Military Review

True Rus. Russian shine against the barbaric Europe

93
True Rus. Russian shine against the barbaric Europe

This year, we are celebrating the 400 anniversary of Russia's withdrawal from the terrible disaster of the Troubles, the accession of the Romanov dynasty. Although the situation is somewhat paradoxical. It is about the beginning of the dynasty, about the first Romanovs on the throne - Mikhail Fedorovich, Alexey Mikhailovich, Fedor Alekseevich and their era, most of our contemporaries know almost nothing. Moscow Russia is something gray and not interesting. General ignorance, dirt, poverty, slavery.


Whether business abroad! Brilliant France, wise England, luxurious Italy, business and neat Germany ... These are the prevailing stereotypes. It seems to be nothing to argue here. For example, the popular American historian Robert Massey bluntly points out about the 17th century: "Russia's cultural backwardness was too obvious." Obvious, what to say here! Evidence as if not required. But ... the fact of the matter is that such stereotypes are operated without proof! If we consider the real facts, then the whole "generally accepted" picture is spreading at the seams.


By the way, how was it formed, “generally recognized”? Western authors have (and have) a clear tendency to embellish and lacquer their past. In particular, it uses a very ugly reception. Praise your, declining others. Well, Russian historians of the XIX and early XX centuries. were largely infected with fashionable at that time "Westernism". For them, the opposite was the desire. To belittle own ancestors, adjusting to foreign opinions.

However, the formation of mass stereotypes was determined even by not biased historical works, and novels and movies. After all, the XNUMXth century was literally the most romantic century. It was then that the heroes of the most popular novels lived and acted, exciting the imagination of many generations of youth. The swords of the musketeers rang. Weaved cunning networks of political intrigues Richelieu, Mazarin and Cromwell. Under the Jolly Roger, the prototypes of captain Blood, Flint and Silver walked across the seas. Friends of Til Ullenspiegel fought for freedom. Krakowyak danced and fellow soldiers of Pan Volodyevsky chopped with enemies. The mysterious prisoner “iron mask” languished in prison. Adventurers like Angelica rolled around the world. And in the American forests “pioneers” with “trackers” lit up with the leaders of the pipe of the world.
Images of courtly ladies, gallant gentlemen, and scholars appear before their eyes.

Well, remember at least vivid pictures of how brave and refined musketeers click their heels on the parquet floor of the Louvre or pace together in a friendly line on the Parisian pavements! But in general, it would be worthwhile to take into account - these are fantasies, and not even historians, but artistic authors. With historical reality, they have too little in common. And sometimes they don't even have one.

Yes, the West loved luxury and brilliance. But they were not achieved at the expense of scientific progress or more advanced social systems, but due to the extremely steep squeezing of juices from their own common people and the beginning of the robbery of the colonies. Yes, and shine, if you look, turned out to be doubtful. If we talk about the same French musketeers, then there were only 2 companies, they were the personal guard of the king. Besides these, in France there was a 2 regiment of the guard. Only they received a salary and wore a uniform — no other regular units existed in France. The rest of the army was assembled from personal detachments of nobles, from mercenaries, and was a motley rabble. By the way, unlike Russia, where from the XVI century. There was a magnificent 10-thousand body of archers.

Clutching the heels of the parquet with the musketeers would be difficult. Because in their times the floors in the palaces were covered with straw. And the straw was changed once a week for a very prosaic reason. Sorry for the frankness, but there were no toilets in the west. Even in the palaces. Even in the Louvre, Palais Royal, Versailles. However, in England they appeared in 1581 - the British traded with the Russians and the Turks and borrowed a useful innovation. But other European countries did not rush to adopt it. In France, even a hundred years later, they used pots, and special servants went with them around the palace. They were not enough at balls and receptions, gentlemen aristocrats squatted around corners, ladies sat down under the stairs, and one of the German princesses complained: “Palais Royal smelled urine.” Therefore, the kings had several palaces. From time to time they moved, and left the residence washed and cleaned.

But after all, Europeans generally did not differ in hygiene. They perceived the cult of purity much later, in the nineteenth century. - from the Chinese (in a tropical climate, mud led to dangerous infections). Although earlier, before the eyes of Western citizens, there was an example of a more healthy lifestyle: Russians went to the bath at least twice a week. But such custom was described by foreign guests as exotic and “barbaric”. The Dutch, the French and the Germans laughed at him. The British referred to their superstitions and taught that bathing leads to serious illnesses. It got to the point that they lamented - they say, frequent washing "spoils the complexion" of Russian women.

No baths or baths in the west were even in the royal chambers. Lice and fleas multiplied under the wigs and were considered quite normal. In England, the louse was called the "gentleman's companion." When King Henry VII of England was crowned, a dispute arose whether to consider the extreme abundance of lice under the crown as good or bad omen? And in France already at the end of the 17th century, in the era of Louis XIV, a collection of rules of good taste taught that you should not brush your hair at the table so as not to share your insects with your neighbors. The same collection instructed gentlemen and ladies that do not interfere with washing their hands at least once a day (!). Better still, rinse your face.

It was the untidiness that gave birth to the famous French perfumery. Drowning out the odors of sweat and unwashed body, aristocrats generously sprinkled perfume - they then resembled strong colognes. And to hide the dirt, acne and acne, the ladies sprinkled the face, shoulders and chest with a thick layer of powder. He was also fascinated with ointments, creams and elixirs from the most dubious components, often bringing himself to eczema and erysipelas.

By the way, in the Moscow Museum-Estate of the Romanovs on Varvarka pay attention to one exhibit. Fork found during the excavations of Moscow. In our country, forks have been used since the time of Kievan Rus. In Europe, they ate with their hands. In Italy, forks appeared at the end of the 16th century, and in France they were introduced only in the 18th century. And the beds were made of huge sizes. They fit husband, wife, children, with his family could put a guest. And the servants and apprentices spent the night on the floor, side by side.

And the speech of Europeans was very different from the refined turns, which we are used to in novels and films. Memoirists convey the direct speech of aristocrats with a multitude of extremely obscene words, and only in translation are they replaced with allegories. By the way, it was typical in later times. German or English ladies expressed that the boatswain's ears would wither, and in Russian retellings a sublime and courtly vocabulary appeared.

As for the chivalrous attitude towards the ladies, these ideas also migrated into our consciousness from nineteenth-century novels. And in the Renaissance, the German poet Reimer von Tsvetten recommended to their husbands "to take a baton and stretch the wife on the back, stronger and with all his strength, so that she could feel her master and not be angry." The book "On Evil Women" taught that "a donkey, a woman, and a nut need to be hit." Even the nobles frankly, for money, sold beautiful daughters to kings, princes, aristocrats. Such transactions were considered not shameful, but extremely profitable. After all, the lover of a high-ranking official opened the way both to the career and enrichment of her relatives, she was showered with gifts. But could give to another, resell, peel. The English king Henry VIII in fits of bad mood beat the favorites so that they “went out of business” for several weeks. The rule of gallantry did not apply to common people at all. They were treated as if they were to be used.

The economy of European countries remained predominantly agrarian. Peasants made up 90-95% of the population. There were few small cities - Paris (400 thous. Inhabitants), London (200 thous.), Rome (110 thous.) Other centers - Stockholm, Copenhagen, Bristol, Amsterdam, Vienna, Warsaw, were limited to 20-40 thous. Inhabitants, and the population of most cities did not exceed 1-5 thousand. But their common and characteristic feature was dirt and crowding (up to 1000 people per hectare).

The houses were squeezed into the narrow space of the fortress walls, they were built in the 3-4 floor, and the width of most streets did not exceed 2 meters. Carriages did not pass through them. People made their way on horseback, on foot, and the rich men were worn in their sneakers. Even in Paris, only one street was paved, the Boulevard Soures la Reine was the only place for the nobility to stroll to, where they chose to “show themselves”. Other streets were not paved, had no sidewalks, and in the middle of each was a ditch, where waste was thrown right out of the windows and the contents of the pots spilled out (there were no toilets in the houses either). And the land in the city was expensive, and to occupy a smaller area, the second floor had a ledge above the first, the third over the second, and the street looked like a tunnel, where there was not enough light and air, evaporation from garbage accumulated.

Travelers, approaching a large city, felt the stench from afar. Although the townspeople got used to it and did not notice it. Unsanitary conditions caused terrible epidemics. Smallpox rolled about once every 5 years. The plague, dysentery, and malaria have also been targeted. Only one of the epidemics, 1630-1631, killed 1,5 millions in France. In the Italian cities of Turin, Venice, Verona, Milan during the same years, between one third and one half of the inhabitants died out. Infant mortality was very high, of two babies survived alone, the rest died away from disease, malnutrition. And the people behind 50 were considered old men. They really wore out, poor from deprivation, rich from excesses.

On all roads and in the cities themselves robbers raged. Their ranks joined the ruined nobles, impoverished peasants. In Paris, 15-20 robbed corpses were picked up every morning. But if the bandits (or the rebels) were caught, they were ruthlessly massacred. Public executions in all European countries were a frequent and popular spectacle. People left their business, brought wives and children. In the crowd, the peddlers scurried around, offering goodies and drinks. Notable gentlemen and ladies rented windows and balconies of nearby houses, and in England, spectators specially built stands (with paid places).

But so accustomed to blood and death in the West, that they were not enough to intimidate criminals. Investigated as much as possible agonizing reprisals. According to British law, a “qualified penalty” was imposed for treason. The man was hanged, but not to death, pulled out of the loop, opened the stomach, cut off the genitals, cut off the arms and legs and in the end - the head. In 1660, Mr. S. Pins described: “I went to Charing Cross to watch how they hang up, release insides, and quartered Major General Harrison. At the same time, he looked as cheerful as possible in a similar position. Finally, they finished him and showed his head and heart to the people — loud cheering was heard.

In the same England for other crimes, gradually, one by one, weights were put on the chest, until he gave up the ghost. In France, Germany and Sweden, wheeling was often used. Counterfeiters were boiled alive in a cauldron or molten metal was poured into the throat. In Poland, criminals were put on a stake, fried in a copper bull, hung on a hook under the rib. In Italy, the skull was broken with a beater. Decapitation and gallows were quite commonplace.

A traveler in Italy wrote: "We saw along the road so many corpses hanged, that the journey becomes unpleasant." And in England they hung tramps and petty thieves who dragged items worth 5 pence and above. The justice of the peace was single handed down by the justice of the peace, and in every city on bazaar days another batch of guilty persons was torn up.

Western science and universities are very often stuck out. But they forget or deliberately silence some little things. The concepts of science of that time were very different from those of today. In the universities of the XVI – XVII century. studied theology, jurisprudence, and in some - medicine. There were no natural sciences in the universities. Passed, however, physics. But she (the science of nature's device) was considered humanitarian, and it was crammed according to Aristotle. And mathematics was studied purely by Euclid, Europe did not yet know any other mathematics.

As a result, universities produced empty scholastics and judicial chiclets. But medicine remained in its infancy. Generally recognized remedies for various diseases were considered bleeding and laxatives. King Henry II, wounded with a spear in the eye and brain, was given a laxative and began to bleed. During suppuration of the abscess behind the ear, Francis II was given enemas, and in addition closed the exit of pus and caused gangrene. Laxatives brought Queen Margot to death with pneumonia. Louis XIII from childhood suffered from catarrh of the stomach - he was given anemia by bleeding. And Cardinal Richelieu with hemorrhoids was tortured with daily enemas. But they were treated by the best doctors!

The Europeans attributed magic, alchemy, astrology, and demonology to the field of “science”. Of the natural sciences, astronomy first began to develop - it became a “by-product” of the then fashionable astrology. But any serious research has long remained a lot of lonely enthusiasts. What kind of scientific level can we talk about here, if Giordano Bruno was burned down in 1600 in Rome, Copernicus’s work "On the conversion of celestial bodies" was banned in 1616, and Galileo was forced to renounce evidence of the Earth's rotation in 1633. Similarly, the founder of the theory of blood circulation, Miguel Servet, was burned in Geneva. Vesalia for the work "On the structure of the human body" starved to death in prison. And at the same time, all the Western countries enthusiastically burned "witches". The peak of the terrible orgy fell not at all on the “dark” times of the Middle Ages, but on the “brilliant” XVII century. The women were sent to the fires by the hundreds. And universities are actively involved in this! It was they who gave the "scientists" conclusions about the guilt of the "witches" and earned good money on such scientific research.

Well, now let's compare with Russia, at least in general terms. In the era of the reign of the first Romanovs, it developed vigorously and dynamically. She was often visited by foreign merchants and diplomats. Their impressions speak for themselves. For example, the English ambassador Carlyle was impressed by the palace of Alexei Mikhailovich, calling the Russian court the most beautiful and majestic "among all the Christian monarchs." Admired and wealth. “From the inside, the palaces are so beautifully decorated and hung with Persian rugs, which are so delightfully made with gold, silver and silks, that you don’t know by surprise where to look. There you can see such a collection of gold, precious stones, pearls and magnificent objects that you cannot describe everything ”(Ayrman).

Moscow has made an indelible impression on all the guests. It was called "the richest and most beautiful city in the world" (Perry). The Hungarian traveler Ercole Zani wrote: “I am surprised by the enormity of the city. It surpasses any of the European or Asian ... There are countless people living in the city - others are a million, and others, more knowledgeable, more than 700 thousands. Without a doubt, he is three times more than Paris and London I have seen. ... Although most of the buildings there are made of wood, but outside they are quite beautiful and interspersed with the boyars' mansions represent a wonderful view. The streets are wide and straight, many large squares; it is laid out with thick round solid logs ... ".


The impressions of foreigners came not only about the capital. They described "many large and in their own way magnificent cities" (Olearius), "populous, beautiful, original architecture" (Juan Persian). Noted “temples, elegantly and magnificently decorated” (Kampenze). “It’s impossible to express how gorgeous a picture is when you look at these brilliant chapters ascending to heaven” (Lizek).

Russian cities were much more spacious than in Europe, with each house there were large courtyards with gardens, from spring to autumn they were buried in flowers and greenery. The streets were three times wider than in the West. And not only in Moscow, but also in other cities in order to avoid dirt, they were covered with logs and bridges with flat wooden blocks. Russian masters were awarded the highest marks of their contemporaries: “Their cities are rich in masters diligent in various kinds” (Mihalon Litvin). There were schools at monasteries and temples - they were still organized by Ivan the Terrible. And there were higher educational institutions that trained qualified officials, clergymen. Under Alexey Mikhailovich there were 5 in Moscow.

