and total sweeps of the population, the old and small were killed, the able-bodied were stolen for sale in slavery (Islam is the religion of the world, well), and newer memories overlapped with more ancient events
      1. Guun
        -1
        11 February 2013 13: 53
        In general, Islam is not a religion of peace and the first Muslims do not attack. Here is an example of Saladin, who didn’t attack 30 churches with his 000 army, while Rene de Chanion didn’t slaughter pilgrims. and old people). And will the Christians be so inclined that they loved everyone so much that they decided to cut out everything with the words of an all-expanding love with the words God recognizes his own? How do Christians love everyone, even those who killed Christ?

        Generally in Islam, kill children, women and the elderly to kill HARAM. And those who do this are wicked or illiterate people who from Islam know only the name and that's it.

        The Mongols slaughtered only those who resisted so that others had something to think about. Otrar in Kazakhstan is an example of this.
        1. avt
          +2
          11 February 2013 14: 35
          Quote: Guun
          In general, Islam is the religion of the world and the first Muslims do not attack.

          But with the religion of the Mongols is generally complete ......! They are shamanists with tambourines, then they say no, their own religion was -bon. On like Mithraism, well, like fire-worshipers -Zoroastrians, that is, monotheists. Well, how do you like the yellow crusade that the Mamluks and the Crusaders fought off together? Look for a very interesting fact.
        2. +5
          11 February 2013 15: 07
          And the Mongols of the times of Batu are not Muslims at all. you got something wrong.
          1. -1
            12 February 2013 01: 53
            Parabelum,
            TarTara - worshiped the solar gods Tara and Tarh Godinovich.
        3. +3
          11 February 2013 17: 54
          Uh-huh .. Arabs in the 7-8 centuries, oh, how peace was carried to everyone along with the "religion of peace" on their spears from Spain to Central Asia inclusive
        4. Frigate
          +3
          11 February 2013 17: 59
          Quote: Guun
          In general, Islam is not a religion of peace and the first Muslims do not attack. Here is an example of Saladin, who didn’t attack 30 churches with his 000 army, while Rene de Chanion didn’t slaughter pilgrims. and old people). And will the Christians be so inclined that they loved everyone so much that they decided to cut out everything with the words of an all-expanding love with the words God recognizes his own? How do Christians love everyone, even those who killed Christ?

          Generally in Islam, kill children, women and the elderly to kill HARAM. And those who do this are wicked or illiterate people who from Islam know only the name and that's it.

          The Mongols slaughtered only those who resisted so that others had something to think about. Otrar in Kazakhstan is an example of this.

          Salahaddin was Saladin primarily due to the fact that he is a Kurd, honest, proud, warlike Kurd, nothing to do with Islam
        5. -1
          17 February 2013 19: 33
          Islam in the Golden Horde was adopted by the khan of Uzbekistan in the XIV century, while the Mongols were pagans who lived and fought along the Great Yass of Genghis Khan.
    2. +2
      11 February 2013 16: 01
      Prometey

      Quote: Prometey
      Back at school, reading Jan’s books


      Reread these books carefully now, as I understand it, after many years many of them have been forgotten.

      Quote: Prometey
      a) still had to somehow feed the army


      I will tell you the terrible:
      - "feed" --- the army is foraging from villages and villages, food supplies in the Middle Ages were made only for fortresses in case of a siege, and food was brought into the cities in the form of rent-tribute and as an object of trade. The number of urban residents began to more or less seriously prevail over the number of rural residents only in the last 50-70 years.


      Quote: Prometey
      b) collect alleged tribute, and what tribute from the ashes?


      in order to collect tribute, you have to win - "torture" your opponent, or do you think that it is possible, after standing under the locked city walls, to come for tribute next year?
      The actual destruction of cities was a method of intimidation; for subsequent cities and countries, the assault and destruction of Otrar had a decisive role in the fate of Samarkand.


      Quote: Prometey
      A sort of SS and Sonderkommandy sample of the 13th century.


      the cruelty of the assailants is directly proportional to the determination of the defenders. The fate of Russian cities is associated with fierce resistance, which caused great losses among the attackers - Ryazan, Torzhok, Kozelsk and so on.


      Quote: Prometey
      Then you can pay attention to the fact that many cities have survived.


      please, please list the surviving Russian cities, under whose walls the Mongol-Tatars appeared.


      Quote: Prometey
      and what tribute from the ashes?


      Remember after how many years the ruined and destroyed cities were rebuilt again.
      By the way, I recommend paying attention to how many times during the attack Moscow was burned to the ground and how quickly it was restored.
      1. +2
        11 February 2013 17: 56
        But Old Ryazan didn’t really come to life again .. ((
        1. 0
          11 February 2013 19: 33
          Quote: Mairos
          But Old Ryazan didn’t really come to life again .. ((


          there is such a thing.
      2. buga1979
        0
        11 February 2013 21: 43
        a year later Moscow was already rebuilt
        1. dedroid71
          -4
          11 February 2013 23: 08
          What is Moscow like in 1237? The wooden fortress is harbor.
          Also write that, they say, it was not built right away. And Vladimir, for example, a herak, opa, and built up.
        2. -1
          11 February 2013 23: 25
          Quote: buga1979
          a year later Moscow was already rebuilt


          Yes, of course, do not share the link? Otkel such firewood.
      3. +2
        12 February 2013 11: 11
        Quote: Karlsonn
        Reread these books carefully now, as I understand it, after many years many of them have been forgotten.

        For what? What will I find there new?
        Quote: Karlsonn
        "feeding" --- the army fodder from villages and villages, food supplies in the Middle Ages were made only for fortresses in case of siege, and food was brought into the cities in the form of tribute and as an object of trade. The number of urban residents began to more or less seriously prevail over the number of rural residents only in the last 50-70 years.

        The army is foraging in all the surrounding alleys; in fact, you have not revealed anything new to me. The fact that the Middle Ages is 90% of the population living in villages, so it means that the destruction of a dozen towns could not bring much damage to the economy, especially since wooden structures are not as expensive as stone ones, are they?
        All other questions to the author of the article, including about sonderkommandy.
    3. Frigate
      0
      11 February 2013 17: 44
      Quote: Prometey
      We were inspired from the school bench, they like to show artwork with rich colors, like the popular works of V. Yan, that cruel “Mongols” went through Russia with fire and sword, destroying everything in their path. All Russians who were not killed were naturally enslaved and then sold. All Russian cities were destroyed and burned. A sort of SS and Sonderkommandy sample of the 13th century. However, if you look closely at the invasion. Then you can pay attention to the fact that many cities have survived.
      In the last sentence - the whole point! While still in school, while reading Yan’s books (in an artistic sense, magnificent works), he wondered what sense it was to ruin and destroy everything with such fierceness, if a) it was still necessary to somehow feed the army and b) collect supposedly tribute, and which tribute ashes?

      Now, you’re right, there’s no sense when these brutal barbarians and all that is said. I think it was for the most part peaceful consolidation, the armies were destroyed, but the people were left, the political system, religion, the worldview of the captured peoples were more or less preserved. The conquests of Genghis Khan are by no means comparable with the conquests of England (WB), the Russian Empire, where everything was anointed, the Ottoman Empire, where it was Muslimized or in general by any empires. Still such scholars as Ershov write that the Mongols slaughtered all Russians a little more than completely.
    4. +5
      11 February 2013 18: 28
      Quote: Prometey
      A sort of SS and Sonderkommandy sample of the 13th century. However, if you look closely at the invasion. Then you can pay attention to the fact that many cities have survived.

      So rebuild the wooden city for a short time.
      If at all you doubt the cruelty of the Mongols, visit the local history museum in Yaroslavl, for example. Check out the results of recent excavations of huge mass graves of the 13th century and the conclusions of forensic experts. May insight come ...
      1. 0
        12 February 2013 12: 01
        nerd.su
        How huge? And it’s written on the bones that they are from the 13th century?
        1. +2
          12 February 2013 12: 20
          Quote: Prometey
          How huge?

          sufficient. I don’t remember the numbers, but these are sanitary burials. That is, there were so many killed that the survivors could not bury them as expected, we can talk about at least the death of more than half of the inhabitants. Men, women, children with traces of violent death (typical for cold weapons damage).
          Quote: Prometey
          And it’s written on the bones that they are from the 13th century?

          What bones do not usually write dates on smile And what does the Fomenko mathematical method arouse in you more confidence than age determination methods?
    5. YuDDP
      -1
      12 February 2013 00: 36
      standard question about horses: there isn’t enough forage for such a horse with swap horses
      standard answer: you can not write, do not write
      second standard answer: read the new chronology. Fomenko and Nosovsky have already explained everything with arguments
      1. Yoshkin Kot
        -3
        12 February 2013 12: 35
        the standard answer is what did peasants feed cattle in winter? there are a couple of cows and horses for a family? a dozen lambs? a hundred chickens?
        1. +1
          12 February 2013 19: 59
          So much cattle in the village was not corny due to the fact that you can’t store a lot of feed manually. One horse (not in every family), a couple of goats, several chickens. All. This is a wealthy family; most did not even have one.
          Try to mow hay for one horse with a simple scythe, bring it without a tractor.
          1. 0
            13 February 2013 07: 52
            Quote: Setrac
            So much cattle in the village was not corny due to the fact that you can’t store a lot of feed manually.

            But the families were large, and without a cow they could not feed a large family. There was no internet and no television to distract from work. So they were prepared. And why do you need to carry everything at once, stand in stacks, and take it slowly in winter, in winter time fellow how much.
          2. 0
            13 February 2013 23: 26
            Setrac,
            Do not confuse peasants of 12-13 centuries with serfs, villages of that time were small. 5-10 yards, but family according to current concepts, they were huge, in one yard there were up to a dozen adult men (15-40 years old) at least 5 horses and 5-10 heads of cows and bulls, fifty sheep and up to a dozen pigs, they didn’t keep a lot of chickens, they raised geese, for the winter they were slaughtered, smoked or frozen, the whole family went out to hay, from small to large, such a village could contain (wait) up to a hundred soldiers with horses hi long time
    6. avreli
      0
      12 February 2013 12: 15
      All Russian cities were destroyed and burned ... However, if you take a closer look at the invasion. Then you can pay attention to the fact that many cities have survived.

      It is not clear what the dispute is about, dear (there are many more posts). How did cities ruin so quickly?
      So this is not surprising. For in the XIII century they were not much better fortified than the camps of the Romans. In fact, these were the bases of troops (squads) whose main purpose is field battles. And if it didn’t work out in the field, then the cities were good enough to sit out the very sloppy raid.
      Fortification was wretched - that materials, that the shelling sector.
      In order not to be limited to declarations, I will illustrate.
      It’s too lazy to look for pictures for a long time, but, for example, local history installations. I believe no one will suspect the locals of wanting to belittle the achievements of their ancestors.
      So (pictures links, so as not to overload the post).
      The capture of Ryazan.
      Overall plan:
      http://www.regionryazan.ru/history/shturm_ryazani.jpg
      Larger:
      http://www.regionryazan.ru/history/shturm-b.jpg
      What do we see? Shaft and log structure of the floor and a half.
      The enemy, however, possessed siege equipment.
      The capture of Vladimir.
      http://www.tomovl.ru/komi/images/vladimir3.jpg
      Larger:
      http://100чудес.рф/img/058/image04.jpg
      The same picture.
      The capture of Kozelsk.
      Oopsss ...
      As far as I remember, Kozelsk in the old days was considered almost the most modern fortress - a river on both sides, competent fortification with towers.
      And here is the picture.
      http://data4.gallery.ru/albums/gallery/10663-6a9a5-33432362-m549x500.jpg
      And the result - the besiegers were stuck for a long time.
      But the tsunarefs did not go to the north-west, for they would specifically rake there. The fortifications of Novgorod in those days looked like now Pskov.
      http://www.pravoslavie.ru/sas/image/100516/51641.p.jpg
      ...
      And thanks to the Kazakhs for a reminder of participating in the battle campaign.
      Knowing not twenty years ago the character went bad - they always have been.
      So when we return, do not be offended ...
      1. Marek Rozny
        0
        13 February 2013 21: 24
        Quote: avreli
        And thanks to the Kazakhs for a reminder of participating in the battle campaign.
        Knowing not twenty years ago the character went bad - they always have been.
        So when we return, do not be offended ...

        For God's sake. If you come as a normal guest, like most Russians, we will feed you. And if you come to sit in front of the "Asians" - you will get another treat.
    7. +1
      13 February 2013 00: 50
      “And Evpatiy beat them so mercilessly that the swords were dulled, and he took the Tatar swords and chopped them” Knead a lot of mincemeat. Honor and Glory to such heroes!
      1. dedroid71
        0
        20 February 2013 23: 31
        I welcome on this thread all those who have mined me!
        Maybe share, for what?
  2. avt
    +16
    11 February 2013 09: 55
    From historians, yoke singers, one can never get answers to a few simple questions. As a 300000 thousandth horse-drawn army with a convoy in the winter generally survived. After all, this is a herd of a MILLION horses! Ever and somewhere such armies gathered? What did the horses eat? Anyone who has seen a live horse will not find the answer to this question, well, except for a historian like Pivovarov. The second question is simpler - how did they ride in the forests in the winter, in hundreds of thousands? Here they gather historians and arrange a winter run for them, along the forests. You can object a cavalry corps to the Patriotic War. I agree, but the scale of the connections is not comparable, the whole horde would have died from a single nurse. Well and yet, they famously took large cities and stood near Kozelsk. How so? There that machine guns fought off them and the cartridges ran out? Well, at least something like this.
    1. Fox
      +7
      11 February 2013 10: 05
      Quote: avt
      From historians, yoke singers, you can never get answers

      what are the answers!? what have they come up with and develop. the whole history of the yoke is concocted around the ARTISTIC work of Jan. an analogue of modernity is the notorious Holocaust, the GULAG ... but what is it, how are Libya and Syria covered? in our country, bandits are called "rebels" and " opposition".
      1. Yoshkin Kot
        -2
        11 February 2013 12: 04
        n-dya, one froze stupidity, and how much without thinking it picked it up!
    2. +5
      11 February 2013 10: 09
      Quote: avt
      As a 300000 thousandth horse-drawn army with a convoy in the winter generally survived. After all, this is a herd of a MILLION horses!

      Now I don’t remember where I read that the army consisted of 50 thousand, in other sources other data. Historians themselves do not know how much to write the number. Thank you for the article, and plus, I look forward to continuing.
      1. Yoshkin Kot
        0
        11 February 2013 12: 05
        n-dya, 2 tumens came out, along the way they mobilized in the steppe, among the peoples who had been part of the horde for 20 years
      2. avt
        +3
        11 February 2013 14: 12
        Quote: Karpv
        Now I don’t remember where I read that the army consisted of 50 thousand, in other sources other data. Historians themselves do not know how much to write the number. Thank you for the article, and plus, I look forward to continuing.

        Yeah, like the figure is closer to the truth and not so offensive. But only anyone familiar with the rear support of troops will count and say -10 well, a maximum of 15 thousand, which is quite comparable with the subsequent massive use of large cavalry formations. But then this is not IGO, but something else.
        1. +2
          11 February 2013 17: 59
          Do not tell my slippers. Which are 10-15 thousand. When these 10 thousand were burned in 1240 Kiev, there were up to 50 thousand people there. How do you imagine the assault on Kiev with such forces?
          1. avt
            +1
            11 February 2013 19: 24
            Quote: Mairos
            Do not tell my slippers. Which are 10-15 thousand. When these 10 thousand were burned in 1240 Kiev, there were up to 50 thousand people there. How do you imagine the assault on Kiev with such forces?

            And I will not . When you look at the slippers, look at the text of the article and the picture. I actually talked about the winter campaign, there on the arrows look at the dates.
          2. +2
            11 February 2013 19: 45
            Quote: Mairos
            Which are 10-15 thousand. When these 10 thousand were burned in 1240 Kiev, there were up to 50 thousand people there.

            Ten thousand armed soldiers will EASILY "build" and one hundred thousand population.
            Well, how and by whom Kiev was stormed - there is no data here. The article says that they used prisoners and adherents, which is quite possible and reasonable. Plus, the storming officers had good "engineering technology" and siege training (throwing and battering guns, etc.). All sources speak about it.
            Nobody drove the "Orcs" to the walls, as in the movies. They made a tunnel, demolished the wall, the gate - and entered the city. And then the picture is sad for the civilian population. Well, with the laws of military discipline existing in the Batu army
            one of his warriors cost many simply armed resistance. IMHO.
            1. Marek Rozny
              -2
              11 February 2013 20: 02
              In general, it is stupid to compare the fighting qualities of the average Russian of that time and the ordinary steppe. In Russia, the professional military was a limited layer - the prince's squad. The rest were ordinary people without military training and experience.
              And now compare the steppe mentality in which EVERY man was obliged to be a professional war. The Turks and Mongols did not have men at all who did not have weapons. Generally. Categorically. Except for the disabled and infirm. Since childhood, ALL boys trained in endless exercises on a military theme and got used to horse-riding lifestyle.
              In peacetime, they honed military skills in bloodless barymths, stealing cattle from neighbors. This is not for the purpose of profit (livestock always have their roof above the steppe), and not with the goal of dispelling boredom, in the barmyt, teenagers learned the basics of reconnaissance, attack, retreat. It was impossible to kill categorically - after all, relatives. For the death that happened - the guilty family bore a serious punishment, which was not disputed by all the laws of Stepnyak.
              But the main thing is that all men were obliged to regularly undergo "military field training" annually in the form of a round-up hunt. The steppe inhabitants have kept reserved places since ancient times. Hunting there without an order from the khan attracted the death penalty. But when the time for the "khan hunt" came, all the subordinate men turned into a full-fledged army. Hunting among the steppe inhabitants in this case was a war game with all the attributes of hostilities - read how the "khan hunts" were conducted - this is an absolute copy of military operations (without sieging buildings and false retreats), in which there was a clear military-official hierarchy, tactical tasks, flank maneuvers and summing up with punishments for unlucky or inept participants in the action. Thanks to this "hunt" those who in wartime became "officers" or "generals" were selected, receiving under their command tens, hundreds, thousands or tumens of warriors.
              In other words, most of the inhabitants of Russia of the 13th century are peasants or artisans, and prof.voynov - grains. And the steppe inhabitants are really without exception people who have undergone military training. It is not surprising that in the 13th century (and not only then) the small steppe inhabitants completely defeated absolutely all the armies of the world of Eurasia, whether in the East or the West.
              1. +2
                12 February 2013 12: 38
                Marek rozny
                Well, if the steppe men were professional warriors like that, then the neighbors near them simply would not have a chance not only to establish states, but simply to survive. You live the legends of the evil nomad that were composed by pre-revolutionary historians. As a result, these tales of the elusive and invincible nomadic centaurs even migrated to scientific monographs. Later, L. Gumilyov quite clearly and reasonably substantiated that the nomadic herders could survive only through peaceful existence with settled peoples. For most of his life, the nomad was preoccupied with the preservation of his herds and pastures. Only an extraordinary event, for example, a mass death of cattle, could make him go on a military campaign. And even then, the steppe men were raiding very reluctantly, having little chance of success. They could only count on speed until the enemy gathered an army.
                What could contrast the medieval steppe in the field against an organized horse-drawn army? Their weapons and armor were clearly not of the level that was forged in the cities (let archaeologists or historians show us the Mongolian medieval mines or forges I would really like to see). Also, the steppe inhabitants did not know how to storm the walls of cities, because in the steppe, where there was nothing other than yurts, no one taught them this.
            2. avt
              +1
              11 February 2013 20: 53
              Quote: ikrut
              Ten thousand armed soldiers will EASILY "build" and one hundred thousand population.

              And if we take into account the number of professional fighters and just the male population who died in internecine wars, and even from the 50000 inhabitants we subtract children, infirm old men of both sexes, even taking into account women, the picture for Kiev is not encouraging.
              1. 0
                12 February 2013 20: 03
                100000 people will not provide 10000 soldiers.
    3. +3
      11 February 2013 11: 22
      Quote: avt
      Well and still, they famously took large cities and stood near Kozelsk. How so? There that machine guns fought off them and the cartridges ran out?

      It’s just that the Mongols ended their shells for the MLRS, with which they so famously destroyed any fortification laughing
      1. Yoshkin Kot
        -1
        11 February 2013 12: 16
        and their army was melting along the way, storming the cities was no easy matter, decent losses, it was clear that the steppe militia had driven ahead of them, but still
    4. Yoshkin Kot
      0
      11 February 2013 12: 03
      from aphids, it easily survived, I want to remind you that they actually always lived in this climatic zone! and it’s not worthwhile to approach those events with modern standards, and the horses were different, much less combatant and much more enduring
      1. avt
        +4
        11 February 2013 14: 20
        Quote: Yoshkin Cat
        from aphids, it easily survived, I want to remind you that they actually always lived in this climatic zone! and it’s not worthwhile to approach those events with modern standards, and the horses were different, much less combatant and much more enduring

        Well, that's what I'm talking about! laughing Well, think, HOW THE STEPPE miracle heroes famously fought in the FORESTS ?! On the horses I’ll say - you can tell stories about a super Mongolian horse that feeds with roots from under the snow, and then passes many kilometers in the saddle and even takes part in battles. Isn't it funny yourself? And if you look, find out that the Mongols preferred Turkmen horses. That's when hunting to listen to fairy tales and watching new-dimensional films will definitely not be hunting.
        1. Marek Rozny
          +2
          11 February 2013 15: 41
          Quote: avt
          then many kilometers of marching under the saddle takes place and even participates in battles. Isn't it funny yourself?

