Military Review

Famous flag of unknown country

232
Western European map of the middle of the XVII century.


Lovers of domestic stories have long been aware of the existence of geographical maps of the XVII – XVIII centuries, on which east of the Volga shows a certain country called Grande Tartarie (Great Tartaria, on Russian maps - Tataria). Academic scientists try not to comment on this fact. But supporters of alternative versions are finding new proofs of the fallacy of our usual ideas about the past of the Fatherland. On this topic, an interesting material was spread on the Internet by our contemporary, who appears in LiveJournal under the account yuri_ost.

ALREADY NOT FOR WHOM It’s no secret that mysterious Tartary freely stretched on the maps of bygone days in the vast expanses of Eurasia. Practically in the same borders, the Russian Empire subsequently appeared, and then the Soviet Union. Many also know that concepts such as Siberia, the Tatars, the Russians, the Mongols, who previously had completely different meanings that we used to operate today, were gradually replaced.

On various maps of Tartary portrayed as a country with borders and cities. But why in the domestic history textbooks of Tartary as a state is not mentioned?

Perhaps due to the fact that Tartaria is not a self-name. Although there is a Russian name - Tataria (Russian 1737 map of the year). So why not talk about it and the previously existing in the world names of this country?

The symbols of the state are traditionally the emblem, flag and anthem. It can be assumed that Tataria-Tartary was a state and it may have had its own anthem, but I think we will never know how it sounded.

As for the emblem and flag, then theoretically there is always a chance to find them. And it happened! In the book World Geography, published in Paris in 1676, the article on Tartary is preceded by the image of an owl on a shield, which many experts know (in Fig. 1). It can be assumed that this is the coat of arms of Tartaria.

We find a similar image in the frequently encountered illustration of the book by Marco Polo, who described his journey through Asia and his stay at the “Mongolian” Khan Kubilai (Fig. 2). The empire, by the way, Marco Polo found well organized and hospitable.
So what do we have? We have two images of owls on the shield in two different books, which can be considered, however, only hypothetically, as the coat of arms of Tartary.

But maybe Tataria-Tartary had a flag? Let's look in the library repositories.

If you look into the collection of maritime flags of the world, compiled at the beginning of the 18th century, apparently in France, then you will see not one flag of Tartaria, but two. At the same time, along with its flags, there are also flags of Russia, and flags of the Great Moguls (note that some images are glued together, because you had to copy them in parts).

The first Tartar flag is the flag of the emperor of Tartaria, and the second is just Tartaria. But the trouble is, the images of the flags have practically disappeared (the possibilities of newspaper printing, unfortunately, do not allow the images of these flags to be reproduced, only Internet users can see them in the electronic version of the article. - Ed.). It’s impossible to really determine what is painted there (like an owl). But it is important for us that the flags of Tartaria are shown in the old drawing along with the flags of other countries, and one of them is imperial. That is, no one in Western Europe at the beginning of the XNUMXth century has doubts that the empire of Tartary exists and has its own fleet.

Now let's look at one more - this time the Dutch table of the beginning of the XVIII century, where the sea flags of the world are also collected. And again we find two flags of Tartaria, but not so worn out anymore, the image on them can, although with difficulty, be disassembled (photo in the Internet version).

And what we see: on the imperial flag (here it appears as the flag of Kaiser Tartary) the dragon is depicted, and on the other flag - an owl! Yes, the same owl that in the French "World Geography" and in the illustration to the book of Marco Polo. Russian flags are also there, but they are listed in the table as the flags of Muscovy.

Now we know that the flags of Tartaria were, which means that it was a state, and not just a territory on the map. We also learned that one of the flags of Tartaria is imperial. Therefore, we are talking about the empire!

LEFT find out what colors were used on the Tartar flags. The answer to this question was found in the “Expression of the sea flags of all the universe states”, published in Kiev in 1709, with the personal participation of Peter I.

Unfortunately, only one copy of the "Declarations ..." was found on the Internet with a weak resolution, which makes flag signatures difficult to read. Nevertheless, we see that the flags of Tartaria used black and yellow colors.

This is confirmed by the Dutch cartographer Carl Allard's Book on Flags (published in Amsterdam in 1705 and reissued in Moscow in 1709): “The flag of the king of Tataria is yellow, with a black dragon with a basil tail lying to the outside. Another Tatar flag, yellow with a black owl, with a yellowish percy. ”

By the way, here, among the Russian flags, a yellow flag with a black double-headed eagle appears.

In the Russian-language book about flags, the Dutchman Allard has a good understanding of the images of the flags of Tataria-Tartary with Russian inscriptions. But here the Tataria autocrat is called a czar (fig. 1).

A few more tables with Tartar flags were found on the Internet — the English table 1783 of the year and a couple of other tables from the same 18th century. What is most surprising, a table with the imperial flag of Tataria, published as much as 1865 in the USA, was found!

In the English 1783 table of the year, the first three Russian flags are listed as flags of the Tsar of Muscovy (at that time, according to the academic version of the story, the rule was Empress Catherine II), followed by the imperial flag of Russia (Russia Imperial), then the trade tricolor, followed by admiral and other sea flags Russia. And for some reason, the flag of the viceroy of Muscovy is located in front of the flags of the Muscovy in this table.

This flag is also present in the book of Allard, but it is not identified there and is considered a mistake by modern experts.

At the same time, it is known that in the 1972 year, the Moscow vexillologist A.A. Usachev (Vexillology is a historical discipline studying the flags, banners, standards, pennants, etc. - Ed.) Suggested that this is the flag of Israel Ori, one of the leaders of the Armenian liberation movement. Ori, who was in Russia on the instructions of Peter I, went to the Netherlands, where he recruited officers, soldiers and craftsmen on behalf of the king, possessing great powers. From here, they say, and naming him "the vice-king of Muscovy."

However, we must not forget that Ori died in the 1711 year, and the table was published by the English in the 1783 year. The flag of the viceroy of Muscovy is in front of the flag of the king, that is, it turns out that he is superior. The flags of Russia, including the imperial (imperial), are shown after the flags of the king of Muscovy.

It can be assumed that the mess with the flags of Muscovy and the Russian Empire is explained by the political necessity of the formation of the Romanov dynasty of new heraldry.

Nevertheless, the fact that the flag of some incomprehensible Muscovy Viceroy is placed in the first place cannot but cause questions from meticulous researchers. What if something happened in the 1770s that is not told to us in history lessons? And the teachers themselves do not know about it ...

BUT RETURN to the empire of Tartary. If this country had flags (this, as we can see, is confirmed by both domestic and foreign sources of that time), it means that you can already assume with reasonable confidence that the shield with the image of an owl is, after all, the GERB (or one of the emblems) this power.

Since the above-mentioned sources dealt with maritime flags, therefore, maritime navigation was developed in Tartaria ...

And yet it is strange that history has not left us a single name of the emperor (Kaiser, Caesar) Tartary. Or are they known to us, but under different names and with other titles?

German flag table. Nuremberg, 1750 g

We are completing the publication of material on the flags of Tartaria, which were found in the tables of the sea flags, published several centuries ago in Western Europe and the USA.

On the flag of the emperor of Tartaria, probably, it makes sense to dwell in more detail. On the last 1865 table of our year (published in the USA), this flag is no longer called imperial, and there is no other flag (with an owl). Probably, the time of the empire is already in the past.

If you look closely at this image of the Tartar dragon, you may find that the emperor dragon of Tartary has no direct relation to the dragons of China-China (now China) or the legendary serpent Zilant on the coat of arms of Kazan. (See drawing in the Internet version) .

Strangely enough, the dragon on the imperial flag of Tataria resembles the dragon on the flag of Wales, although the colors are completely different. But this is a topic for heraldry specialists ...

It is a pity that in those documents in which only images of the flags of the empire of Tartaria were found, there are at least minimal details about the countries that owned one flag or another, with the exception of the “Book of flags” Allard. But there is nothing about Tartaria either - just a description of its flags and their colors.

However, the most important thing is that the flags of Tataria were found in tables published by different countries and at different times. A leisurely reader can, of course, say: "Is it possible to draw a conclusion about the existence of an empire only from a few flag designs?"

In his own way, he is right. Indeed, we considered only symbolism here.

But now we know for sure that on the maps and in the books of those distant times there were references to Moscow Tartary (with the capital in Tobolsk), Free or Independent Tartaria (with the capital in Samarkand), Chinese Tartary (do not confuse with the Tea-Room, which is on the maps - another state), and, in fact, the Great Empire of Tartaria.