There was urban transport, cab drivers - until the end of the XVII century. foreigners talked about them as a curiosity, they have not had this before. They did not have yamskoy mail, which connected remote areas with each other. “There is a good order on the big roads. Special peasants are kept in different places, who must be prepared with several horses (1 has a village with 40-50 and more horses) so that, upon receiving the grand-prince's order, they can immediately harness horses and rush on (Olearius). From Moscow to Novgorod we arrived in 6 days.

Travelers have reported "a multitude of rich villages" (Adams). “The whole land is well sown with bread, which the inhabitants take to Moscow in such quantity that it seems surprising. Every morning you can see from 700 to 800 sledges going there with bread, and some with fish ”(Chensler). And the Russians lived very well! Without exception, all foreigners who visited Russia drew pictures of almost fabulous prosperity compared to their home countries! The land “abounds in pastures and is well-processed ... There is a lot of cow butter, like all sorts of dairy products, thanks to the great abundance of animals, large and small” (Tjapolo). They mentioned "the abundance of grain and livestock" (Perkamot), "the abundance of vital supplies that would honor even the most luxurious table" (Lizek).

And the abundance was affordable! “There are no poor people in this country, because edibles are so cheap that people go on the road to look for someone to give them to” (Juan of Persia - obviously, referring to the distribution of alms). “In general, in all of Russia, due to the fertile soil of the foodstuffs, it is very cheap” (Olearius). Barbaro, Fletcher, Pavel Aleppsky, Margaret, Contarini also wrote about low prices. They were amazed that the meat was so cheap that it was not even sold by weight, “but with carcasses or chopped by eye”. And chickens and ducks were often sold in hundreds or magpies.

Money was made by the people. Peasant women wore large silver earrings (Fletcher, Brembach). The Danish Ambassador Rode reported that "even women of modest origin sew a taffeta or damask outfit and decorate it on all sides with gold or silver lace." They described the Moscow crowd, where "there were many women decorated with pearls and hung with precious stones" (Mass). I suppose there were no boyars in the crowd. Meyerberg came to the conclusion: "In Moscow, such an abundance of all things necessary for life, convenience and luxury, and even obtained at a reasonable price, that it has nothing to envy any country in the world." A German diplomat Geis, arguing about the "Russian wealth", stated: "But in Germany, they probably would not have believed it."

Of course, welfare was not provided by the climate and not by some special fertility. Where were our northern edges before the harvests of Europe! Wealth was achieved by the extraordinary diligence and skills of peasants, artisans. But it was also achieved by the wise policy of the government. Since the Time of Troubles, Russia has not known catastrophic civil strife, devastating enemy invasions (Razin’s uprising in its scale and consequences could not be compared with the French Fronde or the English revolution). The royal army invariably trashed any enemies.

And the government did not rob people. All foreign guests admit that taxes in Russia were much lower than abroad. The people are not ruined. This was not an accident, but a deliberate policy. Adam Olearius wrote about Alexei Mikhailovich that he was “a very pious sovereign who, like his father, does not want to allow at least one of his peasants to be impoverished. If any of them are impoverished due to crop failure or other accidents and misfortunes, then he, whether he is a royal or boyar peasant, is given an allowance from the order or the office in which he is in charge, so that he could recover again, pay his debt and pay taxes to his superiors. ” Merchants, peasants, artisans had the opportunity to expand their farms, put the children on their feet. As a result, the whole state benefited.

By the way, and the epidemic occurred much less frequently than in "civilized" Europe. "In Russia, in general, the people are healthy and durable ... they haven't heard much about epidemic diseases ... there are often very old people here" (Olearius). And if we continue the comparison, then the blood flowed much less. “Crime is extremely rarely punishable by death” (Herberstein); “The laws of criminals and thieves are opposed to English. You can't hang for the first offense. ”(CHENSLER). Executed only for the most terrible crimes, and the death sentences were approved only in Moscow - personally by the tsar and the Boyar Duma. And our ancestors never knew such sadistic follies as mass witch hunts ... This is how stories about wild and downtrodden Russia — and about enlightened, refined Europe — are scattered.
Author:
Originator:
http://zavtra.ru
93 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. knyazDmitriy
    knyazDmitriy 11 June 2013 08: 17
    39
    Such articles should be filmed and released on the central channels so that the children know who they are and who their ancestors are! And they did not look with envious eyes at the geyropu.
    1. vlad767
      vlad767 11 June 2013 12: 54
      15
      I wonder what the liberals will say to this? I suppose they will again yell that this is "undemocratic, malicious propaganda." laughing
      1. kolobock
        kolobock 11 June 2013 15: 12
        -7
        And what to comment on the opuses of Putin lackeys?
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Denis
          Denis 11 June 2013 15: 46
          +1
          kolobock - and another troll crawled out
          1. Joker
            Joker 11 June 2013 15: 50
            +4
            here came another troll

            Not for long, will soon be removed like all its predecessors. hi
            1. Denis
              Denis 11 June 2013 16: 32
              +5
              Quote: Joker
              Not for long, will be removed soon
              They are like the contents of a clogged sewer, climb and climb
              Many under different nicknames
      2. lesnik340
        lesnik340 11 June 2013 19: 44
        +2
        They will say this is not tolerant of Europe. And it would be necessary to teach about this in history.
    2. Sakhalininsk
      Sakhalininsk 11 June 2013 13: 37
      10
      Quote: knyazDmitriy
      Such articles should be filmed and released on the central channels so that the children know who they are and who their ancestors are! And they did not look with envious eyes at the geyropu.


      This does not fit ideals into the Westernized political lobby. And the author is absolutely right to us, unlike the bloodthirsty zats from the geyropa, there is something to be proud of. What is it already that the detractors of Russia are poked by tyrants Ivan IV and Peter I, as these accusers of Russian savagery write for their mutual rule they executed people less than impudent Saxons or French women who convicted us of barbarism in an ordinary year.
      In a word, you need to learn and know the history of your homeland and not believe the crap that is written in the west and dictated by the west.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. Egoza
          Egoza 11 June 2013 15: 51
          10
          Quote: kolobock
          Even if Ivan IV was executed less, he still remains a tyrant

          He is the KING! AND STATE GOVERNOR! And a tyrant is not a tyrant - look at the horizontal of that century. Or would you like him to be a "crap"?
          1. Orik
            Orik 11 June 2013 17: 01
            +6
            He is the KING! AND THE STATE!


            So the liberals, this is the tyrant. Now, if John IV had ruined the country into several parts, sold his people into slavery and allowed the Western riffrader to plunder the riches, then he would be the most democratic, most Christian, enlightened monarch. There was no Nobel Prize then, but the rollback would have been given in a different way.
    3. Nevsky
      Nevsky 11 June 2013 14: 12
      +3
      People, do you think this is true? Russian-Horde Empire? Recently I looked, at first I thought the author had grassy grass, but then:



      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Setrac
        Setrac 11 June 2013 15: 33
        +4
        Quote: Nevsky
        People, do you think this is true? Russian-Horde Empire? Recently I looked, at first I thought the author had grassy grass, but then:

        Everyone thinks so at first, and then, having figured it out, they come to the conclusion that Western historians have a lot of fun.
        You probably heard about the Mughal empire, which then mythically turned into the Mongols. The Mughal Empire surpassed the USSR in size.
      3. Corneli
        Corneli 12 June 2013 14: 14
        +1
        Quote: Nevsky
        People, do you think this is true? Russian-Horde Empire? Recently I looked, at first I thought the author had grassy grass, but then:

        Well ... judge for yourself, some of Fomenko’s works, excerpts from annotations and book titles speak for themselves:
        Moscow in the light of the New Chronology- "... In the XIV century on place of modern Moscow, according to the authors, the greatest battle of Russian and world history - the Battle of Kulikovo. After 200 years, in the XVI century, the grandiose construction of the last capital of the Great Medieval Empire began here
        Tsar Slavs- "OUR CIVILIZATION IS SEVEN CENTURIES!
        Such is the sensational conclusion of recent studies by G.V. Nosovsky and A.T. Fomenko in the field of chronology and reconstruction of medieval history. The new results obtained by the authors in 2003-2004 allow a different look at the place of Russian Orthodoxy in Christianity. In particular, it turns out that Russia was baptized by Christ himself in the XNUMXth century A.D.... And the first century after the birth of Christ turns out to be the XNUMXth century AD .... "
        Cossacks-arias from Russia to India - I don’t even want to throw quotes, you will guess)
        The conquest of America by Yermak-Cortes and the rebellion of the Reformation through the eyes of the "ancient" Greeks- "New information about the Battle of Kulikovo, about Ivan the Terrible and the history of Esther, about the famous campaign of the ataman-conquistador Ermak-Cortes and the Great Troubles in the Empire of the XVI-XVII centuries. These testimonies constitute a significant part of the "antique" works of Herodotus, Plutarch and Thucydides. "- Herodotus and all sorts of Thucydides fight, in foam, in coffins
        The split of the empire. From Grozny-Nero to Mikhail Romanov-Domitian - "It turns out that the well-known" ancient "works of Tacitus, Suetonius and Flavius ​​are devoted mainly to the history of Russia-Horde of the 1613th-1610th centuries, including the era of the Reformation. Apparently, the" ancient "Roman emperors Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius and Nero - these are reflections of the four Horde kings-khans, united in Russian history under the name of “Ivan the Terrible.” The reader will find out who the “ancient” heroes Daedalus and Icarus really are, and also what the famous Pharos lighthouse is, one of the wonders of the world. It is shown that the campaign of the commander Germanicus, the nephew of Tiberius, is the conquest of America by the Cossack ataman-conquistador Ermak-Cortes in the 1612th century. It turns out that the "ancient classics" even illuminated the era of the first Romanovs. Suetonius and Tacitus knew the story of Ivan Susanin, who saved Mikhail Romanov from the Poles in XNUMX. The capture of "ancient" Jerusalem by Emperor Titus by Joseph Flavius ​​is most likely the siege and capture of Moscow in XNUMX-XNUMX by Skopin-Shuisky, and then by Minin and Pozharsky. "
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 12 June 2013 14: 38
          0
          Quote: Corneli
          Well ... judge for yourself, some of Fomenko’s works,

          Well, Fomenko is a noble storyteller, already enviable, but he has no more delirium than in traditional history.
          For example, we know that in the Middle Ages in the lower Volga region there was a powerful Jewish state - the Khazar Kaganate, BUT, for several centuries, historians have been placing the "homeland" of the Jews on the territory of Palestine, nonsense.
          Or else we know that before the railroads appeared, the main transport arteries were rivers, we know that the Danube is the main artery of Europe, which means that there should be a large trading city near the mouth of the Danube, through which almost ALL of Europe traded with the Mediterranean and Slavic peoples. And such a city IS called ... Constance, what a funny coincidence. Or maybe this is Constantinople?
          1. Corneli
            Corneli 12 June 2013 15: 45
            +3
            Quote: Setrac
            For example, we know that in the Middle Ages in the lower Volga region there was a powerful Jewish state - the Khazar Kaganate, BUT, for several centuries, historians have been placing the "homeland" of the Jews on the territory of Palestine, nonsense.

            AND? Well, there was the Khazar Khaganate, but why did you get the idea that it was Jewish? Just because the ruling elite adopted Judaism and a certain number of Jews came there (to the kaganate)? And if they had accepted Islam, would they have become Arabs? Catholicism by the Germans? Orthodoxy (from their ally of Byzantium for example) -Greeks / Romans? The Khazars, mainly the nomadic people - the Turks, have little relation to the Jews themselves and their language group (and culture).
            The Palestinian state is "the promised land", Israel, Judea is a completely different thing ... the state itself / a of the Jews. It was there approx. from 1100 BC e. until 70 AD (both independently and as part of various empires), until they lifted up the Romans with their uprisings and they burned Jerusalem (and under Hadrian in 135, they also renamed it and the region), and all the Jews were dispersed from there, Schaub did not buzz. To the Khazars, part of the Jews came 600 years after that. So what nonsense I did not understand.
            Quote: Setrac
            Or else we know that before the railroads appeared, the main transport arteries were rivers, we know that the Danube is the main artery of Europe, which means that there should be a large trading city near the mouth of the Danube, through which almost ALL of Europe traded with the Mediterranean and Slavic peoples. And such a city IS called ... Constance, what a funny coincidence. Or maybe this is Constantinople?

            Not giving in about the arteries, the Danube and commerce ... But MOST Constantinople, the one that is right now Istanbul is that then?) However, if I remember correctly, Constance was so named (renamed) in honor of the sister of Constantine the Great. So there are 2 different cities ... Tomes-Constanta, Byzantium-Constantinople-Istanbul.
            1. Setrac
              Setrac 12 June 2013 15: 59
              -2
              Quote: Corneli
              Not giving in about the arteries, the Danube and commerce ... But MOST Constantinople, the one that is right now Istanbul is that then?) However, if I remember correctly, Constance was so named (renamed) in honor of the sister of Constantine the Great. So there are 2 different cities ... Tomes-Constanta, Byzantium-Constantinople-Istanbul.

              There are many cities of the same name. And Istanbul throughout the PROVEN history was Istanbul.
              Quote: Corneli
              Israel, Judea is a completely different thing ... actually the state / s of the Jews. It was there approx. from 1100 BC e. up to 70 g.

              Well, where did you get this? No, it's fantastic. It has been there since 1953 AD!
              1. Corneli
                Corneli 12 June 2013 16: 18
                +2
                Quote: Setrac
                There are many cities of the same name. And Istanbul throughout the PROVEN history was Istanbul.

                Yes you sho ??? By whom "PROVEN"?))) You will not be very much embarrassed by the fact that until 1930 the official, internationally accepted name of the city was Constantinopolis recognized, including by the Great National Assembly of Turkey? laughing And only on March 28, 1930, the Turkish authorities ordered to use only the Turkish version of the name, in fact, Istanbul.
                Quote: Setrac
                Well, where did you get this? No, it's fantastic. It has been there since 1953 AD!

                For example, I read Josephus Flavius ​​"The Jewish War" and "Antiquities of the Jews", Tacitus "Analas" ... They were contemporaries of the Jewish uprising of 66-71 AD. e. (And Flavius ​​dac and generally a direct participant and a prisoner of war))). In general, they write "amazingly fantastic" things, although before Fomenko they are like cancer to heaven, of course ...
                1. Setrac
                  Setrac 12 June 2013 16: 27
                  -1
                  Quote: Corneli
                  For example, I read Josephus Flavius ​​"The Jewish War" and "Antiquities of the Jews", Tacitus "Analas" ... They were contemporaries of the Jewish uprising of 66-71 AD. e. (And Flavius ​​dac and generally a direct participant and a prisoner of war))). In general, they write "amazingly fantastic" things, although before Fomenko they are like cancer to heaven, of course ...