          On the "Mongol" steppe stunted hardy horses, not only the Horde marched along and across Eurasia, but the Red Army also reached Berlin on them. Check out materials about horses during the Second World War.
          1. avt
            +1
            11 February 2013 16: 40
            ----- [quote = Marek Rozny] On the "Mongolian" steppe stunted hardy horses, not only the Horde marched along and across Eurasia, but the Red Army reached Berlin on them. Look at materials about horses during the Second World War. [/ Quote] ----------------
            Yeah, and ate pasture. All the same, it’s better to read the whole comment, and not pull out only what you like -----------------------------. [Quote = Guun] In winter nomads rarely fought, the beginning of spring then there was a horde. In winter, the army blossomed home for the winter. Horses dig food from under the snow with hooves, if there was snow, it melted and everything is covered with ice, then immediately JUT (a massive death of cattle that always happens in the steppe in winter). The Mongols had hardy horses but were small in stature, and with hooves in the woods it was impossible to dig a feed for themselves with a huge herd; the Mongols had 3-4 horses for each war. If somewhere jute, then all the nomads from this place migrated. Nomads sit in such a horde in winter at home ------------- I agree with this, as it will be more solid and closer to the topic.
            1. Marek Rozny
              +7
              11 February 2013 16: 56
              Auth
              in your post nonsense is written. I will explain:
              1) Naturally, the steppes are more accustomed to fighting in an open field, where they have implemented the proven practice of warfare. However, in the forest, the steppe fought quite effectively, achieving victory by shelling the enemy with bows on forest roads or clearings, where skirmishes usually happened.
              2) Because Steppe horse breeds (Kazakh, Mongolian, Yakut, Bashkir) are extremely hardy, unpretentious, withstand extreme frosts (usual for their range), and also adapted to independently obtain food (unless, of course, the snow cover is acceptable). If it was impossible to get food from under the snow for some reason, the steppe inhabitants strained the Russian cities to give out fodder, which was usually performed by the Russians without question. If the Russians began to vomit, and in a rude manner, like the Ryazanians, the steppe inhabitants, without thinking twice, took it by force.
              3) What the hell is that about the Mongols' preference for Turkmen horses? Yes, the Akhal-Teke is a beautiful horse, but it is not for the harsh military conditions. An Akhal-Teke is a Rolls-Royce for a Khan or Sultan, hundreds of simple "Mongolians" could be given for such a good horse. However, not a single steppe dweller would have thought of replacing steppe horses in the army with Turkmen ones. It's just dumb. On Akhal-Teke horses, not a single army of steppe dwellers will be able to achieve victory. Or at least really make a march in combat conditions.
              1. Frigate
                +1
                11 February 2013 18: 02
                Quote: Marek Rozny
                1) Naturally, the steppes are more accustomed to fighting in an open field, where they have implemented the proven practice of warfare. However, in the forest, the steppe fought quite effectively, achieving victory by shelling the enemy with bows on forest roads or clearings, where skirmishes usually happened.
                2) Because Steppe horse breeds (Kazakh, Mongolian, Yakut, Bashkir) are extremely hardy, unpretentious, withstand extreme frosts (usual for their range), and also adapted to independently obtain food (unless, of course, the snow cover is acceptable). If it was impossible to get food from under the snow for some reason, the steppe inhabitants strained the Russian cities to give out fodder, which was usually performed by the Russians without question. If the Russians began to vomit, and in a rude manner, like the Ryazanians, the steppe inhabitants, without thinking twice, took it by force.
                3) What the hell is that about the Mongols' preference for Turkmen horses? Yes, the Akhal-Teke is a beautiful horse, but it is not for the harsh military conditions. An Akhal-Teke is a Rolls-Royce for a Khan or Sultan, hundreds of simple "Mongolians" could be given for such a good horse. However, not a single steppe dweller would have thought of replacing steppe horses in the army with Turkmen ones. It's just dumb. On Akhal-Teke horses, not a single army of steppe dwellers will be able to achieve victory. Or at least really make a march in combat conditions.

                totally agree
              2. +3
                11 February 2013 19: 55
                Quote: Marek Rozny
                1) Naturally, the steppes are more accustomed to fighting in an open field, where they have implemented the proven practice of warfare. However, in the forest, the steppe fought quite effectively, achieving victory by shelling the enemy with bows on forest roads or clearings, where skirmishes usually happened.
                2) Because Steppe horse breeds (Kazakh, Mongolian, Yakut, Bashkir) are extremely hardy, unpretentious, withstand extreme frosts (usual for their range), and also adapted to independently obtain food (unless, of course, the snow cover is acceptable). If it was impossible to get food from under the snow for some reason, the steppe inhabitants strained the Russian cities to give out fodder, which was usually performed by the Russians without question. If the Russians began to vomit, and in a rude manner, like the Ryazanians, the steppe inhabitants, without thinking twice, took it by force.
                3) What the hell is that about the Mongols' preference for Turkmen horses? Yes, the Akhal-Teke is a beautiful horse, but it is not for the harsh military conditions. An Akhal-Teke is a Rolls-Royce for a Khan or Sultan, hundreds of simple "Mongolians" could be given for such a good horse. However, not a single steppe dweller would have thought of replacing steppe horses in the army with Turkmen ones. It's just dumb. On Akhal-Teke horses, not a single army of steppe dwellers will be able to achieve victory. Or at least really make a march in combat conditions.

                You are absolutely right. You "+". Your opponent is a pure theoretician who has never seen a horse up close. All the more so "Mongolian".
          2. Frigate
            +1
            11 February 2013 18: 01
            Quote: Marek Rozny
            On the "Mongol" steppe stunted hardy horses, not only the Horde marched along and across Eurasia, but the Red Army also reached Berlin on them. Check out materials about horses during the Second World War.

            Test
        2. +3
          11 February 2013 17: 11
          avt

          Quote: avt
          Well, think, HOW THE STEPPE miracle heroes famously fought in the FORESTS ?!


          Dear stop shaming stop
          on the picture :

          Mongolia, Red Gate to the gorge on the way to Ulagan.


          this is firstly.

          secondly --- in the Horde, besides the Mongols, there were all sorts of them.

          thirdly, the Mongols had experience of conducting military operations in forests and mountains at this moment bully Beijing for example surrendered in 1215.

          pictured is the neighborhood of Beijing


          photographed unfortunately not me crying , go there as follows:
          - Beijing,
          - Dong Zhi Men subway station,
          - bus station, bus 916 go to Huiarou (about 1 hour 40 minutes),
          - taxi, cheap, fast and cheerful (immediately agree with him to go back!),
          - ticket office of the funicular and up fellow
          it was an advertisement feel




          Quote: avt
          That's when hunting to listen to fairy tales and watching new-dimensional films will definitely not be hunting

          laughing
        3. +5
          11 February 2013 19: 52
          Quote: avt
          Mongols preferred Turkmen horses

          And now, for some reason, Mongolian horses are very much appreciated by hunters and travelers, but ordinary "horses" are not held in high esteem there.
          I am on "Mongolian" horses for more than a dozen kilometers. I drove through the Sayan Mountains. Taiga, swamps, mountains, rivers. I saw all the "fairy tales" with my own eyes. And how the horse eats. And how much passes in a day with a load of 80 kg. Etc.
          Turkmen horses are good in deserts, for short raids, and she simply will not go through the forest and swamp.
        4. Yoshkin Kot
          +1
          12 February 2013 12: 37
          visit the Baikal region and ask the locals how they live
      2. +4
        11 February 2013 18: 01
        I served in Mongolia and saw that their horses were eating, ours would die, and they would be naught, dry grass sticking out from under the snow ..
        1. Marek Rozny
          +7
          11 February 2013 18: 17
          Quote: Mairos
          I served in Mongolia and saw that their horses were eating, ours would die, and they would be naught, dry grass sticking out from under the snow ..

          I just want to add that in spite of the fact that steppe horses can eat old grass, but a horse never eat garbage, which can damage their health, like dogs or cows can do. One of the reasons why the steppe inhabitants consider horses to be the most intelligent animals is that the horse does not eat poison or really useless food. In this regard, their head fumbles. Therefore, horse meat in steppe inhabitants is considered the cleanest and safest food (especially since the horse is extremely rarely sick with diseases dangerous to humans). Even raw horse meat is usually safe food. And in her blood, too, there are a lot of all sorts of usefulness, though now Kazakhs do not consume blood, now we have Islam. Earlier, drinking horse blood was common.
    5. +3
      11 February 2013 12: 41
      Here are a couple of questions I’ll ask. What not only horses ate? Who and what made them horseshoes, arrowheads, etc., and WHERE? Well, it’s no secret that the great Roman Empire left material traces of existence after itself. And what did the Tataromongol empire leave behind? Steppe and steppe circle. I read that there were attempts, searched, and did not find. How is that?
      1. +4
        11 February 2013 13: 31
        How many of you were in the Kaluga region?
        Kozelsk is not so far from Orel.
        Had to ride on the local roads.
        For the 21st century ... it's not expensive. It’s easier and more comfortable for the car to drive around the field.
        And the 13th century?
        Yes, these .. mythical Mongols searched for Kozelsk - 1,5 months. Through the snow to him .. crawled to say - give 10 percent - you will remain alive.
        ...
        Interesting Alexander Samsonov writes ....
        Read, read .. huh, I think TI is natural. Okay.
        And the last paragraph - BA A - and unobtrusive, such a reference - to alternative options.
        ...
        "... the best time to hit found winter, when it will be possible, following the example of the Russians, to move along the beds of frozen rivers. .. "
        Yes, yes, listen ... The Russian winter was also considered the best time to strike - the Poles of the 16th years, the Livonian Order of 1242, Napoleon 1812, Hitler 1941.
        .. Stamps - don't you notice?
        1. lechatormosis
          +3
          11 February 2013 13: 58
          Yes you are right
          You can only navigate through the snow in winter in RUSSIA on the rolled roads in those days and you should try to get to Ryazan or Smolensk with a mass of riders of some 10 goals. Only the movie
          1. Marek Rozny
            +6
            11 February 2013 15: 47
            Quote: lehatormoz
            You can only move on snow in the winter of RUSSIA on rolled roads in those days, they weren’t dead and try to go to Ryazan or Smolensk with a mass of horsemen

            Apparently, you think that snow only occurs in Russia))))) In the steppe hordes - present-day Kazakhstan and Mongolia, more snow falls in winter than in the European part of Russia.
            Ulan Bator is generally considered the coldest capital in the world. In second place in this "rating" is Astana. So the snow and winter in general in Ryazan or Smolensk were even more comfortable for the steppe inhabitants than at home))))
            1. sams
              +3
              11 February 2013 17: 03
              Quote: Marek Rozny
              In the steppe hordes - present-day Kazakhstan and Mongolia, more snow falls in winter than in the European part of Russia.

              I do not know how in Kazakhstan, but in the steppe regions of Mongolia there is little rainfall. If snow does occur, then due to the dry air and high solar activity (constantly sunny weather), it evaporates and is blown away very quickly by the wind. As a rule, hills in winter are bare, without snow, or with a minimum cover of 3-5 cm. Perhaps, in some foothill areas, the situation with precipitation is different.
              1. Marek Rozny
                +2
                11 February 2013 17: 19
                Compared to Kazakhstan, there is less snow in Mongolia, but long-term frosts in winter of -45 and higher are normal. Plus, it should be borne in mind that the bulk of the Horde troops came from the Kazakh steppes, not the Mongol ones. From the territory of modern Mongolia in the 13th century, only the Naiman, Kerey, Kiyat families left Genghis Khan. And the remaining steppe inhabitants - Kipchaks, Argyns, Uysuns, Jalayirs and others - at the beginning of the 13th century have long lived on the territory of modern Kazakhstan.
                1. ENESEI
                  -1
                  12 February 2013 00: 20
                  My aunt in the 60s lived in the city of Dezkazgan, this is not far from Baikonur, and so she told me that in stores in their city she met price tags with the inscription "meat of a dead sheep". Probably during the time they did not bring food, so they died.
                  1. Marek Rozny
                    +1
                    12 February 2013 00: 48
                    Rave. In Soviet trade, there could not be such a price tag.
                    1. ENESEI
                      0
                      13 February 2013 00: 13
                      In the 60s of the last century, there was a very harsh organization called OBKHSS, which gave real terms for various machinations, and a "tower" could be awarded for embezzlement of more than 10 rubles. So, either hollow the frozen ground and bury the dead animals, or try to somehow sell it for a cheap price. It’s only now, under the guise of meat, they “drink” soy, but then everything was not commensurably stricter with this.
              2. +2
                11 February 2013 17: 43
                sams

                Quote: sams
                but in the steppe regions of Mongolia there is little rainfall. If snow does occur, then due to the dry air and high solar activity (constantly sunny weather), it evaporates and is blown away very quickly by the wind.


                What ignorance!
                Have you ever been to Mongolia yourself?


                Quote: sams
                As a rule, hills in winter are bare, without snow, or with a minimum cover of 3-5 cm.


                hug and cry ... crying

                google as they say to help! good
                1. sams
                  0
                  11 February 2013 19: 00
                  Mongolian steppe in winter

                  1. Marek Rozny
                    +1
                    11 February 2013 19: 43
                    and there is no photo of this January winter in Mongolia? Especially Inner Mongolia, which is now in the PRC. This year, the Mongols are generally buried in the snow.
                  2. +3
                    11 February 2013 20: 51
                    Quote: sams
                    Mongolian steppe in winter


                    I want you to upload today's photos of Kiev, we have +2 now fellow it is raining and snowing, and on the basis of this I will say that the stories are about frozen Germans in 1941 and Swedes in the 17th lie?
              3. +1
                11 February 2013 19: 46
                If there is a lot of snow (by Mongolian standards), then in Mongolia there is a death, which happened in 2012, i.e. in our time.
                1. Marek Rozny
                  +2
                  11 February 2013 20: 07
                  any steppe dweller knows this. only even "a lot of snow" is not fatal for the steppe herds. I say this as a Kazakh, whose ancestral aul brings snow to the roof every year. In the old days, many horses died, but there were always enough left alive. Jute is a grief, but not a catastrophe of a universal scale.
                  So to frighten the steppe dweller and his horse in Ryazan winter is a stupid thing. Not a resort, kanesh, but certainly not "General Winter" for the Horde.
              4. +1
                12 February 2013 08: 14
                I lived in Mongolia in Ulan Bator for 6 years, I will say so there was enough snow there. In winter, we went skiing, playing hockey. In Mongolia, the presence of snow is highly dependent on the area. But they never complained about the lack of snow.
            2. +4
              11 February 2013 18: 04
              Quote: Marek Rozny
              In the steppe hordes - present-day Kazakhstan and Mongolia, more snow falls in winter than in the European part of Russia.

              Why, there is even permafrost in Mongolia. And it’s as if to the south of Moscow. And even Kiev ... But those who poorly studied geography are still confident that the harshest winter in European Russia :)) Out of the ignorant, a glorious galaxy of alternativeists grows :) And it’s unlikely for us will be able to convince them ...
              Although about "winter in Ryazan is more comfortable" is a question related to unusual conditions ... But in general, the forest zone in winter is more favorable for life than the steppe ... There is a pile of firewood, floodplain meadows, although less, but there is more grass on them, plus settled the population is more thrifty than the steppe people :)
          2. +3
            11 February 2013 20: 03
            Quote: lehatormoz
            You can only move on snow in the winter of RUSSIA on rolled roads in those days, they weren’t dead and try to go to Ryazan or Smolensk with a mass of horsemen

            So, it seems, the article just says that we MOVED ALONG THE FROZEN RIVERS. The snow is usually not rough along the channels. But in spring or autumn, moving around at that time (without roads) is just much more difficult. Swamps, forest cuttings, crossings over rivers and streams are not the best way for horses. Personally, my winter hike just does not cause any contradictions. Everything is VERY logical if for horses. Plus a lot of floodplain grass under the snow off the coast. A kind of "canned food" for feeding Mongolian horses. Well, for a foot invasion and for technology - I agree - not the most convenient time.
          3. +3
            12 February 2013 00: 27
            Quote: lehatormoz
            Moving on snow in the winter of RUSSIA is possible only on the rolled roads


            NONSENSE!


            Quote: lehatormoz
            and try a mass of horsemen of commercials of 10 goals to go to Ryazan or Smolensk


            we will dishonor you tsutut, like a dunno laughing .

            ... December 11, 1941, the 2nd Guards Cavalry Corps of Dovator was transferred to the Kubinka area. 150 km he walked along the rear of the Nazi troops, pursuing their retreating units, and on December 19 went to the river Ruse ...
            (the cavalry corps is more than 19, just don’t tell anyone)
            It seems to me that with battles in the fields and forests, against a superior enemy, against aviation, artillery, tanks, especially since being in the immediate rear of the enemy - pass 150 km. It was much harder than going 600 km. like a winner.

            hi
        2. Guun
          +4
          11 February 2013 14: 01
          In winter, nomads rarely fought, the beginning of spring then there was a horde. In winter, the army blossomed home for the winter. Horses dig food from under the snow with hooves, if there was snow, it melted and everything is covered with ice, then immediately JUT (a massive death of cattle that always happens in the steppe in winter). The Mongols had hardy horses but were small in stature, and with hooves in the woods it was impossible to dig a feed for themselves with a huge herd; the Mongols had 3-4 horses for each war. If somewhere jute, then all the nomads from this place migrated. Such nomads sit at home in the winter and in spring give 10%, and another question about tithing, the Mongols paid tribute and no one remembers the size of the tribute. It seems that tithe is in the church only.
          1. Marek Rozny
            +1
            11 February 2013 15: 50
            Yes, the steppe usually always started hiking in the spring. In winter, they were usually in Kystau (wintering). If the campaign lasted several years, then they did not always stop for winter vacation - depending on local climatic conditions (the Caucasus, the warm part of Eastern Europe), they could continue to wet opponents.
        3. +1
          11 February 2013 20: 26
          Igarr,

          It is no coincidence that under Khrushchev, when there was still no satellite intelligence, one of the criteria for choosing position areas for ICBMs was inaccessibility and secrecy from undercover intelligence. An example is Kozelskaya rd or Bologoe, Teykovo, not to mention taiga Krasnoyarsk or Novosibirsk. At one time I had to go around the expanses of Yaroslavl, Kostroma, Ivanovo
          , Vladimir and almost all of historical Russia. So many places and areas since the 13th century have not changed at all ..
      2. Marek Rozny
        +3
        11 February 2013 15: 44
        Quote: Sirocco
        Who and what made them horseshoes, arrowheads, etc., and WHERE?

        Blacksmithing among the steppes has been quite developed since ancient times. Read something else on the history of Eurasia besides Fomenkovism. Any regional archaeologist will clearly show you the products of the steppes of the Middle Ages.
      3. +1
        11 February 2013 23: 48
        Quote: Sirocco
        What not only horses ate?


        that the horses were not taken from the vanquished.


        Quote: Sirocco
        Who and what made them horseshoes, arrowheads, etc., and WHERE?


        You are just like small laughing For eight years, Caesar rode back and forth in Gaul and now I want to ask:
        - who supplied his legions with pilums, if often there was no connection with Rome?
        I will answer you:
        - slaves, just like in the case of the Mongol Tatars.


        Quote: Sirocco
        Well, it’s no secret that the great Roman Empire left material traces of existence after itself.


        not a secret wink





        Quote: Sirocco
        And what did the Tataromongol empire leave behind? Steppe and steppe circle.


        look for the answer here:
        (I will tell you as an unknowing wink )

        STEPPE YES STEPPE CIRCLE

        Steppe and steppe all around
        The path is far away.
        In that steppe deaf
        Froze coachman .

        And gaining strength
        Feeling the death hour
        He comrade
        I gave orders:

        “You, my friend,
        Do not remember evil
        Here in the wilderness steppe
        Bury me!

        You are horses
        Take to the priest
        Give a bow
        To mother

        Tell your wife
        The word farewell
        Pass the ring
        Engagement.

        Tell me about me
        What's frozen in the steppe
        And her love
        I took with me!
        And her love
        I took it with me! ”
    6. 0
      11 February 2013 16: 37
      There is an interesting version on this topic: "why small towns resisted for so long, and large capitals of principalities fell in a week" - there is an interesting version: The Russian princes themselves, during their strife, struck competitors against the capitals, destroying defensive structures during the assault. How not to repair the walls, which are demolished every 10 years, you will not achieve strength, and the repaired walls (sometimes somehow repaired) of the capitals of the principalities fell under the blows (who ???), say, Batu's troops, very quickly. And rival princes attacked small cities much less often, and their walls stood like a monolith to hold out for 2-3-4 weeks in front of Batu's troops. So the Russian princes, with their strife, sawed a branch under them, not only bringing fragmentation into the Russian people, but also destroying the strength of the defensive walls of their capitals.
      1. Marek Rozny
        0
        11 February 2013 16: 42
        Almost all Russian cities that were destroyed by the Horde with blind rage and total destruction were "marked" by the murder of the Horde ambassadors, which is one of the most terrible crimes among the steppe inhabitants. It was the harsh "otvetka" of the Horde that taught Europe not to kill the envoys.
        1. BruderV
          0
          12 February 2013 13: 18
          This is Ryazan (Sparta) !!!)))
      2. +1
        12 February 2013 10: 22
        All cities began with the Kremlin (Detinets) and only then grew Podil. The walls surrounding Hem were always below the walls of Detinets. The big city was easier to capture.
    7. +2
      11 February 2013 16: 41
      avt

      Quote: avt
      From historians, yoke singers, one can never get answers to a few simple questions.


      о wassat Fomenko fan


      welcome dear hi



      Quote: avt
      As a 300000 thousandth horse-drawn army with a convoy in the winter generally survived.


      silently - gritting his teeth.


      Quote: avt
      After all, this is a herd of a MILLION horses! Ever and somewhere such armies gathered? What did the horses eat?


      Are you actually aware of the goals of the Jebe and Subaday campaign?


      Quote: avt
      What did the horses eat? Anyone who has seen a live horse will not find the answer to this question.


      You yourself have once seen a Mongolian horse, you’re our expert laughing How do you imagine Mongolia? Do you know that winters are very severe there? As an expert, you have questions:
      - did the Mongols harvest hay for sheep and horses for the winter?
      - where and how did they store it?
      - How did living creatures survive in the Mongolian steppes in the winter?


      on the picture:
      Batgargal Tsamba is watching his flock.
      1. +4
        11 February 2013 16: 43
        Quote: avt
        The second question is simpler - how did they ride in the forests in the winter, in hundreds of thousands?


        if you do not know the history of the Fatherland, this is only your personal misfortune, if your imagination paints you a picture - a million horses in the form of a two-row column (two rows of 500 each) make their way through the snowy Russian forests fellow --- Congratulations!!!

        after the Ryazan, the Mongols went into more than a dozen columns, and by the way, the figure of 300 horsemen and 000 horses belay ?


        Quote: avt
        Well and still, they famously took large cities and stood near Kozelsk. How so?


        even a dumb wick (I spit wildly, wash my hands with soap and brush my teeth) can help you:
        - ....
        According to different versions, several factors in different combinations could affect the siege duration:
        A general decrease in the combat effectiveness of the Mongolian army after the first stage of the campaign, which was revealed during the siege of Torzhok and became a possible reason for refusing to march on Novgorod.
        Rasputitsa made the valleys of the Zhizdra rivers impassable and flowing into it near Kozelsk Drugusny and locked the Mongol army on the watershed.
        Rasputitsa turned the city into an island fortress.
        The raskutitsa cut off the units of Kadan and Storm from the main forces.
        Kozelsk was designated a gathering place for troops.
        Before the approach of all the Mongol units, Kozelsk did not storm.
        The Mongols took revenge on the city for the long-standing assassination of ambassadors by the former Kozel prince, a participant in the battle of Kalka, Mstislav Svyatoslavich ...


        Quote: avt
        Well, at least something like this.

        bully
        1. Marek Rozny
          +3
          11 February 2013 17: 10
          Quote: Karlsonn
          The Mongols took revenge on the city for the long-standing assassination of ambassadors by the former Kozel prince, a participant in the battle of Kalka, Mstislav Svyatoslavich ...

          By the way, it is important to note that the Horde clearly remembered which Russian principalities took part in the battle of Kalka. They were hit hardest after all. And for some reason many historians do not connect these facts. Therefore, for these historians, the actions of the steppes often look outwardly illogical, they beat these princes, but for some reason they simply agreed.
          1. avt
            +2
            11 February 2013 21: 07
            Quote: Marek Rozny
            By the way, it is important to note that the Horde clearly remembered which Russian principalities took part in the battle of Kalka.

            Why did not Smolensk go bankrupt? The rule is either valid for all or not the rule. Or did memory fail?
            1. Marek Rozny
              +1
              11 February 2013 21: 47
              Svyatoslav Mstislavich is a prince who ruled Smolensk (1232-1238) during the Horde campaign against Russia, but did not participate in the battle on Kalka. Formally, there was no "jamb for Kalka" behind him.
              There is a version that he allegedly took part in this battle, but, to put it mildly, this is a dubious version. Princes Mstislav Udaloy and Daniil Romanovich fled alive from the battlefield, and the Horde killed the rest. But Svyatoslav Mstislavovich didn’t make it to the lists of those fleeing, nor to the lists of those killed in battle. And he ruled in 1223 Polotsk, not Smolensk.
              1. avt
                0
                12 February 2013 10: 45
                Quote: Marek Rozny
                Svyatoslav Mstislavich is a prince who ruled Smolensk (1232-1238) during the Horde campaign against Russia, but did not participate in the battle on Kalka. Formally, there was no "jamb for Kalka" behind him.