We have found documentary evidence of the existence of the state symbols of the empire in the north-east of Eurasia. We do not know which of Tartaria these flags belonged to: the whole empire or some part of it. However, the main thing that the flags were found.

* * *

IN SEARCH Flags of Tatarstan revealed two more facts that do not fit into the canonical history.

1 fact. In the 18th – 19th centuries, flags of the Kingdom of Jerusalem were depicted among the flags at the time (pictured).

According to the traditional version of history, this kingdom ceased to exist in the 13th century. But the flags signed by Jerusalem are in almost all the collections of nautical flags mentioned above. Information about the possible use of this flag after the defeat of the Crusaders could not be found. And it is unlikely that Muslims who captured Jerusalem would leave the flag with Christian symbols to the city.

In addition, if this flag were used in the 18th – 19th centuries by any order (like the Jesuits), then most likely, the authors would have written in documents.

Maybe there are some facts on this subject that are known only to a narrow circle of initiates?

But that's not all. In a note by a member of the Special Meeting on Russian national colors of Lieutenant Commander P.I. Belavenets “Colors of the Russian State National Flag”, published in 1911, suddenly reveals something amazing.

And this “something” makes you wonder if Jerusalem was placed in Palestine due to a misunderstanding?

Think about it: Peter Belavenets writes that, by the highest order, he brought to St. Petersburg a flag granted by Tsar Peter Alekseevich to Archangel Archbishop Athanasius in 1693 year.

In the illustration with the caption “Flags stored in the cathedral of Arkhangelsk” we see three flags, two of which are the flags of the Jerusalem kingdom, while one of them is tied to a white-blue-red tricolor. Not otherwise, the Holy City of Jerusalem should be searched somewhere on the East European Plain and, most likely, not in the 12th – 13th centuries.

2 fact. In the 17th century manuscript reprinted in 1904, “On the initiation of a sign and flags or ensigns,” we read: “... Caesarians began to have their own sign of a double-headed eagle, from such a case as it will be announced here. From the creation of the world in 3840 year, also from the conception of the structure of Rome hail in 648 year and from the Nativity of Christ our God for 102, the Romans had a battle with the Tsysar people, and at that time the Romans were a burgher and a regimental governor named Kaius Marius. And he Kaius for the special sign, instead of the head-flag, he built a single-headed eagle in every legion, and the Romans held that sign until the tenth year after the birth of Christ our God, during the time of the state of Caesar Augustus. And at the same time, there were still great battles between the Romans and Caesars, and the Caesars three times beat the Romans and took from them two banners, that is, two eagles. And from that number, the Tsysarians began to have in their rank, in the sign and in the seal of the double-headed eagle. ”

And what do we learn from the source? "Tsysaryan" and "Romans" - not the same thing. "Tsysaryan" began to have a sign in the form of a two-headed eagle, which means they - Tsargorod, that is, Byzantines.

"Eastern Roman Empire" fought with the "Western". Emperor Octavian Augustus (he died 4 after the described events) was a “czar” and, if we proceed from the textual logic of the text, he fought on the side of the “Cesarians”, i.e. Byzantines, against the "Romans"!

However, according to canonical history, Byzantium begins its countdown from the year 330, i.e. 320 years after the events described! Then the Roman emperor Constantine the Great (who, incidentally, bore the title "Augustus") transferred the capital to the city of Byzantium, renaming it Constantinople.
We do not see a very clear interpretation of the appearance of the double-headed eagle in Byzantium in the mentioned Book on the Flags of Allard 1709: “One eagle was during the old Roman CESARES; expressing their power, in which, later, the last CESARI even came to this (after the conquest and unification of the two kingdoms, that is, from the east and the west), the double-headed eagle and the aboriginal place were abolished. ”

That is, both kingdoms, according to Allard, existed simultaneously and independently, and then were merged.

“Eh, simplicity,” the same leisurely reader will say with a wink, find some dubious sources and cast a shadow on the fence. This, I suppose, the authors confused everything or made up their minds. ”

May be so. But the reprint of the manuscript "On the initiation of the sign and flags or prapor" was carried out by the Imperial Society of Russian History and Antiquities at Moscow University. This is not anyhow what office. Yes, and publishers of collections of flags in the XVIII – XIX centuries at a relatively high cost of producing documents, it seems to me, it would hardly be possible to publish deliberately unreliable collections.

Why did you have to dwell on these two seemingly unrelated facts? It seems that they have nothing to do with the empire of Tartary ...

LET'S think about it. Peter I, who personally edited the “Declaration of the Marine Flags of All Universe States” in the 1709 year (this is a fact from canonical history), acknowledges the existence of Tartaria led by the czar.

In the Russian-language version of the “Book of flags” of the same 1709, there are only three types of crown princes: “Old Roman Caesars”, Caesars of the Holy Roman Empire and Tatar Caesar.

In the "Expression" the imperial flag of Russia is yellow with a black double-headed eagle, the "Caesar" flag of the Holy Roman Empire is also yellow with a black double-headed eagle, the flag of the Tatar Caesar is yellow with a black dragon.

On the coins of the Golden Horde under the rule of the khans of Uzbek, Janibek and seemingly Aziz-Sheikh, a double-headed eagle is depicted. The coat of arms of Byzantium is also a double-headed eagle.

The appearance of the double-headed eagle in Byzantium happened, according to one version, after victories (victories) over Rome, on the other - after the “union of two kingdoms”.

Apparently, Peter I tried on the flag of Jerusalem (Kingdom of Jerusalem). Maybe he had a right to it. Flag of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, we repeat, was in use in the XVIII – XIX centuries!

Yes, there were more questions in our study than there were answers. Let everyone decide for himself whether the empire of Tartaria-Tataria existed as a state or not.

History is like a religion: where there are canonical books, there are apocrypha there, which are anathematized by zealous worshipers.
But when the flock has many questions, and the preacher does not give them comprehensive and clear answers, faith weakens and religion gradually fades away, and then dies. And on its fragments ... Thinking about this academic science.

Brief conclusions of the author:

• in addition to the image on the maps of the territory of the empire of Tartaria in documents of the 18th – 19th centuries there are enough images of its flags;
• the flag is a symbol of the state, and not of the territory, which means that the empire of Tartary existed as a state;
• this state existed independently of the state of the Mughal and Chinas (modern China);
• despite the presence of the imperial flag of Tartaria, we cannot yet say with certainty whether these flags were symbols of the whole of Tartaria or some of its parts;
• In a number of considered sources there are tensions, inconsistencies and contradictions (the Kingdom of Jerusalem and Rome-Byzantium), which give rise to doubts about the truth of the canonical version, require additional study of our past; there is also doubt as to whether the dragon should be on the flag of the empire of Tartaria or another symbol;
• the author simply likes the flag with the owl, because there are many flags with the eagles, and one with the owl. Owls are beautiful and useful birds. Slavic and Turkic peoples living in the territory of the former Tartary, as well as Greeks, owls are revered. But for many other peoples, owls personify dark forces, which leads to some thoughts. I wanted all doubts to disappear and a yellow flag with a black owl would be recognized as the flag of the Eurasian Great Empire.
Originator:
http://redstar.ru/
232 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. FC SKIF
    FC SKIF 17 August 2013 08: 09
    24
    Rather, we would have invented a time machine - all history textbooks to landfill at once. The author is wondering about ancient times. Of course, everything is distorted there, if some figures are trying to rewrite the recent history, with live eyewitnesses, documents and photographs. I finished school in Ukraine in 1996. I remember that every (!) Year in a poor country history books changed. Poor our brains, how they endured all this.
    1. Horde
      Horde 17 August 2013 10: 04
      +6
      There are a lot of facts indicating the presence of the HUGE STATE in the 18th century. These are old maps, this is the British encyclopedia BRITANICA 1774G, where the presence of TARTARIA is clearly indicated in the list of all other states.
      Moreover, TARTARIA is the capital of Tobolsk
      Tartaria Independent capital Samarkand
      Tartaria The Chinese capital Chinyan and note CHINA the Russian word

      Here is a map of INDEPENDENT AND CHINESE TARTARIA 1811
      By the beginning of the 80th century, only the Independent and Chinese Tartaria remained an otogrom state, occupying almost 19% of Eurasia. This state was defeated by England and Romanov Russia only in the SECOND HALF of the 19th century during the so-called OPIUM WARs.
      By the way, to say TATARIA the Romanovs who conquered Tartaria during the Pugachev war had already misinterpreted the word.
      right TARTARIA- T-Horde.
      At the heart of all states lies the Horde.
      It seems the picture is not inserted. I'll try to search again.
      1. Nicholas C.
        Nicholas C. 17 August 2013 15: 04
        0
        Flocks - an example of vile anti-Russian propaganda and lies. It is necessary to clearly understand what the author informs in it. It's not about the legendary Tartaria at all, but about the fact that we are still wild at almost 19! century lived in the mythical Muscovy (a term coined by Western propaganda).
        1. Horde
          Horde 17 August 2013 15: 30
          11
          Quote: Nikolai S.
          Flocks - an example of vile anti-Russian propaganda and lies. It is necessary to clearly understand what the author informs in it. It's not about the legendary Tartaria at all, but about the fact that we are still wild at almost 19! century lived in the mythical Muscovy (a term coined by Western propaganda).