                  Ai-ay-ay, can you tell us where the ORIGINALS of these wonderful works are stored? They are not here!!!
                  Quote: Corneli
                  Yes you sho ??? By whom "PROVEN"?)))

                  That is, history has not been proven by anyone, even later, an option is adopted that is beneficial to the government at the time of adoption, no science.
                  1. Corneli
                    Corneli 12 June 2013 16: 48
                    +1
                    Quote: Setrac
                    Ai-ay-ay, can you tell us where the ORIGINALS of these wonderful works are stored? They are not here!!!

                    No, I will not say, in fact I never bothered to search for "originals", neither these nor other books. If there are people who are sure that they never existed in nature ... for God's sake, let them prove it)
                    Quote: Setrac
                    There are many cities of the same name. And Istanbul throughout the PROVEN history was Istanbul.

                    Quote: Setrac
                    Quote: Corneli
                    Yes you sho ??? By whom "PROVEN"?)))
                    That is, history has not been proven by anyone, even later, an option is adopted that is beneficial to the government at the time of adoption, no science.

                    And here you are at all lost ... Sources until 1930 in bulk, with the name Constantinople). Or do you definitely need the "original" of the decree of Constantine the Great, on the renaming of Byzantium to Constantinople on May 11, 330?)
                    1. Setrac
                      Setrac 12 June 2013 16: 54
                      -1
                      Quote: Corneli
                      No, I will not say, in fact I never bothered to search for "originals", neither these nor other books. If there are people who are sure that they never existed in nature ... for God's sake, let them prove it)

                      Thinking with your brains, you probably also "did not bother", why argue if you "do not know"? And science is such - it requires proof.
                      P.S. In vain spent his precious time.
                      1. Corneli
                        Corneli 12 June 2013 17: 01
                        +1
                        Quote: Setrac
                        Thinking with your brains, you probably also "did not bother", why argue if you "do not know"? And science is such - it requires proof.
                        P.S. In vain spent his precious time.

                        Omg ... And you mean in the "course"? Excuse me, but I didn't see ANY proof from you) Stuffs and that's it. And about Constantinople in general epic feil, then you pretend that we did not talk about it)
                        Yet try to answer, respected "thinking with his brains", "And Istanbul has been Istanbul throughout the PROVEN history." I'm REALLY looking forward to proof of this stuffing)
                      2. Setrac
                        Setrac 12 June 2013 17: 09
                        0
                        Quote: Corneli
                        And about Constantinople in general epic feil

                        It was "free creativity", enjoy. Although it looks more believable than the official version!
                        Quote: Corneli
                        evidence from you I did not see

                        About the evidence - below.
                        Quote: Corneli
                        never bother searching

                        Your words? What claims to me? Bother! Find out!
                      3. Corneli
                        Corneli 12 June 2013 17: 27
                        0
                        So you have no proof? NO! Just sophistry "free creativity" and that's it. Expected)
                      4. Setrac
                        Setrac 12 June 2013 17: 34
                        0
                        Sorry, what proof do you need? This YOU prove the veracity of the official story. Troll of course the beast is large, but not tasty.
                      5. Corneli
                        Corneli 12 June 2013 18: 47
                        0
                        Quote: Setrac
                        Sorry, what proof do you need? This YOU prove the veracity of the official story. Troll of course the beast is large, but not tasty.

                        Hmm ... I'm also a "troll"!) Back to the beginning of the dispute:
                        Quote: Setrac
                        Or else we know that before the railroads appeared, the main transport arteries were rivers, we know that the Danube is the main artery of Europe, which means that there should be a large trading city near the mouth of the Danube, through which almost ALL of Europe traded with the Mediterranean and Slavic peoples. And such a city IS called ... Constance, what a funny coincidence. Or maybe this is Constantinople?

                        Here is your "free creativity", I expressed my version, with evidence ... you answer:
                        Quote: Setrac
                        And Istanbul throughout the PROVEN history was Istanbul.

                        I answered that too) And I asked you where did you get this))) But you, you can't answer and are doing sophistry ... well, you have also switched to "trolls")
                      6. Setrac
                        Setrac 12 June 2013 21: 42
                        0
                        Quote: Corneli
                        I answered that too) And I asked you where did you get this))) But you, you can't answer and are doing sophistry ... well, you have also switched to "trolls")

                        If you are not comfortable with Fomenko read Morozov or Kolyuzhny, they are monsters compared to Fomenko.
                      7. Corneli
                        Corneli 13 June 2013 19: 08
                        0
                        Quote: Setrac
                        If you are not comfortable with Fomenko read Morozov or Kolyuzhny, they are monsters compared to Fomenko.

                        Hmm ... He does not suit me, because he writes (mostly) just monstrous nonsense, I can't even read it very drunk (and I don't dabble in "hard drugs")). And you suggest that I read even more "advanced historians"? It's like ... I don't like Petrosyan's "humor" or B. Moiseev's "creativity" ... so I need to find "clowns" and "p ... moat" abruptly?)
                      8. Setrac
                        Setrac 13 June 2013 21: 28
                        0
                        Quote: Corneli
                        And you suggest that I read even more "advanced historians"?

                        Oh how, but what about "give me proof"? Here they are, study! No! You don’t need this, you don’t tolerate a run over the sacred cow of traditional history. Scaliger is an authority for you in comparison with Lomonosov.
  • Corneli
    Corneli 12 June 2013 14: 25
    0
    Continuation of the selected works of Fomenko:
    What Shakespeare actually wrote- "... It turns out that such famous plays as" Hamlet "," King Lear "," Macbeth "," Timon of Athens "," Henry VIII "," Titus Andronicus "are based on the real events of the XII-XVI centuries, which unfolded in the Great Empire.Prince Hamlet is a reflection of Andronicus-Christ (Andrei Bogolyubsky) and John the Baptist; King Lear is a reflection of Khan Ivan the Terrible; King Macbeth is the Gospel king Herod; Timon of Athens is Judas Iscariot; King Henry VIII is Ivan again Terrible; Queen Anne Boleyn is Elena Voloshanka = Esther ... "
    Colonization of America by Russia-Horde in the XV-XVI centuries - "... When and by whom America was mastered? Why did the Crimean khans pray to Orthodox icons? How German professors of Russian history forged Lomonosov's work on the history of Russia. What are the famous seven wonders of the world? Who and when invented gunpowder?" laughing )
    In the XNUMXth century, the Romanovs destroyed old Russian category books and instead made fake genealogies for themselves and their nobles. Latin letters were invented by the famous Russian saint Stephen of Perm in the XIV century as a simplified writing for Western Europe ... "
    Book 1. Western myth- ".. The authors discovered an important parallelism, according to which the kings-khans of the Russian-Horde Empire of the XIII-XVI centuries were reflected in the Western annals as the Habsburg emperors of the XIII-XVI centuries, as well as the tsars and emperors of" ancient "Rome. French queen Catherine de Medici, probably is a reflection of the Russian queen Sophia Palaeologus in the Western European chronicles. It becomes clear what St. Bartholomew's night is. The famous Joan of Arc, apparently, is described in the Bible under the name of the prophetess and warrior Deborah. And the famous French Marshal Gilles de Rais, the legendary companion Joan of Arc, was reflected in the Bible as the famous warrior and hero Samson. At the same time, the main original of the biblical story of Samson is the struggle of Zemshchina against the Oprichnina in Russia under Ivan IV the Terrible in the XNUMXth century ... "
    And there are such "works" to read, not reread !!! The most important thing about annotations is the following:
    "The book is written so that reading it does not require any special knowledge from the reader(Logically, a person with minimal knowledge immediately wants to laugh). Only interest is required to Russian (for the sake of everything, this nonsense is being written !!! banal speculation ... we were fooled all our lives, and here the boys will open your eyes, not for free) and general history and the desire to figure out its many riddles.
    So sho no grass ... all honestly, for the money
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Joker
    Joker 11 June 2013 15: 12
    15
    I remembered one story about Suvorov and the lieutenant, right in the topic of lovers of the West. Read.
    Lieutenant Kozodubov imitated the French in everything. French manners. He spoke French. Books read French. Especially the lieutenant liked to talk about Paris: and what people put on, and what they eat, and what they drink, and how they spend their time. And yet he likes the French. And all the same to him from the Russians is not good. And although Kozodubov himself in France and Paris has never been, but it turned out from his words that he was almost born in Paris, that he was not a Russian at all, but a Frenchman.
    The lieutenant buzzed his comrades about the French and Paris all their ears.
    Here, once met Suvorov Kozodubov, looked, asked:
    - How are you doing in Paris? What do mother and father write?
    “So my mother is in St. Petersburg and my father is in St. Petersburg,” answered the surprised lieutenant.
    - Oh, sorry, sorry! - Suvorov apologized. “I thought you were French.”
    The lieutenant understood nothing. Still praises everything French, and Russian scolds.
    A few days have passed. Suvorov met the lieutenant again, again with a question:
    - How are you doing in Paris? What do mother and father write?
    - So, your Excellency, I have already said, my mother in St. Petersburg and my father in St. Petersburg. And I was born in Pskov.
    - Ah, forgive, forgive the old man, forgot.
    The lieutenant cannot understand what is the matter. He began to complain to his comrades about Suvorov: they say, the old field marshal, they say, the memory is nowhere and the speech is sometimes incomprehensible, strange.
    He sees Suvorov that the lieutenant did not understand anything either.
    It happened just during the war with the French. Come break in battles. The French offered to exchange prisoners to officers. Suvorov agreed. Compiled by staff officers lists.
    I looked through Suvorov.
    “This is not all,” he says.
    “Everything, Your Excellency,” the officers report.
    “No, not all,” the field marshal repeats. - There is another Frenchman not specified ...
    The officers laughed. Understood the joke of field marshal. They told the lieutenant. He rushed at full speed to Suvorov.
    - Your Excellency! - shouts. - Your Excellency, mistake! I am russian! I told you so.
    “There is no mistake,” replies the field marshal. - You are not Russian.
    “Russian,” says the lieutenant. - Russian. And my mother is Russian and my father is Russian. And I have a surname Kozodubov. And in Pskov born.
    - Not much is born in Pskov. Little that mother yes father Russian, says Suvorov. - Yes, you're not Russian. Your soul is not Russian.
    It finally got to the unintelligent head, what's the matter. He fell on his knees, asks for forgiveness. Thought Suvorov said:
    - Well, so be it - stay. Just go out of my sight. Go think. Be proud, you fool, that you are Russian!
    1. Joker
      Joker 11 June 2013 15: 16
      +4
      Who cares here is completely all the stories about Suvorov and Russian soldiers http://lib.rus.ec/b/122147/read is very entertaining and instructive reading, I will tell you hi
      1. Egoza
        Egoza 11 June 2013 15: 55
        +5
        Quote: Joker
        all stories about Suvorov and Russian soldiers

        Remarkably A.V. Suvorov taught sissies and pro-Western sisters! A REAL RUSSIAN COMMANDER!
        1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Avenger711
      Avenger711 11 June 2013 17: 00
      +2
      Usually, they immediately planted and shot for such a thing. Even civilians. Although it may be in a society where nobles in their native language even after the war with Napoleon shunned it was the norm.
  • Apologet.Ru
    Apologet.Ru 11 June 2013 17: 55
    0
    Absolutely right, colleague! Therefore, “Tsarist autocratic power, we must strive to recreate not only because such a desire will be true repentance in our grave sin of destroying one of the original principles of Russian life and connivance to this destruction. This aspiration at the same time corresponds to the true Russian ideology, which is nothing but the Orthodox faith and the Russian life based on it in all its fields, from personal to state, why the Russian state should be led by the tsarist autocratic power. The ideology of Russian people will never allow that the basis of state life was not God-given power, that is, constitutional or republican power not based on the Orthodox faith ”(“ Russian Ideology ”).
  • Apologet.Ru
    Apologet.Ru 11 June 2013 18: 53
    0
    Personally, I believe that the 74-year-old “revolutionary” EXPERIMENTS over Russia and the 22-year-old “democratic” EXPERIENCES over its peoples are ENOUGH! Only the return of the AUTHORITY-MONARCHY-TESTED INSTITUTE TESTED FOR CENTURIES will save Russia!
    1. Avenger711
      Avenger711 11 June 2013 19: 03
      -1
      It will not save, although you can simply leave Putin a life ruler.
      1. Apologet.Ru
        Apologet.Ru 11 June 2013 20: 13
        +1
        Colleague, what does Putin have to do with it?
        Monarchy is an eternal, supreme and always possible principle; if it becomes impossible for any nation, then only through the moral decline of the nation itself. So it is in Russia: “if the Russian idea, although high, is beyond the power of the Russian people themselves, then ... this idea for Russia itself is canceled ... At the same time, the world mission of Russia is also canceled ...”
        1. Avenger711
          Avenger711 12 June 2013 01: 12
          +4
          The monarchy has ONE advantage over the elected circus, the continuity of power and its preparation. And without the nobility she will not work. But in our country, the nobility had to be driven back in the year 1820. Because it is like a cat from a Chinese proverb that catches mice all the less, and eats and sleeps more.
      2. Horde
        Horde 11 June 2013 20: 21
        +1
        Quote: Avenger711
        It will not save, although you can simply leave Putin a life ruler.


        only this was not enough, what would railroads come to us from all over the world?
  • Prometheus
    Prometheus 11 June 2013 19: 50
    +3
    Better to tell in history lessons in schools. And then the teacher talks to us about the repressions and about how Stalin strangled the agro-industrial complex before and after the war.
  • fattalist
    fattalist 11 June 2013 20: 57
    0
    YES SIR!!!!
  • afire
    afire 12 June 2013 00: 09
    +2
    Awesome article, very nice to read!
    You feel like a man, MORE THAN today the thought has taken a slam on the prohibition of every kind of gaydros!
    For once, I'm proud of the thought))
  • Denis
    Denis 11 June 2013 08: 35
    +9
    It was uncleanliness that gave rise to the famous French perfumery.
    And having written about unwashed Russia, what did he think if he loved his country?
    Are you, my friend, an hour not a liberalist?
    Looking at the past and present, I want to bow to the kings and the church for saving the faith, whether it is everyone’s business to believe or not, and we are obliged to bow
    Otherwise, they would be Catholics now with all the hilarious homosyatsky jolly ensuing from there
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 11 June 2013 15: 35
        +3
        Quote: kolobock
        So throw the computer away. It is also made in the "tlerasty-Gomosyak" West


        However, invented by Russian scientists.
        In addition, the "Gomosyak" West uses our communist oil and gas, and they do not disdain others.
      2. Denis
        Denis 11 June 2013 15: 37
        +2
        Quote: kolobock
        It is also made in the "tlerasty-Gomosyak" West
        Try if you do not grow wiser, then at least understand geography. Is China the West?
    2. Apologet.Ru
      Apologet.Ru 11 June 2013 18: 58
      +1
      When writing about unwashed Russia, he meant dirt on the streets and in public toilets, and not observance of hygiene rules by peasants, artisans and bourgeois, I'm not talking about the Russian aristocracy ...
  • Igor39
    Igor39 11 June 2013 09: 00
    +8
    That went to the mud, now indulge in the ass, and then what? I think will be dirty perverts laughing
    1. folds
      folds 11 June 2013 14: 14
      +3
      further the number of mosques will exceed the number of churches and will fight for moral and physical purity according to Sharia law
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Joker
      Joker 11 June 2013 15: 52
      +1
      That went to the mud, now indulge in the ass, and then what? I think will be dirty perverts

      And again they will be in a hundred years, as they will forget about it and forget about it, if of course they exist hi
  • Lyokha79
    Lyokha79 11 June 2013 10: 27
    +4
    This should be taught in schools, so that children, from young nails, know the history of the Motherland and be proud that the country in which they were born and live is much better than "civilized and enlightened Europe"
    1. The comment was deleted.
  • Trapperxnumx
    Trapperxnumx 11 June 2013 10: 33
    +9
    Where can we, with our bathhouse, to their lousy highnesses ... Eh ... We are barbarians, in a word. And thank God!
    1. avt
      avt 11 June 2013 14: 46
      +4
      Quote: Trapper7
      Eh ... We are barbarians, in a word. And thank God!