                Mstislav - Boris Romanovich the Old. Killed on Kalka. Again, the collective responsibility for the murder of ambassadors does not grow together. The horde of Smolensk never touched, but Kozelsk with the prince is a baby under the root. Even the law of Genghis Khan was stolen - not to kill the carts that did not reach the check. Or maybe someone ordered a prince from Chernigov?
      2. Marek Rozny
        +3
        11 February 2013 17: 06
        Carlsonne, welcome!
        The guys just really do not understand the breed of horses, or simply can not imagine adequately the fighting of one or another side in the Middle Ages.
        By the way, this winter I was twice in the aul (Akmola region) - in December there were -45 frosts, the eggs rang specifically for me, but the horses snorted, but put up with much more restraint than I did))))
        In January, it was two weeks ago - in the morning at 4 o'clock there was a blizzard, people were really blowing away by the wind. Visibility of three or four meters in the headlights. And it was not so easy to blow horses and riders away.
        Steppe horses are ugly, even possibly ugly, small, but they are superior to other horse breeds in all winter and hiking conditions. A song, not a horse! The steppe does not need any other horse, neither German heavy trucks, nor Russian draft, nor Arab and Turkmen horses (for short distances), because with these horses the steppe simply could not get out of our Mongolian ancestral home))))
        1. +2
          11 February 2013 17: 37
          Marek Rozny welcome dear hi drinks

          Quote: Marek Rozny
          The guys just really do not understand the breed of horses, or simply can not imagine adequately the fighting of one or another side in the Middle Ages.


          there are those who, apparently from an alternative reality, are writing to us here belay request
          then they have a million horses wandering through the woods in a forest, then they have Mongols and all the other eighteen languages ​​- newborn children - they saw the forest for the first time near Kiev, then the steppe inhabitants lose their fighting ability at once as they leave the steppe belay --- In short, a complete scribe in the head is going on, and it is tempting to ask how the Mongols conquered non-steppe China and bent their manes to the peoples in the Caucasus, Altai, Siberia, did not act weakly in Afghanistan and the Pamirs?


          Quote: Marek Rozny
          By the way, it is important to note that the Horde clearly remembered which Russian principalities took part in the battle of Kalka.


          I also adhere to this point of view, the main reason for this is that the Russian princes ordered the Mongolians to be cut out before the Kalka (even before crossing the Dnieper).


          Quote: Marek Rozny
          In January, it was two weeks ago - in the morning at 4 o'clock there was a blizzard, people were really blowing away by the wind.


          I remember the blizzard in Kolyma and the Far East - brrrr --- horror.
        2. +5
          11 February 2013 20: 14
          Quote: Marek Rozny
          A song, not a horse! The steppe does not need any other horse, neither German heavy trucks, nor Russian draft, nor Arab and Turkmen horses (for short distances), because with these horses the steppe simply could not get out of our Mongolian ancestral home))))

          I agree. UNIQUE animal. I have not seen analogues in universality and not whimsical. Smart, patient, hardy, lifting (more than 80 kg! - and 20-30 km in the taiga, swamps, mountains). Our ordinary horse lives there for a year - from the strength of two. Not withstand. Although they are trying to apply them.
          If there was an opportunity - I would have got myself such a belly. But ... probably not in this life :)))
          1. Marek Rozny
            +4
            11 February 2013 20: 27
            From the TSB article on horses in the Red Army in WWII:
            "... Small, but unpretentious and hardy Mongolian horses, which retained their working capacity even with interruptions in the supply of feed, were highly valued by commanders and fighters. and the lack of oats and very slowly restoring it. Mongolian horses were used under the saddle, in carts and even in harnesses for light artillery pieces "...
            And here are the memoirs of a war veteran:
            “At first we thought that such small horses would not take away soldiers with full equipment,” recalled the war veteran Ivan Yemelyanovich Kushnir. “But the Mongolian proverb that the strength of a horse is learned in running turned out to be true. Having passed the difficult military roads on Mongol horses, we were convinced that that they are strong, do not know fatigue and are unpretentious in food.During the short breaks between battles, they themselves nibbled the grass, gnawed the bark of trees and were always ready to join the battle. They sensed danger along with the owner, their gait was light and noiseless, so that the enemy did not notice the close approach of an entire horse regiment, which made it possible to quietly go behind enemy lines. And before the long journey, the Mongol horse sniffed the owner and whinnied quietly, letting out rare drops of tears from clever eyes. "

            If I compared the Akhal-Teke with a Rolls-Royce above, then the steppe horse is a real jeep, created for hiking and extreme life.
            Z.Y. And about getting a horse - you can ride a hippodrome. In Astana, this is quite a popular activity for city dwellers to ride on the weekends and tinker with horses in some thread of private horse farms, and then fry the barbecue in the same place or ride a snowmobile. And inexpensively, and a lot of emotions from communicating with these animals. It is impossible to remain indifferent when communicating with them.
            Z.Z.Y. And they are just delicious, as they eat steppe forbs, not oats. Therefore, steppe horse meat is rich in healthy vitamins and minerals.
      3. Frigate
        +2
        11 February 2013 18: 05
        Quote: Karlsonn
        Batgargal Tsamba is watching his flock.

        Well, dear, I neighing fame. A huge plus for you
    8. +3
      11 February 2013 19: 38
      Quote: avt
      Anyone who has seen a live horse will not find the answer to this question,

      Not part of the discussion. It was just that in Buryatia and Tuva I had to deal with horses and the indigenous population. So, the hunters told me that they don't make hay for the horses for the winter. They just let go of the horse. She herself finds and digs out food from under the snow. But these are not ordinary horses - "Mongolian" (that is, Buryat). An ordinary one, of course, won't survive that way. This horse is not very picky about food. I've seen it myself - it even eats moss from the trees. She is looking for food herself, although they try to choose parking so that it is that the horses are there. And I also asked - and how wolves-bears. I was told that the horse smells like a man and the animal practically does not touch it. And the horse itself will not go far into the mountains and taiga.
      Now about moving around the forest. Perhaps better than a horse there and nothing to move around. It is likely that large masses of equestrians moved on a wide front (due to the need to feed horses), periodically gathering together for battle. The case of Kolovrat attacks on individual units is an example. And about 300 thousand horsemen, not everything is clear. This figure is called as the maximum. Perhaps this is the total number of troops. But they most likely moved quite separately. They sent scouts ahead and chose driving routes (I read about this somewhere). Those. - at the same time and in one place there was no huge herd. IMHO.
      But as it was in reality, who fought with whom and for what - we can now guess more. As with those horses ... :))
    9. +3
      11 February 2013 19: 55
      in general, the Tumens walked along different roads and concentrated together only for large goals, the same Ryazan, if one tumen has a problem with some town, the second tumen suits, if it is a particularly important city, then there are several at once, and there are problems to find food in the whole direction for 10 ? eat and rob the village and eat for your health.
      1. 0
        11 February 2013 21: 18
        I’ll cry now .. along with the horse ..
        ".. And before the long journey, the Mongol horse sniffed the owner and whinnied quietly, releasing rare drops of tears from smart eyes".
        And the eyes are ... smart
        ..................... and tears ... rare ...
        ..
        Explain the connoisseurs of Genghis Khan's strategy - how did he know about the west sea?
        About the edge of the universe? The earth was then flat. So wherever you go - you will hit the edge.
        I read it in the library of the Tangut khan?
        Yes, just ..... WHY ... he had to shuffle ... to hell with pies?
        Japan has not yet been conquered. Indochina, India, Siberia and the Far East.
        Eh ....
        1. Marek Rozny
          +2
          11 February 2013 22: 19
          Igarr, have you seen the horse? And the eyes of this really smart animal? Trust me, the horse is as intelligent and emotional as possible for an animal. So the words of the front-line soldier are clear to me. More beautiful than a horse's eye, only a camel's. But a horse has a "smarter" look, and a camel is simply "more beautiful"))) In other animals, eyes are not so attractive to humans.

          And the steppes knew little about the Western world. Firstly, the steppes of Eurasia controlled the main part of the Great Silk Road, along which goods, merchants, preachers, travelers and ambassadors walked in both directions from Asia and Europe. Secondly, the Turkic steppes literally trampled European land, starting with the Huns and ending with the Kipchaks-Polovtsy, which in Europe were called Cumans. Thirdly, by the time of the conquest of Russia, the Horde was already a gigantic state (moreover, the largest state in the world), which included both China and Central Asia, in which they knew quite well about Western Europe.
          It is not necessary to represent the entire population of the Horde in the form of wild nomad soldiers. There were already more cities (Chinese and Muslim) in the Horde at the time of the Battle of Kalka than there were cities in all of Europe. Open the atlas of history and see what was already controlled by the Horde at the time of the conquest of Russian lands. And science in the 13th century in the East was incomparably higher than European, including geography.
          And in the eyes of the steppe, neither Japan, nor the Far East, nor Germany, nor others inconsiderate territories are not interesting to own and live. Tribute to receive is one thing. And the steppe inhabitants are not interested in living there. After conquering the nearby rich "eternal enemy" - China, Genghis Khan first of all set the task of uniting the Khorezm state with the Turkic nomads. But the short-sighted and pampered Khorezmshah Mohammed sent a steppe upstart in three letters. The union did not work, so Genghis Khan was forced to annex Central Asia by force. After the bulk of the steppe inhabitants began to obey the Redbeard, only a small part of the Kipchaks of Khan Kotyan remained, who flatly refused to recognize the power of Chinggis. That is why Genghis Khan sent troops to punish Kotyan. And then the Russians got into the steppe showdown. The Horde asked the Russians not to get involved in other people's affairs, but the Russians boldly and nobly did not turn on the reverse gear and decided to support Kotyan, with whom one of the princes had a family relationship. In the end, what happened happened. Naturally, later Russia became the main target of the Chingizids' conquests. Well, Western Europe was bent down again because Kotyan fled there. While they were chasing him to Hungary, they had to screw up the Germans, Poles and Hungarians who got into the steppe squabbles during the play. As soon as Kotyan was done (he was soaked by the frightened Hungarians), they no longer went to Europe unnecessarily. The limit of the Horde's borders was clearly delineated in this direction - where the Turkic steppes of modern Ukraine ended. The steppe is the territory in which the nomads' way of life is maximally imprisoned. The steppe inhabitants did not want to eat fish like Italians or Japanese. A piece of lamb and horse meat is the best food for them.
          And the Far East is not even interesting at all for the primary conquest. Who is there to take tribute? From the poor taiga tribes?
          India (the Delhi Sultanate) was taken two more years before Kalki in 1221, chasing the son of Khorezmshah - Jalaladdin.
          1. +3
            12 February 2013 02: 03
            Quote: Marek Rozny
            Believe me, a horse is a really smart and emotional creature, as far as possible for an animal.

            The animal is not just smart, but, as for me, has a phenomenal memory. If a horse has walked along the road once, it remembers all the obstacles on it for two years. It is a pity that today these are "fairy tales" for us. and to see a horse live today is a rare success.
        2. 0
          11 February 2013 23: 41
          By the way, the modern division, too, is by no means on the same road riding an even box to the joy of Frederick the Great
  3. eagle owl
    +6
    11 February 2013 10: 01
    Igo was not an occupation. The enemy did not leave garrisons in the captured cities. It is sad that Russia could not unite at that time in its history.
    1. Yoshkin Kot
      +1
      11 February 2013 12: 07
      I agree, Northeastern Russia actually became a vassal of the Horde, and was able to maintain its Faith (even total Islamization under the Uzbeks did not affect Russia); besides, Russia was able to save its dynasty, unlike the Bulgars
      unlike the southwestern one, which simply became part of the steppe when Daniil Galitsky escaped from Kiev, effectively leaving the city under Tatar occupation
      1. Marek Rozny
        +4
        11 February 2013 17: 41
        It was "not fun" for the steppe inhabitants in North-Eastern Russia. There is no place to feed the herds (and this is the main reason for steppe dwellers in choosing a place of residence).
        But that steppe part of modern Ukraine was chosen by nomads one and a half thousand years ago. Before the Rurikovichs, the area where Kiev is now located was ... Khazaria. It is clear that the Horde who arrived, as well as other nomads who lived in the steppe of present-day Ukraine, happily settled in their usual eco-niche, squeezing the Slavs out of there for a while. But then, the Slavs slowly began to return, and eventually dissolved the "Ukrainian" steppe dwellers in themselves. Gogol described this process well:
        “Finally, whole villages and villages began to settle with houses and families near this formidable stronghold, in order to use its protection, with the condition of some duties (here Gogol writes about the first Cossacks - my note). And thus the places near Kiev began to empty, and meanwhile, people on the other side of the Dnieper were crowded. The family and the married little by little from the treatment and intercourse with them acquired the same warlike character. The saber and the plow became friends and were with every peasant. Meanwhile, riotous bachelors, along with chervonets, guilds and horses, became kidnap Tatar wives and daughters and marry them. ”From this confusion, their facial features, at first different in character, received one common physiognomy, more Asiatic. costume is completely Asian, a people in which two opposite parts of the world collided so strangely, two elements of different nature: European caution and Asian great carelessness, simplicity and cunning, strong activity and the greatest laziness and bliss, striving for development and improvement - and yet the desire to seem to neglect any improvement. "
        1. +2
          11 February 2013 20: 20
          Quote: Marek Rozny
          But that steppe part of modern Ukraine was chosen by nomads one and a half thousand years ago. Before the Rurikovichs, the area where Kiev is now located was ... Khazaria. It is clear that the Horde who arrived, as well as other nomads who lived in the steppe of present-day Ukraine, happily settled in their usual eco-niche, squeezing the Slavs out of there for a while. But then, the Slavs slowly began to return, and eventually dissolved the "Ukrainian" steppe dwellers in themselves. Gogol described this process well:

          I agree with Gogol and with you! Yes, it is not difficult to notice even today in the "indigenous" population "of the steppe Ukraine. There are types - right now - a saber, a turban and a horse :))) Because I am always amused by claims to Aryanism and especially" Svidomo "and" Square " history connoisseurs.
          1. Marek Rozny
            +4
            11 February 2013 20: 41
            Well, any nation has "svidomye") Sometimes they are funny, and sometimes they cause a pichalka.
            In general, Ukrainians, thanks to a mixture of Slavic and Turkic genes, are the most beautiful women in the world, IMHO) Slavic female beauty + Asian cheekbones - this cannot but captivate)
  4. 0
    11 February 2013 10: 06
    Personally, I don’t recognize classical history, the Mongol-Tatar yoke even more so, I think that these are notions of historians of the 17-18 centuries. So minus the article, the fiction of Miller and his followers is not of interest.
    1. Yoshkin Kot
      +1
      11 February 2013 12: 07
      it is common knowledge that you are before wassatyou keep elven history
      1. +1
        11 February 2013 12: 40
        Quote: Yoshkin Cat
        it is common knowledge that you are presenting an elven story

        Oh, my friend Moisha, I drew up! I admit I miss you. Will we continue our cheerful dialogue?
        1. Yoshkin Kot
          0
          11 February 2013 12: 43
          I'm embarrassed to ask, and who is your moishe? case not a sexual partner?
          fuuuu pervert !!! "!
          1. 0
            11 February 2013 13: 14
            Quote: Yoshkin Cat
            I am shy to ask, and who is your moishe

            Have you forgotten, Moysha, you are my young friend. Oh, not good ..... I forgot my hard-earned money. You see, I reminded you. Now you will know and behave well.
            1. Frigate
              +4
              11 February 2013 18: 08
              Quote: baltika-18
              Have you forgotten, Moysha, you are my young friend. Oh, not good ..... I forgot my hard-earned money. You see, I reminded you. Now you will know and behave well.

              Why are you doing this? argue with a respected Cat in essence, why insults and contempt?
    2. Frigate
      -2
      11 February 2013 18: 07
      Quote: baltika-18

      Personally, I don’t recognize classical history, the Mongol-Tatar yoke even more so, I think that these are notions of historians of the 17-18 centuries. So minus the article, the fiction of Miller and his followers is not of interest.

      Dear, are you again for yours?
    3. +1
      12 February 2013 05: 41
      Quote: baltika-18
      I think that these are the notions of historians of the 17-18 centuries

      For what purpose? laughing
      1. 0
        12 February 2013 20: 09
        Quote: bot.su
        For what purpose?

        The goal is very simple - to hide the truth about the bloody Christianization of Russia, about the real conquerors - the crusaders. These supposedly ancient annals were written by the church to whitewash themselves beloved.
        1. 0
          13 February 2013 08: 13
          Quote: Setrac
          The goal is very simple - to hide the truth about the bloody Christianization of Russia, about the real conquerors - the crusaders. These supposedly ancient annals were written by the church to whitewash themselves beloved.

          Oh ... don't get up! what And what are the names, church titles and positions of these "historians of the 17th and 18th centuries"? And why did they not clean up all the bloody chronicles of the Christianization of Rus? Why were they silent about the crusaders !?
  5. avt
    +6
    11 February 2013 10: 17
    Quote: baltika-18
    Personally, I don’t recognize classical history, the Mongol-Tatar yoke even more so, I think that these are notions of historians of the 17-18 centuries. So minus the article, the fiction of Miller and his followers is not of interest.

    That's it ! I came across a friend. I ask where are the annals of the yoke, well, gotyoty immediately after the invasion? He is a classic to me, well, where did the destruction of the Russian Land come. Wait, but the Mongols, where are they registered here? Well, well, this is so clear. Fine !? Or maybe I ask death from internecine strife, as above in the text? So he started yelling already. Well, the argument during the excavation is mol to the burned layer before the Mongol period and after ....... Well, a very scientific approach.
    1. Yoshkin Kot
      -1
      11 February 2013 12: 08
      I would also give in the ear wassat so got the elven ichstorics
      1. +1
        11 February 2013 13: 36
        Pop my eyes, Yoshkin Cat, here you are right ...
        To all these fans ... of elven tales ... what is called - Traditional Chronology - I would love to give .. to the UHI.
        Plus .... without entering into a private matter.
        1. Yoshkin Kot
          -1
          12 February 2013 12: 51
          risk your health wassat
    2. Marek Rozny
      +4
      11 February 2013 15: 53
      In addition to Russian annals, there is also a huge layer of oriental annals in Turkic, Arabic, Persian, Mongolian, Chinese.
      I'm not saying that the Western European chroniclers recorded the invasion of the Horde.
    3. Frigate
      +1
      11 February 2013 18: 09
      Quote: avt
      I came across a friend. I ask where the annals of the yoke,

      And the annals just protect them from people like Fomenko and Chudinov, from Zadornov, all the more so since he would have found ancient Aryan scratches there
  6. lechatormosis
    0
    11 February 2013 11: 08
    The funny thing is that for 300 years the supposedly Mongol-Tatar yoke, the Russian people had to riot for the most part both externally and internally BUT ANYTHING SIMILAR
    Therefore, the version of the story presented by the author for the most part is a beautiful fiction.
    1. Yoshkin Kot
      +1
      11 February 2013 12: 09
      but why at least? they didn’t keep garrisons, they didn’t force Vera, unlike the Jews of the Bolsheviks, how many Ivanovodnostvodny people divorced here on the forum, one Baltic 18 which is wassat
      1. -1
        11 February 2013 12: 49
        Quote: Yoshkin Cat
        Faith was not raped, unlike the Jews of the Bolsheviks,

        And what kind of Vera did the Bolsheviks rape, Pavlovna or Petrovna? ​​You were probably jealous? Or did they apply the principle "who is the last, the one and the dad? You and the poor fellow?
      2. lechatormosis
        0
        11 February 2013 14: 03
        Well, about the garrisons and faith, too, the big question is, the whole HISTORY OF THE TATAR OF THE MONGOL IGA CREATED from the imagination of famous pseudo-historians of the 17th century.
        There is no convincing and irrefutable evidence of the participation of TATARO MONGOL in this matter.
        I am more inclined to the version of INTERFEODAL DISASSEMBLY OF RUSSIAN PRINTS.
        1. Frigate
          -1
          11 February 2013 18: 12
          Quote: lehatormoz
          Well, about the garrisons and faith, too, the big question is, the whole HISTORY OF THE TATAR OF THE MONGOL IGA CREATED from the imagination of famous pseudo-historians of the 17th century.
          There is no convincing and irrefutable evidence of the participation of TATARO MONGOL in this matter.
          I am more inclined to the version of INTERFEODAL DISASSEMBLY OF RUSSIAN PRINTS.

          another sufferer
      3. -2
        11 February 2013 20: 06
        What would they rape faith if they themselves planted it?
    2. Marek Rozny
      +4
      11 February 2013 16: 03
      Why is it that the Russians should have been totally thonged? There was no such task.
      The first task: to subdue a small part of the Kipchaks (Polovtsy) Kotyan. The bulk of the Kipchaks, even before the Battle of Kalka, was already part of the Genghis Khan empire since the conquest of Khorezmshah Muhammad in the 20s.
      The second task: the conquest of the Russian principalities in order to receive tribute. For this, Russian troops were destroyed (moreover, a small part of the Russian troops and princes voluntarily joined the Horde forces, there are references to Russian renegade princes).
      And the Horde had a great influence on Russian-Ukrainian culture. Take into account the giant layer of Turkism in these languages. In one Ukrainian - more than 5000 words of Turkic origin. The Russians adopted most of the elements of military affairs, while before the 13th century Russians more often used Scandinavian-type weapons, then during the Horde they switched almost entirely to eastern weapons.
      The steppe influence is also present in architecture: before the Horde, Russian churches were built in the Scandinavian style, and after that the characteristic oriental bulbous domes appeared.
      Regarding genetics, those Slavic regions that were on the border with the Steppe, or are now on the territory of the Steppe - there is a high level of people with Asian facial features - characteristic non-Slavic cheekbones and so on. Moreover, among Ukrainians in Western and Southern Ukraine, these features practically dominate over Slavic ones. Many of them figs can be distinguished externally from the "Tatar".
      1. +1
        12 February 2013 10: 41
        High cheekbones, this is generally a characteristic feature of the Slavs, from Serbs to Poles and to Belarusians, to which the horde certainly did not reach. A characteristic feature of the Horde was a flat face, it is just not typical for the border Slavs.
      2. Yoshkin Kot
        0
        12 February 2013 12: 53
        the Mongols had a lot to learn, especially when the Russian local cavalry became
      3. Ingvald_Bueny
        +1
        17 February 2013 17: 25
        Quote: Marek Rozny
        The Russians adopted most of the elements of military affairs, while before the 13th century Russians more often used Scandinavian-type weapons, then during the Horde they switched almost entirely to eastern weapons.