          Are you one of those who turn everything upside down?
          where do you see anti-russian propaganda or lies? the article is only about the existence of a state about which historians are SILENT, that's just what they lie, and they are silent about RUSSIAN HISTORY.
        2. Setrac
          Setrac 17 August 2013 17: 30
          10
          Quote: Nikolai S.
          Flocks - an example of vile anti-Russian propaganda and lies.

          What our children learn in history lessons is vile anti-Russian propaganda.
        3. Andrey57
          Andrey57 18 August 2013 10: 34
          +4
          Go to the "Historical Wall" in the Samara region, although this giant fortification stretches from Perm to Astrakhan, and look in which direction all the bastions are deployed, they all look to the west! In addition, you can see pictures of the standard fortresses, which were demolished by order of the Romanovs, although they did not know that over time everything can be viewed from a height, so Tartaria really was a powerful empire, in which even chains of fortresses and other fortifications were built according to standard designs. in series of several thousand and lines for thousands of kilometers, this was not at all in Muscovy of the Romanovs. By the way, the obituary on the occasion of the death of the father of Charles XII "Swedish" was written at his court in Russian, in Latin script, and the late king himself and his son were called not kings of Swedes, but kings of Wends and Fryags (Varangians), who were Slavs. hi
          1. Horde
            Horde 18 August 2013 15: 29
            +3
            Quote: Andrey57
            Go to the "Historical Wall" in the Samara region, although this gigantic fortification stretches from Perm to Astrakhan, and look in which direction all the bastions are deployed, they all look to the west


            dear Andrei Serif lines exist rather their traces remained




            the direction of defense of these lines is not to the WEST, but to the EAST i.e. Romanov Russia defended itself against TARTARIA
        4. Mikhail3
          Mikhail3 18 August 2013 12: 58
          0
          The article is a vivid example of the so-called. "historical science". This is how this very "science" looks like - a heap of arbitrary interpretations of arbitrary "evidence" and generally unconfirmed assumptions that are suddenly elevated to the category of "facts". When a person toils about this shame at his own expense - well, stupid as a navel and nothing more. And he got through and lo and behold - already state funding! And now he is already a "scientist"! Ugh...
          The picture of the poor artist, who has completely and irrevocably gone mad, looks very good as an illustration of all this "science" ...
          1. Horde
            Horde 18 August 2013 16: 59
            +1
            Quote: Mikhail3
            The article is a vivid example of the so-called. "historical science". This is how this "science"


            the value of your speech here about the article is zero. I even know how you wrote your subjective attitude when you saw the word TARTARIA. Read nothing, based only on an acute feeling of dislike for the repulsive phenomenon associated with this word, you are not inventing anything new just using a cliche created before you, they uttered what the so-called "traditional historians" and their committed followers from the pseudo-scientific workshop have used for many decades before you. Namely, "there are no facts and all this is nonsense." But only sometimes articles need to be read because Nowadays more and more facts are found in ancient documents in the form of maps about which you did not deign to say anything, and unnoticed artifacts in the form of colossal CROSS LINES, to which academic science turned its ass, not to mention discoveries of new HISTORICAL methods of FIN AND OTHER SCIENTISTS. It's time to finally open your eyes.
      2. Horde
        Horde 17 August 2013 15: 17
        +4
        I found this map

        1. Skiff-2
          Skiff-2 17 August 2013 19: 14
          12
          Quote: Horde
          I found this map

          This is Ulus Dzhuchiev - the legacy of the eldest son of Genghis Khan, later divided into the Golden (Central Asia, Volga, Russia) and the Blue (Siberia) Horde. Horde, Order (knightly in Western Europe), warrant (building a naval group) - these are words of the same meaning - military formation, organization. By his origin, Ivan the Terrible had the right to the throne of Ulus Dzhuchiev (his mother, Elena Glinskaya, from the family of steppe kings), so when the rightful tsar (khan) of Siberia was killed by the usurper, and the heir was not left, the Russian Tsar entered into his legal rights, and took the oath Ermak Timofeich cited - everything was LEGITIMATE, but not without violence.
          1. Gregazov
            Gregazov 18 August 2013 16: 43
            +1
            All caesars are easily explained. Roman emperors were called Caesars or Augustus for well-known reasons. It was believed that the caesar (emperor) can be only one and only he owns power over the entire universe. He also served as the defender of Orthodoxy from external enemies. Therefore, the people who accepted the Orthodox faith automatically fell under the power and guardianship of the Roman emperor. There was no Byzantine emperor. There was only the emperor of the empire Romeev.
            The Russian sovereign became emperor after the destruction of the Roman Empire by the Ottomans. There is genuine written evidence of the recognition of this fact by the Eastern Patriarchs.
            The Western Holy Roman Empire is a fake, based on a falsified so-called testament of Constantine, according to which Constantine gives the Western part of the empire to the pope. On the basis of this fake, the next Pope, in gratitude for the liberation of Rome (i.e., the pope from the power of Byzantium), crowns the imperial dignity of the German leader.
            Khan Uzbek was married to the daughter of Rome (Byzantine emperor). The Byzantines saw a counterweight to the German tribes in the strength of the Mongols. Trying to enlist their support, they did not defend Russia (which at that time was legally part of the Roman Empire) and surrendered it to the Mongols. The Russians finally established autocracy (sovereignty) only under the Grand Duke Ivan III.
            Each of the three emperors claimed universal power and sought it. Therefore, in principle, the peaceful existence of the emperor of Tartaria and the emperor of Russia was impossible.
      3. baltika-18
        baltika-18 17 August 2013 16: 21
        +8
        Quote: Horde
        There are a lot of facts indicating the presence of the HUGE STATE in the 18th century. These are old maps, this is the British Encyclopedia BRITAIN 1774

        Support, Horde.
        Tartaria was mentioned until the end of the 18th century, and to be precise until 1775. After this, there are no references. What was significant in our territory at that time?
        1773-1775 the Pugachev uprising. And immediately the question arises: was it a rebellion? The scope is something too solid, since the regular army led by Suvorov was sent to suppression.
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 17 August 2013 17: 45
          +3
          Quote: baltika-18
          Support, Horde.
          Tartaria was mentioned until the end of the 18th century, and to be precise until 1775. After this, there are no references. What was significant in our territory at that time?
          1773-1775 the Pugachev uprising. And immediately the question arises: was it a rebellion? The scope is something too solid, since the regular army led by Suvorov was sent to suppression.

          This war began much earlier, after the death of Ivan the Terrible. I want to remind you of the so-called uprising of Stepan Razin, as well as confusion. The war of the Romanovs against the old Rurik dynasty (?) Began in the 17th century and was fought on two continents - Asia and America.
          1. baltika-18
            baltika-18 17 August 2013 18: 59
            +2
            Quote: Setrac
            This war began much earlier, after the death of Ivan the Terrible

            You are right, Sergey. But apparently the end of the old empire was precisely the year 1775. The defeat in the war and then the division between the victors. The story with Alaska from this point of view is understandable.
        2. Andrey57
          Andrey57 18 August 2013 10: 40
          +1
          After the Pugachev war, thousands of fortresses were built that were built according to a single standard throughout Siberia, present-day Kazakhstan and Central Asia.
          1. Iraclius
            Iraclius 18 August 2013 17: 38
            +3
            Come on, come on ... Tell the deceived inhabitants of Russia about "thousands of fortresses that have been dug down." Preferably with photos and plans of fortifications. In addition, try to refute the official version of the Pugachev uprising - so that there are written testimonies, archaeological artifacts and confirmation from Western and Eastern (most importantly!) Contemporaries that Pugachev was not the leader of the peasant uprising, but was someone else. For example, he fought for the independence of the proud Tartar kingdom.
            So that you don’t start pounding tons of nonsense ahead of time, I earnestly ask you to remember such a word as "Old Believers" who were strongly and often offended by the Russian tsars. Where are they writing about the Great Fair Tartar Kingdom? laughing
            1. Cynic
              Cynic 18 August 2013 17: 54
              +5
              Quote: Iraclius
              Come on, come on ... Tell the deceived inhabitants of Russia about "thousands of fortresses that have been dug down." Preferably with photos


              There are hundreds, if not thousands, of such forts on the territory of Russia, and all of them are completely destroyed! If the conquerors had known that someday aerial photography would have appeared, they would have covered it all with sand. Humans roam the earth, and it does not occur to them what picture opens from a bird's-eye view.
              Not all forts discovered from the air are located in the Irtysh area. There are many of them in Ukraine. But the greatest density of the found fortresses is in a very limited space in the Omsk and Tyumen regions.
              The last frontier of the state. Imagine how much effort was put in place to thoroughly “clean” the area? So that the descendants could not even find traces of the former fortification power of the Siberian "savages"?