      So after all, the barbarian - Barbara, Barbarossa. Remember this Frederick? But just means barbara - beard, well, and Ross - red, Sigismund Herberstein mentioned in his report that the flag in Russia was red. And the article, yes, youth should be read. +
      1. Corneli
        Corneli 12 June 2013 00: 09
        +1
        Quote: avt
        So after all, the barbarian - Barbara, Barbarossa. Remember this Frederick? But just means barbara - a beard, well, and Ross - red, Sigismund Herberstein mentioned in his report that the flag in Russia was red.

        Barbarian: other gr - barbaros, lat. - barbarus, old glory. barbarian.
        Barbarossa: from Italy. barba is the beard and rossa is the red
        It was necessary to twist the meaning of the word so much to attract a red "Russian" here !? flag? sad
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • ALPETSEM
    ALPETSEM 11 June 2013 11: 43
    +8
    That’s why they pour on the past of Russia with false dirt, in order to seem cleaner themselves, their auto-training is like that.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  • maratenok
    maratenok 11 June 2013 11: 59
    +5
    Quote: knyazDmitriy
    Such articles should be filmed and released on the central channels so that the children know who they are and who their ancestors are! And they did not look with envious eyes at the geyropu.

    it’s necessary on TV, and the article is correct that Europe is a former dirty continent
    1. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 11 June 2013 13: 59
      +3
      And to show not at half past one in the afternoon or at noon for housewives, but at the most normal time, even with advertising.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Denis
      Denis 11 June 2013 16: 35
      +4
      Quote: maratenok
      Europe is a former dirty continent
      Former? Everything is back to square one
  • dmb
    dmb 11 June 2013 12: 35
    +4
    Fellow citizens, why are we so gullible. The West itself does not like in many of its manifestations, but one cannot blame everything so primitively and indiscriminately. Leonardo and Mikkilangelo, Rastrelli and Rossi. It was in the west that Levitsky, Rokotov, Bazhenov studied. And Lomonosov, by the way, too. Propaganda should not be so primitive.
    1. smile
      smile 11 June 2013 14: 14
      +6
      dmb
      This article is just a counterbalance to sweeping massive propaganda about unwashed Russia and the European paradise. What is wrong with the article? It does not in any way deny the achievements of Europeans. It just says. that everything was not quite the way they are presented, and that is why the population of Russia in the 16-17th centuries was inferior, for example, to the French 5–6 times by the beginning of the 19th century almost with France (and not only due to conquests).
      And as for studies, yes, we learned from them in some ways, adopted something ... a common thing - if we take into account that the population of Europe exceeded us tenfold, it is obvious that they simply had to achieve great success in science, than we ...
      1. Gato
        Gato 11 June 2013 16: 03
        +1
        What is wrong with the article?

        Yes, that's right. Well, in some places the author thickened the colors, embellished something. But in general, everything is correct. In general, I highly recommend reading the "Everyday Life ..." series, both ours and Western authors.
        1. smile
          smile 11 June 2013 16: 18
          +2
          Gato
          I read several books - the whole series is too big, no time. It is interesting, but to some books, especially to those whose authors are foreigners, there are an order of magnitude more claims than to this article. Agree, the author of this article simply did not have the opportunity to present a detailed analysis, there is not enough space. So he said only the main thing ... :)))
          1. avt
            avt 11 June 2013 17: 05
            +5
            Quote: smile
            I read several books - the whole series is too big, no time.

            It seems that Rubruk's report or Karpini mentions the fact that the Horde uses a knife and fork for a meal, and this is 1253! Moreover, he pointed out that noble people have flour, millet, sausages, the poor - lamb, meat, slaves -, they even fill their stomachs with dirty water. "This is a report from a scout, but the chronicler Matvey of Prague, well, our Solzhenitsyn, already wrote that the Mongols they eat carrion, foxes and drink water from puddles. This is such an enlightened Euryopian squiggle ... This is how one writes its chapters into history.
      2. dmb
        dmb 11 June 2013 19: 10
        +3
        Dear smale. I can only repeat that the propaganda must be competent. You can observe the results of illiterate propaganda in numerous comments in which ignorance is passed off as valor, and the thesis is put forward as the main argument of our superiority: "And they are each other there ...". Well, sometimes the most "gifted" people also remember that we have a vigorous bomb and Orthodoxy.
    2. Denis
      Denis 11 June 2013 17: 48
      +3
      Quote: dmb
      but you can’t blame everything so primitively and indiscriminately
      Beat the enemy with his own weapons!
      You will not begin to measure knowledge with a gopota in an alley?
      In the face and further on business. And they are also almost people ...
      Leonardo and Mikkilangelo ...
      They are the summit, peak of dawn, now it's time for sunset
      And the creations of Rastrelli and Russia can be at home, without homosexuality, etc.
      1. dmb
        dmb 11 June 2013 19: 37
        0
        But do not tell me where in the West you can see the creations of Rastrelli and Russia with homosexual, etc.? And what do you mean by pr.?
        1. Denis
          Denis 11 June 2013 21: 39
          +1
          Perhaps he didn’t accurately express a thought, but was based on your expression
          The West itself does not like in many of its manifestations, but one cannot blame everything so primitively and indiscriminately. Leonardo and Mikkilangelo, Rastrelli and Rossi.
          You yourself moved them there
          Quote: dmb
          What do you mean by pr.?
          And this is what happened in London and Sweden and will happen again and again. I don’t want this at home, so I won’t follow their dead-end doctrine of tolerance
          1. dmb
            dmb 11 June 2013 21: 55
            +1
            Can I still ask you what kind of dead-end doctrine you are talking about, what is it? At the same time, it would be interesting to find out what relation the above representatives of Western culture have to him, and in particular what exactly they brought to what happened in London and Sweden. Honestly, you can "joke" for a long time, but laziness. I recommend that when you write something for everyone, and not just for yourself, sometimes think over what has been written, then maybe "Rossi with gomosyatiny" will not come out from under your pen. PS All the creations of the aforementioned architects are located on the territory of Russia, with or without "gomosyatina, etc."
            1. Denis
              Denis 12 June 2013 00: 23
              +1
              Maybe I’m not correctly standing the phrase, but I know that the distortion of the opponent’s phrases does not do honor
              Quote: dmb
              from under your pen and will not come out "Rossi with gomosyatiny"
              Where did I write this?
              Quote: dmb
              And can you still ask what dead-end doctrine you are talking about, what is it
              On the flood of the country by migrants, then what needs to be continued?
              Quote: dmb
              what relation do the aforementioned representatives of Western culture have to it, and in particular what exactly did they bring to what happened in London and Sweden
              You are misinterpreting again, it was said that it’s not worth borrowing, so that it doesn’t work out
              Quote: dmb
              All creations of the mentioned architects are in Russia
              It remains to add that the Earth is round. For a long time, already in a past life I studied at a vocational school, but even then I knew about it and saw
              And now I want to see without any gay parades around
              So don't
              Quote: dmb
              for a long time to "joke"
              try to read carefully, if anything, then you can ask again for complete clarity
  • knn54
    knn54 11 June 2013 12: 38
    +6
    The facts have long been FAMOUS, therefore, the tale of leafy Europe and barbaric Moscow is a CONSCIOUS lie in the spread of which our "giants of thought and fathers of Russian democracy" also participate.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  • Fuzeler
    Fuzeler 11 June 2013 12: 44
    +7
    I would not speak about Europe so unequivocally in the negative, as it is written in the article, BUT, studying at one time, within the framework of the university program (well, on top of that, I liked it in the 1st year), 10 years ago I made my own conclusion for myself : Muscovy was not such a backward state. At least take that legislation (for example, the fact that the death penalty was used much less often in our country, or the fact that the "witch" should VERY try to be really burned, mostly imprisoned in monastery prisons, and then bailed out) that we had , well, the standard of living is not the lowest in Europe. Look, for example, at what we had in the middle of the 17th century (when the religious schism began). We did not have such real civil wars as in Europe ... No, well, there were clashes between Old Believers and "Nikonians", of course, but all this was of a local nature (if I am not mistaken, then only the brothers of the Solovetsky Monastery put up long-term resistance).
    It’s just that with Peter the Great all this sack with the humiliations of the old one has begun, and is still going on.
    1. knn54
      knn54 11 June 2013 14: 19
      +4
      -Fuzeler: It’s just that with Peter the Great this whole bag with the humiliations of the old as it began, is still going on.
      Through a “window”, Russia poured into Russia from Europe: tobacco, wigs with lice, men's clothing ... with STOCKINGS and CORSETS.
      And from Russia, at bargain prices, - hemp, ship wood; corn; ore, metal ...
      PS "Oh, Caesars! I went to see him this morning - he washes in a small basin - in the same water and washed his hands and face and spit there too .. But he disdains us. And he hasn't been to the bath since his arrival from Vienna" ... .N Tolstoy, "Peter the First".
      PS "Civilized" Europe and "barbaric" Moscow on the example of the death penalty:
      http://newzz.in.ua/histori/1148855352-civilizovannaya-evropa-i-varvarskaya-moskv
      a-na-primere-smertnoj-kazni.html
      1. Horde
        Horde 11 June 2013 19: 55
        +3
        And from Russia, at bargain prices, - hemp, ship wood; corn; ore, metal ...
        PS "Oh, Caesars! I went to see him this morning - he washes in a small basin - in the same water and washed his hands and face and spit there too .. But he disdains us. And he hasn't been to the bath since his arrival from Vienna" ... .N Tolstoy, "Peter the First".


        how did this populist fake of the Jew A. Tolstoy "Peter 1" permeate into the minds of the people, it is time to leave the image of Peter as a progressive reformer of the country, there are too many serious questions for him.
        By the way, you didn’t give those quotes from "Peter1"
        -Pyotr1 - "and what kind of country this is, as they come out of the house and shit under the doors, why not, as in Europe it is clean, neat"
        -Peter- "we will come to Europe, I will order all ambassadors to sew up their pockets, so that they would not steal, I know you"
      2. Horde
        Horde 11 June 2013 20: 08
        +3
        -Peter imposed rampant drunkenness among the nobility, binges were for several DAYS, many died from this
        -Peter forced the people to smoke tobacco, NO DAMAGE for all the time, but then of course there are MILLIONS of lives.
        -Peter changed the RUSSIAN LIFESTYLE by introducing the Gregorian calendar, introducing into the Russian circulation LATINISMS and other foreign words, which is very similar to today, it just makes you sick of Americanisms, I can imagine how our ancestors spat at that time.
        -the introduction of non-Russian costume, a departure from the traditions of RUSSIAN ARCHITECTURE (TEREMA) WAS REPLACED BY THE FOREIGN WESTERN AND GREEK ARCHITECTURE STYLES.
        -punishment of your own son - UNAUGHTIBLE HARDNESS.
        -system of education, which did not teach ANYTHING, but only stupid.
        -physical destruction of the Russian people through all sorts of adventurous enterprises such as the Prut campaign.
        -Significant time this king lived abroad because he did not like Russia.
        -As a result of the lengthy Northern War, it turned out that the WORLD was NOT CONQUERED, as it should be in an honest heroic war, but PURCHASED for gold. PETER WAS EVEN NOT EVEN A SILVER.
        - the impostor appropriated the title of EMPEROR over which they openly laughed in the west.
        -Peter finally ENROSED the people under Peter, the peasants lost ALL RIGHTS and finally turned into slaves.
        -And the last, if any of our leader, ruler is openly praised in the West, then it’s unclean if it’s either a thief, or an impostor, like Peter is a tyrant ARE THE TREATER of the Russian people
        1. Denis
          Denis 11 June 2013 21: 44
          +1
          Quote: Horde
          Pyotr-tyrant AREA TREATER of the Russian people
          It would be if Catholicism were allowed into Russia
          1. Horde
            Horde 11 June 2013 22: 13
            +1
            Quote: Denis
            Quote: Horde
            Pyotr-tyrant AREA TREATER of the Russian people
            It would be if Catholicism were allowed into Russia


            Peter destroyed the patriarchate, and precisely because it was the Russian patriarchs who were for ANCIENT Piousness, without European innovations, but this was at that time. Now Gundyaev, is keeping quiet about the AMERICANIZATION of our life, and about the dominance of Jews in all spheres of statehood, and even about such an abomination As juvenile justice and same-sex marriages, I have not heard anything from the patriarchs of our church, but "without the light of Christianity, all the Slavs would have remained beasts" here are the TURNOVER Gundyaev allows himself.
            1. Avenger711
              Avenger711 12 June 2013 01: 14
              0
              Yes, the Russian Orthodox Church for the people, thank you laugh. By the 18th century, Orthodoxy could already be scrapped.
              1. Setrac
                Setrac 12 June 2013 13: 18
                0
                Quote: Avenger711
                Yes, the Russian Orthodox Church for the people, thank you laugh. By the 18th century, Orthodoxy could already be scrapped.