        Armament of the Scandinavian type? Did this exist? In Russia, there were Frankish swords, but they were obsegermanskogo type and were characteristic of more than one Scandinavian. As for the ax, the Norwegian ax and the Russian ax are completely different, and their technique of ownership is different. The set of armor of the 11th century Russian horseman or combatant also differed from the Scandinavian warrior set, as well as the steppemen, although of course there were some elements of borrowing certain decisions. But it is all the more worth noting that the interaction of the Slavs with the steppe peoples of the Polovtsy and Khazars began several centuries before Russia met the Mongol horde. Therefore, to say that borrowing from the horde is not entirely correct. If we compare the armament of the Russian infantryman of the 12th century / equestrian warrior with the Mongolian opponent, then of course you can see a more primitive armament of the steppe (ordinary warrior), except for the saber (by the way, the Finno-Ugric word) and quilted armor, instead of a helmet, an ordinary hat made of thick leather . The Mongol army took the principalities in quantity, cruelty, and of course, because in Russia at that time there was no single center, otherwise the Horde would have raked as soon as the Khazars and Pechenegs had raked them.
        It is worth noting that the saber and its derivatives are nothing more than a sword with a curvature of the blade at a certain degree, the invention is Sino-Japanese, which was then adopted by the Turks in the V century from R.Kh. And now in Chinese museums you can find samples of Chinese edged weapons with a relatively curved blade dating back to the XNUMXth century BC
        Japanese sword - katana also has a blade with a curvature like this kind of Japanese weapon like naginata. At the same time, the checker is a Circassian long knife, an independent invention of the mountain peoples, also has no relation to the Mongols.
        The Mongols, in addition, used such Chinese inventions as gunpowder, as well as ballista.
        Later, Chinese armor had a strong influence on Mongolian uniforms. Well, and the most important Chinese invention - "pilaf" is a favorite dish of the Horde people; the Mongols first tasted rice for it in China.

        Quote: Marek Rozny
        The steppe influence is also present in architecture: before the Horde, Russian churches were built in the Scandinavian style, and after that the characteristic oriental bulbous domes appeared

        Would you take a closer look at the architecture of Russia, otherwise write absolute rubbish, some kind of Scandinavian style, where can you look at it?
        Dome - invented in the Roman Empire. Domes of Russian Churches are domes of Byzantine Temples. Moreover, Russian architecture with Mongolian (if such exists at all) has nothing in common.
        As for the eastern domes, such elements of architecture began to spread throughout the eastern world thanks to the Arab Caliphate and its borrowing from the Eastern Roman Empire, from which the "domes" began to spread throughout the countries of the Islamic world.
        Of course, if you name at least one Horde city of the 12th century with "eastern onion domes", then we will consider this issue. Moreover, the Mongols' religious buildings are mainly borrowed from the Chinese Civilization, a vivid example of modern Buddhist boors in Mongolia itself.
        1. Marek Rozny
          -1
          18 February 2013 19: 10
          1) How much can you give examples of purely East Slavic weapons (not borrowed from nomads or Scandinavian Germans)?
          2) Saber - Turkism. The verb "shabu" (the phonetic version of "sabu") literally translates as "chop". Example: "cutting down trees" - "aғash shabu".
          3) Do not be too lazy to read the materials on the armor of the Horde, you will discover a lot of interesting things. Not just "leather hats and quilted robes".
          4) About a single center - and when did the Russians have it? Only after the collapse of the Horde. The Russians (or rather the Muscovites) digested the experience of the Horde state building and introduced it on their own after the collapse of the Genghisids empire. This is what I’m talking about.
          5) Sabers appeared en masse among the Turks. In the 7th century. And the images of the saber in China are nothing more than a certain experimental model, which never found a place in China. By the way, FIG knows that the Chinese put the museum there with the date of the 4th century BC, if the oldest image of a Chinese saber dates from the 2nd century BC I am afraid that this is the home-made, which is famous for Chinese history. In this case, you can’t talk about Japan and katana, they could not even forge iron until the 8th century.
          6) A checker generally gained distribution relatively recently, and why remember it here is not clear.
          7) The Chinese invented gunpowder and firearms. Nobody argues with this. What is your argument, it is also not clear. Maybe they decided that it was the main among the steppe?
          8) Chinese armor from the steppe are quite different.
          9) Pilaf has never been a favorite dish of the Horde people. This is a favorite dish among settled Uzbeks and Tajiks. And the steppe (Kazakh, Mongol, Kalmyk, Buryat, Bashkirs, Nogay, Altai) prefers cooked meat - horse meat and lamb. This is now pilaf common with us, and before that they only ate sarts.
          10) is familiar with the theme of Russian architecture enough, although amateurly. Once again I write about the Scandinavian style - study the structure of Russian churches.
          11) Can you distinguish a dome of the correct form from a bulbous one? Hope so. The Russian church is distinguished by the onion shape of the towers, which is common in Eastern Asian cities. Of course, this form was not invented by the Turks, but they brought it to Russia after they got acquainted with the architecture of the Muslim East. And about the Horde cities - open the world map and see what cities were already in the Chingizid empire at the time of the conquest of Russia. On the territory of the Eurasian steppe there are hundreds of ancient cities founded by steppe people at one time or another. Some of these cities died for one reason or another, while others are alive and well. And not from the 12th century, but from an early period. The Turks were familiar with urban planning and were actively engaged in the development of cities in the territory under their control in convenient places (especially in Turkestan, where the history of cities began 2-3 thousand years ago even before the Turks). Only it was in the Steppe that cities were not built, preferring to have pastures there. Remove the crosses from Russian churches and look at them in profile. If you see the "Roman Empire" there, and not a plot from the Muslim "Thousand and One Nights", then I will be very surprised)))
          In the 13th century, the Horde (even if we consider them Mongols) were not Buddhists and did not build Buddhist temples. So the remark is by.
  7. +2
    11 February 2013 11: 18
    baltika-18
    avt
    I support. I, too, somehow do not believe in the classical concept of the "Mongol" invasion. Everything is written on the water with a pitchfork. Ian, of course, wrote an interesting trilogy, but it hardly pretends to historicism. And also in the Soviet history textbooks (after all, they are more interesting than the current ones) there were interesting pictures - a Mongol warrior goes on a hike on horseback in light armor or in his own national dress). And on other pages - a Russian heavily armed knight or a Western European knight, chained in armor. It was natural bewilderment - how in general the so-called. could the light cavalry of the Mongols be able to withstand the heavy western cavalry? Before the widespread use of firearms and the professional organization of the infantry (15th century), the death of heavy horsemen in battle was rare. And in the 18th century, when tactics had already completely changed, light cavalry was thrown into battle against heavy cavalry - cuirassiers and gendarmes only in exceptional cases - for this is a pointless waste of people.
    1. avt
      +3
      11 February 2013 11: 41
      Quote: Prometey
      It was natural bewilderment - like the so-called could the light cavalry of the Mongols resist the heavy western cavalry? Before the widespread use of firearms and the professional organization of infantry (15th century), death in the battles of heavy riders was a rare occurrence

      And this is a continuation of the questions! The most interesting thing is the legends about heavily armed European horsemen! They were idiots that they put on armor in which they themselves could not climb a horse ?! And here it turns out that the protection was the same everywhere in weight, obviously the battle armor did not weigh more than 20-30 kg. There is no sense .. But all that’s more is tournament, that is, for fun and not to risk it again, safety precautions.
      1. Yoshkin Kot
        +1
        11 February 2013 12: 12
        and the reason is simple, they, like the members of the forum, did not read serious historians, but read out chivalric novels, and would know that the full armor was either tournament or ceremonial, the last commander (king) wore on the battlefield, without participating in it surrounded by bodyguards, and he was needed, so that a dashing crossbowman would not shoot him
        and at best a warrior wore a cuirass over a chain mail and a helmet like a pot and other rubbish laughing
        1. 0
          11 February 2013 12: 54
          Quote: Yoshkin Cat
          helmet like pot and other rubbish

          Well, you have a "pot-like" construction between your shoulders, and this construction sometimes reproduces "a thought-type", which then "sort of turn into comments."
          1. Yoshkin Kot
            -1
            12 February 2013 12: 54
            from aphids, I at one time was fond of reconstruction, so that little girl to school! step march!
        2. +3
          11 February 2013 12: 55
          Yoshkin Cat
          The fact of the matter is that most "serious" historians could not distinguish tournament armor from combat, hence the legend about the clumsiness of heavy riders and supposedly that having fallen, he could not get up (I wonder if the historian was put on a horse in armor, but then accidentally drop it - could he immediately get up and run briskly, or would he have been passed out for a while?).
        3. -1
          11 February 2013 13: 42
          Crossbow bolt ...
          ...... easily and simply pierced pieces of iron, laden with poor commanders.
          And even if you didn’t break through .... try to drive a car (bicycle), which has a disc in it ... through it ... there is an armature.
          Or .. iron-cuirasses .... with sharpening in different directions .. armaturins?
          1. -1
            11 February 2013 14: 23
            Igarr
            Watching from what distance and do not forget - a crossbow is not a muscular strength of a person, but a primitive mechanism, which could provide a greater pulling force than a bow. And about easy and simple - it's hard to say. We tested modern sports bows and crossbows for penetration - a galvanized bucket for their arrows turned out to be an insurmountable obstacle :) which essentially fits in with the fortress of solid armor of the 15th century.
            1. +1
              11 February 2013 15: 02
              Crossbow .... was there a bolt? or arrow..decorative?

              ..
              With half a kilometer .... will not break. Getting out of SVD is problematic.
              And from 50 meters? twenty?
              To get ... in a fever.
              1. +2
                11 February 2013 19: 34
                Igarr
                It seems like they shot an arrow from a distance of 50-70 m, it’s hard to get from a bigger one. Honestly, I have not heard anything about the bolt. And that's not the point. For some time, the crossbow was a solid weapon, especially effective when defending walls. But even if he broke through the defense from 50 m (which I think turned out to be a great success), then for the second shot, if the arbalester or archer stood without cover, they had no chance - they became pins.
                1. Marek Rozny
                  +1
                  11 February 2013 19: 46
                  No one in Russia can use a bow identical to medieval. You will go to prison for the manufacture and storage of weapons.
                  And athletes also have what is sold in stores - toys that are useless for combat use.
                  1. +2
                    12 February 2013 10: 48
                    Mongolian cavalry bow is a work of art. No nation in the world has created anything like this. In many ways, it was the Mongolian bow that gave them numerous victories.
                    1. 0
                      12 February 2013 20: 12
                      The so-called Mongolian compound bow meets most of all in Russia, in Mongolia it does not exist at all, these are Russian weapons that Western historians give out as Mongolian.
                    2. 0
                      13 February 2013 07: 41
                      Jurkovs
                      Present at least one. All the so-called complex compound bows were single specimens and were never used in large numbers (only in the imagination of romantic historians). It was much easier to cut a stick with a person’s height and pull a bowstring on it, which the British actually did by arming their archers with long bows. In terms of firing range and slaughter, they were much more effective than all the so-called complex compound bows, because you can not argue with physics - the greater the lever, the greater the efficiency.
                    3. Ingvald_Bueny
                      0
                      17 February 2013 17: 30
                      Please tell me the range of the arrow in such a bow?
                  2. +1
                    13 February 2013 07: 30
                    Quote: Marek Rozny
                    No one in Russia can use a bow identical to medieval.

                    You are naive to idealism. Do you think that a medieval nomad could make onions better than those that are made today from stronger and lighter materials?
                    1. Marek Rozny
                      +1
                      13 February 2013 21: 28
                      Modern bows are made for shooting sports, they are legally limited in their strength in order to minimize the likelihood of harm to humans.
                2. +1
                  11 February 2013 20: 32
                  They didn’t shoot with arrows, as we think.
                  Arrows are for hunting.
                  Used in battle - such as darts, heavy, double-edged blades.
                  The annals say - "..with arrows .."
                  Caused (mainly) - sliding, superficial wounds. The point is blood loss.
                  Wave the piece of iron, if we say, the cheek is torn, legs are in blood, squish in boots.
                  Well, with luck, in the throat there, in the eye - on the spot.
                  She will get stuck in armor, whoever had it, is also not a gift.
                  Therefore, they fired - in volleys. And in the style of Robin Hood - complete nonsense.
                  The work of snipers is a separate area.
                  ...
                  ".. No one in Russia can use a bow identical to the medieval one ..." - respected Marek Rozny, you should not think of medieval bows as a terrible weapon.
                  By and large - it was nonsense.
                  Decorative.
                  As you suppose - making long-range onions in STEPI.
                  What shall we do? From wormwood?
                  And at least ... let's say 50 thousand troops.
                  And, for God's sake, about the lost recipes ..... not necessary.
                  Compound bows, too.
                  The people were ... dead, sick, weak. Then.
                  And those who remained healthy lived exactly until the first fight.
                  Well, maybe until the second.
                  And on a new one.
                  1. Marek Rozny
                    +4
                    11 February 2013 20: 47
                    The European bow was really bullshit. But the steppe bow (Scythian, Hunnish, "Tatar", "Mongolian") is another matter. Plus, keep in mind that the steppe dwellers have practiced shooting from this weapon almost every day since childhood. Plus, keep in mind that the steppe people shot arrows much more per minute than the Arabs or Europeans. And taking into account the hail of arrows, this is really a weapon of mass destruction in the Middle Ages).
                    The Bashkirs and Kalmyks quite successfully beat the French in the war of 1812, using their bows.
                    1. 0
                      11 February 2013 21: 45
                      Lord, where did you get such nonsense?
                      Who told you?
                      Nikita Mikhalkov in his film?
                      Bashkirs and Kalmyks successfully beat the French.
                      Beat! and beat well. Using, INCLUDING ... and bows. But mostly arcana!
                      ...
                      As you can imagine - ".. since childhood, they practiced shooting from this weapon almost every day. Plus, keep in mind that the steppe dwellers shot a lot more arrows per minute .."
                      Nothing more to do in Jailau? except how to bullet from an onion? Long away? To speed? And who brought back arrows? Really .. dogs?
                      Who the kid ... would have trusted ... the battle ... HIGH BOW? Arrows?
                      And what - fighting ..... BATTLE..bows in every family were?
                      Or were they made? Of what?
                      1. Marek Rozny
                        +3
                        11 February 2013 22: 28
                        What else can a nomad do? Cattle graze, shepherds (from among teenagers) are for this. Household chores are exclusively for women, up to the collection and dismantling of the yurt. The men were engaged only in hunting, war, and the manufacture of weapons. The steppe-type bow is a complex device compared to its European counterpart, but the steppe inhabitants did not lack it. A steppe man who did not have a weapon is nonsense. Such a person did not have the right to vote. Even as part of the Russian Empire, among the Kazakhs, who were ruled on the basis of a special legal right, such a person was deprived of the right to vote during the elections of biys (judges), volost rulers and khans ("military democracy"). And the arrows were not brought by the dogs, no need to make jokes. To a nomad to wave a thousand kilometers is not a problem, not like a ride to the place where the arrow fell.
                        What bows were made of - and could read somewhere. For the steppe, there was no problem with the raw materials for making bows and arrows.

                        Z.Y. By the way, about the dogs. The steppe dogs have two types of dogs - basins (hound for hunting) and alabai (Central Asian wolfhound to protect the herd). Alabai are the ideal watchmen. Moreover, the Alabai act not only as guards, but also as ... shepherds. Alabai know how to manage the herd of other animals, not letting them scatter in different directions, and if necessary they will lead cattle in the right direction. Sheep and other cattle obey them.
                      2. Marek Rozny
                        +4
                        11 February 2013 22: 56
                        Here is what the Arabs wrote in the Middle Ages about the Turkic wars:
                        Al-Jahiza writes in his treatise: “The Türks are a people for whom a settled life, a stationary state, the length of stay and stay in one place, the small number of movements and changes are unbearable. The essence of their addition is based on movement, and they have no destiny to rest ... they do not engage in crafts, trade, medicine, agriculture, tree planting, construction, canals and harvesting. And they have no other thoughts than raiding, robbing, hunting, riding, battles of knights, searching for prey and conquering countries».

                        Another historian, speaking about the manufacture of a sword from the Arabs, first lists eight to nine operations, each of which is performed by a special master, and then notes: “Similarly, a saddle, arrows, quiver, spear and all weapons are made ... And the Turk does everything himself from beginning to end, does not ask for help from his comrades, does not ask his friend for advice. "He does not go to the master and is not worried about his deferrals from day to day, his false promises and does not think about paying him remuneration."

                        But the most unusual lines were left in his manuscript by Ibn al-Fatih, who, on behalf of Caliph Hisham, went as an ambassador to the headquarters of the Turkic Hagan and tried to convert the latter to the Muslim faith. He wrote the following: “I got an audience when he made a saddle with his own hand. Kagan asked the interpreter: who is this? He answered: the ambassador of the king of the Arabs. Kagan asked: my subject? Tolmach answered: yes. Then he ordered me to be taken to a tent, where there was a lot of meat, but not enough bread. Then he ordered me to call and asked: what do you need? I began to flatter, saying: my master sees that you are in error, and wants to give sincere advice - he wants you to convert to Islam. Kagan asked: what is Islam? I told him about the rules, about what Islam forbids and encourages, about religious duties and about serving God. Kagan asked: who are the Muslims? I replied that they are residents of cities, and among them there are bath attendants, tailors, shoemakers. Then the kagan told me to wait a few days.
                        Once the kagan mounted a horse and was accompanied by 10 people, each of whom held a banner. He told me to go with him. (Soon) we reached a hill surrounded by a grove. As soon as the sun rose, he ordered one of the ten people accompanying him to unfurl his banner, and it flashed ... And ten thousand armed horsemen appeared, who cried out: chah! cah! And they lined up under the hill. Their commander rode out in front of the king. One by one, all the standard bearers unfurled their banners, and each time ten thousand horsemen lined up under the hill. And when all ten banners were unfurled, under the hill stood one hundred thousand horsemen, armed from head to toe.
                        Then the kagan ordered the interpreter: tell this ambassador and let him convey to his master - among (my warriors) there is no bath attendant, no shoemaker, no tailor. If they accept Islam and fulfill all its requirements, then what will they eat?»

                        And finally, another interesting entry left by the Arabs:
                        «Turk shoots at wild animals, birds, targets, people ... he shoots, driving at full speed back and forth, right and left, up and down. He fires ten arrows before the Kharijit (Arabic shooter) puts one arrow on the bowstring. And he rides his horse, descending from a mountain or in a valley at a faster speed than Kharijit can ride on flat ground. The Turk has four eyes - two on the face, two on the back of the head».
                        Arabs, who had conquered many countries by that time, perceived the Türks exclusively as a military machine, which significantly exceeded their own. They did not suspect then that Fomenko and other alternative agents would doubt the fighting qualities of the nomads of central Eurasia.
                      3. 0
                        12 February 2013 20: 24
                        Another myth that the life of a nomad herder is easy and serene, if a man goes to war his family will die of starvation.
                        Quote: Marek Rozny
                        ride to the place where the arrow fell.

                        The problem is that where the arrow fell, there are enemies who are unlikely to calmly collect the arrows.
                      4. Marek Rozny
                        +1
                        13 February 2013 21: 35
                        nobody will starve to death. there is a kid who drives cattle. plus alabai dogs. I know aul life very well.

                        and about the arrows - damn it, so I talked about peacetime. and during the battle, essno no one will jump to pick up arrows, there are enough of them in the quivers, and if they end, that is, spear-nise, saber (kylysh, semser), knife (pyshak), ax (aybalta), maces (baluan). At worst, kamcha, lasso or soyul-club.

                        in general, "A good leader, having learned about the number of enemy chiefs, must oppose them with his own, he carefully observes what kind of weapons the soldiers need to be put in charge: whether it will be archers, spearmen or people armed with swords" (from Temirlan's code).
                      5. +1
                        12 February 2013 20: 21
                        All correctly compound bow is an expensive weapon that is owned either by rich people or professional warriors, in addition, it requires certain knowledge.
                    2. +1
                      12 February 2013 11: 25
                      Quote: Marek Rozny
                      European onion - really was garbage.

                      Why's that? The English long bow with its long heavy arrows successfully pierced the armor. What else is needed: there is a tactic, there is a weapon for this tactic, why glue horn plates and tendons if the desired result is achieved without unnecessary fidgeting.
                      All the same, the military specialization of the site, you must be aware that the weapon that allows you to achieve the desired result is good. And it doesn’t matter more complicated or simpler, older or more modern.
                      1. +1
                        12 February 2013 21: 23
                        You can’t break through the bow armor. it's all out of ignorance, no matter how cosmic the bow is, it all depends on the strength of the archer. There are several types of arrows: cut-off - with a wide tip that causes cut wounds, but is effective only against armless warriors, armor-piercing - with a narrow long tip - the point is that a narrow tip penetrates between the rings of chain mail, there is no talk of breaking through with soft tip.
                        Before the appearance of crossbows, a warrior in armor was literally invulnerable.
                      2. +1
                        13 February 2013 08: 12
                        Setrac
                        I can add that the main purpose of the archers was nevertheless to disable the horse in order to make the rider lose his main advantage - a ram blow to the enemy. For this, actually cut off and intended - the horses inflicted very painful wounds, and for the protected soldiers they were useless. One of the most successful examples of such tactics is the Battle of Agincourt, when the British brought down a hail of arrows on the French. And the death of the French knights there was not from arrows, but from the crush that began when the horses began to fall and the French began to trample on each other.
                      3. 0
                        13 February 2013 09: 17
                        Quote: Prometey
                        Battle of Agincourt

                        Well, they would have said about Poitiers, under Agincourt the main attack was dismounted knights ...
                        In addition, the beginning of the widespread use by the English of longbow archers is the beginning of the 14th century, the battle of Agincourt is already the 15th century. And to a large extent, the reinforcement of the armor of the French knights is associated with protection from arrows from the English long bows of which
                        Quote: Setrac
                        You can’t break through the bow armor
                        wink (I did not indicate which armor ...)
                      4. Marek Rozny
                        0
                        13 February 2013 21: 38
                        And many people in Russia flaunted in armor?))))) And those who had armor were completely chained in armor?))))
                    3. +1
                      12 February 2013 20: 17
                      Another myth that since childhood, nomads learn to shoot from a bow, from childhood, hunters shoot from a bow, shepherds do not shoot from a bow. That is, we consider what part of the food in the diet is game and find out how well one or another people own onions, from here the nomads mainly eat meat from their herds and do not own onions because the game in their diet is not much (percentage), the Slavs share game 30 to 70% of the meat diet.
                      This is already counted and the count is not in favor of the nomads.
                      1. 0
                        13 February 2013 09: 26
                        Quote: Setrac
                        That is, we consider what part of the food in the diet is game and find out how well one or another people own onions, from here the nomads mainly eat meat from their herds and do not own onions because the game in their diet is not much (percentage), the Slavs share game 30 to 70% of the meat diet.