              Is that familiar?
              It's from here
              http://topwar.ru/31098-posledniy-rubezh-derzhavy.html
              So ?
              1. Iraclius
                Iraclius 18 August 2013 18: 36
                +2
                Mr. Cynic! Andrey's statement57 directly states about, I quote: "thousands of fortresses built according to a single standard throughout Siberia, now Kazakhstan and Central Asia."
                What did you draw for me? "Thousands of razed fortresses"? And evidence that they were built by one people?
                This is a time. Secondly, I’ll give you quite a lap.i.d.a.s. an example (why completely correct, literary terms are blocked ???) - tanks were first used in battle by the British. It is a fact. Guided by the pseudo-logic of the new-chrenologists, we are all part of the British Empire. For in Russia tanks of British production were also used. So it turns out?
                1. Horde
                  Horde 18 August 2013 18: 52
                  +1
                  Quote: Iraclius
                  Mr. Cynic! Andrey's statement57 directly states about, I quote: "thousands of fortresses built according to a single standard throughout Siberia, now Kazakhstan and Central Asia."


                  excuse me for interfering in a scientific dispute gentlemen, comrades, but here there are more fortresses, forts, as well as serif lines
                  http://maxpark.com/community/506/content/2012308
                  1. Iraclius
                    Iraclius 18 August 2013 19: 01
                    +2
                    Dear Horde! How does this change the essence of my question and the lack of an exhaustive answer to it?
                    More recently, someone was seriously trying to prove that the Great Wall of China was directed against the Chinese.
                    1. Horde
                      Horde 18 August 2013 19: 24
                      +2
                      Quote: Iraclius
                      Dear Horde! How does this change the essence of my question and the lack of an exhaustive answer to it?


                      the lines are, moreover, very long hundreds of kilometers, many forts are quite of the same type, which indicates STANDARDIZATION. ALL THIS IS HIDDEN i.e. tried to destroy the historical memory and all this against the backdrop of FULL SILENCE is that history?
                      1. Iraclius
                        Iraclius 18 August 2013 19: 53
                        +2
                        Horde! I notice in your statements a certain contradiction in substance.
                        This is a classic definition in science - Contradictio in adjecto - there is no actual evidence that there was some confirmation of the existence of the "empire of Tartaria". And, nevertheless, you appeal to them. And you are trying to convince readers that the strengthening of Russia is not the strengthening of Russia, but the strengthening of Tartary. Why is that?
                      2. Horde
                        Horde 18 August 2013 20: 14
                        0
                        Quote: Iraclius
                        trying to convince readers that the strengthening of Russia is not the strengthening of Russia, but the strengthening of Tartaria. Why is that?


                        in the first place, Romanov Russia defended itself against Tartaria, the corners of the walls face east.
                        there is no actual evidence that there was any confirmation of the existence of the "empire of Tartaria".


                        how is there no evidence when exactly there is?
                      3. Iraclius
                        Iraclius 18 August 2013 20: 23
                        +5
                        Did Romanovskaya Russia defend itself against Tartaria? Hmm ... I'm almost ready to believe in your theory (joke!), If only you prove to me that the fortifications were built specifically against Tartaria, and not against other principalities or steppe robbers. I really look forward to the results of your research.
                      4. Horde
                        Horde 18 August 2013 21: 01
                        +1
                        please, pay attention to the shadow in the northern hemisphere from south to north in the north was TARTARI in fortification. Do you understand anything? sharp corners to attack



            2. Cynic
              Cynic 18 August 2013 19: 27
              +4
              Quote: Horde
              that interfere in a scientific dispute gentlemen comrades

              What dispute?
              The eruption of bile and contempt on those who dared to doubt its majesty historical science!
              And the fact that there are facts that do not fit into her Procrustean bed, then x ... with them! The bed is Procrustean!
          2. Cynic
            Cynic 18 August 2013 19: 22
            0
            Quote: Iraclius
            What did you draw for me? "Thousands of razed fortresses"? And evidence that they were built by one people?

            Mmm.
            Actually answered the question
            Quote: Iraclius
            Come on, come on ... Tell the deceived inhabitants of Russia about "thousands of fortresses that have been dug down." Preferably with photos and plans of fortifications.

            Sorry, I’m not a telepath, but I didn’t know that you still need other evidence, alas.
            Moreover, for your information, I am quite familiar with sophistry, so do not try to hone it here and now.
            1. Iraclius
              Iraclius 18 August 2013 19: 57
              +5
              There is no question of any sophistry. It is about necessity and sufficiency. I never got a single argument. Therefore, I can safely consider "pseudo-theory" a pseudo-theory. Near-scientific and without any intelligible argumentation at all.
              For those who are particularly persistent, I ask again - where is the evidence (documentary, archaeological, numismatic, ethnolinguistic, etc., etc.), where is the existence of a single "Tartar Empire" visible? Where are they? Where? There is a request not to refer to the intrigues of the "evil-dwellers" as deliberately anti-scientific. Thanks.
              1. Cynic
                Cynic 18 August 2013 20: 26
                +3
                Quote: Iraclius
                There is no talk of any sophistry.

                Is it really so?
                Quote: Iraclius
                where is the evidence (documentary, archaeological, numismatic, ethnolinguistic, etc., etc.), where is the existence of a single "Tartar Empire" visible?

                Sorry, but after re-reading the article, I tried to understand why it caused such a sharp rejection in you ?!
                Indeed, in essence, the author, constantly apologizing, draws the attention of readers to the facts found by him about the existence in heraldry of some traces of a certain state.
                Heraldry is a science and the records in its books are simply not made!
                Note medieval!
                And the author, in which they just did not blame him, up to the betrayal of his homeland and the preparation of the rejection of Siberia!
                Here we can only say that everyone judges others to the extent of his depravity. Alas.
                Whatever you say, but there are heraldic records! There are cards! There are aerial photographs!
                With this you and others like you are trying to gaping wounds of our history! Not ashamed ?
                Refuting the findings, the controversial who argues laughing , You cannot refute the facts, and the worst can not offer anything in return, except for your conclusions on a foreign basis.
                Where is our base? Why is it so fervently destroyed!
          3. TuKta
            TuKta 19 August 2013 06: 00
            0
            and who first invented and implemented the submarine? let's not talk about the same American who stole the idea from us ... that’s not the point, the thing is who embodied quite realistically ...
      4. Setrac
        Setrac 18 August 2013 17: 54
        0
        Quote: Iraclius
        So that you don’t start pounding tons of nonsense ahead of time, I earnestly ask you to remember such a word as "Old Believers" who were strongly and often offended by the Russian tsars. Where are they writing about the Great Fair Tartar Kingdom?