                The ROC was NEVER for the people, she was interested in money, power, land, serfs. Such a state in the state, thanks to the Communists that we do not pay church tithes, parasites in robes.
                I would like to draw your attention to the fact that Dmitry Donskoy did not want to fight against the "horde", he considered imperial power to be legitimate, but through the efforts of the churchmen, the war took place.
            2. Denis
              Denis 12 June 2013 13: 43
              +2
              Quote: Horde
              Gundyaev, keeps quiet about the AMERICANIZATION of our life, and about the dominance of Jews in all spheres of statehood, and even about such abominations as juvenile justice and same-sex marriage
              I don’t confuse priests with saints. They are people. There are selfless ascetics, and there are also very thieving (here a thief in the old Russian sense, who not only steals, betrays, etc.) creatures. It’s bad when it’s the father of a small church, it’s even worse if the official is from the church and catastrophic when the leader. The leaders can do a lot of mischief, but they’re not all good. Is the same Gundyaev the whole church? Just like Putin (and before EBN, a head with a patch and all sorts and all ...) all of Russia?
              And before Gdyaev the hierarchs of the church used to go against conscience, but with the authorities
              But even if the commander of the traitor cannot be considered traitors of the entire unit
        2. Avenger711
          Avenger711 12 June 2013 01: 13
          0
          And then the country then held all of Europe by the balls. The question is where exactly are you absolutely wrong and what great achievements of Peter did you lose sight of.
    2. Gato
      Gato 11 June 2013 16: 18
      +5
      Dealing with Russian history began not so much with Peter as with the time of Anna Ioanovna. Biron and the "managers" brought by him from all over Europe diligently shredded everything they could. It was then, for example, that the Varangian version of the history of Kievan Rus appeared with the general thesis about the inability of the Slavs to create their own state without outside (European, of course) help.
      If anyone does not know: the originals of the historical chronicles of the pre-Mongol period HAVE NOT PRESERVED. Generally. The same "Tale of Bygone Years" is known to us only from copies of copies, in which the scribes also made their corrections in accordance with the "current political situation."
  • OLGRIN
    OLGRIN 11 June 2013 13: 18
    +6
    And then think about it, because there was no general plague in Russia as in Europe. But in the way of Genghis Khan Russia was the first. Bath steers!
  • politruk419
    politruk419 11 June 2013 13: 19
    +6
    Medinsky's trilogy "Myths about Russia" provides very convincing arguments that the West was then far behind in the social structure. The situation leveled off by the nineteenth century, with the onset of the Industrial Revolution.
    Paris became Paris under Louis Napoleon, i.e. in the middle of the XIX century. And before that there was purulent sralnik. London has always been a swollen, moldy bedbug; improvements began in Victoria's time. Berlin only flourished under Bismarck. Rome is still a garbage dump, except for the museum ruins and the Vatican. The best city (in matters of urban planning) in Europe has always been Prague (but very small) and then St. Petersburg. Later, Stockholm and Amsterdam. (And also relatively small)
    1. The comment was deleted.
  • Fitter65
    Fitter65 11 June 2013 13: 36
    +5
    So it is not in vain that foreigners in Russia lived in fenced enclaves, so as not to mess up the country of arrival ...
  • shurup
    shurup 11 June 2013 13: 41
    -4
    I love the mention of American historians. the author of the pitccha estcho! Against their background, Zadornov is a scribbled, snickering, stupid inhabitant of an elite apartment. Waiting for new pearls from across the ocean.
    What to take from them? - they don’t go to the bathhouse in the system, but are washed in the shower. Instead of footcloths, five-fingered socks are used, and they blow their nose in them.
  • sergey261180
    sergey261180 11 June 2013 14: 12
    +1
    “Donkey, woman and nut need blows”
    Your golden words von Tsvetten!
    The West loved luxury and splendor. But they were achieved not at all due to scientific progress or more advanced social systems, but due to the extremely steep squeezing of juices from their own common people and the robbery of the colonies that had begun.
    What has changed over the years?
    At universities XVI – XVII century. studied theology, jurisprudence, and in some - medicine
    And on the contrary, the MEPhI has now introduced the department of theology. So we are progressing! Just where?
    1. Gato
      Gato 11 June 2013 15: 44
      0
      at the Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, on the contrary, they have now introduced the department of theology


      Is this a joke or serious?
      1. sergey261180
        sergey261180 11 June 2013 18: 11
        +2
        Seriously. There is a scandal now. Members of the RAS demand to close it. The Russian Orthodox Church is overweight about this. In short, insanity grows stronger.
  • nod739
    nod739 11 June 2013 17: 11
    +3
    excellent article

    sorry for the information war, we lost and lose,
    and what will happen next?
    the West has already so discredited itself that the same RT beats the audience away from famous brands of information
  • Avenger711
    Avenger711 11 June 2013 17: 11
    +2
    But at least starting from the 18th century, all this was successfully consumed, then there was a reform of 1861, when the peasants were hung with debts for generations to come, and ended up in a wild illiterate, eternally starving country, suffering greatly from a lack of land (seriously, about constant hunger the end of the 19th century is not known only to the downright liberals, but I, for example, have not heard about the famine in the 18th century). Because even then they wanted to live "as in Europe", only Europe was robbing the colonies, and our nobles were their serfs.

    Actually the simplest Google search immediately leads to such quotes:

    “Brockhaus and Efron”, whose authors are difficult to suspect of pro-Soviet agitation, states at the beginning of the 1891th century in Russia “an extreme upset of the peasant economy”, and in the article “Hunger” emphasizes: “Since the middle of the 92th century, Western Europe has been relieved of hunger due to a political change system, the rise of the national economy, the development of a network of communications. In Russia, hunger happens until then; such are the years 1897-98, 1906-07, 8-100, which caused famine in vast areas of Russia. ” It is also emphasized that from the XI to the XVI century in Russia there were 34 cases of hunger for every 1854 years, but this figure is constantly increasing. In the XVIII century, 35 famines were noted, and only in the first half of the XIX century (until XNUMX) - already XNUMX.
  • Ilya Mikhalych
    Ilya Mikhalych 11 June 2013 18: 48
    +1
    Interesting article . Glory to Russia !!!
  • Horde
    Horde 11 June 2013 19: 32
    +3
    In general, this whole era from the strange death of Alexei Mikhailovich to Paul1 causes only a flurry of questions.
    Why did Russia, namely, what our state was called under Alexei Mikhailovich, suddenly change its development vector so sharply ???
    Why did Russia abandon all Russian ???
    -in religion, the transition to the Greek religion (schism)
    - in architecture, the transition to Greek (classicism) and European standards of construction.
    - the transition to European clothing, why?
    - Transition to the European calendar, although astronomers still use the Julian calendar.
    - the seizure by German scientists of Russian science (until the middle of the 19 the number of Germans was absolutely overwhelming)
    - and many, many other questions.
    There is such a writer, the historian of our time, Alexander Kas, and so, examining the time from the Great Troubles of the beginning of the 17th century to the time of the arrival of Peter1, he quite convincingly argues that starting from Alexei Mikhailovich the Germans ROMANOVA came to power in Russia. That the first Romanov Peter1 and further after him was no longer RUSSIAN KINGS, so all this time before Pavel it was mainly SALVED and difficult to understand, almost impossible. However, an analogy with today's events can be traced.
    Jews came to power in Russia and now we have what we have
    http://istclub.ru/forum/76-%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D1%8C-%E2%84%961-%D0%BF%D0%B
    5%D1%80%D0%B2%D1%8B%D0%B9-%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9
    -%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%82-%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC
    % D0% B0% D1% 82-word /
  • Horde
    Horde 11 June 2013 20: 52
    +1
    Travelers reported “many rich villages” (Adams). “The whole land is well seeded with bread, which residents are transporting to Moscow in such numbers that it seems surprising. Every morning you can see from 700 to 800 sleighs going there with bread, and some with fish ”(Chanceler). And the Russians lived very well!


    but for contrast, the photo of the Russian village of the late 19th century Prokudin-Gorsky
    this is an example of what Romanov Russia brought the peasants to.



    why is there such a difference? In the 17th century Russia was rich and prosperous, and in 19-20 there was complete poverty and degradation. The answer in the 17th century was the reign of Mikhail Fedorovich and Alexei Mikhailovich RURIKOVICHI-RUSSIAN. Next from Peter to Nikolashka the Germans. According to the traditional history, the Romanovs went from Mikhail Fedorovich, but this not like the truth, the Antichrist came to Russia in the image of Peter.
    1. Avenger711
      Avenger711 12 June 2013 01: 15
      0
      From Peter to these pictures another 150-200 years. The country was not profiled by Peter.
      1. Horde
        Horde 12 June 2013 08: 58
        0
        Quote: Avenger711
        From Peter to these pictures another 150-200 years. The country was not profiled by Peter.


        I gave the above link to the historical forum and club, see who Peter was actually.
      2. Setrac
        Setrac 12 June 2013 13: 21
        0
        Quote: Avenger711
        From Peter to these pictures another 150-200 years. The country was not profiled by Peter.

        All the Romanovs tried
    2. OLGRIN
      OLGRIN 12 June 2013 12: 27
      +1
      Yes, it seems to be the other way around. Rurikovich's descendants of Rurik, and the Romanovs are just Russians, only later became related to the Hohenzollerns for political reasons.
      And there is still no fit in how this Viking story of the creation of the ruling family appeared only in the XNUMXth century? Where did the Rurikovich come from then? Or, for example, Ivan the Terrible didn’t know about himself?
      For example, my name is Oleg. Is this an Old Russian name or what else? This is an ancient Scandinavian name - Khilga "speaking with the dead" (in Russian, Olga, Oleg). Where did it come from in Russian? Read the Rus-Byzantium treaty from 806-807. there are entirely Varangian names.
      Another thing is that it was not the Russians who lay under them, but they began to live according to Russian customs. I would, in their place, also begin to live in a Russian way.
      And here is why everything has gone awry since the XNUMXth century, we would have to figure this out so as not to repeat itself.
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 12 June 2013 13: 35
        0
        Quote: OLGRIN
        And there is still no fit in how this Viking story of the creation of the ruling family appeared only in the XNUMXth century?

        Well, what Vikings are Scandinavians, these are the speculations of historians. And you know that the Scandinavian platform is rising, and relatively quickly, and for example, there was a sea in the place of Sweden 1000 years ago, of course, some rocks were sticking out of the water, but there was no talk of any state formations or "strong" peoples. The mighty fishermen-warriors are the same myth as the empires of the nomadic peoples of antiquity.
        But how did the Slavs live at that time? Slash-and-burn farming flourished in Russia (I won’t write that this is Yandex to help), which meant that the farmer had considerable physical strength and good ax skill. In addition, from 30 to 70% of the food came from game obtained by hunting, that is, besides an ax, possession of a bow and a horn (spear) was also.
        Russia - Russian - words with the same root - channel, mermaid, dew, all this is connected with water, that is, Russians are river people. Given that the main transport arteries were rivers, it is obvious that the mythical Vikings, Varangians - Russians and (or) Slavs.
        1. OLGRIN
          OLGRIN 12 June 2013 14: 56
          0
          Tooth I give, that 1000 years ago Scandinavia was in the same form as today, with minor changes.
          Above, I wrote 806-807, you need to read 906-907. But there were many more contracts.
          Here is an excerpt from the 911 agreement, we read:
          We are from the sort of Russian. carls. Inegeld Farlof. Veremud. rulav. goudes | roadald. carn. frelav. rual. act. Truan. Lee | Dole Fost. stemid. even sent from the olga of the great prince roska and from all izh saut under the rook of his light and great prince. and his great boyars. ”
          Where are the Slavic names? That Gostomysl is our opinion, he kind of advised Rurik to call his relative.
          Only now they developed a story that the Slavs could not create their own state, this is in my crap. And how did you live before that? It turns out just hanging out in their original place. What is there Ros from Croatia, these are Polish fairy tales. Modern Russians are descendants of the Aryans (one haplogroup) and therefore our ancestors lived on their territory since when ancient Rome did not exist and probably Ancient Egypt. Well, there were a lot of events. I don’t know how the word Rus was formed, but the word is beautiful and I personally really like it.
          1. Setrac
            Setrac 12 June 2013 15: 07
            0
            Quote: OLGRIN
            Tooth I give, that 1000 years ago Scandinavia was in the same form as today, with minor changes.

            Well I'm a little bit wink exaggerated that does not cancel the fact as such.
            Quote: OLGRIN
            Where are the Slavic names?

            And what names do you consider Slavic and Russian?
            1. OLGRIN
              OLGRIN 12 June 2013 16: 25
              0
              I think Slavic (if I understand them by ear) then such as: Yaropolk, Mstislav, the same Gostomysl, Dobrynya.
              But the names Karl, Truan, Roald do not seem Slavic or Russian to me.
              With Russian names it will already be more difficult, we are constantly in progress.
          2. Horde
            Horde 12 June 2013 15: 28
            0
            Tooth I give, that 1000 years ago Scandinavia was in the same form as today, with minor changes.


            your tooth is certainly a weighty historical artifact, but even this will not be enough. You didn’t lie about raising the Scandinavian coast, and so Scandinavia rises quickly.

            Here is an excerpt from the 911, read


            and what kind of contract? what is the name of? when was it first made public?
            1. OLGRIN
              OLGRIN 12 June 2013 16: 14
              0
              The highest point of Scandinavia, Gallhepiggen, height 2469m, and its height has not changed since the first ascent in 1850.
              Then 2469 meters are divided by 1000 years and we get an increase of 2,469 m per year. Will not be too much? Even if we subtract half and then a lot.
              I believe this treaty was made public in Constantinople exactly in 911 (according to the Gregorian style), since this year it was signed.
        2. Corneli
          Corneli 12 June 2013 16: 04
          0
          Quote: Setrac
          Well, which Vikings are Scandinavians, these are the speculations of historians.