                        At least half of the game in the forest is obtained by snares and other tricks. So these are your speculations far from practice. In addition, shooting in the forest, and even an arrow, is very limited in distance. So, the shooter is well-aimed, but the bow is weak. In military affairs, several other bows and shooting techniques were used.
                        Another thing is that I also do not agree that Russian archers and bows were worse than the steppes. The constant need to fight with the nomads on the one hand and with the heavy western cavalry on the other, forced to use the best of weapons and tactics of both, to combine and adapt.
                        And in the establishment of the yoke, the leading role was played by feudal fragmentation, and not the "best" military training of the steppe inhabitants.
                      2. Marek Rozny
                        0
                        13 February 2013 21: 56
                        Aboul Faraj:
                        "When the Mongols are not engaged in war, they should give themselves up to the hunt. And they should teach their sons how to hunt wild animals so that they gain experience in fighting them and gain strength, energy to endure fatigue and be able to meet enemies as they do in the fight of wild and untrained animals, not sparing (themselves) ... Men from twenty years of age and older are recruited by the fighters. For every ten, an officer must be appointed, and for every hundred, and an officer for every thousand, and an officer for every ten thousand ... Not a single warrior out of a thousand, hundreds or ten in which he was enrolled should go to another place; if he does, he will be killed, and will also be with the officer who received him"
                      3. Marek Rozny
                        0
                        13 February 2013 21: 51
                        Where do the numbers come from? ))))
                        1) Read at least one medieval source on the steppe. Why write about a topic you don't know anything about? I say again, all the steppe inhabitants from childhood (whether they were Turks or Mongols) were accustomed to archery. And absolutely every man of the steppe was OBLIGED to have a weapon. Without a weapon - it's like now without a passport. Such a person in the Steppe did not have the right to vote. This is not an abstract phrase, it is a control system in the hordes. Khans are elected from among the Chingizids-sultans by the opinion of ordinary steppe dwellers, who convey their word to their biys (judges), aksakals, other respected people and rulers of their kind, and they, in turn, listening to the opinion of each inhabitant of their aul, convey their voice in large meetings of the ulus, where they finally choose the khan, after which they raise him on the mat. Genghis Khan was also elected and declared khan by the steppe people from the Naiman, Kerey, Konyrat and Kiyat clans. Something like the modern American electoral system. The steppe people call the system "military democracy". And every man in the ulus was OBLIGED at the first call to get ready and go immediately on the campaign, with the exception of children, the elderly and the infirm. This is surprising for you, and the Turks and Mongols survived among more numerous neighbors only thanks to total militarization.
                        2) Regarding food and hunting. Yes, indeed, the steppe inhabitants do not need game - hunger among the steppes almost never happened in history, even if jutes occurred. But participation in the hunt was MANDATORY for every man. Not appearing on the hunt - was subject to severe punishment. Every year a khan’s big hunt was held, where a military field game was held. Only instead of people, the role of opponents was portrayed by wild animals.
                    4. +1
                      13 February 2013 07: 53
                      Marek rozny
                      It's fun to read your comments about the rate of onions. Yes, bows were used both in the Seven Years' War and in the Napoleonic and, oh my God, even at the end of the 19th century by the Indians against the US troops. But somehow you know, they didn’t make any special impression on the enemy armed with a firearm, even in the 18th century.
                      The bow was a deadly weapon at distances not exceeding 50-70 m, and then only for poorly dressed infantrymen. Shots from films where nomads mow the ranks of opponents from half kilometer distances and even canopy shooting leave the conscience of Hollywood directors.
                      1. Marek Rozny
                        0
                        13 February 2013 22: 01
                        In the 18-19 century, the value of the bow significantly decreased after the appearance of firearms. By the way, in the 18th century, Kazakhs switched to a firearm — Kara-cartoons of their own and Central Asian production, and abandoned bows (unlike the Bashkirs, Kalmyks and Dzungars). The Dzungars therefore asked Russia to constantly sell them firearms (which in the end happened) because they complained to the Russian tsars that the Kazakhs mercilessly shot the dzungars from rifles at a safe distance, giving no chance in battle.
                        But where does your smile and Russian opponents of the steppes in the 13th century? Or did the Russians already go with a firearm at that time?
                      2. Ingvald_Bueny
                        +1
                        17 February 2013 17: 35
                        Karamultuk, less commonly karamyltyk, is a long-barreled wick gun among Asian peoples (Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan ...) around the XNUMXth - beginning of the XNUMXth centuries.
                      3. Marek Rozny
                        0
                        18 February 2013 19: 14
                        gyy, "kara myltyk" literally translates as simply "big gun" from Kazakh)))
                        in addition, the Kazakhs switched to firearms not in the 19th, but in the 18th century. All ancient Russian and European engravings of the 18th century depict Kazakhs almost always with long wicked guns. and it was because of the rifles that the Jungars began to lose the war and therefore turned to the Russians for help with a firearm and guns.
                  2. -1
                    12 February 2013 09: 00
                    Regarding arrows, various types of arrows were used in battle, depending on the intended purpose:
                    The faceted shape of the tip, in the form of a narrow pyramid, was preferable, both in terms of accuracy of hit and in terms of breakdown power. Scythians were the first to cast faceted bronze tips.
                    The leaf-shaped, and especially triangular with burrs, tips, however, throughout the era of the use of onions did not give up their positions, since they inflicted a significantly more severe wound and were poorly removed from it.
                    Finally, “cuts” were often used — arrows with a flat, chisel-like tip. The breakdown force was theoretically worse for them than for arrows with a faceted tip, but in practice such a tip had anti-ricochet properties. The breakdown force of the “cuts" fell significantly less when deviating from the normal when hit.
                  3. +1
                    12 February 2013 10: 51
                    Mongolian onions had a very complex design. It used lining from the argali horns, which gave it range and penetration.
          2. 0
            12 February 2013 10: 45
            Question. When crossbows became a mass weapon. Obviously not in the Mongol era, as far as I know, they came into fashion during the centenary war of England and France.
          3. Yoshkin Kot
            0
            12 February 2013 12: 55
            young man, but who will let him go to the distance necessary for this? and quite saved from the bolt at the end, and the range of the crossbows was not great
    2. Yoshkin Kot
      0
      11 February 2013 12: 10
      class! one more story on writers teaches, do not teach on writers and satirists, especially Bolshevik wassat
    3. 0
      11 February 2013 13: 11
      They always went on a light campaign, and put on the battle. It is only in films that go both at home and in a campaign in chain mail, if not more ..
    4. +2
      11 February 2013 19: 59
      read how the Battle of Grundwal went and find the answers how the Tatar cavalry Ryazan regiments and the Polish hussars defeated the heavy cavalry of the Teftons
      1. Marek Rozny
        +1
        11 February 2013 20: 17
        in-in. moreover, I note the actions of the Crimean cavalry of the Tatars - they were the first to go into battle, destroyed the German artillery at the same time, and then broke off the system of knights with a false retreat, after which the Poles and the Russians entered into business. then the Tatars again cut into the battle and at this phase actively used the lasso, knocking knights off their horses.
        1. 0
          11 February 2013 20: 41
          ".. then the Tatars again got into the battle and during this phase they actively used the arcana, knocking the knights off their horses."
          Is this chess?
          What are the lassos .. in hand-to-hand combat.
          What a knocking down knights..arcans.
          You can steal, dump along with the horse (if three, four) .. and then on the side of the dump.
          ...
          Here we are all dreamers .... don’t feed bread ..
          1. Marek Rozny
            0
            11 February 2013 20: 49
            Read the materials on the Battle of Grunwald.
            1. -2
              11 February 2013 21: 35
              So what?
              What else to read?
              ".. destroyed the German artillery at the same time .."
              Were they such good gunners? Without leaving the horses, who cried with clean, rare tears - riveted all the guns, raped all the kernels, poured all the gunpowder with urine, put out the stoves?
              and the gunners were left alone, right? Figley from them, from the grimy take ... with gunners, then?
              1. Marek Rozny
                +3
                11 February 2013 22: 33
                If you have not read anything about this battle, why get in a conversation about it?
                1. +2
                  11 February 2013 23: 23
                  Ignorance was ignorance is ignorance will be, instead of looking for materials on this battle, or to bring a counter argument to another battle, where the knights utterly defeat the Tatars light cavalry, it is better to pour a bucket of slop
          2. +1
            11 February 2013 23: 12
            here it is appropriate to recall Jacquerie, when the French knights were removed from the horses practically by the gods, and then finished off with daggers and stilettos to the joints between the armor.
            1. +1
              12 February 2013 06: 43
              You guys are shown on the good side ... your ardor.
              Impulse, ardor .. youthful.
              It is visible that you read and are reading. Are fond of.
              Nothing .. ".. both a black sheep and a white one are hung by the legs .."
              Time will pass, read more. Views - will change.
              I hope.
              ...
              Yoshkin Kot, we must pay tribute to him. He perceives the new chronology as a fantasy. Well, he was taught like that.
              And why should we consider that - Traditional chronology - Truth? And not the same fantasy?
              That's when you understand this simple difference ... then we'll talk.
              1. Marek Rozny
                0
                12 February 2013 12: 27
                Quote: Igarr
                Here we are all dreamers .... don’t feed bread ..

                Quote: Marek Rozny
                Read the materials on the Battle of Grunwald.

                Quote: Igarr
                Without leaving the horses, who cried with clean, rare tears - riveted all the guns, raped all the kernels, poured all the gunpowder with urine, put out the stoves?
                and the gunners were left alone, right? Figley from them, from the grimy take ... with gunners, then?

                Quote: Marek Rozny
                If you have not read anything about this battle, why get in a conversation about it?

                Quote: Igarr
                You guys are shown on the good side ... your ardor.
                Impulse, ardor .. youthful.

                Igarr, judging by the correspondence, it is you who react very emotionally. Where in my words you found "youthful enthusiasm and ardor" is difficult for me to understand.
                Secondly, I ask you once again, if you are generally unfamiliar with the topic of the Battle of Grunwald, then why would you even get involved in a dispute about it and make some mischief? The actions of the troops of the Tatars and Slavs are described by European historians enough, this topic has been chewed and chewed, there are no special "white spots" there. If it seems ridiculous and incredible to you that the Tatars massacred the German artillerymen or that they effectively used the lasso against the knights, then these are the problems of your worldview and education. If you have never really seen a horse and have no idea what a "lasso" is, do not write without any sense.
                Here AVT has just asked me a good question about Smolensk. This is a correct and interesting argument with a person who has a different opinion. And for you in this matter - only cursing, showing the limitations of your knowledge of the subject.
                1. +1
                  12 February 2013 12: 52
                  Estimate the volume .. my screeching ...
                  and the volume of their .. thoughts .. about the era of 800 years ago ...
                  Appreciate .. the credibility of the sources where you got all this.
                  And then about the limitations .. we will interpret.
                  Unlimited ... our specialist.
                  ..
                  WHERE IS THE CAPITAL- EMPIRE - CHINGHIZID? In Moscow?
                  1. Marek Rozny
                    +1
                    13 February 2013 22: 05
                    Igarr, it’s hard to argue with a man who has only slogans and cliches in his head. And the capital of the Horde was at different times in different places - Karakorum, Saray-Batu, Saray-Berke, Beijing (Khanbalik), etc. This is both the capital of the whole Horde (Ulug Ulus), and its individual parts. Russian princes wound more than a thousand kilometers, going for labels or complaining to the khan about a neighbor.
      2. +1
        12 February 2013 21: 25
        Ryazan regiments were in armor, and the Polish hussars did not belong to light cavalry.
  8. +3
    11 February 2013 12: 36
    In any case, the ancient history was clearly "combed" in order to whitewash the Russian princes, whom almost all were considered saints. And they fought among themselves, not sparing their people, and brother went against brother - for a sweet soul. And here is such a "profitable business" - the invasion of Batu! on the sly, everything was written off to him.
    1. Yoshkin Kot
      +1
      11 February 2013 12: 46
      no one whitewashed them, they just taught medieval history at the age of children's idealism, they taught it completely in universities, not without Marxist censorship, of course, but less than that, I will give an example of censorship, Vladimir Monomakh, having come to power in Kiev, expelled all Jews from Russia (usurers) they were all) to Poland with a ban on return under pain of death and flow (looting of property). there were later similar examples,
      1. +1
        11 February 2013 13: 28
        Quote: Yoshkin Cat
        she was taught in universities completely, not without Marxite censorship, of course, but more or less, I will give an example of censorship, Vladimir Monomakh, having come to power in Kiev, sent all the Jews from Russia (they were loan sharks) to Poland

        Is that the way they teach in universities? (by the way, the abbreviation of the university is written in small letters). What a nightmare - Jews in Russia in the 12th century - and there are thousands of them !!! wassat
        1. 0
          11 February 2013 15: 44
          Most bastard from such pearls ...
          In universities ... taught ... that Jews were expelled from Russia, starting with Monomakhovskaya.
          Three quarters of the faculty are Jews.
          In the Conservatory, cultural "centers" - generally nine-tenths.
          And they teach.
          Well, they did not expel anyone - neither migrant workers, nor Chinese, nor Negroes - only poor Jews.
          ...
          Was there ... Jews many times more? In Kievan Rus.
          Either .. Jews .. they themselves .. censored.
          And on the other hand ... if there are many Jews, this is a branch of the Khazaria, and not Kievan Rus.
          In short ... someone is clearly lying ...
        2. Yoshkin Kot
          0
          12 February 2013 12: 59
          you did not know? or didn’t know that the Jews were the ruling elite of the Khazars ???
      2. 0
        11 February 2013 23: 28
        The Marxists didn’t care much about the history of ancient Russia, for them practically no history existed until the 17 year, and I suspect if it were not for Stalin, she would not have rejoiced like a science in the USSR
    2. +1
      11 February 2013 23: 26
      our field fragmentation ended in what century? and now remember the year that Italy and Germany were formed as united states, so it’s not necessary to blame the princes for special inhuman cannibalism.
  9. +3
    11 February 2013 12: 42
    baltika-18
    Prometey
    avt

    Then open our eyes to the western campaign of the Mongol-Tatars:
    battle of Legnica on April 9, 1241

    Battle of the Chaillot River April 11, 1241
    1. +2
      11 February 2013 13: 02
      Flooding
      Where are the pictures from? At the last incident, those who are right with the banner of the Ottoman Empire laughing
      And where did you get the idea that these were the Mongols? translation of ancient texts troublesome business
      1. +1
        11 February 2013 13: 32
        First - Hewdigs Codex (1353)
        In the second miniature, I find it difficult to answer, date back to the XIII century.
        As for the banner of the Hungarian king Bela IV, of course, I’m not sure.
        But I know for sure that the crescent was widely used in European heraldry. However, you are free to consider how you please.
        Coat of arms of the King of Hungary Andras III (1290-1301):

        Finally, another miniature, this time from the Hungarian Chronicum Pictum (aka Kepes Kronika):

        King Bela IV, pursued by unknown horsemen of unknown identity.
        1. 0
          11 February 2013 13: 49
          Quote: Flood
          King Bela IV, pursued by unknown horsemen of unknown identity.

          Well, yes, well, their faces are all the same here. The fact is that there is a letter from Bela 4 to the Pope, in which he does not mention any Mongols, calls those who attacked "infidels", and deciphers the Russians, brodniks with east, Bulgarians and other heretics.
          1. +2
            11 February 2013 13: 59
            Quote: baltika-18
            Well, yes, well, their faces are all the same here. The fact is that there is a letter from Bela 4 to the Pope, in which he does not mention any Mongols, calls those who attacked "infidels", and deciphers the Russians, brodniks with east, Bulgarians and other heretics.

            Please provide a text.
            Particularly interested in the mention of wanderers.
            I suspect that the Hungarians knew little about them.
        2. 0
          11 February 2013 13: 51
          What is not installed here?
          King Belo .. haunted by .... blue riders (shy - blue - say) ..
          Typical such ... sticks, on the heads.
          Judging by the yellow-black flowers, it is clear who painted.
        3. Marek Rozny
          +3
          11 February 2013 16: 08
          Quote: Flood
          King Bela IV, pursued by unknown horsemen of unknown identity.

          gyyy, Kazakhs wore such hats until recently. This headdress is called "kalpak" (the Russian word "cap" comes from it).
          Kazakh Khan Abylay:


          Well, pay attention to bathrobes - typical Asian.
          1. +3
            11 February 2013 16: 22
            Quote: Marek Rozny
            gyyy, Kazakhs wore such caps until recently

            I guess what kind of hats these are, however, which were worn by more than one ancestor of the Kazakhs.
            1. Marek Rozny
              +6
              11 February 2013 16: 37
              The Kyrgyz and Karakalpaks also had similar kalpaks. Neither the Kazan Tatars nor the Mongols had such headdresses. Until the tragedy of the 30s of the 20th century, Kazakhs were the largest Turkic people on the territory of the Horde, the Russian Empire, and the USSR. Other steppe Turkic nomadic peoples (Nogais, Bashkirs, Karakalpaks, Siberian Tatars) are several times smaller than the Kazakh ethnos. Each Kazakh clan is proud to have taken part in the campaigns of the Chingizids. Personally, my Argyn clan joined Genghis Khan in 1209-1211, even before his war with Khorezmshah. The name of my subgenus is translated as "guardsman" (karauyl), tk. Later, the bodyguards of the Chingizids were selected from my family, and the name of my tribe in a sub-genus literally translates into Russian as "the one who seizes foreign countries" ("zhaulybai").
              The commander of the Crimean khan's army Tugai-bey came out of my kind of argyn, who helped Bohdan Khmelnitsky to fight off the Poles. Fans of Fomenkovschina do not want to explain how it happened that my family ended up in the Ukrainian steppe to kick asses for the gentry, if in their opinion there was no horde, but all of them were supposedly Russian? Or now they will begin to explain that Argyn Tugai-Bey - in fact, Alexei Timofeevich Belyakov - is a native Ryazan and just an Orthodox commander))))
          2. 0
            11 February 2013 18: 25
            Quote: Marek Rozny
            This headdress is called "kalpak" (the Russian word "cap" from him

            Or maybe vice versa. The Russian root base -cl -, - kr-, since -l- can easily turn into -p-, always semantically refers to round shapes, kolob, kolobok, circle, wheel, knee, bell, brace , the cap is no exception, the head is round. yes, and the word head itself is also from here, with the transition -g-k-. That is, we have the Russian root base -cl -, - cr-. Only in Russian, the root base forms the bushes cap, fooled, fooled. So from the point of view of origin, "kalpak" came from "cap" by replacing the vowel.
            1. Marek Rozny
              0
              11 February 2013 18: 49
              Measuring an inch by your yardstick is patriotic but exhausting. Not only the cap is Turkism. But the aforementioned "kolobok" was molded from the Türkic verb "kalau", one of the meanings of which is specifically to roll something into a round pancake, usually manure for a dung ... And the word "side" in Türkic is pardon, it is literal "poop" sense. A gingerbread man is what a dung beetle constructs))))
              But the word wheel has nothing to do with the "circle". This is an Indo-European word that contains the meaning of "spinning, spinning." The word "brace" is also there.
              A knee, a bell is not the topic at all. Neither the word knee has anything to do with a "circle", let alone a bell, which in Russia before the Horde was practically never rounded. More often the bell was a simple piece of iron, on which they beat another (they were called "beat" and "riveted", if I am not mistaken).
              1. Ingvald_Bueny
                0
                17 February 2013 17: 54
                Quote: Marek Rozny
                A knee, a bell is not the topic at all. Neither the word knee has anything to do with a "circle", let alone a bell, which in Russia before the Horde was practically never rounded. More often the bell was a simple piece of iron, on which they beat another (they were called "beat" and "riveted", if I am not mistaken).

                You are wrong. A bell (Russian colo-circle, stake is a round stick) is a dome-shaped musical instrument, so it cannot be a simple "piece of iron". Maybe you don't know, but the Byzantine bells sounded the Blagovest on the Tithe Church in Kiev in the 11th century, before the invasion of the Mongols. The bell, aka "Campana", has nothing to do with the Horde. On the contrary, due to the invasion of the Mongols, the bell business in Russia was dying out during this period.
                Bells were known to Jews, Egyptians, Romans. The famous bells were in Japan and China.
                In a dispute about the origin of the bell, a number of scientists consider China to be its homeland, from where the bell could come to Europe along the Silk Road. Evidence: it was in China that the first bronze casting appeared, and the oldest bells from the 23th-11th centuries BC were found there. the size of 4,5 - 6 cm or more. They were used in different ways: they were hung around the waistband of clothes or the neck of horses or other animals as amulets (to ward off evil spirits), used in military service, in the church for worship, during ceremonies and rituals. By the 5th century BC the passion for bell music became so great in China that it took whole sets. bells.
                However, in literature sometimes, as the oldest, the Assyrian bell from the times of Salmanassar II (860-824 BC), which was found during excavations of the palace of Nineveh, stored in the British Museum, is mentioned.

                So if the Horde had bells, they borrowed them from either the Chinese or the Russians. Most likely the Chinese.
                1. Marek Rozny
                  0
                  18 February 2013 19: 16
                  Ingvald, did I even say somewhere that the Türks invented the bell? You look closely at the essence of the dispute. not at all in the subject.
      2. 0
        11 February 2013 23: 30
        Do you identify all prints and pictures with the realism of photography ???? Thought it was a medieval photoshop?)))))
    2. ENESEI
      +1
      12 February 2013 04: 30
      More recently, scientists have been able to decipher the signatures of the original drawings of the 13th century. The troops surrounding the Russian city shouted: "We are the Horde - open the gates", to which the defenders of the city always answered: "And we are Rat!"
  10. +6
    11 February 2013 13: 08
    To everyone denying the yoke:
    The people live, their foundations, traditions. Mostly free people, princes sometimes go around the land, collect dues. Invaders appear, demand tithing, including in the form of slaves. Princes receive shortcuts to power and the hard power of princes is established, liberties and liberties are reduced, tribute is paid. Why do not you yoke.
    Well, for those who believe that they should have been re-mongolized in 300 years, do not confuse you with an aggressive campaign and consolidation / resettlement in this territory. They came, destroyed large administrative centers and forces, appointed vassals who were already fulfilling the will of the conquerors, punitive raids against the "irresponsible"
    1. lechatormosis
      +2
      11 February 2013 14: 08
      So here we need irrefutable evidence that these invaders were MONGOLS.
      There is no evidence of these.
      1. +2
        11 February 2013 14: 18
        Quote: lehatormoz
        lechatormosis

        I see a little differently.
        Of course, a lot of questions. And inconsistencies too.
        But if historical documents are not considered an argument, then what is proof for you? Creativity Fomenko?
        The situation is just the opposite - irrefutable evidence is needed in order to change or supplement traditional history with new facts.
        1. lechatormosis
          +2
          11 February 2013 14: 30
          in the first place of battle.
          FURTHER - BLOOD BATTLES Battles are always accompanied by the presence of mass graves of the remains of warriors.
          And here the most interesting is not a single little bit burial found MONGOLS HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN IT (again say Fomenko is to blame)
          1. +2
            11 February 2013 15: 41
            Quote: lehatormoz
            in the first place of battle.
            FURTHER - BLOOD BATTLES Battles are always accompanied by the presence of mass graves of the remains of warriors.

            Do you understand what the matter is, dear.
            What is proof for you is for me personally just an occasion to think. Evidence is an indisputable fact that refutes or confirms any prevailing belief.
            Tell me, as an archaeologist, an archaeologist in what soil at what depth should I look for artifacts or remains of 700-800 years ago?
            1. -2
              11 February 2013 16: 09
              Quote: Flood
              Tell me, as an archaeologist, an archaeologist in what soil at what depth should I look for artifacts or remains of 700-800 years ago?

              I’m not an archaeologist, but I think I’m probably somewhere at a depth of 7-8 meters, there are no guesses about the ground, I don’t know.
          2. Marek Rozny
            +5
            11 February 2013 16: 12
            There are no graves of the Mongols. It is a fact. Instead of the Mongols in the mounds are other steppe inhabitants - the Türks, who formed the basis of both the Horde army and the Horde state apparatus.
            1. +1
              11 February 2013 16: 31
              Quote: Marek Rozny
              There are no graves of the Mongols. It is a fact. Instead of the Mongols in the mounds are other steppe inhabitants - the Türks, who formed the basis of both the Horde army and the Horde state apparatus.

              Marek, of course, we use the word "Mongols" in a collective sense.
              Now we are not even talking about the percentage and ethnicity.
              But about the historical fact as such.
              By the way, what is the difference between the graves of the Mongols from the graves of those same Turks?
              1. Marek Rozny
                +2
                11 February 2013 16: 44
                everyone is different. the Mongols professed shamanism different from Turkic Tengrianism. Even in Mongolia itself, the ancient Turkic mounds are strictly separated from the Mongol ones.
            2. Frigate
              +1
              11 February 2013 18: 36
              Quote: Marek Rozny

              There are no graves of the Mongols. It is a fact. Instead of the Mongols in the mounds are other steppe inhabitants - the Türks, who formed the basis of both the Horde army and the Horde state apparatus.