        Ltd., Old Believers, what a wonderful topic! schism of the orthodox church!
        Let's see what kind of split it was!
        So, it would seem what difference does how many fingers should be in the pinch during baptism? But this is only the external side, in fact, the number of fingers is a symbol, three fingers symbolize the trinity, those who are baptized with two fingers reject the trinity. What is a trinity? These are not just abstract gods sitting in the sky, the three essences of one god are symbolized by the three constituents of man:
        God the son - symbolizes the physical component, the body
        God the father - symbolizes the mind
        God is a holy spirit - symbolizes the soul.
        That is, those same schismatics reject the soul. And who in our time rejects the trinity? These are Catholics, they believe that there is a man on earth and a heavenly father in heaven, there is no holy spirit in their religion, therefore the Western civilization turned out to be so immoral.
        That is, we see that in the 17th century there was not an abstract split between the Old Believers and nobody knows who, but a very real split between Orthodoxy and Catholics.
  • Flooding
    Flooding 17 August 2013 20: 01
    +2
    I feel, Horde, that this article is your work :)
    Welcome.
    1. Horde
      Horde 17 August 2013 20: 07
      +3
      Quote: Flood
      I feel, Horde, that this article is your work :)
      Welcome.


      hi Vladimir
      no, not my article already Vadim Smirnov does not miss
      1. Flooding
        Flooding 17 August 2013 20: 13
        +2
        Quote: Horde
        no, not my article already Vadim Smirnov does not miss

        Too radical? And you try gradually, in small doses. Suddenly pass?
  • vladimirZ
    vladimirZ 18 August 2013 06: 13
    +2
    Article is nonsense. The author is trying to substantiate a claim about non-Russian lands beyond the Urals, about some non-existent state in the 18th century, supposedly destroyed by Russia, Muscovy.
    In Siberia, specifically in the Baikal region, the year of foundation of towns and cities was already in the 1600s. Specifically, Irkutsk - 1661. Prior to this, small nomadic tribes lived on these lands, who lived in nomadic yurts and did not have statehood and permanent places of residence.
    The author, and others like him, need these "arguments" to justify the future alienation of these lands from Russia. In another way, I do not explain this article.
    1. Setrac
      Setrac 18 August 2013 07: 40
      0
      Quote: vladimirZ
      Article is nonsense. The author is trying to substantiate a claim about non-Russian lands beyond the Urals, about some non-existent state in the 18th century, supposedly destroyed by Russia, Muscovy.

      Quote: vladimirZ
      Prior to this, small nomadic tribes lived on these lands, who lived in nomadic yurts and did not have statehood and permanent places of residence.

      With your knowledge of history, you do not reject the thesis of non-Russianness of these territories, but only push back 200 years into the past, you help the enemy in tearing away our lands.
      1. vladimirZ
        vladimirZ 19 August 2013 06: 34
        +6
        Damn the bullshit.

        “With your knowledge of history, you do not reject the thesis about the non-Russianness of these territories, but only push back 200 years into the past ...”.
        Setrac (1)  Yesterday, 07:40 ↑


        The lands of the Trans-Urals, the North, Siberia, the Far East, these are Russian, if you want Russian, territories and no one else's.
        The Russians settled in free lands that were not occupied by any other state. We still have lands for hundreds, thousands of kilometers unoccupied by any population, just look at the map. That they, too, belong to non-existent Aboregens or "universal humanity"?
        No. These are Russian lands, but as yet undeveloped by us and to no one else, not to any "world mankind", as long as the very concept of "statehood" exists, they cannot belong except to Russia.
        In the 15-17th centuries the "era of geographical discoveries" was going on all over the world, the development of new free lands, and Russia was no exception in this process.
        We Russians mastered these lands, included them in the territory of Russia, small nations and nationalities that did not have statehood and civilization proper for that period of life, who lived in this vast territory, included them in the Russian people.
        They did not destroy them, as the "civilized" Western European peoples and the United States did, boasting about their democracy and protection of human rights, but took them under their protection, allowing them to maintain their national status and join civilization under the Russian state flag.
        The author of the article, "reforming history" and pursuing the goal of dismembering Russia, is greatly disrespected and censured.
        The author, a representative of the hidden "5th Column", works for Russia's enemies - the West and the United States, who dream of destroying Russia.
    2. Andrey57
      Andrey57 18 August 2013 10: 47
      +4
      And why did you decide that Tartary was "non-Russian" ??? There are maps where Nonesh Sweden was also included in Tartary, and the obituary at the court of the king, father of Charles XII, on the occasion of his death, was written in Russian, though in Latin script, and the king himself called himself the king of the Wends and Fryagians, and no Swedes.
    3. chehywed
      chehywed 18 August 2013 15: 44
      +3
      Quote: vladimirZ
      The author, and others like him, need these "arguments" to justify the future alienation of these lands from Russia. In another way, I do not explain this article.


      Well, it's so obvious! As adherents of the remodelers of History don’t understand, Yes, and where did the wind of remodels blew out to calculate for a long time. Who said that "Siberia is not a storehouse of Russia, but a storehouse of all mankind"? And the processing of consciousness began.
  • Gregazov
    Gregazov 18 August 2013 16: 56
    0
    The reason for the Pugachev war is known, but not widely advertised. I will refer to "Essays on the History of the Russian Church" by Kartashev. In short, Emperor Peter, not long before his overthrow by Catherine, signed a document on the withdrawal of the monastic lands from the property of the monastery order (formally they were the property of the state, but managed by the monasteries) and their transfer to the peasants and retired military men. The order of the emperor began to be carried out, new owners appeared at the land, but Catherine came to power, who canceled the decision of her late husband regarding the distribution of land and gave it to the conspirators and her favorites. The men who had just held the piece of land in their hands were left with nothing. The impostor Pugachev appeared, who declared himself Peter Fedorovich and promised to return the land to the people. The people went after the land, so Tartary has nothing to do with it.
  • Horde
    Horde 17 August 2013 10: 23
    +1
    not quite the map that I wanted to show, but on this one it’s also quite clearly a map of the 18th century
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 17 August 2013 10: 54
      +9
      Enchanting. Do you realize what kind of game it is? Especially about Tobolsk?
      1. Tektor
        Tektor 17 August 2013 11: 59
        +7
        Yes, Tobolsk founded the conqueror of Siberia - Ermak ...
        Although there is an opinion that Ermak simply freed his country (!) From the invaders, because he was immediately recognized as his ruler by the indigenous population. And the capital of Tartaria at that time was Isker, now Omsk. Although its earlier name is Asgard of Ireland, it seems.
        1. Nagaibak
          Nagaibak 19 August 2013 20: 22
          0
          Tektor "And the capital of Tartary at that time was Isker, now - Omsk. Although its earlier name is Asgard Irri, I think."
          Isker is not Omsk! He was in the region of present Tobolsk, just north of thereof. On a steep bank. Part Irtysh washed away. The remains are excavated by archaeologists.
      2. Horde
        Horde 17 August 2013 12: 09
        0
        Quote: Spade
        Enchanting. Do you realize what kind of game it is? Especially about Tobolsk?

        you probably didn’t even know about it?

        map of Siberian researcher Remezov 18th century






        learn materiel, history has already gone far ahead
        1. Skiff-2
          Skiff-2 17 August 2013 15: 21
          +9
          Khakassia, Valley of the Kings, fragments of the inscription of the tombstone of Tsar Kue Tegin: "We are Russians, in Russian we speak, one root, from red, from dews such blood. My miracle that I am the" trunk "of RA (Sun), the root of the sun-like, from "branches" of RA. And what were the Rysichi! What a fist! Now we suffer from strife, from fleeting fights, from some fatal diseases. The Türks, however, were the trunk of the RA servant, while in essence. And what a great army was, and which "leaked", as well as words. Was the race from the RA branch of the basis of protection, a warrior. Do not agree? " And another fragment: "The root of the Aryan tree is called Türkic, which is what Tagi was. The Türks are the race they are, a similarity (well, for example): there are Karaids and kuravs, here are Ugrians. What were the Aryans cruel, similar to the dead Fashion, what happy times! The basis of the law (covenant) you called sacrifice ... You were beaten with glory, flesh of flesh were Rysichi. " ... And one more fragment: "Sacrifice is the essence of Russians, Russians speak the blood like that. You Russians are a totality, forever you are children, the essence of things to come. And from fair-haired people there is a similar life force. The wealth of Russians is the word of the storyteller - eternal life force, your wisdom Your children are the essence of what is to come ... "This is what the ruler of these lands said about himself and his subjects, what their names were, that the Turks are a military estate of the Russian clan, while EVERYTHING (!), And why we are Russians like that. "You are Russian - an aggregate" - i.e. all of WE, living on this earth from time immemorial, are RUSSIAN, and the one who wants to divide us is the ENEMY, because he wants to divide and rule.
          1. Horde
            Horde 17 August 2013 15: 33
            +2
            Quote: Skif-2
            Khakassia, Valley of the Kings, fragments of the inscription of the tombstone of King Kue Tegin:


            please do not send a link for this occasion ...
            1. Skiff-2
              Skiff-2 17 August 2013 18: 22
              +5
              Quote: Horde

              please do not send a link for this occasion ...