          Why do you care so much about the "Varangian version" I personally do not understand ... At about the same time, the Vikings traveled all over Europe, burned half of France (including Paris), conquered England 2 times (why are they not yelling that it can not be so?)
          P.S. Incidentally, the last major raid, once England had already been conquered by the Vikings, was made by the Norwegian son-in-law of Yaroslav the Wise) (he really blew), and then the one who defeated him blew William the Norman-descendant of the Vikings again (in the same 1066). Actually, such "beloved" England as a state began to exist precisely from Wilhelm. And nothing ... it doesn't really flatten them
          1. Setrac
            Setrac 12 June 2013 16: 10
            0
            Quote: Corneli
            Why do you care so much about the "Varangian version" I personally do not understand ... At about the same time, the Vikings traveled all over Europe, burned half of France (including Paris), conquered England 2 times (why are they not yelling that it can not be so?)
            P.S. Incidentally, the last major raid, already conquered by the Vikings in England, was committed by the Norwegian son-in-law Yaroslav the Wise) (he really blew it), and then the one who defeated him blew Wilhelm to the Norman descendant of the Vikings again (in the same 1066)

            According to Stanislavsky - I do not believe.
            1. Corneli
              Corneli 12 June 2013 16: 24
              0
              Quote: Setrac
              According to Stanislavsky - I do not believe.

              Those.? There were no Vikings in Europe? England did not conquer? Paris not fired? The Vikings (Danes, Norwegians, Swedes) were not founded in Ireland, Iceland, Greenland, and North. America of its states and settlements?
              1. Setrac
                Setrac 12 June 2013 16: 43
                0
                Quote: Corneli
                Those.? There were no Vikings in Europe? England did not conquer? Paris not fired? The Vikings (Danes, Norwegians, Swedes) were not founded in Ireland, Iceland, Greenland, and North. America of its states and settlements?

                Someone was somewhere, someone was conquered, somewhere they fired and even founded something. But who is where and what is a difficult question. Forgot another important question "WHEN".
                1. Corneli
                  Corneli 12 June 2013 16: 54
                  0
                  Quote: Setrac
                  Someone was somewhere, someone was conquered, somewhere they fired and even founded something. But who is where and what is a difficult question. Forgot another important question "WHEN".

                  I see) And your last name is not Fomenko by chance? laughing
                  Speaking of complexity ... Not knowing about history absolutely does not stop you from arguing ... You don’t know if there was Wilhelm (Rurik, Konstantin, Josephus Flavius, Tacitus ...), if he was, then when, where, what did he do .... but if you don’t like the version you grill - I don’t believe it!) without any evidence that you don’t have anymore ... I just don’t believe that)
                  1. Setrac
                    Setrac 12 June 2013 17: 01
                    0
                    Quote: Corneli
                    but if you don’t like the version you grill - I don’t believe it!) without any evidence that you don’t have anymore ... I just don’t believe that)

                    You are confusing something, historians who put forward versions must prove, indicate the sources, and the originals, not copies, and there are no originals, this your Tacitus first surfaced in the 18th century and was in absentia rooted! You must prove as a proponent of traditional history. So if I start promoting the version of Fomenko, I will have to provide evidence, while I reject the official history, they must prove to me.
                    1. Corneli
                      Corneli 12 June 2013 17: 10
                      0
                      Quote: Setrac
                      You are confusing something, historians who put forward versions must prove, indicate the sources, and the originals, not copies, and there are no originals, this is your Tacitus first surfaced in the 18th century and was in absentia shot!

                      Even here you feilite, he "surfaced" at least from the 15th (1470-first printed edition) century beginning. (this is when it has already begun to print, and not rewrite).
                      1. Setrac
                        Setrac 12 June 2013 17: 14
                        0
                        Quote: Corneli
                        Even here you feilite, he "surfaced" at least from the 15th (1470-first printed edition) century beginning. (this is when it has already begun to print, and not rewrite).

                        No, let's start from the last CONSERVED edition, references to copies that have not reached us are not accepted.
                      2. Corneli
                        Corneli 12 June 2013 17: 19
                        0
                        Quote: Setrac
                        No, let's start from the last CONSERVED edition, references to copies that have not reached us are not accepted.

                        You can look at the photos in Wikipedia, there are different years there, including the controversial "Meditsa" manuscripts of the 9th century ... and look for where they are stored) I will not go there anyway and I will not bring them to you (and there will be enough photos)
                      3. Setrac
                        Setrac 12 June 2013 17: 44
                        0
                        Quote: Corneli
                        You can look at the photos in Wikipedia, there are different years there, including the controversial "Meditsa" manuscripts of the 9th century ... and look for where they are stored) I will not go there anyway and I will not bring them to you (and there will be enough photos)

                        Okay, even so, all the same, the 16th century of the publication is too late, it does not smell of any history of the beginning of the first millennium. The described events can be attributed to the boundary between the first and second millennium, on the basis of the fact that the original source (which has come down to us) dates from this time.
                      4. Corneli
                        Corneli 12 June 2013 18: 10
                        0
                        Quote: Setrac
                        Okay, even so, all the same, the 16th century of the publication is too late, it does not smell of any history of the beginning of the first millennium. The described events can be attributed to the boundary between the first and second millennium, on the basis of the fact that the original source (which has come down to us) dates from this time.

                        1470 (print) is the 15th century (about the fact that there are pictures of manuscripts of the 9th century silent)). In addition, the events described by Tacitus intersect with other contemporaries (as well as simply with archaeological finds and arch. Monuments). Speaking of Tacitus and Flavius, in Rome there is the Arc de Triomphe of Titus (built in 80), in honor of the capture of Jerusalem in 70 AD. e. Isn't she proof too?)
                      5. Setrac
                        Setrac 13 June 2013 21: 34
                        0
                        Quote: Corneli
                        Speaking of Tacitus and Flavius, in Rome there is the Arc de Triomphe of Titus (built in 80), in honor of the capture of Jerusalem in 70 AD. e. Isn't she proof too?)

                        Modern history is written from written sources, so the triumphal arch of dubious antiquity is not proof. About the written sources describing the events of a MILLENNIUM PRESENT I wrote above - deception, you want to be mistaken - your right, you do not need to propagate your own misconceptions.
  • Denis
    Denis 12 June 2013 14: 09
    +1
    Quote: Horde
    total poverty and degradation
    From the picture, is it worth judging that the house is covered with straw? So there’s still a place to know. And then you can shoot a report about poor Papuans in huts made of palm leaves ... Only for those huts they don’t for some reason build a house of palm lumber. They don’t want money or there’s nothing ?
    Remember the poet
    ... a hut covered with straw, with carved shutters a window
    I won’t say anything about shutters, but being in the Yaroslavl region saw carved platbands and what! With poverty, which they love to talk about, they will not cut them out, not to them. So everything is relative
    Thinking of a piece of bread will you cut such a thing?
    1. Horde
      Horde 12 June 2013 14: 55
      0
      From the picture, is it worth judging that the house is covered with straw?


      Well, what is it covered in your way with slate? and that you bring this window, what is it? when were these trimmings cut out?
  • Bully
    Bully 11 June 2013 21: 51
    +2
    Yes, the reason for the change of the Rurik dynasty is shrouded in mystery. Although, I suspect, the papists had a hand here too. After all, the consequence of the arrival of the Romanovs was (as actually under Gorbachev-Yeltsin, and now too) the destruction of the historical cultural barrier to spiritual crap, which rushed from the West to Russia.
  • Opera
    Opera 11 June 2013 22: 14
    +1
    Quote: Nevsky
    People, do you think this is true? Russian-Horde Empire? Recently I looked, at first I thought the author had grassy grass, but then:

    In order to correctly answer this question and the truth was not so shocking, first you can get acquainted with the works of Klassen E.I. about the ancient history of the Slavs, his translation of the works of the Polish philologist Tadeusz Volansky, to read Herodotus’s statements about the Slavs of the Scythians ... Then it will be clear why, for example, Etruscan is not read exclusively by Western scholars, but it becomes clear using the Slavic alphabet and not only that ...
    Every thinking and generally sensible Russian person looking around and not finding ANYTHING Mongol-Tatar wherever he is at that moment - in Moscow, Ryazan, Kiev ..., at least once in his life asked himself a question - how is it possible 300 - summer (think about it) HIS ?!
    Read, then and compare our history with the European does not occur! And the article is certainly a plus.
    1. Corneli
      Corneli 12 June 2013 13: 53
      +4
      Quote: Oper
      read the statements of Herodotus about the Slavs of the Scythians ...

      Herodotus did not write anything about the "Slavs" ... putting an equal sign between the Scythians / Sarmatians / Aryans / Chimerians / Slavs is a new trend, for the most part far-fetched and based on fantasies
      Quote: Oper
      Every thinking and generally sensible Russian person looking around and not finding ANYTHING Mongol-Tatar wherever he is at that moment - in Moscow, Ryazan, Kiev ..., at least once in his life asked himself a question - how is it possible 300 - summer (think about it) HIS ?!

      Hmm ... you can go to the Crimea and find there the ruins of Greek / Byzantine cities that were there when they were, but at the same time you WILL NOT DISCOVER traces of nomads, no Huns, no Pechenegs, no Alans, or Polovtsians (they never existed never and are they fiction?) ... although not .. Crimean Tatars run around trying to build huts). And in China, by the way, they were also conquered by the Tatar-Mongols, for some 150 years you will not find "evidence of the IGA" either ... you can pour such "examples" for a long time ... There was a culture, there was a state, but lose it no ... everything has dissolved in other culture-states.
      P.S. For example, I read one of the apologists of the "alternatives" Mr. Fomenko, he seriously believes that the Roman Empire did not exist ... Not any "300 years of IGA" nomads who sometimes came for tribute and lived far in the steppe. And for more than a thousand years, cultural and architectural values, a cloud of all kinds of written evidence, cities, houses, roads, bridges ... All this seems to be there, but the Roman Empire is not!
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 12 June 2013 14: 26
        -3
        Quote: Corneli
        P.S. For example, I read one of the apologists of the "alternatives" Mr. Fomenko, he seriously believes that the Roman Empire did not exist ...

        Correctly believes that there was no Eastern Roman Empire, there was no Western Roman Empire, but there was the only Great Roman Empire of the German Nation, and ETA never owned Italy or Asia Minor.
        Quote: Corneli
        a cloud of all written evidence, cities, houses, roads, bridges ...

        That's just the point, there is nothing, neither written evidence, nor archaeological evidence of the IGA, but only ONE page in the annals of the 18th century !!!.
        1. Horde
          Horde 12 June 2013 15: 16
          0
          Correctly believes that there was no Eastern Roman Empire, there was no Western Roman Empire, but there was the only Great Roman Empire of the German Nation, and ETA never owned Italy or Asia Minor.


          so what was this empire? who ruled? lifetime?
          1. Setrac
            Setrac 12 June 2013 15: 24
            0
            Quote: Horde
            so what was this empire? who ruled? lifetime?

            Yandex to help you, or a wiki, as you like, I did not come up with this empire.
            1. Horde
              Horde 12 June 2013 15: 34
              0
              Quote: Setrac
              Quote: Horde
              so what was this empire? who ruled? lifetime?

              Yandex to help you, or a wiki, as you like, I did not come up with this empire.


              if you are talking about the Holy Roman Empire of the Habsburgs, then just a significant part of Italy went there.
              1. Corneli
                Corneli 12 June 2013 16: 27
                -1
                Quote: Horde
                if you are talking about the Holy Roman Empire of the Habsburgs, then just a significant part of Italy went there.

                I won't be particularly surprised if this empire "didn't exist" either)
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Corneli
    Corneli 11 June 2013 23: 41
    +1
    I read the article and komenty .... my head swells and conflicting questions climb into it (
    1. Peter 1, was a bright and successful reformer, who gave all sorts of different enemies (like the Swedes) lyuley and raised Russia? Or a dumb despot, a tyrant worshiping the West and destroying the super-advanced Russian culture and Russia in general, as a state?
    2. Was the Tatar-Mongol invasion AT ALL? Or Kiev, Ryazan, Vladimir and other cities themselves burned down (well, or their population mysteriously disappeared somewhere)?
    3. The article and comments say that in Russia in Moscow alone a million people lived, plus there were also a bunch of big cities, besides this there were no epidemics, yoke, riots and unrest. People lived almost like in paradise, multiplied, multiplied, and rich people lived for a long time ... And then it is written that in Russia there were MUCH LESS populations than in some kind of France (where it was just happening)! How can this be?
    4. How is it that, given the super-ancient Slavic civilization (starting from the Aryan-Scythians, for example), there are fewer thousands of millennia of total dominance in absolutely everything before Europe, we are poorer and worse off?
    In general, I do not understand anything (
    P.S. To the author: In medieval Europe, narrow streets were made on the basis of the defense of the city (first of all) and there was "tightness", because everyone tried to live inside the walls. It is clear that the "tower" and orchards with vegetable gardens in such conditions cannot be done. Don't want to live under the protection of the city walls? In crowded but not mad"? Live outside the city, but it's a problem (just how long)
    1. Horde
      Horde 12 June 2013 00: 45
      +1
      Peter 1, was a bright and successful reformer, who gave all sorts of different enemies (like the Swedes) lyuley and raised Russia? Or a dumb despot, a tyrant worshiping the West and destroying the super-advanced Russian culture and Russia in general, as a state?


      try not using the Internet to answer yourself, but what did Peter successfully reform?

      Was the Mongol-Tatar invasion AT ALL? Or Kiev, Ryazan, Vladimir and other cities themselves burned down (well, or their population mysteriously disappeared somewhere)?


      against the "ancient chronicles" "alternative historians" put forward common sense and the questions that they raise on the INVASION hang in the air and do not find answers. By the way, "alternative historians" are people who are more deeply involved in history, do not hush up facts and do not invent extra entities.

      The article and comments say that in Russia in Moscow alone a million people lived, plus there were also a bunch of big cities, besides this there were no epidemics, yoke, riots and unrest. People lived almost like in paradise, multiplied, multiplied, and rich grew long-lived ... And then it is written that in Russia there were MUCH LESS populations than in some kind of France (where it was just happening)! How can this be?


      you and all the rest who are not knowledgeable in history are accustomed to the fact that traditional historians TISHniki answer all questions with the ultimate accuracy and about the birth of Christ, and about the beginning of some Livonian war, which is 500 years from us, but the further the event, the WORSE accuracy is proved mathematically, only SILENTS, the successors of the medieval monks-scholastics-numerologists, can give the absolute accuracy of the event. The author of this article sets out only the facts taken from medieval travel notes, but each of the eyewitnesses of those events sets out his VISION on the situation, therefore, someone could it seems that a million people live in Moscow in the beginning of the 17th century, and to someone less, because the official figures have not been preserved, or maybe they did not exist.
      1. Corneli
        Corneli 12 June 2013 13: 15
        +1
        Quote: Horde
        try not using the Internet to answer yourself, but what did Peter successfully reform?