              When they asked Shyngyskhan (Vostokkhan): "where are all these Mongols, where is your family?"
              Then he took a bucket of water and, taking salt in his palm, sprinkled it into the water: "You see, my family (people), just like salt dissolved in the cauldron of the peoples of the empire"
            3. +1
              12 February 2013 02: 27
              Quote: Marek Rozny
              Instead of the Mongols in the mounds are other steppe inhabitants - the Türks, who formed the basis of both the Horde army and the Horde state apparatus.

              I have a house in one very old village. In Ukraine. It is believed that this village is one of the longest in Europe. From end to end - 16 kilometers, if not more. Along the river. So, on the territory of this village there are quite a lot of mounds. Quite high — probably there are also more than 10-12 meters in height and 40 meters in diameter. In some places special concrete pedestals with security plates from the USSR have been installed. I was not able to find out what kind of mounds. They say - Scythian. But, as for me, those who say themselves do not know. Excavations there, apparently - have never been carried out. And what can you tell about the mounds. If convenient - write to the PM.
              1. Marek Rozny
                +1
                12 February 2013 04: 55
                Mounds and statues (stone "women") were left by nomads-Turks and Scythians throughout the geography of the Eurasian steppe. It is impossible to open and study them all. And it doesn't make much sense. In general, the mounds of nomads of different eras have been studied quite well in Soviet times, and historians / archaeologists have a general idea of ​​them. There is a lot of literature on this topic. Soviet archaeologists have worked especially hard in Ukraine. And the gold finds of the Scythian mounds of Ukraine, which are known to the whole world, are generally a separate interesting topic.
                But in general, there is little unusual in the mounds - the remains of a buried person, a horse (as a whole or only a skull), weapons, dishes with food, clothes, and personal items. It is clear that objects from mounds are already in a semi-destroyed state from time to time, and therefore are not of particular interest either to black diggers, who usually look for gold in them, or to academic science, which is difficult to surprise with artifacts of nomadic life.
                Outwardly, especially Scythian burial mounds do not differ from Turkic ones. Except that huge mounds are most often of Scythian origin. They loved the swing. The higher the status of a person during life, the larger the mound was. But already in ancient times there were "black diggers" who did not miss the chance to rob graves, so the probability of finding treasures in the 21st century is not high. Although anything can happen.
                Now CIS archaeologists are more interested in mounds in Altai and in East Kazakhstan - there the Scythians managed to make mummies and create a special microclimate so that the body of the deceased was in eternal ice underground. Thanks to this, the mounds of this territory have preserved a bunch of things in almost pristine form.
                I myself somehow accidentally dug up a nomad’s burial place in Almaty when a hole in the garage was being dug with friends in the city. At a depth of 3 meters, a usual burial was found with all the attributes of a male nomad. By the way, even one gold earring was found near the skull. The dishes were broken, but nevertheless porcelain (!) Shone like it had just been from a modern factory. There were still large pieces of rotten thick boards, but from what they - figs knows him. Likely they partially covered the grave, Kazakhs still bury it like that - without coffins, only in a shroud in a special niche of the grave and at the same time cover the body with boards or bricks. and only then they bury it.
            4. Ingvald_Bueny
              0
              17 February 2013 17: 57
              Do you think Genghis Khan was a Mongol, Manchurian or Turk?
              1. Marek Rozny
                0
                18 February 2013 19: 19
                In his biography, I see only Turkic names, Turkic way of life, Turkic worldview on state governance, as well as Turkic genealogy. Even if we assume that Genghis Khan was a Mongol from birth, then all the same, his descendants became Turks, not Mongols. The Mongols do not have Chingizids, and the Türks (especially the Kazakhs) of the Chingizids still still have "Kamaz and a small cart". The lineage of his mother, his father, and his wives are part of the modern Kazakhs.
    2. Frigate
      +2
      11 February 2013 18: 19
      Quote: OneMoreDay
      To everyone denying the yoke:
      The people live, their foundations, traditions. Mostly free people, princes sometimes go around the land, collect dues. Invaders appear, demand tithing, including in the form of slaves. Princes receive shortcuts to power and the hard power of princes is established, liberties and liberties are reduced, tribute is paid. Why do not you yoke.
      Well, for those who believe that they should have been re-mongolized in 300 years, do not confuse you with an aggressive campaign and consolidation / resettlement in this territory. They came, destroyed large administrative centers and forces, appointed vassals who were already fulfilling the will of the conquerors, punitive raids against the "irresponsible"

      Well, you must admit, tithe is that small part that the princes paid, it is so small that the princes, instead of uniting for a long time as before, fought with each other, so it turns out that Igo was the beginning of statehood among the Russians
      1. Marek Rozny
        +1
        11 February 2013 18: 33
        In my opinion, Gumilyov once noticed that the United Russia and the ONE China first appeared from the Horde. The steppes turned out to be not so bad managers, if they had managed not only to rule countries for centuries that no one else could conquer, but laid the foundations for their further state building.
        Both Moscow and Beijing (Khanbalyk in the era of Genghisides) are not just the capitals of Russia and China, these are administrative centers created by the steppes to manage the respective territories... The Chinese, despite their Han arrogance, willingly admit the fact that it was the Genghisids who were the founders of a united China, and therefore erect monuments to Genghis Khan, but in Russia it is popular among some to consider it either offensive that some Asians ruled Russia, or even recently decided to consider that these "wild steppe inhabitants" were not born in Russia at all. Although Muscovy is flesh and blood (in the administrative and political sense) - the Golden Horde. What's in big things, what's in nuances. Moreover, it is funny that pre-Petrine Moscow, in the way of life of the townspeople, was more like a typical Central Asian city than a Slavic one. Muscovites even disdained to drink alcohol, although they were Orthodox. And they dressed exclusively in Asian, not Russian. Descriptions of pre-Petrine Muscovy by contemporaries of those years are a very fascinating thing.
        1. 0
          11 February 2013 18: 56
          Quote: Marek Rozny
          Both Moscow and Beijing (Khanbalyk in the era of Genghisides) are not just the capitals of Russia and China, they are administrative centers created by the steppes to manage the respective territories.


          Well, don't go overboard! I don’t know about Beijing, but Moscow was not created by the steppe people. And the fact that manners were Asian, so to live with wolves ... Well, then, this is the "Mongolian gene". The steppe dwellers have won - their morals, weapons and much more have become fashionable ... Now there is a temporary American yoke, so American camouflage, army boots and McDonald's are in vogue ... Do you have McDonald's in Kazakhstan? :)
          By the way, the Mongols were the only ones who so seriously defeated us. And how many will now show on the map where that Mongolia is? We are already arguing whether they were at all ... I hope in five hundred years our descendants will also argue how miserable cowboys from Texas could build their own McDonald's in Russia? :)
          1. Marek Rozny
            +2
            11 February 2013 19: 08
            Moscow is just like a city created, of course by Russians. But Moscow as an administrative center was created by the Horde people. After the Moscow prince was empowered to collect tribute from other Russian lands (in other words, they were placed above other Russian cities in status), then Moscow began to turn into what it is now. Therefore, the ambitions of the Moscow princes after the Horde collapsed were openly expansionist and arrogant in relation to other Russian lands. Tver tried to become “great”, but Moscow, which was close friends with the “Tatarva” after the collapse of the empire, quickly put Tver in its place and firmly secured the status of the “Grand Duchy”. It was not in vain that Ivan the Terrible turned his principality into "Tatar clothes" (in the political sense) at the right moments, putting the Chingizid princes instead of himself as the head of Muscovy.
            And read about Beijing (more precisely, Hanbalyk). Beijing, of course, was also founded by the Chinese, but it never had the capital status like Moscow. Only the Horde made this city the capital of China. And since then this country has not had another capital.
            ZY There are no McDonald's in KZ) Although we have a bunch of Americanisms without him, which shows the same trend that was inherent in medieval Muscovy and modern Russia and other countries that are in "cultural occupation" from others)
            1. 0
              12 February 2013 07: 09
              Here we watch each from its bell tower ...
              Quote: Marek Rozny
              But Moscow as the administrative center was created precisely by the Horde. After the Moscow prince was given the power to collect tribute from other Russian lands (in other words, they were placed above the status of other Russian cities), then Moscow began to turn into what it now is

              The principality of Moscow existed before the arrival of the Mongols, which means that Moscow was an administrative center, and did not become it by the decision of the Horde. Yes, the principality was so-so, but therefore it did not suffer so much during the first Mongol campaigns, it took people from the destroyed cities and thanks to the dexterity and luck of its princes it rose to the point that the Moscow princes were able to claim the Horde label.
              The khans of the Golden Horde used the principle of "divide and rule" in Russia, the label was given to various Russian princes. To create competition in the amount of a bribe for a label :) and to prevent the strengthening of a single principality. So the rise of Moscow is more likely an oversight of the Horde than their merit. And friendship with the "Tatarva" was abused by the same Tver princes. Maybe Ivan the Terrible wrapped his principality in Tatar clothes, but he took Kazan. By the way, in all or in many princely families there was a significant part of the Horde blood, political marriages have not been canceled.
              So, if the steppe residents had a strong influence on the formation of Moscow as the capital of Russia, then this did not happen thanks to them, but contrary to :) Well, their cultural influence is great, 300 years of vassal dependence were not in vain.
            2. avt
              +1
              12 February 2013 12: 18
              Quote: Marek Rozny
              Moscow - how simple the city was created, of course by the Russians. But Moscow as the administrative center was created precisely by the Horde. After the Moscow prince was given the power to collect tribute from other Russian lands (in other words, they were placed above the status of other Russian cities), then Moscow began to turn into what it now is. Therefore, the ambitions of the Moscow princes after the Horde fell apart were frankly expansionist and arrogant in relation to other Russian lands. Tve

              And here it’s closer to the truth than the tales of super-horses of the Mongolian breed, certainly adapted to the terrain but nowhere else in the world for some reason not widely used in cavalry, the Mongols naturally do not count them just in the place of the breed. If we consider in this plane, then many obscure moments in the first campaign are immediately removed. In the face of attracting military force to end the strife for the principalities and establish the supremacy of one princely family and the elimination of competitors, in Kozelsk it is Chernihiv. Well, their opponents, the Yaroslavichs, very successfully collaborated with the Volga Horde, and when Andrei, Nevsky’s brother began to flirt with the West, immediately stopped, of course they paid for help. And this construction was held with varying success until Ivan the 4th, when he declared himself not Grand Duke a King. That in the understanding of the people of that time it was not ordinary, but for Kazan and Astrakhan it was not at all acceptable, so Vanya in Kazan repeated Kozelsk - he removed the competitors. But he couldn’t turn the tide to the end, and the Tatar prince appeared supposedly to mock.
        2. +4
          11 February 2013 18: 58
          Quote: Marek Rozny
          In my opinion, Gumilyov once noticed that the United Russia and the ONE China first appeared from the Horde.

          I doubt the accuracy of the words. Could search, but I do not think that it is worth bothering. Not FROM the Horde, but possibly because of the Horde.
          Marek, it’s somehow interesting for you: where you don’t poke it — all thanks to the Turks, that is, to the Kazakhs.
          Quote: Marek Rozny
          And they dressed exclusively in Asian, and not in Russian.

          It's funny Still, it means somewhere dressed in Russian. And then you look soon and there will be nothing Russian left. Everything inherited from the Türks.
          Share the sources. I want to join.
          1. Marek Rozny
            +4
            11 February 2013 19: 28
            1) Regarding Gumilyov's phrase, I will try to find the exact wording, although this idea is the main one in his wonderful work "From Russia to Russia".
            Muscovy is an ulus, the same as the Crimean ulus, Nogai yurt or Siberian ulus. There are some nuances, but on the whole, this is an ordinary fragment of the empire, which, unlike other uluses, managed to recreate the empire anew, and not disdaining to actually exhibit as a Chingizid state in order to comply with all the necessary political formalities of that time. Grozny behaved in exactly the same way as Tamerlane, who was not a Genghisid by blood, but had ambitions and strength, thanks to which the neighbors "for some reason" did not doubt their Chingizid origin and the real right to reign in their uluses and even annex other uluses to their own)))
            Of course, under Peter Alekseevich, the vector of Russia changed abruptly, and the powder also covered the essence of Russian tsarist power, but the insides of the Horde remained in their original form - from absolute power to Horde penal servitude and tughras (Asian seals of Russian tsars). In the eyes of the steppe dwellers, the Russian Empire was the legitimate successor of the Chingizids, this is stated in a huge number of historical documents from the diplomatic correspondence of the steppe dwellers with Muscovy. Akpatsha ("White Tsar") - for the Turks it is not just a foreign king, it is legal genghiside, although "for some reason" slightly unusual in appearance))))))) Such is the game where one side pretends to be Chingizid blood, and the other side seems to sincerely believe in it) This is a valid format of communication between Muscovy and all other parts of the former Horde ... But in relations with the West, Russia tried to appear "European-Christian" for obvious reasons.
            2) Most of the Russians naturally dressed for the most part in Russian. And it was Muscovy that cut eyes of contemporaries with the fact that the local residents dressed and behaved like typical Central Asian citizens. Only Peter the Great stirred up Moscow and put on its head a European powdered wig in the literal and figurative sense. You can read about the mores in pre-Petrovian Muscovy (in this city), any material available on the Internet, whether it be of Russian or European origin. There is no difference, everywhere the same thing is emphasized by the authors.
            1. Marek Rozny
              +1
              11 February 2013 19: 39
              ps pre-Petrine Muscovy - 16-17 centuries before the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov, in which Moscow was no longer very culturally different from other Russian cities.
              1. Ingvald_Bueny
                +1
                17 February 2013 18: 51
                Source, please provide.
                1. Marek Rozny
                  0
                  18 February 2013 19: 20
                  any material on pre-Petrovsky Muscovy. which one you find.
            2. Yoshkin Kot
              0
              12 February 2013 13: 12
              do not exaggerate, and the Russian outfit for arrogant wearers of pantaloons and stockings was "Asiatic"
            3. Ingvald_Bueny
              0
              17 February 2013 18: 49
              Quote: Marek Rozny
              Muscovy is an ulus, the same as the Crimean ulus, the Nogai yurt or the Siberian ulus.

              And where can I read about it?

              Quote: Marek Rozny
              Grozny behaved in exactly the same way as Tamerlane, who was not a Genghisid by blood, but had ambitions and strength, thanks to which the neighbors "for some reason" did not doubt their Chingizid origin and the real right to reign in their uluses and even annex other uluses to their own)))

              Which neighbors didn’t doubt it?


              Quote: Marek Rozny
              In the eyes of the steppes, the Russian Empire was the legitimate successor of the Chingizids

              In the eyes of the Russians and, by the way, Ivan Vasilyevich the Terrible himself, which comes from Augustus Caesar, Russia is the successor of the Eastern Roman Empire. Moreover, the Mongols did not manage to conquer Rus until the end. And the fact that the former Horde "possessions" came under the royal hand of the Russian Tsar, so you should study how this happened and why.

              Quote: Marek Rozny
              Most of the Russians naturally dressed for the most part in Russian. And it was Muscovy that cut eyes of contemporaries with the fact that the local residents dressed and behaved like typical Central Asian citizens. Only Peter the Great stirred up Moscow and put on its head a European powdered wig in the literal and figurative sense. You can read about the mores in pre-Petrovian Muscovy (in this city), any material available on the Internet, whether it be of Russian or European origin.

              Read the materials correctly, but rather visit museums.
              1. Marek Rozny
                0
                18 February 2013 19: 26
                1) Trepavlov wrote well about the relationship between Ivan the Terrible and other Horde uluses. Moreover, it is difficult to suspect him of a certain adherence to the "Horde theory", rather the opposite)))
                2) What does it mean that not all of Russia was conquered? What Russian lands did not take the label of reign from the khans of the Horde?
                3) About museums you can not promote. I travel constantly, and always the first thing I go to museums is to spend hours of time. In addition, I usually buy books from these museums. At home, a decent collection has accumulated. You can’t buy many of these books in ordinary stores and you won’t find scans in the internet. Some are generally released in a few hundred copies. I have seen museums in Russia and Asia enough to have at least some minimal idea.
        3. Ingvald_Bueny
          +1
          17 February 2013 18: 24
          Quote: Marek Rozny
          In my opinion, Gumilyov once noticed that the United Russia and the ONE China first appeared from the Horde.

          Of course, until 1211 there was never a single China, and until 1237 there was no single Russia.
          Quote: Marek Rozny
          The steppes turned out to be not so bad managers, if they had managed not only to rule countries for centuries that no one else could conquer, but laid the foundations for their further state building.

          Well, the Chinese from the horde in 1368 freed apparently very well managed. And Russia in 1380 gave a serious battle to the Horde and won the battle.
          Moreover, the Mongols conquered Russia, separate principalities, which exhibited at different times from 5-10 thousand soldiers against 100 thousand Horde invaders. It’s the same as Americans boasting of victory over Japan.
          I wonder what are the foundations of state construction in Russia laid by the Ordzintsy besides the label and yasak?

          Quote: Marek Rozny
          but in Russia it is popular among some to consider it either offensive that some Asians ruled Russia, or in general, recently decided to believe that these "wild steppe inhabitants" never existed in Russia.

          Uv. what does the Asians have to do with it, if the Slavs living beyond the Sarmatian mountains were considered Asians in the Middle Ages? Moreover, apart from Semyon Bekbulatovich, there was not a single "ruler of Russia of Horde origin".

          Quote: Marek Rozny
          Although Muscovy is flesh from flesh (in the administrative-political sense) - the Golden Horde. What big things, what nuances. And it is funny that pre-Petrine Moscow, in the way of life of the townspeople, was more like a typical Central Asian city than a Slavic one. Muscovites even disdained to drink alcohol, although they were Orthodox. And they dressed exclusively in Asian, and not in Russian. The descriptions of the pre-Petrine Muscovy by contemporaries of those years are a very fascinating thing.

          Muscovy is itself an adaptation of the word "Moscow" in German. The Moscow principality had nothing in common with the Zolta Horde, except for vassal dependence.
          As for the descriptions of pre-Petrine Moscow, are you mistaken, I don’t know where you read what you write about, or do you come up with?
          There was a minimum in Central Asia in Moscow of the 16th century. One of the reasons Russia did not come into contact with Central Asia at that time.
          At the expense of alcohol - this is a Russophobian stamp. You probably only spoke with Russians on the Internet and talked. Orthodoxy just strictly prohibits the excessive consumption of alcohol. Under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich in Moscow there were only a few drinking establishments, and that was mainly for foreigners.
          As for the clothes of the "Muscovites" (why do you write that, are you German?), What is Asian about them? Where are these descriptions? Typical Russian (Slavic) clothing. You should visit Russian museums, but familiarize yourself with the sources so as not to expound such funny opuses.
          1. Marek Rozny
            0
            18 February 2013 20: 15
            1) The Yuan Dynasty has commanded China for a hundred years, a pretty good result. Only the Manchu dynasty commanded more Han.
            2) in 1380, Dmitry Donskoy defeated not the Horde, but the enemies of the Horde)))))) Temnik Mamai was a Nechingizid, he had no rights to the khan throne. He was a separatist who sought to tear off the Crimean yurt from the Horde with his allies Genoese, ON and Ryazan) Many thanks to Dmitry on behalf of the legitimate khan of the Horde Tokhtamysh. True, soon Dmitry's rivals, the Ryazan people, whispered to Tokhtamysh that supposedly Dmitry Donskoy had contacted the enemies of the Horde, for which the khan boiled over and burned Moscow. The people of Ryazan were right or they erected a vain, but Dmitry Donskoy still did not begin to swing the rights before the khan. The conflict was hushed up, given the merits of Donskoy in "strengthening constitutional power" and "fighting anti-Horde separatism."
            By the way, on the battlefield from Mamaia were Italians (Genoese) and Russian princes with their regiments. And the Crimean steppes did not support Mamai, for which the influential Murzes of that ulus were killed, and therefore the defeated Mamai did not rush to the Crimea home, but to the neighboring countries - to the ON.
            3) About 100 thousand against 5-10 thousand - where did you get it? There were not so many wars in the campaign of Batu Khan. In addition to the western campaign, the steppes also had to control the remaining territory, and extinguish the Persian uprisings. In addition, in addition to the Russians, these Tumens defeated a bunch of other nations - Kipchaks Kotyan, Caucasians, Hungarians, Germans, etc. It is not necessary to make it as if, apart from the Russians, the steppes didn’t muddle anyone else. Russia is one of the goals, but far from the only one.
            4) About "what the Horde's people laid down" in the state administration - that's all. From diplomatic turns of speech and tughr seals, to a double-headed coat of arms and a regional management system. Yes, even on their heads, Russian tsars wore the usual Kazakh borik hat, decorated with jewelry. What are the "monomakh caps"? Simple steppe headdresses, which are still in use today. That the nature of the Russian government, that the external elements - all Horde with a few exceptions. There are plenty of works on this topic.
            5) Are you kidding or do not seriously understand what you are arguing with? By the phrase "Asians ruled" I mean the rule of the Horde in Russia. There is no question of any other context. And Bekbulatovich was the last Horde ruler, not the only one.
            6) I am writing "Muscovy", "Muscovites" because these terms have already become established. You perfectly understood the place and time. You can read the history of Muscovy in any historical document of that period or scientific work. There you will find what was there from the Horde, and what was not.
            7) Have you now decided to separate the concepts of "Horde" and "Central Asia"? Like the inhabitants of Central Asia and the Horde at that time, different concepts? Are you definitely friends with geography, ethnography and history?
            8) About alcohol - let's not be blunt. "Drinking in Russia is fun" since the time of the Rurikovichs. The fact that they drank in Russia is known in more than detail (not 40-degree vodka, kanesh, but other brew, wine, beer and mead). And only in Muscovy, up to the Romanovs, alcohol was practically out of the law. Ivan the Terrible, on pain of death, prohibited the use of alcohol (only allowed his guardsmen in strictly designated places). At the same time, in other Russian lands, drinking alcohol was not particularly limited. And taverns were everywhere. Where did you get the "Church strictly prohibits" if the priests themselves drive wine and force the parishioners to accept "the blood of Christ." Of course, the church is against excessive use, but in general it did not constitute any opposition to this phenomenon.
            About clothes already worn out. read numerous sources - Russian, European. moreover, women still dressed in Turkic style during the time of Peter the Great.
      2. 0
        11 February 2013 18: 51
        Quote: Frigate
        Igo was the beginning of statehood among the Russians

        Justify the frigate. Below, Marek has spoken more correctly, although it can also be argued. But your phrase, sorry, looks stupid.
      3. 0
        11 February 2013 20: 30
        Tithing is VERY much, so every month you try to give a tenth of your salary to the church.
        1. Marek Rozny
          +1
          11 February 2013 20: 43
          We are now paying much more taxes than during the Horde.
        2. Yoshkin Kot
          -1
          12 February 2013 13: 15
          I give, I don’t suffer, but it’s right, it’s a matter of my conscience, and it’s technically not possible to collect tithe under those conditions (ps, and church tithe is a kind of community parish fund, priest’s income, church repair and construction, children's education, social widow assistance and orphan training)
      4. 0
        12 February 2013 09: 42
        I agree, we have lost something, gained something. Unity is a consequence of joining the Horde, otherwise there would probably be a development of the Polish type: a gentry freemen, to whom the king is not a special decree and powerless slaves.
        And I will add: autocracy is not a consequence of the civilizational factor (strangers came and brought their foundations - this should just be perceived as a yoke), but the consequence of the fact that under conditions of wars the system that most fully corresponds to the situation gradually crystallized. The one who could not change (or chose the wrong path) came to naught
  11. +2
    11 February 2013 14: 20
    So here we need irrefutable evidence that these invaders were MONGOLS.
    There is no evidence of these.