              I typed directly from the book - Genrikh Sinkevich "Proto-Slavic writing. Decryption results." 1999 Publishing house "Letopis". There is not only about the Slavs and Turks, but also the decryption of the "Phaistos disc" from about. Crete, the writing of the Etruscans - the true builders of Rome, the writing of the proto-Babylonian civilization and the Indian "city of the dead" Harappa or Mahenjo-Daro. Before the separation of languages ​​during the Babylonian pandemonium, there was one language on Earth, our ancestors spoke in it, which is why Russian (in a broad sense) is the mother tongue for all other languages ​​of the planet, which is why the sacred meaning of every foreign word is understood only in Slavic transcription, because and we are called Slavs (rightly slavs) - for the keepers of the word - the first language in which Adam spoke. This language was called Syrian (solar), we are children of Ra ...
              1. baltika-18
                baltika-18 17 August 2013 19: 03
                0
                Quote: Skif-2
                I typed directly from the book - Genrikh Sinkevich "Proto-Slavic writing. Decryption results." 1999 Publishing house "Letopis"

                It is necessary to read. Is there anything interesting on the Internet?
              2. baltika-18
                baltika-18 17 August 2013 19: 31
                +1
                Quote: Skif-2
                Henry Sinkevich

                You probably meant Gennady Grinevich.
                1. Horde
                  Horde 17 August 2013 19: 43
                  +1
                  Quote: baltika-18
                  You probably meant Gennady Grinevich.


                  Senkevich Henryk - Russian-Polish writer 19v
                  Grinevich Gennady, linguist-decryptor of the 20th century, the end of the 20th century, Chudinov criticized him for deciphering Etruscan texts.
                2. Skiff-2
                  Skiff-2 17 August 2013 19: 46
                  +1
                  Quote: baltika-18
                  You probably meant Gennady Grinevich.

                  Of course, I apologize to Genadiy Stanislavovich Grinevich, a senior researcher at the World History Department of the Russian Physical Society.
            2. Andrey57
              Andrey57 18 August 2013 11: 05
              +3
              http://chudinov.ru/category/veneryi-paleolita/ вот ссылка на сайт Чудинова, там уйма материалов, из которых следует, что у русских было 4 вида письменности за много тысяч лет назад, там же есть снимки блях со скифских доспехов - на каждой по русски написано шрифтом 0,2мм, что сделаны они в каком-то храме, да и сами они себя называли не скифами, а скитаями, а скиф - греческое искажение слова скитаи - скифос. но буква тета читается и как "Ф", и как "Т".
          2. Asan Ata
            Asan Ata 18 August 2013 07: 09
            +5
            Rave. Come to Astana, see a 3D copy of Kultegin's stele, read the translation.
          3. romb
            romb 18 August 2013 11: 59
            +4
            Fuck, what a wild interpretation of "Kultegin" you have .... crying
            Here is a more accurate translation:
            http://irq.kaznpu.kz/?lang=r&mod=2&bid=3&les=14&li=1 wink
          4. Marek Rozny
            Marek Rozny 20 August 2013 22: 27
            +2
            Quote: Skif-2
            fragments of the inscription on the tombstone of tsar Kue Tegin: "We are Russians, in Russian we speak, one root, from red, from dews such blood.

            I read any nonsense from the alternatives, but this is generally a "diamond")))))))) This is how it was necessary to get stoned to translate the indisputable Turkic text like this! )))))))))))))))
          5. klew
            klew 22 August 2013 10: 52
            0
            What nonsense is this? Khakassia has always been a separate state! And the only thing that united Khakassia and Russia was trade routes! Do not rewrite history.
            Or just take the history books of the peoples who lived here and read them. I understand that when a vacuum is in your head, you can come up with such nonsense to at least somehow adapt it to your desires. But there is a local story that is also taught here.
        2. Lopatov
          Lopatov 17 August 2013 15: 23
          +3
          Quote: Horde
          history has already gone far ahead


          So much so as to create a mythical state from scratch?
        3. Horde
          Horde 17 August 2013 17: 51
          +2
          here is a clickable card

      3. Cynic
        Cynic 17 August 2013 18: 52
        +6
        Quote: Spade
        Enchanting.

        Yes, yes.
        Just recently material was passing on the presence in Siberia of traces of the presence of fortresses.
        Traces are visible only in aerial photography.
        Yes, about Tobolsk, Omsk and more.
        The example may be unsuccessful, but everyone knows about the siege of the Greeks of Troy, literary as they thought at first.
        Schliemann believed and found! truth thankful the descendants specified, the necessary Troy was, if I am not mistaken, the third!
        But no one believed in her at all!
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 17 August 2013 19: 06
          +8
          Do you understand what he’s talking about? about the existence in the 18th century of a large independent state with a capital in Tobolsk, no more and no less.
          1. Skiff-2
            Skiff-2 17 August 2013 19: 40
            +3
            Before Ermak, Tobolsk was called Siberia - the capital of the Siberian kingdom. Siberian kingdom - Blue Horde, part of Ulus Dzhuchiev. Xin - China, hence the "Chinese Tartary" among the European people. Now we recall the answer of Ambassador Ivan the Terrible in England to the question "How is your Tatar Tsar?" "What kind of tsar do you mean? There are many Tatar kings at my sovereign's hand - Astrakhan, Kazan, Kasimovsky ..." The title of Russian sovereigns included in yourself a list of all these kingdoms, khanates and principalities, including, of course, Siberian with the capital Tobolsk.
          2. Cynic
            Cynic 17 August 2013 19: 49
            +3
            Quote: Spade
            Do you understand what he’s talking about?

            I understand, I do not understand another, why there are no documents of those times!?
            Quote: Spade
            the existence of a large independent state in the 18th century

            Foolishness of course, but now the existence in the last century of this same in Russia is questioned.
            Before the arrival of Gorbi (Rurik?!) Everything was bad!
            Here in the cultural West, these documents are!
            And we don’t!
            And they are trying to convince us that not, because it was not!
            Schaz-zz!
            Do you believe in decency and lack of passion in the same China?
            Why the territory of Siberia was not developed?
            Why is there a clear association _ Stripping territory.
          3. Nagaibak
            Nagaibak 19 August 2013 20: 24
            0
            Lopatov "Do you generally understand what he is talking about? About the existence in the 18th century of a large independent state with the capital in Tobolsk, no more and no less"
            Yes, they do not care!
        2. Anti
          Anti 18 August 2013 00: 38
          0
          Quote: Cynic
          Schliemann believed and found!

          Schliemann finds Troy. Or he tells everyone that what he found is Troy. And no one knows if this is true or not.
          1. Cynic
            Cynic 18 August 2013 17: 43
            +3
            Quote: Anti
            And no one knows if this is true or not.

            Pr-rVilna! laughing
            Only here probably not
            question everything
            ,
            Cum grain salis
            .
            Remember _ It may not be, there is something in it, everyone knows ? So here is information on Troy, this is already from the category _ everybody knows it.
            And the refutants have already proved (?) That Schliemann didn’t find Homer’s Troy, or rather he revealed the cultural layer in the excavation, but another, like Homer’s, this is the third cultural layer!
            Somewhere I met a mention of a historian who devoted his life to proving that the Iliad was written not by Homer, but by another Greek, though also Homer!
            wink
            1. Anti
              Anti 18 August 2013 18: 23
              0
              Sighted or not sighted Homer wrote? Nobody knows history and this is sad.
    2. Very old
      Very old 17 August 2013 13: 48
      +1
      If you are a Horde, then it does not mean RIGHT. So much nonsense ... So much nonsense ...
      1. Horde
        Horde 17 August 2013 14: 27
        -1
        Quote: Very old
        If you are a Horde, then it does not mean RIGHT. So much nonsense ... So much nonsense ...


        well, for example?
  • kvodrato
    kvodrato 24 November 2013 16: 45
    0
    The history of Russia or how they hid our past
  • poccinin
    poccinin 17 August 2013 08: 52
    +7
    sad that. that history books are different every year. different authors. different views on the same events. You have to look for truth on the Internet yourself. And young people are not up to the history of the girl's ancestors. Alcohol girls. "What the hell is Ivan the Terrible or WAR AND WORLD. night clubs and restaurants!
    1. Anat1974
      Anat1974 17 August 2013 21: 49
      10
      Are you very familiar with youth? In fact, it is different. We recently celebrated the 25th anniversary of the Society of Disabled People, so I was very surprised that young people came to congratulate them (she came, not from under the stick). And not only congratulations, but they helped organize everything. Youth by the way, we are very patriotic. A month ago, the soldiers who died in 1941 were buried, the youth stood just crying (and they are 13-17-20 years old). A girl of 16 years old was carrying a wreath and I saw how hard it was for her, but she didn’t even say a word. So don’t la la about our youth. This generation of 40-50 year olds (oddly enough) is unbearable, only blah blah. And when at least some old man was helped, and at least you know at least one participant in the Second World War in your area? So poccinin communicate more with young people, and do not watch it on the box. I bet - for a sense of herdness (everyone blathers about it and you sing along with a sense of doom). Could continue yet, but perhaps I will finish.
      Sincerely YOUNG (unfortunately).
  • Enjoy
    Enjoy 17 August 2013 09: 17
    12
    This is a view of our land from the outside, and very far away. If today's reviews of Russia in the Western press are made historical facts, then we get Mordor, inhabited by orcs, or huge North Korea.