        I try (from what I remember from the textbooks of the USSR)): the army, for example (though it's a shame, I made it according to the "Western" model ... but what can you do, it was more effective at that time), created a fleet from scratch and founded ports and a shipyard (Russia did not have this), built Peter (the advanced city at that time + located in a strategic point) ... I can continue, but here you’re litter, if not the Internet, then at least a couple of books from home to look through, Schaub Nitsche do not be confused)
        Quote: Horde
        Was the Mongol-Tatar invasion AT ALL? Or Kiev, Ryazan, Vladimir and other cities themselves burned down (well, or their population mysteriously disappeared somewhere)?

        against the "ancient chronicles" "alternative historians" put forward common sense and the questions that they raise on the INVASION hang in the air and do not find answers. By the way, "alternative historians" are people who are more deeply involved in history, do not hush up facts and do not invent extra entities.

        Sorry, but I didn't see the answer .... the mysterious "common sense" is different for everyone. Recently I have read so many such "common sense", as much as my head swells (But only normal answers are not visible. A lot of contradictions - I see ... answers and imputed explanations - no!

        Quote: Horde
        The author of this article sets out only facts taken from medieval travel notes, but each of the eyewitnesses of those events sets out his VISION on the situation, therefore, it might seem to someone that a million live in Moscow in the beginning of the 17th century, and to someone less, because there are no official figures or maybe they weren’t.

        I have no pretensions to the author of the article or to the information stated in it) It is quite interesting and informative. The questions I have asked are based on the article and comments from readers. Actually, the questions are based on the notorious "common sense", because much of what is written contradicts itself
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 12 June 2013 14: 01
          -1
          Quote: Corneli
          I try (because I remember from the textbooks of the USSR)): the army, for example (though it's a shame, I made it according to the "western" model ... but what can you do, it was more effective at that time)

          I hasten to disappoint you, the regiments of the foreign system were in Russia before Peter1, this merit was attributed to Peter the First undeservedly (sorry for the tautology).
          Quote: Corneli
          created, from scratch, a fleet and founded ports and shipyards (Russia did not have this)

          And then by, and the fleet was also a shipyard, Peter the Great became famous for building BAD ships from raw wood, a wrecker, an enemy of the people, Stalin was not there.
          Quote: Corneli
          built by Peter (advanced city at that time + located at a strategic point)

          And you read HOW Peter was built, do you seriously believe in hundreds of millions of serfs and monks who carried the earth in their palms and skirts to fill the swamp? Marasmus! There is an opinion that in the place of Peter Already there was a large trading city and it was called Mr. Veliky Novgorod, Peter the Great only renamed the city, and undeservedly. Or do you want to say that before people were fools and didn’t use such a strategically important place, and Peter the Great OGOGO immediately cut a chip - this is called common sense, do not think that the ancients were dumber than us.
          Quote: Corneli
          I can continue, but

          Continue, we will try to dispel your delusions.
          1. Horde
            Horde 12 June 2013 14: 51
            0
            There is an opinion that in the place of Peter Already there was a large trading city and it was called Mr. Veliky Novgorod, Peter the Great only renamed the city, and undeservedly.


            there was a city, but Oreshek, about Veliky Novgorod, then this version of yours is THIRD, after the traditional and version of Fomenko. laughing
        2. Horde
          Horde 12 June 2013 14: 37
          0
          the army, for example (though it's a shame, I made it according to the "western" model ... but what can you do, it was more effective at that time), with


          the reform of the army by Peter, as you say "on the Western model" is
          -firstly a change in the appearance of a soldier i.e. the introduction of a European uniform, but we’ll think about whether a Russian soldier needs all these cocked hats, tight boots, tight narrow uniforms because the conditions of Russia and Europe are different in climatic terms. If you take the point of view that the army is being created from scratch, as for example now in Georgia (everything is American) is one thing, but the Russian army Fought ALWAYS, (the Crimean campaigns of Vasily Golitsin, Peter the Great), therefore the military traditions multiplied by experience created a soldier fully prepared for waging wars in specific conditions. effective combat.
          Continuing to fight in European terms is the right construction in the same direction and the offensive in the same correct order is also a marching step, it was more like a parade on the parade ground. Now you begin to understand that such methods of warfare are just a good way to destroy your own soldiers. The rebuilding during the attack had a more psychological effect, but under the fire of artillery, large losses were inevitable.
          And such TRANSFORMATIONS are presented to us as the OUTSTANDING achievements of Tsar Peter the Great.
          History - FALSE, for example, the introduction of the Western advanced, of course, the latest product of the Western military thought of the SILICON GUNS with a bayonet, which of course any historian would not have been able to create in Russia. This can be answered for reasons of linguistics.
          SHTYK - the Polish word is written in all dictionaries, it was born, of course, also there, but what does it mean? Dictionaries do not give an answer to this, but only Russian can give
          The bayonet is the tyk quite in Russian. or
          The CAPSA protrusions on the gun barrel for aiming at a corner of a place, whose word is definitely German, in all dictionaries, and what does this mean? in German here already find it difficult to answer, but
          TsAPFA-STSEP explanation, only in Russian. So around.
          created, from scratch, a fleet and founded ports and shipyards (Russia did not have this)


          here is a 1656 map of the siege of Tsar Aleksey Mikhailovich of the Swedish city of Riga. On the map the THREE-MASTED RUSSIAN VESSELS are clearly visible, even though smaller than the Swedish ones, but if they are multi-masted, they are already marine.

          built by Peter (advanced city at that time + located at a strategic point)


          on the site of the future Petersburg there have long been settlements and entire cities, both Russian and Finnish. for example, Oreshek, just at the exit from the Neva. Another lie of the Trades. Then Peter himself didn’t build anything the city was occupied by Menshikov, Romodanovsky
          during the time of Peter's life, ONE OR TWO stone houses were built in the city. After the death of Peter, the city ceased to exist, as much as what Peter did.
          Sorry, but I didn't see the answer .... the mysterious "common sense" is different for everyone. Recently I have read so many such "commonsenses", my head is swelling


          at least pick up the MILITARY REVIEW archive over the past six months on historical topics there are a lot of things. I’m too lazy to poke around, or on istclub.ru
          1. Corneli
            Corneli 12 June 2013 15: 23
            0
            Vyzh yourself forbade me to use the Internet in response) that I remembered something and said, I don’t want to get involved in the dispute ... except that one moment surprised me about the army:
            Quote: Horde
            firstly, a change in the appearance of a soldier i.e. the introduction of a European uniform, but we’ll think about whether a Russian soldier needs all these cocked hats, tight boots, tight narrow uniforms because the conditions of Russia and Europe are different in climatic terms. If you take the point of view that the army is being created from scratch, as for example now in Georgia (everything is American) is one thing, but the Russian army Fought ALWAYS, (the Crimean campaigns of Vasily Golitsin, Peter the Great), therefore the military traditions multiplied by experience created a soldier fully prepared for waging wars in specific conditions. effective combat.

            As far as I remember, the introduction of the "European" form of uniforms was phased, starting with the "amusing" regiments, the same archers, whom Peter abolished (not least because of the conspiracy, he doesn't care about these "Russian" musketeers, "Cardinal's guards" more loyal will) were not immediately disbanded and participated in his campaigns (because the troops of the new model were not trained enough). In addition, if I'm not mistaken, he took the "Swedish type" of the army as a model. You can write a lot of things here, of course, but then (since the time of Gustav) this type was really advanced (the interaction of artillery, infantry and cavalry), which the same Gustav proved by piling on all and sundry 70 years before the reforms (and the Russians in that number) and the archers from him shook off like children. Actually, all European armies tried to adopt his experience and tactics, not only Peter. As for clothes ... even you think in a sheepskin coat, a hat and boots, the archer was more fun in the Crimea than a soldier in a cocked hat, short uniform and boots? (Russia seems to be big ... and the climatic zones are different)
            Quote: Horde
            Continuing to fight in European terms is the right construction in the same direction and the offensive in the same correct order is also a marching step, it was more like a parade on the parade ground. Now you begin to understand that such methods of warfare are just a good way to destroy your own soldiers. The rebuilding during the attack had a more psychological effect, but under the fire of artillery, large losses were inevitable.

            And then you generally carried in the wrong place ... "Now" and those times are different things ... Phalanxes, legions, equestrian formations (knights), squares (again, phalanxes / legions), and with the advent of mobile artillery and guns ( mass and convenient) linear construction, which was abolished only with the advent of automatic weapons (it was then that it really became fraught with large losses). In that period of time, linear constructions and their variations (as well as for a long time after Peter) were the very thing for the war. But the archers were not sufficiently prepared for such actions and their armament was outdated (I finally get sick of carrying a heavy reed besides a gun, which is not effective anywhere)
            1. Horde
              Horde 12 June 2013 16: 05
              0
              In addition, if I am not mistaken, he took the "Swedish type" of the army as a model


              are you mistaken in Sweden Peter was never, and his teachers were Lefort-Swiss, Gordon-Scot, Blumberg-German, Chambers-?

              that the same Gustav proved that he had piled on all and sundry for 70 years before the reforms (including the Russians) and the archers were raking off him like children.

              when, in what war? you confuse something ...

              As for the clothes ... I xs even you think in a sheepskin coat, hat and boots, the archer was more fun in the Crimea than a soldier in a cocked hat, a short uniform and boots?


              Do you know that even in Crimea there are negative temperatures with snow, and in the Black Sea region the winds are blowing, what do you want and what do you propose to serve in one European uniform? in a sheepskin coat it will be better. did you serve in the army at all?

              In that period of time, linear constructions and their variations (as well as a long time after Peter) were the very thing for war


              there wasn’t. The rules worked out for the European theater of war were more GAME IN SOLDIERS. And there is evidence of this, for example, the war for independence in the United States. The Army of England used the classic non-linear constructions and lost the war because the United States army simply shot the attacks of the Angles with distance. It was a new war, although the amers did not come up with anything clever, but won.
              But the archers for such actions were not adequately prepared and their weapons were outdated (I finally can’t help, in addition to carrying a gun, it’s also a heavy reed, which is not very effective in any case)


              it’s bullshit, of course the musketeer archers were not armed with a berdyshchik, but the archery archers had a cuirass shell and were effective in the attack, just awful laughing
              1. Corneli
                Corneli 12 June 2013 18: 00
                0
                Quote: Horde
                are you mistaken in Sweden Peter was never, and his teachers were Lefort-Swiss, Gordon-Scot, Blumberg-German, Chambers-?

                I never wrote that Peter was in Sweden. The name Gustav 2 Adolf, does it mean anything to you? So, this Gustav from 1610 to 1632, at the head of the Swedish army of a new model, gritted everyone and everything. He defeated the several times superior forces of the Austrian Empire with their best commanders, died in battle, and despite his death, his army still won. Since then, impressed Europeans have begun to reshape their armies in the Swedish manner. Therefore, it does not matter who exactly his advisers were ... all of Europe was making an army according to the "Swedish type" (which after 40 years was replaced by the Prussian type)
                Quote: Horde
                when, in what war? you confuse something ...

                In the one that ended with the Stolbovsky Peace Treaty of 1617, according to which Russia was cut off from the Baltic
                Quote: Horde
                Do you know that even in Crimea there are negative temperatures with snow, and in the Black Sea region the winds are blowing, what do you want and what do you propose to serve in one European uniform? in a sheepskin coat it will be better. did you serve in the army at all?

                Do you know that cold is still a rare occurrence in Crimea? And that wars were fought as a rule in the summer (what frost?) And that Sweden, for example, the northern state and nothing ... ran in jackboots and cocked hats despite the fact that they fought ONLY in the north! Yes, he served, in the southern regions of the Ukrainian SSR it was rather hot than cold)
                Quote: Horde
                The rules worked out for the European theater of warfare were more GAME IN SOLDIERS. And there is evidence of this, for example, the war for independence in the United States. The Army of England used the classic-line constructions and lost the war because the United States army simply shot the attacks of the Angles from a distance. It was the war is new, although amers did not come up with anything clever, but they won.

                Are you sure that England lost precisely for this? Are you serious?) If the amers came up with such labor tactics, after 100 years, during the war of the North and the South, how did rams fight in a system? Isn't that SO dumb?
                Quote: Horde
                Of course, musketeers, archers were not armed with a berdysh, but archers, armed with a berdysh, also had a cuirass shell and in the attack were effective, just awful laughing

                I think their "horror" is greatly exaggerated ... It is extremely inconvenient to carry with you a reed and a musket, long and heavy objects, but what about reloading a musket in battle, I finally can. By the way, precisely because of the inconvenience, the European pickeners and halberdists disappeared into the fog and only the musketeers with bayonets remained
                1. Setrac
                  Setrac 12 June 2013 18: 08
                  0
                  Quote: Corneli
                  Since then, the impressed Europeans began to redraw their armies in the Swedish manner.

                  The strength of the Swedish army was not related to the formation and ammunition of the infantryman. Sweden at that time had iron deposits with the highest quality ore and made the best steel, which ultimately resulted in superiority in artillery. Bronze weapons of other countries did not channel against the steel cannons of the Swedes. And Russia won after the start of production of high-quality iron in the Urals.
                  1. Corneli
                    Corneli 12 June 2013 18: 28
                    -1
                    Quote: Setrac
                    The strength of the Swedish army was not related to the formation and ammunition of the infantryman. Sweden at that time had iron deposits with the highest quality ore and made the best steel, which ultimately resulted in superiority in artillery. Bronze weapons of other countries did not channel against the steel cannons of the Swedes. And Russia won after the start of production of high-quality iron in the Urals.

                    After 70 years, near Poltava, even super-steel did not help them very much) And what about the formation, under Gustav it is not true ... he used a combination of light cavalry strikes (which they made regular and they fought by shooting with pistols and attacking with broadswords), maneuvers of light batteries guns (in the European armies of those times, the gun battery was mostly stationary), the infantry and cavalry had a shallow formation, but several lines (in Europe they still walked in squares / thirds and very deep formation). Plus, he personally loved the "oblique system" in general battles. The combination of the above described with a strict disciplina and allowed him to win ... after his death, the Europeans began to rivet armies on his model
                    1. Setrac
                      Setrac 12 June 2013 18: 34
                      0
                      Quote: Corneli
                      The combination of the above described with strict dysceplina allowed him to win ... after his death, the Europeans began to rivet the armies according to his model

                      It is unclear what prevented copying tactics before his death? Any tactics not based on technological advantage are easily copied.
                      1. Corneli
                        Corneli 12 June 2013 19: 23
                        0
                        Quote: Setrac

                        It is unclear what prevented copying tactics before his death? Any tactics not based on technological advantage are easily copied.