    And what, they had to freeze their sperm so that after some "miserable" 700-800 years, some doubting intellectuals could conduct an independent genetic examination?)))))))
  12. lechatormosis
    +1
    11 February 2013 14: 39
    And WHAT - this idea is interesting because none of the modern scientists has conducted a large-scale study of DNA of various peoples of the world.
    I am sure that at the same time a lot of interesting information will come out about the ways of evolution and movement of peoples along Mother Earth.
    1. 0
      11 February 2013 15: 06
      Yes they did.
      Four days ago there was a similar article. Here.
      http://topwar.ru/23968-russkiy-etnos-predstavlyaet-soboy-drevneyshiy-v-evrope-pl
      ast-chisto-nordicheskogo-naseleniya.html # comment-id-902629
      With this haplogroup R1a, all brains are braided.
      There were no MONGOLS in Russia.
      Separate ... tramps ... only.
      1. +5
        11 February 2013 17: 53
        Quote: Igarr
        There were no MONGOLS in Russia.
        Separate ... tramps ... only.


        --- chewing cake ---

        so there is no America, all the Jews came up with it in order to confuse us; all who say that they were in America lie, their Zionists intimidated (all planes are planted in America near Karaganda, where Zionists torture and implant bugs in the body).
        everything else: photos, videos, movies, books ..... Giant falsification of Zionist sages in order to capture world domination.
        1. -1
          11 February 2013 18: 12
          To the point, Carlson, to the point ...
          accents correct only ... left.
      2. +2
        11 February 2013 23: 34
        Hitler once terribly envied Mussolini and Italians because of their rich history of Rome, in the end, in order to at least somehow declare Germanic noble historical origin and great culture, he had to come up with Aryan theory, here you are with Fomenko and Nosovsky doing the same by the way, well, we don’t have a Colosseum and don’t invent what wasn’t.
    2. Urrry
      +1
      11 February 2013 22: 12
      DNA studies are all there, they already wrote about haplogroups ... and there are studies on the distribution of haplogroups, moreover, there are centers where you can send your saliva and give information to which haplogroup you belong to, where this haplogroup originated and how it spread ...
      There surprising things turn out: the last Russian emperors had a haplogroup more common among the Celts than the Eastern Slavs, and the nobility of Egypt in the pharaonic period by the haplogroup belonged to Europe and not to Africa ... :)
      1. Marek Rozny
        +2
        11 February 2013 22: 38
        As for the Romanovs and the pharaohs - it is not surprising. You yourself know how much blood of the European royal families the Russian tsars had. In general, in my opinion, they almost did not have Slavic blood.
        And the pharaohs and the elite of Egypt in general are the descendants of the ancient conquerors of Egypt. They outwardly differed from other residents of their country. In India, the brahmanas are also descendants of newcomers, if I am not mistaken.
        And not only the Romanovs differ greatly from other Russians by blood. Rurikovich is also an overseas dynasty.
        1. Ingvald_Bueny
          +1
          17 February 2013 18: 56
          Quote: Marek Rozny

          As for the Romanovs and the pharaohs - it is not surprising. You yourself know how much blood of the European royal families the Russian tsars had. In general, in my opinion, they almost did not have Slavic blood.

          In your opinion, you have already piled a lot here.

          Quote: Marek Rozny
          And the pharaohs and the elite of Egypt in general are the descendants of the ancient conquerors of Egypt.

          Whom. Are aliens really?

          Quote: Marek Rozny
          In India, the brahmanas are also descendants of newcomers, if I am not mistaken.

          If you are mistaken, why write about this?

          Quote: Marek Rozny
          And not only the Romanovs differ greatly from other Russians by blood. Rurikovich is also an overseas dynasty.

          For a person who knows little about Russia / Russia, you write a lot about Russian history.
          1. Marek Rozny
            0
            18 February 2013 18: 37
            1) Do you want to challenge the fact that the Romanovs were Germanized by blood?
            2) Pharaohs - according to genetic studies, belong to the haplogroup R1b1a2, which is very different from other Egyptians of the pre-Arab period, in which this haplogroup is found in less than 1% of the population. But it is found in 60-70% of modern Spaniards and French.
            3) Brahmans also differ from other Hindu groups in DNA - haplogroup R1a, which in Russia they like to call the "Russian haplogroup". And the representatives of the highest castes of India themselves consider themselves non-indigenous, but the descendants of some Aryan conquerors.
  13. +6
    11 February 2013 23: 28
    The term "Tatar yoke" first appeared at the beginning of the XVI century. among Polish chroniclers, the “Mongol-Tatar yoke” among Western European scholars at the beginning of the 19th century, and after that domestic historians began to use it everywhere. “Mongol-Tatars” appear from here, although, in principle, such a homogeneous nation did not exist. Initially, the Mongols were conquerors, as they moved to the countries of West Asia and Russia, they were strengthened by Turkic peoples, the name of one of which (Tatars) gradually passed to all Turkic tribes involved in their conquests. Therefore, in historical science, the expression "Mongol-Tatars" has taken root.
    The medieval ethnic history of the Mongolian and Turkic tribes of Central, Central and East Asia is much confusing and controversial. There is currently no clear answer to the question of which tribes are Turkic or Mongolian, if only because the names of the tribes, titles, personal names of the peoples of this region are strongly mixed as a result of borrowing. Between the three main peoples who settled in Central, Central and East Asia (Manchus, Mongols and Türks), there are similar names of generations and clans that speak different languages. The names of a clan and tribe in a given region often did not correspond to its actual ethnicity.
    Tatars (ethnonym "Tatars" - of Turkic-Iranian origin) - Turkic tribe (VI-VIII centuries), subordinate in the VI-XII centuries. many Mongol-speaking entities, which in the X-XIII centuries. also became known as Tatars.
    Mongols (“manghu”, from the Tungus-Manchu word “mangu” (river, water), means “river inhabitants”) is a Tungus-Manchu tribe that lived in the 9th-10th centuries. among other Mongol-speaking tribes, dissolved in them, but left their name and the ruling family, which began to dominate in the XI-XIII centuries.
    1. Marek Rozny
      +2
      12 February 2013 00: 06
      The Mongols, like the Turks, are still divided into clans. Mongolian clans (Hoshiuts, Torgauts and other Khalkha) were not recorded in the western campaigns, all the names of the clans are exclusively Turkic, moreover, precisely those that formed the basis of the modern Kazakh, Nogai, Bashkir, and Karakalpak nations. The only reason why the Kazakhs and Mongols are swearing to smithereens is the origin of several clans - Naimans, Kereis, Kiyats, whom the Mongols consider to be of Mongolian origin, but they allegedly later became Turkic. Although, oddly enough, in the Kazakh language there is not a single Mongolian word or special Mongolian custom (while the Kazakhs have a lot of Iranian, Arabic words). Allegedly, the Naimans and others were completely Turkic. Although all these clans still live in the same territory as in the times of Genghis Khan, "primordially Turkic" clans do not live among them. Moreover, Naimans are generally the largest family among the Kazakhs. Moreover, there are more Kazakh Naimans alone than all Mongols in Mongolia ...
      The last fortress of Mongolian historians is the origin of Genghis Khan himself. They call his family "certainly Mongolian". Although the kiyats became part of the Kazakh nation. The Mongols do not have a single Chingizid, but the Kazakhs Chingizids (a separate genus "Tore") are still above the roof.
      Another thing is that he was born on the territory of modern Mongolia, but only the Turks have always lived there. Mongols in the 13th century lived in the territory of Inner Mongolia, which is now part of the PRC. Genghis Khan brought the last Türks out of the Mongol ancestral homeland and merged them with the rest of the Türkic nomads. Genghis Khan never offered an equal union to anyone, only Khorezmshah Muhammad, insisting that the inhabitants of both states were brothers. In the same way, the "Mongols" of the Kipchaks in the Caucasus were trying to convince them to destroy the Turkic-Alanian military alliance there. And the "Mongols" really convinced the Kipchaks. Moreover, in the Turkic language. The Mongolian language is absolutely incomprehensible to the Turks. This is a completely different language.
      And despite a bunch of facts that the "Tatar-Mongols" did not consist of the Tatars of Kazan and not of the Khalkha Mongols, for some reason they are reluctantly called "Tatar-Mongols" in Russian history. At the same time, Kazakhs, Bashkirs, Nogais, nomadic Uzbeks, Karakalpaks are completely pushed aside by Russian historians from their own history.
      In Kazakhstan, there is a mausoleum of Jochi Khan (the son of Genghis Khan). The heads of all clans who were present at the funeral left their tamgas (something like generic signs) there. There are only Kazakh tamgas. And not a single Mongolian. The Kazakhs have preserved tamgas as well as the generic names of that period. My family has a tamga called "koz" and looks like a mathematical sign of infinity. Any argyn knows his tamga. The Mongols do not have such a tamga.
  14. +4
    11 February 2013 23: 45
    At the beginning of the XII century. the Mongols defeated the Jurchens and Tatars, forming the Hamag Mongol Ulus state (“the state of all Mongols”), but the forces were unequal from the 60's. XII century defeats began, which led to the collapse of this Mongol state. Temuchin in the 80-ies. XII century He led the struggle for the restoration of the Mongolian state and waged war on the old enemies. He could not be a direct successor to the disappeared Menvu dynasty, but it was Temujin who managed to unite many Mongol-speaking and Turkic tribes. He took the khan's title and began to call himself Genghis Khan. It is possible that the Jurchen officials taught and persuaded to accept the name “Mongols” of Genghis Khan, since there used to be a people of Mengu who defeated the Jurchen and Tatars and had their own emperors. However, Mengu was later defeated and his royal dynasty was stopped. Genghis Khan declared himself the successor of this dynasty, the avenger for the defeat of the state, restored its name and the name of the Mongol clan. A significant part of the Tatars, with whom Genghis Khan fought and whom he defeated, survived, became part of the Mongol army of the empire. Many Tatars later became great emirs. Therefore, the population of the power of Genghis Khan in other countries was called not only the Mongols, but also the Tatars, although the ruling elite was Mongolian. Very many tribes living in the midst of the Mongols or Tatars, or under their authority, began to be called and associated with the Mongols and Tatars, taking over their fame and fame. Jalaira, Sunnis, Merkits, Karlauts, Oirats, Onguts, Keraits, Naimans, Tanguts, Uyghurs, Khitan, Bekrins also lived and entered the army of Genghis Khan. Many military leaders and officials came out of them. In quantitative terms, they accounted for a much larger part of the population of the power than the Tatars. The exception later became the Volga Bulgars (Kazan - Muslims), who for a long time did not accept the ethnonym "Tatars" and did not participate in conquests.
    1. Marek Rozny
      +2
      12 February 2013 00: 24
      "Hamag Mongol Uls" is an invention of modern Mongolian historians to prove the Mongolian origin of the "Mongols of Genghis Khan". The names of all the ancestors of Genghis Khan, the title of the Redbeard himself are exclusively Turkic. Mongolian names differ from Turkic names, as Russian from Chinese. The state of Genghis Khan was built on the model and likeness of the Turkic kaganates. The Mongols did not have any states, but the Turks constantly created large empires-kaganates (which were destroyed by themselves and rebuilt again).
      By the way, the name of Genghis Khan is known as Temuchin - it is taken from the Chinese chronicles. Neither the Turks nor the Mongols have such a name. However, given that the Chinese simply do not have some letters, namely the sound and the letter "R", and if we recall that Genghis Khan was proud that his family was a clan of blacksmiths, then his name was most likely Temirchi, which literally means "blacksmith" ... The names Temirshi, Temir, Temirkhan, Temirbek in different phonetic variants and with different additions are common names among the Turkic nomads. My grandfather's name was Temirzhan ("Iron Soul").
      And "Mongol" is a common name for a nation, like the word "Soviet people" or "Russians." If we recall that the Turkic states were built according to the military principle (right wing, left wing, center) and given that these wings were called in Turkic “kol” (“hand”), then it is quite possible that “Mongol” is almost undistorted "mynkol" (in Kazakh the sound "nk" here sounds like "ng") - "a thousand arms (flanks, wings of troops)". By the way, the "military leader" in Kazakh is "KolBashy" (literally, the chief who leads the army - "count").
      And the Mongols never called themselves Mongols. Even in their passports they now write not "Mongol", but "Hoshiut" or "Torgaut". But the Turks carried this name everywhere. And even Babur in India and Afghanistan created the "Mughal Empire". The Turks lived in Mogolistan, but the Khalkha was never there.
    2. Yoshkin Kot
      0
      12 February 2013 13: 18
      emir is an Islamic term but as a synonym will come down
  15. +5
    12 February 2013 00: 22
    To the Jochi ulus in the 20's. XIII century (before campaigning in Russia) included 9000 yurts, which amounted to approximately 30 000 warriors. Most likely, 120 — 140 of thousands of soldiers participated in the invasions of Russia, 75% of whom came from Mongol-conquered peoples. With the formation of the Golden Horde (from 1241), the ethnically motley conglomerate of the conquered peoples became the main population exploited by it: the Volga Bulgars, Russians, Yasses, Circassians, Khazars, Polovtsy (Kipchaks), etc. However, the majority of the population of the Golden Horde were those who lived here before the arrival conquerors Polovtsy (Kipchaks), among whom already in the XIV century. part of the conquerors begins to dissolve. The process of Turkization of the conquerors went quite quickly, already in the XIV century. in the Golden Horde, the Western Türkic-Kipchak literary language developed and was widely spread, and the Mongolian language completely disappeared from use.
    The main population in the steppe part of the Golden Horde remained the former Kipchak (Polovtsian) tribes. Therefore, most of the steppe mounds retain the rite and a set of things characteristic of the Polovtsy during the Golden Horde era. The visiting Mongols left some of their own burials and groups of mounds, without making significant changes to the ethnic composition of the population of the steppes.
  16. Dalian
    0
    12 February 2013 01: 06
    Probably, even at 41-45 we had to behave "less proudly", then life would have gone, hurt. Beer and sausages.
    1. Marek Rozny
      +2
      12 February 2013 01: 36
      If Germany won, the Slavs would not get beer and sausages. The Germans never concealed their intentions regarding the defeated Slavs. The assimilation of that part of the population that was of Aryan origin, and the bulk of the Slavs were subject to physical destruction and transformation into slaves (with subsequent destruction).
  17. ENESEI
    +1
    12 February 2013 01: 33
    The imagination of all historians is simply off scale, the same traitor Rezun in the guise of a "historian" turned 1941 upside down and found a bunch of followers in the "west", what then can we say about 1241, during this time they rewrote their works so many times and composed any "brandyatiny" that is amazing. And baptism in Russia turns out to be one moment 1000 years ago, probably everyone was given a parchment scroll as a gift. Although, probably in the beginning, schools were built and everyone was taught to read and write. And nomads in the Ryazan forests were transplanted to elk, which, even with large snow drifts, fed on the bark of various trees. The only reliable document is the birch bark letters of the 12th century, but for some reason there is no mention of any foreigners or aliens.
    1. 0
      12 February 2013 11: 39
      Quote: ENESEI
      The only reliable document is the 12th century birchbark letters, but for some reason there is no mention of any foreigners or aliens there.

      Dear, answer 1223 - what is this age?
      And I can also imagine a picture of the Mongols galloping, the slaughter is going, the riotous heads fly off the shoulders, and then the exclamation of the chronicler: "Slow down, pzhalusta, I'm writing down .." (c). This is what I mean: in a harsh time, not many will think about capturing the environment, and there is no need to talk about the safety of the written
      1. ENESEI
        0
        12 February 2013 23: 55
        “12th century birch bark letters” should not be taken literally here, because at that time it was not customary to put a date at the end of your letter, so it’s difficult to determine the 12th or 13th century using modern methods. If in their birch bark letters they describe what kind of crop they harvested, then of course they would first write that "the foreign invaders of the Tatar-Mongols came and burned and ruined everything." But there is no mention.
        1. 0
          13 February 2013 09: 28
          Chronicles were written at monasteries or at princes. An ordinary person does not lead them.
          Think yourself in case of trouble, will you try to get out of the way, rally to fight back, or start a storytelling? I am sure that most of the first two options. Of course, now we have divorced youtubers who will shoot on a mobile phone, and not provide assistance. But it's about the big trouble
  18. BruderV
    +2
    12 February 2013 15: 34
    It amuses that all adherents of non-traditional history are puzzled where did the Mongols go? At the same time, it seems that they don’t know that over the 200 years of the horde's existence, a variety of metamorphoses could have occurred there with the population. Here, take today's America and 150 years ago. 150 years ago, the titular nation - the Anglo-Saxons, partly Irish and other impurities of Europeans, a significant part of the Indians on the reserves, the black population is mainly in the south on plantations. We take today’s day only half as white, and they are far from Anglo-Saxons, the rest of the national minorities, or mestizos, mulattos, etc., Negroes now live not only in the south, but almost everywhere, the Indians are almost gone, but the number of Latinos has already exceeded the number of blacks, and the black president is at the helm of the country. And all these transformations in some 150-200 years. And in the case of the steppe horde, for some reason, the short-sighted adherents of sacred knowledge see a mono-ethnic state with the obligatory presence of the capital of the Mongols. Here's how to explain the life of nomads to them? How to convey that the Volga steppe in those days is a seething cauldron in which tribes and peoples melted. Those thousands of 30 Mongols who originally came to the Volga in 100 years could easily dissolve in the local nomads and leave behind only the ruling dynasty. The question is, why would Khan Uzbek if he was a nomad Mongol to accept Islam to the marrow of bones? And why didn’t it find resistance among his titular nation of Mongols, on which he was supposed to rely on? It is most obvious that by the end of the 14th century, the original Mongols were already pretty assimilated with the original peoples of the steppe, since they were much smaller, and the adoption of Islam was a necessity to keep the state from collapse, since it was the religion of the vast majority of the then horde (the Bulgars, the ancestors of the Tatars, Bashkirs, Nogai, the peoples of the Caucasus, etc.). In the same way, the Huns, Khazars, Polovtsy, Pechenegs disappeared without a trace. In those days it was more likely not the names of peoples, but the names of tribal unions, just like the USSR or the USA. After all, there are no such people as Soviet citizens or Americans.
    1. Marek Rozny
      +1
      13 February 2013 22: 07
      Absolutely right.
  19. +4
    12 February 2013 17: 58
    Quote: Marek Rozny
    The names of all the ancestors of Genghis Khan, the title of Redbeard himself are exclusively Turkic.

    The names of Borte-Chino, Goa-Maral, Bata-Tsagaan, Tamachi, Horichar, Uujim Buural, Sali-Hajau, Yeke nuden, Sim-Sochi, Kharchu, Borzhigidai-Mergen, Alan-goa, Bodonchar - exclusively Mongolian. Genghis Khan's mother, Oelun, belonged to the genus Olkhonut, a historical Mongolian tribe, a branch of the Ungirat.
    Genghis Khan (Temujin) was born in the tract Delyun-Boldok - a valley going from the territory of Mongolia to the territory of Russian Buryatia, on the banks of the Onon River. The genus Kiyat-Bordzhigin, North Mongolian (Mongols-Nirun), also includes Buryat roots. The Mongols of that time can conditionally be called "old Mongols." Writing before the 13th century they didn’t have it, its creation is the result of adaptation of the Old Uigur alphabet to write the Mongolian language, according to legend, it was created by a Uigur scribe at the direction of Genghis Khan. The Uyghurs passed on their Buddhist traditions and the Old Uighur script to the Mongols, which, having undergone significant modification, became Old Mongolian, which the Mongols themselves often still call Uyghur to distinguish from a number of other Mongolian scripts. In Russia, this writing was used in the past by Kalmyks and Buryats. The direction of the letter is from top to bottom, the columns go from left to right.
    Since the 1941, the territory of Mongolia has been replaced by the writing in Cyrillic.
    The word "Mongol" in Old Mongolian:
    1. Marek Rozny
      +1
      13 February 2013 22: 48
      Seven ancestors of Genghis Khan: Datum - Manan; Kaids – Khan; Baysunkar; Tumbine Khan; Kabyl Khan; Bartan Khan; Yesugei Khan. Absolutely Turkic names. Not a single Khalkha-Mongolian name. All his batyrs and generals and famous wives also bear exclusively Turkic names.
      Mother Oylen (Olen) and his eldest wife (Borte) are from the Konyrat clan (Kazakh clan), the second wife Kulan is a Merkit, Kazakh clan), the third and fourth wives of Genghis Khan, sisters Yesui and Yesugai are Tatars. Konyrats are recorded in different sources as hongirates, hungirates, ungirates, konrats, hungrads. But their self-name is konyrat (the letter "n" is written here in Russian, and in Kazakh it is a specific sound - the nasal "ng", sounds like "kongyrat" by ear).

      1) According to the version of Abulgazy (Genghisid, one of the khans of Khiva at the end of the 18th century), Genghis Khan comes from a Turkic tribe. The sequence of the ancestors along the line of Mynols (Mugul) and Tatars is given from the Pedigree: Türk - Tutik - Yelshe - Debbakoy - Kuyik - Alynshan.
      Alynshan had two sons - twins, the ancestors of the Tatars and Mynol (Sad), popularly called Mugul, known in history as Mongol. The tribes of Tatars and Mynol are named after them, the latter in history were called Mongols (it should be noted that in the word “mynol” there is a specific nasal Turkic sound “ng”, and not just “n”). The following ancestors were along the line of the Tatars: Tatars - Buқa - Ilansha - Atly - Atsyz - Orda - Baidu - Suyinish. Along the line of mynols: Mynol - Karakhan - Oguz - Teniz - Elkhan - Kyyan, after 400 years - Borte. The people began to call his tribe "Kyyats". Descendants Қabyl-Burtan - Yesuki –Temujin (Temirshi).
      The Abulgazy belongs to the Mongols tribes of Merkits and Konyrats (both tribes are part of the Kazakhs). Father of Konyrat Zharlyk, their pedigree is not given, brother of Konyrat Kabay, his sons Enkiris and Elkonut (the mother of Genghis Khan Oolong, Oelun in the scriptures was born from him).

      2. According to Kadyrgali Jalairi (XVI-XVVII centuries):
      Budanjar Khan - Dotum-Menen - Kaitu Khan - Baysunkar - Tumin Khan - Kabyl Khan - Barzhan Baһadur - Yesuge Bһһadur - Temirshi (Genghis Khan). He cites 8 ancestors of Genghis Khan - the ancestors of the Turkic tribes.

      3. According to Kazybek Tauasarula (1692-1776):
      Merke (nicknamed Jalair) - Manak - Oraks - Andas - Or - Ontur - Bakir - Uzyk - Tor - Kok - Begde - Kara - Buryk - Shamshy - Tileuberdi - Kashau - Dosan - Turymtai (Sheshen attacks) - Tumagul - Din - Bayan - Yesukei - Genghis Khan.

      4. Rashid ad-Din in his “Collection of Chronicles”, which was published in 1305: “Kabul Khan is the third ancestor of Genghis Khan ... the Türkic ancestors in the third tribe call Helenuik ... His children and grandchildren are called - kiyat. (Rashid ad-Din, directly pointing to the Turkic origin of Genghis Khan, was a contemporary of that era and wrote on the orders of the khan. Did he not know where Genghis Khan came from?