    At that time, states in the east appeared and disappeared, and in the west for centuries they did not know about it. So that’s all, alas, guesswork. Although I love Isotria.
  • Zhenya
    Zhenya 17 August 2013 09: 23
    +4
    Of course, I'm sorry, the article is interesting, but this is another rewriting of history, clues for tiny facts.
    1. We will never know what really happened.
    2. The winners write the story.
    3. Too many non-docking and the truth is very stretch like.

    Conclusion:
    This article is another assumption and no more.
    1. bya965
      bya965 17 August 2013 09: 33
      10
      So agree with your comments, but
      Quote: Marrying
      2. The winners write the story.

      Not always, there is also a concept called "propaganda".
      Example World II. So, it was not the Battle of Stalingrad and Voronezh (who does not know, watch the Internet) that turned the Germans back, but the Battle of El Alamein and the tough Naglo-Saxons. It seems to me that you can declare war for this lie, our ancestors did this before.

      Thank you for the article. The more "Ivanov remembering, the better".
    2. baskoy
      baskoy 17 August 2013 12: 47
      12
      "This article is just another guess and nothing more."

      This article is another stone on the grave of the official "history"!
      At one time, I laughed heartily at the "New Chronology" by A.
      Recently, almost by accident, having decided to read this "nonsense", I was not just surprised, but dumbfounded! For me (an astronomical surveyor by education), the astronomical FACTS cited by A. Fomenko and his associates are more than convincing, and the critics of their theory look pale and all their efforts by A. Fomenko are nullified by his comrades. Statistical research is credible too. They are reproached that, not being linguists, they use this science wrongly, but ... Drgunkin A., independently of A. Fomenko, tries to prove that both Latin and English, etc. descended from the Proto-Slavic language. FOREIGN scientists (not difficult to find on the net) have long read some of the Etruscan TEXTS, but this is hushed up, since they used Slavic languages ​​(the Slavs are the ancestors of the ancient Romans, who will allow this?). Lopatin V. also on the basis of psychoanalysis of history ("Scaliger's Matrix") comes to the same conclusions. And here's another confirmation. Many thanks to the author of the article!
      1. Horde
        Horde 17 August 2013 15: 23
        +3
        Quote: baskoy
        I was not just surprised, but stunned! For me (astronomical surveyor by education)


        you, as a surveyor, will probably be interested in reading

        for example, an interesting fact, professional cartographer A.Yu. Ryabtsev made a map of the mutual arrangement of European capitals and a curious picture opened

        the Russian city of VLADIMIR was not in vain called the OWNER of the WORLD-this fact is historians
        not how not to comment, but what can they say. the picture is a simplified image, all the calculations are made taking into account that the Earth is a ball, and some people deigned to doubt. During the Empire, Russia-Horde controlled distant provinces by creating strongholds at the SAME distance from the center of the city of Vladimir. Vladimir is real CENTER OF THE WORLD. No other city has such a geographical effect. Neither Rome, nor Istanbul, nor Alexandria nor anyone.


        http://chronologia.org/xpon4/14_14.html

        1. baskoy
          baskoy 17 August 2013 16: 16
          +5
          Thank! Recently, I have looked at a lot of old maps (of course, on the net). If, not knowing the dates of their creation, arrange all the cards from primitive to detailed and more accurate, and then put down the dates, then it's time to go crazy - on the basis of accurate maps, primitive ones are compiled and these are already used in navigation and explorers! In many ways I do not agree with the reconstruction of history according to Fomenko, but they do not claim to be the ultimate truth in this matter (too daunting task). And the fact that the whole story fits into ONE thousand years, I now have no doubt!
          1. Horde
            Horde 17 August 2013 16: 31
            +4
            Quote: baskoy
            Thank! Recently, I have looked at a lot of old maps (of course, on the net). If, not knowing the dates of their creation, arrange all the cards from primitive to detailed and more accurate, and then put down the dates, then it's time to go crazy - based on accurate maps, primitive ones are compiled and these are already used in navigation and explorers


            always please in general the picture with Russian maps is simply deplorable EVERYTHING DESTROYED, almost everything that we know about the geography of the world or Russia of those years belongs to foreigners, how did you have to hate your history in order to destroy most of the documents? Who could do that? Only OCCUPIERS, only NOT RUSSIAN, Peter and the Germans went on after him.
            1. baskoy
              baskoy 17 August 2013 18: 00
              +7
              That's right!
              “I would rather give my diamonds,
              than my cards! ” - exclaimed the Polish king Stanislav Augustus in
              1794, despite the fact that Kostyushko requested the cards, preparing
              uprising to liberate the country from Russia. (Lopatin V. "Scaliger's Matrix").
              And the Romanov dynasty, apparently, was very hindered by the real history of Russia.
              It is entirely possible that the library of Ivan the Terrible was destroyed by them in the same way as the ancient manuscripts collected by order of Peter the Great and missing somewhere.
        2. Drakk
          Drakk 18 August 2013 11: 53
          0
          I advise someone to google strongholds of the states of Genghis Khan, Tokhtamysh, Batu, Alexander the Great, Gaius Julius Caesar. Cities I think he will find .... Vladimir nervously smokes ....
      2. Setrac
        Setrac 17 August 2013 18: 01
        +5
        Quote: baskoy
        At one time, I laughed heartily at the "New Chronology" by A.

        All Fomenko's supporters (Nosovsky, Morozov, Levashov, Penzin, Kolyuzhny, etc.) started out the same way as you. Everyone thought - well, I'm the smartest, I will prove that all this is nonsense (at least for myself). And he proved that all this is not nonsense. Well, the supporters of traditional history are just idlers, who did not understand, but decided to trust the "specialists". Something like this.
      3. Albert1988
        Albert1988 17 August 2013 20: 07
        +3
        Quote: baskoy
        For me (astronomical surveyor by education)

        That's right for me - genetics by education, some crazy astronomical theories may also seem harmonious and justified, simply because I do not own all the information.
        I’m, in a word, why - I’m sure that the majority of people here, although well-educated, but still not professional historians, therefore, alas, only those who have a historical education and are actively working in this industry can be authorities for us .
        And then we can finally come to the conclusion that, on the basis of a couple of delusional works, say that genetics are all liars, there are no genes and Lysenko was right that corn can be raised from oats!
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 17 August 2013 22: 06
          +1
          Quote: Albert1988
          I’m, in a word, why - I’m sure that the majority of people here, although well-educated, but still not professional historians, therefore, alas, only those who have a historical education and are actively working in this industry can be authorities for us .

          This is not so, you do not need to be a scientist to understand the basis, a non-specialist may not know the details. The concept of "authority" is unacceptable for science, theory is either proven or not, and the proof must be clear. For example, in physics, a theory is considered proven if the experience proving the theory can be repeated by other physicists, in history everything is based on the speculations of historians and the order of the government.
        2. baskoy
          baskoy 17 August 2013 22: 17
          +6
          Sorry for the long quote from Lopatin V.
          "How historical information arises and then multiplies,
          the story with Rurik, the founder of Rus-
          state. Now about who he was and what he did, you can
          read over many book pages. However initial
          source of information about him is only a couple of sentences
          in The Tale of Bygone Years. More precisely, in her so-called Rad-
          zivillovsky list, that is, copies. This is the place where
          but that "came" Rurik to Russia. And that’s all. Everything else is from the evil one.
          There are no genuine documents mentioning Rurik at all.
          The Radziwill list itself “Tales. .. ”appeared in Russia
          in the second half of the XYIII century, still the rest of the copy lists
          are its variations with additions, it is not clear
          where come from. Therefore, the reliability of the
          being is simply zero.
          However, if we talk about reliability, then the original
          “The Tale.” .. ”causes, to put it mildly, great doubts.
          Historians suggest that we take their word for it, that the events described-
          ny in this chronicle, actually happened.
          Again, no evidence, but the basis for doubt is very
          gracious. Judge for yourself. The chronicler Nestor wrote “A Tale. .. " AT
          XII century, we saw it only six centuries later, and even then in
          copies. All this time no one saw her, in any written
          sources it was not mentioned. We don’t know what she looked like,
          what was written on. Its oldest copy, Radziwillowski
          a list is a regular handwritten book with paper sheets.
          And therefore it was made, most likely, all in the same XYIII century. So
          on what basis did historians attribute the creation of the chronicle itself
          into hoary antiquity? On any. So the 'shamans' said. "
          When, in the memory of one generation (ours), the closest history is rewritten several times for the sake of anything and anyone, should I believe these very "professional historians"? I hope you do not operate with concepts in your genetics: "This is what my teacher said, and this is how my teacher's teacher, everyone has known this for a long time, and so on." But historians suggest taking their word for it. Maybe it is still worth checking out alternative research? Who, if not you, should know about the "benefits" of blind faith in Lysenkoism!
          1. Albert1988
            Albert1988 18 August 2013 13: 24
            0
            Comrade! Forgive me, but it is immediately clear that you did not communicate with "professional" historians or did not read many of their works - historians do not blindly rely on what their teachers and predecessors wrote, only the authors of school textbooks who are just too lazy do this. Normal historians dig, look for sources, references, etc., in general, facts, and if the historian does not find reliable facts confirming something, then he openly says that this is a historical fiction))
          2. Horde
            Horde 18 August 2013 18: 15
            -1
            Quote: baskoy
            Sorry for the long quote from Lopatin V.
            "How historical information arises and then multiplies,
            the story with Rurik, the founder of Rus-