                        They were copied, rather quickly, he did not live and fought for so long, so that everything became immediately obvious. Not childishly, they took care of his army, after the first total defeat of the Austrian army. That one was staffed according to the last "squeak" of the tactics of that time (the Spanish tertiaries were then considered the best and invincible infantry in the world), heavy cavalry and heavy cannons, commanded by not the worst general (one of the best in fact) Tilly ... and they were blown to dust. ..and then again and again. Gustav died, let's say so stupidly (in the battle he got lost in the fog with a couple of cavalrymen and was killed by the departure of the Austrians) .But this was again a rather short period of time ... until they realized what exactly the Swedes had, while the troops were retrained, etc.
                2. Horde
                  Horde 12 June 2013 19: 01
                  0
                  I did not write that Peter was in Sweden. The name Gustav 2 Adolf, is he talking about anything? So, this Gustav from 1610 to 1632, at the head of the new army of the Swedish army, was sanding everyone and everything.


                  very interesting, if only it would be even more interesting if you didn’t just cast the Gustav Adolf2 spell, but specifically tell what he introduced there?

                  In the one that ended with the Stolbovsky Peace Treaty of 1617, according to which Russia was cut off from the Baltic


                  Well, the details, why did you decide that the archers were retarded, and the Swedes advanced?

                  And that wars were usually fought in the summer (what frost?)


                  Well, why do you tell me about sheepskin coats, or do you think that stupid Russians forgot to take them off in the summer?

                  ran in boots and cocked hats despite the fact that they fought ONLY in the north!


                  running in over the knee boots I think is uncomfortable, but why do I think so? because running even in kierzach is not convenient.

                  Are you sure that England lost precisely for this? Are you serious?) If the amers came up with such labor tactics, after 100 years, during the war of the North and the South, how did rams fight in a system? Isn't that SO dumb?


                  flintlock rate of fire 3vs / min sighting range 500-800m if attacking in combat step 2 steps / sec = 1 meter then the defenders will produce 25-45 rounds / soldier from one soldier, then you can not be a great strategist to understand that the attacker will win the battle in this situation nothing shines, and this is just small arms, and there are still guns. Therefore, the scenario when the attackers are dragged to the full by the defenders looks UNREAL. The story is false and it is not at all easy to understand the true picture of those years. POPULATIONS.
                  I think their "horror" is greatly exaggerated ... It is extremely inconvenient to carry with you a reed and a musket, long and heavy objects, but what about reloading a musket in battle, I finally can.


                  found an image of archers in nete, something incredible and a berdysh, and peep, and a saber in one bottle ??? it CAN’T BE TRUTH. Because the berdysh must be acted with both hands, and at the same time it is necessary to throw the squeak, but no one does. Again, some stretch.
                  1. Corneli
                    Corneli 12 June 2013 20: 12
                    0
                    Quote: Horde
                    very interesting, if only it would be even more interesting if you didn’t just cast the Gustav Adolf2 spell, but specifically tell what he introduced there?

                    For half an hour he painted armies of Swedes and Europeans ... and accidentally erased everything (((
                    In short, read a little higher, there I wrote to another opponent in brief. And in 2 words - an army with heterogeneous cavalry, brown-shaped (battles), slow-moving infantry and motionless artillery blasting the army with only rifle infantry built in shallow ranks (much greater firepower), regular uniform cavalry and moving guns (which can where they were needed on the battlefield)
                    Quote: Horde
                    Well, the details, why did you decide that the archers were retarded, and the Swedes advanced?

                    Archers are the "old" type of army (just a pole instead of a pike and halberd)). Reading higher than "Swedish" was better.
                    Quote: Horde
                    flintlock rate of fire 3vs / min sighting range 500-800m if attacking in combat step 2 steps / sec = 1 meter then the defenders will produce 25-45 rounds / soldier from one soldier, then you can not be a great strategist to understand that the attacker will win the battle in this situation nothing shines, and this is just small arms, and there are still guns. Therefore, the scenario when the attackers are dragged to the full by the defenders looks UNREAL. The story is false and it is not at all easy to understand the true picture of those years. POPULATIONS.

                    It’s impossible to understand the true picture, but what about the war of annihilation ... The fights of the crowds with swords and bows in hand-to-hand combat were not bloody? Modern wars, if they were of a commensurate scale, would there be no losses (well, or with "smaller" ones)?
    2. Corneli
      Corneli 12 June 2013 00: 49
      0
      Instead of Tiharian "minuses", it would be better if they tried to answer the questions ... At least some
  • ant_ey
    ant_ey 12 June 2013 00: 22
    0
    As for Suvorov, it’s not a joke, he wasn’t Russian to take by blood, but he was proud of Russia and considered himself Russian, that’s what we should achieve !!!
    1. Avenger711
      Avenger711 12 June 2013 01: 16
      0
      Insolent slander.
  • Avenger711
    Avenger711 12 June 2013 00: 36
    +1
    To the question of who was being dragged to the fires, that’s how it was in Russia.
    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Аввакум_Петров
    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Кульман,_Квирин

    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Казнь_через_сожжение_в_истории_России

    Pay attention to the laws of the 18th (!) Century.
    Maybe they washed in Russia more often, although in the summer they were unlikely to heat again because of the threat of fires, and in winter firewood is also needed to heat the house, but they were definitely not inferior in savagery and denseness, and scientific discoveries before Lomonosov, who studied with the Germans , something is not observed. Under Peter, they were only forced to reckon with themselves, and for some time, before the Napoleonic wars, Russia really built all of Europe, but now, regarding the Crimean War, I recall the notorious: "the British do not clean their guns with bricks."
  • Makc
    Makc 12 June 2013 01: 58
    0
    By the way, in the Moscow Museum-Estate of the Romanovs on Varvarka pay attention to one exhibit. A fork found during excavations in Moscow. In our country, forks have been used since the days of Kievan Rus. In Europe, they ate their hands.
    -------
    The author brechet. It was Marina Mnishek who brought the first forks to Moscow.

    The fork appeared in Russia in 1606, and was brought by Marina Mnishek. At a wedding feast in the Kremlin, Marina with a fork shocked Russian boyars and clergy. The word “fork” finally entered the Russian language only in the XNUMXth century, and before that it was called “horned” and “wiles”.
    1. Setrac
      Setrac 12 June 2013 14: 50
      0
      Quote: Makc
      they called it “horned” and “wilts.”

      Interestingly, when did pitchfork appear in Russia? The pitchfork is large, the fork is small.
  • Opera
    Opera 12 June 2013 10: 40
    +1
    Cornelius, questions asked by you were asked by students of the Institute of History and Architects in Moscow (MGIAI) to teachers at lectures and seminars in Soviet times. Simply, when you take various sources, you begin to understand that carts and a small cart and people interested are beginning to ask questions - so why in many textbooks and smart books most of the significant events of Russian history are presented as a fact that does not require any evidence?!?!
    Who is Rurik? From where and why? Westerners answer this question based on only one sheet from the annals donated to Peter 1 (naturally to the reformer), this leaf does not fit the contents of the next or previous page, and the annals themselves are just a list from the earlier but for some reason historians care little ?!
    In our time, thank God many works and studies are available explaining a lot in our history, including the modern pathological hatred of the West.
    Quote: Makc
    The author brechet. It was Marina Mnishek who brought the first forks to Moscow.

    This is all from the same opera - apparently she brought it to you!
  • northwest
    northwest 12 June 2013 13: 40
    0
    My light, mirror, say it! Yes, tell the whole truth: I’m sweetest in the world. All blush and whiter? ...... This article is like a balm for fans of Levashev. Who needs to push through such distorted facts from history?
  • The comment was deleted.
  • OLGRIN
    OLGRIN 12 June 2013 15: 47
    -1
    [quote = Setrac] [quote = OLGRIN] The mighty warrior fishermen are the same myth as the empires of the nomadic peoples of antiquity. [/ quote]
    But I do not agree with this.
    1. Alexandr0id
      Alexandr0id 12 June 2013 21: 23
      +2
      oh how! those. a whole bunch of all the nomadic saganates and sultanates - is this fiction? this could be explained by the inventions of the nomads themselves, but all this is described in Chinese, Arab, Byzantine and other chronicles. why should they?
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Alexandr0id
    Alexandr0id 12 June 2013 21: 22
    +2
    serfdom can be called the main point of the cultural and social backwardness of Russia. the fact that the nobles spoke French, wrote poetry and nobly fought in duels gives absolutely nothing. almost the entire population of the country until 1861 was SLAVES. this is the most shameful in our history, what negatively distinguishes Russia not only from Europe, but also from Asia.
  • Goldmitro
    Goldmitro 12 June 2013 21: 37
    +1
    <<< By the way, how was it formed, "generally recognized" (a picture of the past)? Western authors had (and have) an understandable tendency to embellish and varnish their past. Including, a very ugly technique is used for this. Praise your own, blaming someone else's. Well, the Russian historians of the XIX and early XX centuries. were to a large extent infected with the "Westernism" fashionable at that time (it is still in vogue with our liberals). The opposite tendency was characteristic of them. To belittle your own ancestors by adjusting to foreign opinions. >>>
    It is LONG time for our learned men to begin to documentally clear the "generally recognized picture of the past" from the Western OIL, which has smeared the entire past of Russia, from all sorts of horror films, myths and legends that have been sucked out of the finger, composed and replicated by the enemies of Russia, the Russian people and passed off as reality. Without this, it is impossible to foster patriotism in the younger generation of Russians, they should be proud of their Russia and have every reason for this, despite the hysteria, angry hiss and the outright stench spread by numerous Russophobes about the past of Russia !!!
  • Androsh
    Androsh 12 June 2013 22: 20
    0
    A good article and a comparison of the facts in it.
    Europe was a barbaric country and now it remains in the minds .. homosexuals and juveniles are an example of this. And America, as it was a gangster country that destroyed the Indians, still remains, attacking weak countries and robbing them.
    Glory to Russia and Russia at all times!
    1. Corneli
      Corneli 13 June 2013 19: 39
      -1
      Quote: Androsh
      Europe was a barbaric country and now it remains in the minds ..

      Europe is a CONTINENT! (many countries! and it was and is ... and will most likely be)), And what about barbarism, I even, in your opinion, the current Saudi Arabia or Mali are no longer "barbaric" (and in general, what do you mean by the term "barbarism"? )
      Quote: Androsh
      homosexual and juvenile are an example of this.

      As for the "juvenile" I won't say anything, but "gomosyatina" ... eh ... this phenomenon is characteristic of all over-fed individuals, as an example of the "bohemian" of Russia (if you believe the yellow press, every second artist is p ... r "), as an example our local "power" (he personally saw and heard people's deputies, high militia ranks and their interest in youngsters, boys ... more than 10 years ago!), there are also many purely historical examples (So do not unnecessarily demonize Europe, here, at the top, there is complete "Europe"! Many have never dreamed of such a sho!
      Quote: Androsh
      And America, as it was a gangster country that destroyed the Indians, still remains, attacking weak countries and robbing them.

      Again, forgive me, but nothing that the Russian Empire at about the same time, conquered the Urals, Siberia, the Far East, Alaska ... As it is, there with the indigenous population of these regions (if you can judge by the indigenous "Yakut-Chukotka" governor, with with the original local surname Abramovich, that's not bad), but how about the Chukchi?). For example, I do not consider Russia, in connection with these conquests, bandits ... they could have done it, for themselves, for their country! And in general ... it’s already a hare to remember the past and live in the past (you need to remember it of course, but DO NOT LIVE IN IT!), It’s time to cheer the present, for future descendants! Otherwise ... it's like the ancient Greeks: "Ooo, we were so cool ... we had Alexander the Great! A lot of colonies! The best army !!! ... And NOW, 2 THOUSAND YEARS WE ARE BEING BREAKED BY EVERYONE WHO IS NOT LAZY!" !! No corrections for our "great" past! " So don't be like them ... it's a shame (
  • CCA
    CCA 13 June 2013 19: 16
    +1
    The article is clearly ambiguous and with biases on plus and minus ... But minus facts from the life of Europe took place to be ... I would leave only a statement of facts and remove the author’s comments ... But about the life of France of those times, the film “Perfumer” shows well ... that in general, it prompted Western film critics to remove it from mass distribution ... We just need not to hush up our own achievements and successes, as well as not to procrastinate, the West threw provocations and promoted flaws from our lives ...
  • gura
    gura 16 June 2013 01: 34
    -1
    From Minsk. N-yes. Another rehash of the song "New songs about the old, about us, the very best". Russia is the homeland of elephants! We are the cleanest, we are the most moral! The car - we invented! The light bulb is us! Radio - we are! The steam engine is us! X-rays - we are! (oh, sorry, this is from an anecdote, but all the same - it's true!) It doesn't happen! In addition to the writer Shambarov, whose books about the "white movement" cannot be read without a lump in the throat, a writer whom I respect, there is the science "HISTORY" with a mass of archival material. Now it is available as never before, do not be lazy! And everything was not so clear and blissful in Russia. There was slavery, abolished only in 1860, there were food riots and much more. And they went to study in Europe, and not in the Old Believer monasteries. And the peasantry was not a "ray of light in the dark kingdom", read, at least, the story of Chekhov "The Men", you will receive a lot of unknown and unpleasant for hurray-patriots information about the "God-bearing people." There is also a reverse information war. And scaring Europe with Russia is not new. Here are the words of Napoleon from the order for the army after the battle of Bautzen on May 2, 1813, where he defeated the allied forces: "Soldiers! I am pleased with you. One day you overturned all the plans of your patricidal enemies. (Allusion to Emperor Alexander the First, and his father Emperor Paul. note) We will throw the Tatars into their terrible lands, from where they should not crawl out. Let them remain in their icy deserts, abode of slavery, barbarism and decay, where man is on a par with cattle. You honestly deserve civilized Europe , soldiers. Italy, France and Germany will express their gratitude to you. " So, the information war has been going on from all sides, and for a long time, and this issue requires a calm, critical approach.
  • kidman
    kidman 18 June 2013 21: 50
    0
    Thanks to the author ....