      All names are Turkic. The names of the clans (including the clan "kiyat") are also Turkic. And the fact that the Mongols present as supposedly Mongolian names are simply Turkic names, albeit distorted. The Mongols have completely different names. And those that are associated with Chinggis, the Khalkha, even to the Mongolian meaning, could not. If I write "Alekseu Witschisllavovich Ivanoff", you will still take this name as a native "Alexey Vyacheslavovich Ivanov" ...
      Z.Y. His father’s clan is kiyat (coming out of the Jalayirs), his mother’s clan is konyrat. All these clans are still part of the Kazakhs. And the Mongols, Buryats, Kalmyks do not have these genera. With a fig, should we take Genghis Khan, who for Kazakhs has always been a revered personality, to consider a Khalkha-Mongol?
      1. +1
        14 February 2013 10: 25
        Quote: Marek Rozny
        Seven ancestors of Genghis Khan: Datum - Manan; Kaids – Khan; Baysunkar; Tumbine Khan; Kabyl Khan; Bartan Khan; Yesugei Khan. Absolutely Turkic names. Not a single Khalkha-Mongolian name. All his batyrs and generals and famous wives also bear exclusively Turkic names.
        Mother Oylen (Olen) and his eldest wife (Borte) are from the Konyrat clan (Kazakh clan), the second wife Kulan is a Merkit, Kazakh clan), the third and fourth wives of Genghis Khan, the sisters Esui and Esugai are Tatars.

        If shorter - in Russia there was a Kazakh-Tatar yoke laughing
        Dear Marek, how do you defend the Kazakh version of the story about great ukrov or some other kind of Rodnover?
        1. Marek Rozny
          +1
          14 February 2013 22: 53
          Not even Kazakh-Tatar, but Kazakh-Nogai-Bashkir-Karakalpak-Uz

          Beksko-Siberian. Kazan Tatars (Bulgars) have nothing to do with the "yoke" either. On the contrary, they are victims. And what have ukry, Rodnovers and other science fiction writers have to do with it?
          This is my family, as well as the family of my mother (as well as the family of other Kazakhs) took part in all the campaigns of Genghis Khan and his descendants. And there is no room for fantasy, because the names of these clans are in all historical chronicles - Turkic, Arabic, Persian. And I see only Turkic names, Turkic customs, the Turkic system of state administration, Turkic titles, Turkic families, Turkic archaeological artifacts. Not Russian, not Mongolian, not Iranian or Chinese.
          The genus of the father and the genus of the mother of Genghis Khan are still part of the Kazakhs, not the Mongols. Direct descendants of Genghis Khan - again, still live among the Kazakhs, and not the Mongols. This is 100% our story, which we can share with some of the aforementioned Turkic ethnic groups. What is in Genghis Khan and its Mongol state? Only place of birth. However, all other Turkic empires were born there.
          1. +3
            15 February 2013 10: 32
            Quote: Marek Rozny
            Kazan Tatars (Bulgars) have nothing to do with the "yoke" either. On the contrary, they are victims.

            Following your logic, the Bashkirs, Nogais, Uzbeks should also be referred to the victims. They just suffered a little and quickly shut themselves up in accomplices. And the Bulgars (the same Türks) with their fellow tribe weighed a lot, while they were recorded as accomplices. Yes, and with the Kazakhs, not everything is clear. Since you do not dispute that Genghis Khan was born in Mongolia, then the simplest, and therefore the most likely, version is that he was a Mongol, a Mongol khan, therefore, the Kazakhs were first victims, and only then accomplices. Therefore, they took part in all the campaigns of Genghis Khan.

            Quote: Marek Rozny
            What is in Genghis Khan and its Mongol state? Only place of birth. However, all other Turkic empires were born there.

            If all the Turkic empires originated in Mongolia, then there is the homeland of the Turks. Then the conditions of Mongolia turned out to be so severe that the Turks preferred to leave in a milder climate, or the Mongols came and drove out the Genghis Khan family, which, due to the loss of their homeland, was forced to capture half of the world then known ... In general, either Genghis Khan was a Mongol and the Mongols led the Turks or the Mongols drove the Turks out of Mongolia ...
            I, in fact, do not care who you taxied there. I admit that Russia was for a long time dependent on nomads who were controlled by the descendants of Genghis Khan. I think that they drove the Mongols. Just as the empire of Alexander the Great was founded by the Macedonians, despite the fact that the Greeks outnumbered them. Just as the Inca empire was created by a small group of Incas, and it consisted of many conquered peoples. The Mongols simply dissolved in the Turkic melting furnace.
            Well, we Russians, when we finally united, quickly showed everyone who steers in Eurasia ... And not only with bloody conquests, but also with peaceful coexistence with different peoples and religions. That is, something remained of the Mongols in us :) We had enough yasak ...
            1. Marek Rozny
              +2
              16 February 2013 16: 08
              Eeeh, a good topic for a dinner conversation disappears!)))
              1. +1
                16 February 2013 17: 34
                Quote: Marek Rozny
                Eeeh, a good topic for a dinner conversation disappears!)))

                So the world is small, the end of the world has been canceled, so everything is ahead! drinks
              2. +1
                16 February 2013 18: 32
                Never say never! The Almighty will give - there will be a feast, there will be a conversation! drinks
  20. +5
    12 February 2013 21: 16
    On the defense of Kozelsk.
    Batu Khan did not approach Kozelsk with the whole part of the army (the second part was sent by another route). The Mongols did not expect the city to resist and reject the offer of surrender. There was no local population that could be driven away and sent to storm Kozelsk (the siege method - “hashar”), and the assault by their own army did not bring success. The city was well fortified, surrounded by earthen ramparts on which the fortress walls stood. There were no dams; the city could not be flooded. The Mongols also failed to lure the garrison behind the fortress walls. Remained methods of continuous (shift) assaults, for which troops were not enough quantitatively (it was necessary to call up the second part of the army) or to destroy the fortress walls with stone-throwing guns. The Mongols were forced to first choose the second. It should be noted that they did not bring ready-made wall-hung guns with them, but they took specialists with them and some rare materials, the rest - wood, stone, metal, rawhide, hair, lime was in place. In this case, there was not only one thing - “hashar”, free labor, and the Mongols did everything themselves: they forged simple metal parts for guns, prepared platforms for catapults and collected wood, made shells for stone throwers. Time was running out. Having established the work of wall-beaten machines (“vices”), the Mongols with their help destroyed part of the fortress walls and the assault climbed the shaft. And here there was a "great abuse and evil slaughter." In close combat, the bow and lasso are useless, and dismounted Mongolian horsemen were forced to use mainly combat knives and light axes, which were part of the lightly armed warrior. In the bloody massacre, the Kozeltsy successfully used the so-called "Boot knives", and they managed to repel the attack. Encouraged by the success on the walls, the besieged immediately used it and decided on a sortie, during which they destroyed the siege vehicles and killed 4000 Mongol warriors, including three Temnik sons. However, all participants in the attack during this battle were killed. After such losses, the Mongols had to wait for the second part of the troops (Kadan and Storms). For three days, the combined forces took the city, defending itself according to Slavic sources for 7 weeks (in Arabic - 2 months). By the duration of the defense, Kozelsk is second only to Kiev.
    1. ENESEI
      0
      13 February 2013 00: 34
      SUPERMEN FROM MONGOLIAN STEPPE.
      Having accepted the classic version of the "Mongol-Tatar" invasion, we ourselves do not notice with which mass of irrationalities, and even outright stupidity we are dealing. To begin with, we quote from the work of the famous scientist N. A. Morozov (1854-1946):
      “The nomadic peoples, by the very nature of their lives, should be widely spread over a large uncultivated area by separate patriarchal groups, incapable of general disciplined action requiring economic centralization, that is, a tax on which it would be possible to maintain an army of adult single people. In all nomadic peoples, as in clusters of molecules, each of their patriarchal groups is repelled by another, thanks to the search for more and more new grass for feeding their flocks. Having united together in the amount of at least several thousand people, they must also connect with each other several thousand cows and horses and even more sheep and rams belonging to different patriarchs. As a result of this, all the nearest grass would be quickly eaten and the whole company would again have to be scattered by the previous patriarchal small groups in different directions in order to be able to live longer without having to move their tents to another place every day. That is why, a priori, the idea of ​​the possibility of organized collective action and the victorious invasion of the settled peoples of some wide-spread nomadic people, feeding on herds, such as the Mongols, Samoyeds, Bedouins, etc., should be discarded. throughout our authentic historical horizon, we do not see a single victorious invasion of wild nomadic peoples on settled cultural countries, but just the opposite. So, this could not be in the prehistoric past. All these migrations of peoples back and forth on the eve of their appearance in the field of view of history should be reduced only to the relocation of their names or, at best, rulers, and even then from more cultural countries to less cultural ones, and not vice versa. ”
      We are offered to believe that Genghis Khan, who supposedly lived in present-day Mongolia, by some miracle, in a few years created an army of scattered uluses that surpassed any European in discipline and organization ... It would be interesting to know how he achieved this? Despite the fact that the nomad has one definite advantage that keeps him from any quirks of sedentary power, which he did not like at all: mobility. That's why he is a nomad. The self-proclaimed khan did not like it — he assembled a yurt, loaded horses, seated his wife and children, waved his whip — and went over to distant lands, from where it was extremely difficult to get it. Here is a suitable example: when in 1916 the tsarist officials particularly culminated in the nomadic Kazakhs, they calmly removed themselves and migrated from the Russian Empire to neighboring China. The authorities (and this is about the beginning of the twentieth century!) Simply could not stop them and prevent them!
      1. Marek Rozny
        +1
        13 February 2013 23: 17
        Before the Kagan of Genghis Khan, there were still a bunch of similar precedents. The Chinese did not even have time to reflect on the alleged inability of the nomads to create powerful disciplined armies. They only did that they fought back and regularly paid tribute (albeit in a veiled form).
        And Europe felt the blow of the steppes (Huns). And the Roman emperor had to give his own daughter to Hagan Attila. You write a letter to the Europeans, saying that there was no scourge of God, there were no Asiatic nomads who ate horse meat and koumiss. It seemed to them.

        And the fact that a nomad can really send a khan in three letters and migrate is a fact. But a nomad always needs not only freedom, but also a tough hand, which will lead him to victory over his neighbors and, accordingly, will afterwards give him moral rapture and material wealth, which is less important, but nevertheless necessary.
        And besides, you did not take into account one more important factor, which for a non-Turk may seem unimportant. This is a relationship. The steppes usually don’t throw relatives, but stick together. And if someone swore allegiance to the new khan, then usually other relatives will support.
    2. Marek Rozny
      0
      13 February 2013 23: 02
      Quote: Veteran
      (siege crowd method - “hashar”)

      "Asar" - in Kazakh, is any joint action of people.
      The names Kadan and Buri are Kazakh. "Kadan" - firm, clear (about a step), "қadaң-қadaң basu" - "to walk with a firm gait". "Tempest" is a wolf. The wolf is often found in the names of the Turkic peoples, since it is the mythological ancestor of the Turks.
  21. +4
    13 February 2013 00: 43
    Quote: ENESEI
    first of all, they would write that "the foreign invaders of the Tatar-Mongols came and burned and ruined everything." But there is no mention.

    As of 2012, 1152 birch bark letters of the 11th – 15th centuries were found, of which the vast majority from Novgorod were found in 1050 letters, a city that was not subjected to a Mongol invasion at all. There are several dozen letters from Staraya Russa, Torzhok, Smolensk. But the main thing is that birch bark was NEVER used to write a chronicle text, and looking for historical records on them is a completely hopeless case. Birch bark was considered as ephemeral, not prestigious material for writing, unsuitable for long storage. It was used mainly as material for private correspondence and personal notes, and more responsible letters and official documents were written on parchment. The birch bark letters discovered by archaeologists are, as a rule, discarded documents that fell into the ground at the moment when practical need disappeared. Translated into the concept of today's time - it’s the same as writing important events on napkins or toilet paper.
    1. ENESEI
      0
      13 February 2013 16: 27
      Chronicles in the monasteries were constantly corresponded by the monks to please the new rulers, so there are a lot of distortions and gaps. Let me give you one typical example: at the end of the fifties my mother’s younger sister graduated from the teacher's college and left unnecessary waste paper for kindling the stove. So in one of the textbooks “Khrushchev chroniclers” it was written that allegedly Lavrenty Beria was an English spy. Although at that time I was no more than 10 years old, but this “false scribble” was remembered by me for life. So there were always enough falsifiers of history.
  22. Krasnoyarsk
    +1
    13 February 2013 13: 46
    The Tatar-Mongols for Russia were worse than the Nazis, half the population of Russia was slaughtered, many cities were burned to the ground, as confirmed by historical finds under the old Ryazan.
    1. ENESEI
      +1
      13 February 2013 16: 04
      HOW MUCH was the “MONGOLO-TATAR”?
      In fact, how many of them came to Russia? Some sources mention the "half-million Mongol army." The writer V. Yang, the author of the trilogy “Genghis Khan”, “Batu”, “Towards the Last Sea”, calls the number - four hundred thousand. A primitive calculation shows that for an army of four hundred thousand soldiers, about one and a half million horses are needed. Such a herd will be able to advance at most fifty kilometers, but it will not be able to go further - the advanced ones will instantly exterminate the grass in a vast space, so that the rear ones will die from the feedless very quickly. The invasion of the "Mongol-Tatars" into Russia, according to descriptions, unfolded in the winter. When the remaining grass is hidden under the snow, and the grain has yet to be taken from the population, moreover, the mass of fodder perishes in burning cities and villages. All these horses, if there were a million of them, with all their fantastic ability to soak in the middle of a snowy plain, would starve to death, interfering with each other, beating off each other's rare blade of grass ... Throughout the twentieth century, the number of Mongol-Tatars who attacked Russia was drying out, like the famous shagreen skin. In the end, historians with a gnashing of teeth stopped at thirty thousand - the remnants of professional pride simply do not allow them to go down below.
      It turns out to be a vicious circle: a huge army of "Mongol-Tatars" for purely physical reasons could not maintain combat effectiveness, move quickly, deliver those notorious "indestructible blows". A small army would never have been able to establish control over most of the territory of Russia. Only one conclusion can emerge from this vicious circle - that there were no "aliens". There was a civil war, the forces of the opponents were relatively small and they relied on their own reserves of fodder accumulated in the cities. By the way, it is completely unusual for nomads to fight in winter. But winter is a favorite time for Russian military campaigns. From time immemorial, they went on a campaign, using frozen rivers as "torny roads" - the most optimal way of waging war in an area almost entirely overgrown with dense forests, where a more or less large military detachment, especially horseback, is devilishly difficult to move around. All the chronicles that have come down to us about the military campaigns of 1237-1238. depict the classic Russian style of these battles - battles take place in winter, and the "Mongols", who are supposed to be classical steppe dwellers, act with amazing skill in the forests. First of all, I mean the encirclement and subsequent complete destruction of the Russian detachment on the City River under the command of the Grand Duke of Vladimir Yuri Vsevolodovich ... Such a brilliant operation could not have been carried out by the inhabitants of the steppes, who simply had no time, and had nowhere to learn how to fight in the thicket. From this it follows that for some reason there were no "Mongols", that is, there were no Mongoloids among the "horde". They found out that there could not have been many "newcomers", that even that scanty number of thirty thousand, on which historians were entrenched, like the Swedes near Poltava, could not provide the "Mongols" with the establishment of control over all of Russia. And the horses under the "Mongols" were by no means Mongolian, but these "Mongols" fought for some reason according to Russian rules. And they were, curiously, fair-haired and blue-eyed.
  23. +6
    13 February 2013 14: 41
    Quote: ENESEI
    we quote from the work of the famous scientist N. A. Morozov

    In the field of history N. Morozov is the same scientist as A.T. Fomenko, more precisely, Fomenko is the continuation of the dissemination of pseudoscientific ideas of Morozov. The works of the latter were sharply criticized by professional historians and representatives of other sciences both in pre-revolutionary, and in Soviet and post-Soviet times. Both the historical concept of N. A. Morozov and his research methodology were recognized by experts as erroneous.
    My advice is do not read pseudoscientific works, in their verbal husks you will not find grains of truth.
    1. ENESEI
      0
      13 February 2013 16: 56
      So give at least one powerful argument against! And if I agree in this matter with the point of view of N. A. Morozov, that's why I quote his words, and do not appropriate them, otherwise it will be plagiarism.
    2. +1
      13 February 2013 21: 12
      Here the question is relevant - why? Unfortunately, historians do not give any arguments against the new chronologists, they simply crush with authority, because they cannot answer inconsistencies in history.
  24. ko88
    0
    13 February 2013 14: 45
    Well, what can you do? then such a time was, mores, a cruel age in one word crying
  25. +4
    13 February 2013 17: 57
    Quote: ENESEI
    give at least one powerful argument against

    An argument against what? Against Morozov’s allegations? So, for presenting the views of scholars over a hundred-year period on historical issues in the form of opposing the views of Morozov, the framework of the comment does not allow at all, and is it necessary?
    You can read at least the text of the article "Army of the Mongol Empire" Wikipedia, very well set out, there are links, bibliography.
    1. ENESEI
      0
      13 February 2013 20: 40
      I had to visit Tuva and Khakassia, and I saw everything with my own eyes, so I trust my common sense, and not the fantasies of "armchair historians".
    2. +1
      13 February 2013 21: 14
      And you read David Weber's "Galactic Storm", the level of reliability is the same.
  26. +5
    13 February 2013 22: 09
    Quote: ENESEI
    I had to visit Tuva and Khakassia and I saw everything with my own eyes

    You didn’t invent and apply a time machine, have you visited XII-XIII centuries?
    Do you really not understand that over a thousand years societies have changed dramatically, in many places both climate and local landscape have changed. Having walked along the migration routes and conquests, the Goths, Huns, Mongols, etc. Can you imagine the true picture of their existence in the early Middle Ages and understand their martial art?
    1. ENESEI
      0
      14 February 2013 06: 52
      In those days, there were local wars between the steppe tribes and peoples over the best pastures, because there were no clear state borders. But I doubt that thousands of people found mass insanity and for some reason they left their homes, pastures, their wives, children and old parents, and went tens of thousands of miles to the "last sea". The Bible describes how, for 40 years, Jews led by Moses led the Sinai, but why haven’t they so far been ordered by cabinet historians to go to the aid of the Tatar-Mongol horde to storm Ryazan? Well, of course, everything was painted there according to the location, but the “Tatar-Mongol horde” did not leave its travel notes.
      1. Marek Rozny
        +1
        14 February 2013 22: 56
        And why did the Russians from the 16th century go over tens of thousands of miles to other lands, as long as they did not reach California?
        1. +1
          15 February 2013 10: 45
          Quote: Marek Rozny
          And why did the Russians from the 16th century go over tens of thousands of miles to other lands, as long as they did not reach California?

          It depends on who is called "Russian", if Muscovites, then they are not the only Russians, Russians have always lived throughout Russia, the same Ainu, I will not argue that they are Russians (or Slavs), but they are definitely not Mongoloids, a typical European race, and the Ainu are autokhonts for the Far East and the Japanese islands. Or the Manchus - a typical common delusion - they are considered Mongoloids, and even Chinese, but this is not so.
  27. saved
    0
    14 February 2013 00: 21
    Once I read a book about the construction of Moscow, semi-artistic history, the author seemed to have lived and participated in these years, well, and as usual at the end of the book there are references to historians. So the question is that each time rewriting these historians, we simply do not think about these facts, so to speak, but they are not the truth. Starting from the first lines about the invasion of the Mongols in the WINTER, when it is much more difficult to get food, and if you take into account the spread of the numbers of soldiers 30–500 thousand, it’s like bad films are killed in bad films, but they don’t end) and the pearls about how Evpatiya Kolovrat was shot, from ? For me personally, such facts are very doubtful. I cannot completely challenge the invasions of the Mongols, but I also do not want to blindly trust historians.
  28. saved
    0
    14 February 2013 00: 43
    Once I read a book about the construction of Moscow, semi-artistic history, the author seemed to have lived and participated in these years, well, and as usual at the end of the book there are references to historians. So the question is that each time rewriting these historians, we simply do not think about these facts, so to speak, but they are not the truth. Starting from the first lines about the invasion of the Mongols in the WINTER, when it is much more difficult to get food, and if you take into account the spread of the numbers of soldiers 30–500 thousand, it’s like bad films are killed in bad films, but they don’t end) Even if there was intelligence in the forest part of Russia where there wasn’t wide roads, drag the whole scrub, all the appliances, while fighting with warriors who know every bush, I don’t know. And the pearls about how Evpatiy Kolovrat was shot, from stone-throwers, which apparently were loaded like machine-gun ribbons with stones with the corresponding rate of fire and sniper hits on maneuvering cavalry and infantry.? For me personally, such facts are very doubtful. I cannot completely challenge the invasions of the Mongols, but I also do not want to blindly trust historians.
  29. +5
    14 February 2013 01: 42
    Quote: Marek Rozny
    Rashid ad-Din in his "Collection of Chronicles",

    The same dear Rashid ad-Din distinguishes the Mongols as a separate ethnic group, and separates the Mongols from the Tatars-Turks. I will quote excerpts from Jami at-tawarih by Rashid al-Din:
    “Bartan Bahadur was the grandfather of Genghis Khan, and in Mongolian grandfather is called ebuge. The first son of Bartan Bahadur was named Mungetu-Kiyan. The third son was Yesugei Bahadur, who is the father of Genghis Khan, while the Mongols call the father Echige. The Kiyat-Burjigin tribe comes from its offspring. The meaning of “burdzhigin” is “blue-eyed”. All kiyats come from the descendants of Mungedu-Kiyan. This name was given to him because he was a great Bahadur, because the word kiyam means in Mongolian "rapidly rushing stream." He was the sovereign of most of the Mongol tribes. Esugei Bahadur fought and fought a lot with other tribes of the Mongols, and with the tribes of the Tatars, in the same way with the Chita emirs and troops. Most of the wars and battles of Esugei Bahadur were with the Tatars, which at that time were the most famous Turkic tribes and whose army was more numerous than others. Yesugei Bahadur went to war with the Tatars and killed Temujin-Uge and Kori-Buka, who were their sovereigns, and their herds were looted by the good. When he came back, Genghis Khan was happily born. Yesugei Bahadur, considering this event [victory over the Tatars] for a happy omen, put him the name Temujin. His eldest wife, Oelun-fujin, she was also called Oelun-eke, she was a fool from the tribe. Fujin in Haitian is the wife, and since they [the Esugei Bahadur tribes] lived near the borders of that state [i.e. Hit], then used their expression. The first son - Temujin, who, when he, having killed the sovereign of the Naimans, became a sovereign at the age of fifty, was given the nickname Genghis Khan. "

    Khalkha-Mongols (Khalkhasians) are modern Mongols, the core of the tribes of which was formed already in the 15th century.
  30. 0
    26 November 2015 00: 27
    I was a bit late with the comment. According to the Yaroslavl Museum of Local Lore and excavations in 1930 and 2000, Yaroslavl was completely destroyed in February 1238 and all its inhabitants were killed. This is evidenced by 7 or 9 burials for several dozens of people. On all bones, injuries from edged weapons. Some of them still have teeth marks of animals, which suggests that the bodies were lying unburied for a long time. Only in the spring, when the Slavs returned from the woods to the ashes and began to rebuild the city, they buried the dead. So the conclusions of archaeologists confirm the official version.