            Alexander you slightly shift the accents Lopatin, how to put it mildly paraphrasing Alexander Haig "he is of course ours, but this is a son of a bitch" the fact is that people like Lopatin, Levashov, rest in peace to him, Bushkov and others. research, they forget to make references mainly to the research of Morozov, Fomenko, Nosovsky.As for the Radziwil list, the FINA did just a gorgeous research at one time, and your humble servant brought in his five kopecks
            http://topwar.ru/23256-informacionnye-voyny-chast-2-issledovaniya-radzivilovskog
            o-spiska.html
    3. Bezarius
      Bezarius 17 August 2013 12: 48
      +4
      I do not consider the presence of a large number of cards - tiny facts. Definitely our story has been rewritten. And we even know who and when copied, or maybe you do not respect Lomonosov?
      1. Albert1988
        Albert1988 17 August 2013 20: 35
        +2
        Maps in those days were not very accurately drawn, especially since the map was English, and they always had problems with this part of the world ...
        1. Cynic
          Cynic 17 August 2013 20: 57
          +1
          Quote: Albert1988
          Maps in those days were not very accurate.

          So here it’s not about the accuracy of the conversation, but the fact of the presence, not in our sources, of a certain state.
          In several sources.
          hi
          1. Albert1988
            Albert1988 17 August 2013 22: 00
            +1
            And how reliable are the sources? And how many are there? about such a state there should be a darkness of information.
            1. Skiff-2
              Skiff-2 18 August 2013 15: 25
              +1
              Quote: Albert1988
              And how reliable are the sources? And how many are there? about such a state there should be a darkness of information.

              And what kind of state are we talking about? About the Great Tatarstan? Can anyone really doubt the existence of the Tatar khanates throughout this territory? Kazan, Astrakhan, Siberian, Crimean, does anyone doubt that they were? Or that Tatars inhabited them? Yes, in Russia until the 19th century Tatars and Kyrgyz and Kazakhs and Bashkirs and Cheremis were called - as a generalized, collective name and not in their darkness, but because they lived nearby. The fact that this whole territory inhabited by unlike Tatar tribes was called the Great Tatarstan is not surprising, but was this a single centralized state? At the time of the creation of the Mongol Empire, yes, most likely, and the capital was Karakoram, but after the fragmentation of the Empire, of course there wasn’t, but after all, the totality of quarreling Russian principalities in the 13th century was nevertheless called Rus, so why not be called the Great Tataria Ulus Dzhuchiev?
              1. Albert1988
                Albert1988 18 August 2013 18: 01
                +2
                Quote: Skif-2
                And what kind of state are we talking about? About the Great Tatarstan?

                That's right - that it was TATARIA, from the word Tatar, inhabited by Tatars, even if it is a collective name, and not some kind of mythical "Taрtaria ", which was inhabited by Russians and which was allegedly conquered by Romanov Russia with the support of the bad Romanovs and their allies, the bad Germans, that this" Tartary "was a type of" good "Russia, and European, Moscow Russia was a type of bad ...
            2. Cynic
              Cynic 18 August 2013 18: 01
              0
              Quote: Albert1988
              And how reliable are the sources?

              Well, supporters of Fomenko then were not there, if only MV was used.
              1. Albert1988
                Albert1988 18 August 2013 18: 29
                +2
                I agree, Fomenko was not yet born, and the time machine has not yet been invented, BUT! We know very well how "well" the Europeans know Russia, and indeed the whole of Eurasia, in terms of culture, history, geography, etc. So even then there could be people who did not know anything about this region, and who were drawing on the maps not what was in reality, but what they themselves imagined. Or they simply confused Tartary with Tartary, that is, with the state of the Tatars.
                Agree - this can also be the case.
                1. Cynic
                  Cynic 18 August 2013 19: 10
                  0
                  Quote: Albert1988
                  BUT! We know very well how "well" the Europeans know Russia, and indeed the whole of Eurasia, in terms of culture, history, geography, etc.

                  Are you sure ?
                  Ordinary laymen agree, but civil services, mercantile people?
                  Sorry, but this is very unlikely.
                  More precisely in general _ It can’t be! Do not repeat for ideological cliches.
                  1. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 18 August 2013 19: 37
                    +4
                    Quote: Cynic
                    Ordinary laymen agree, but civil services, mercantile people?

                    Quote: Cynic
                    Do not repeat for ideological cliches.

                    In those days, civil servants and trading people didn’t have much more information than a simple layman on some issues, especially as sailors knew everything about the coast, but had no idea about the central regions of the continents)
                    In the same way I can say: do not repeat after conspiracy theorists)
                    1. Cynic
                      Cynic 18 August 2013 19: 55
                      0
                      Quote: Albert1988
                      do not repeat after conspiracy theorists

                      Do not repeat what?
                      What previous generations are not dumber than ours?
                      If you do not think so, I am sorry for you.
                      hi
                      1. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 18 August 2013 20: 09
                        +3
                        Quote: Cynic
                        What previous generations are not dumber than ours?

                        Of course not, sometimes even smarter than that, but you have to take into account the fact that there was no Internet, radio, television, books were not written and printed in very large quantities and were of great value, even in the west, in general, the information reached before people for a very long time, its authenticity was often impossible to quickly verify, and sometimes it was generally impossible.
                        This is where the mistakes came from.
                      2. Cynic
                        Cynic 18 August 2013 20: 35
                        0
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        in general, information reached people for a very long time, its authenticity was often impossible to quickly verify,

                        Therefore, its value was indescribable.
                        Sorry, did you read Marco Polo?
                      3. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 18 August 2013 20: 47
                        0
                        No, Marco Polo did not read.
                        “Therefore, its value was indescribable.” - but I do not agree with this - the value is only that information, whose authenticity is beyond doubt, - it can be safely used, the rest - just take note.
                      4. Cynic
                        Cynic 18 August 2013 20: 52
                        0
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        do not read

                        View at least general information.
                        Interpretations of his books are different, but converge in one _ Everything regarding his profession is stated absolutely precisely. the rest was not important for him.
                        drinks
                      5. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 18 August 2013 21: 00
                        0
                        Be sure to read how I find time smile
                      6. Cynic
                        Cynic 20 August 2013 18: 55
                        0
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        how will I find time

                        Yes, there is always not enough.
                        Quote: Cynic
                        View at least general information.

                        drinks
  • Dovmont
    Dovmont 17 August 2013 09: 29
    +4
    Several fuzzy images in several Western European publications, and already such global conclusions. Everyone has long been aware of the dense fallacies of the West with regard to Russia, so referring to them is not entirely correct!
    1. Motors1991
      Motors1991 17 August 2013 15: 12
      +7
      Especially if you recall the spreading cranberries of A. Dumas. In fact, Russia began to study Central Asia, Mongolia, the Far East in the second half of the 19th century, from where the British and the Dutch might have some kind of maps of Siberia, Central Asia, if they were there never been. Similarly, the father of history Herodotus drew his cards.
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 17 August 2013 18: 07
        +3
        Quote: Motors1991
        .To truly Central Asia, Mongolia, the Far East, Russia began to study in the second half of the 19th century, from where the British and the Dutch might have some kind of maps of Siberia, Central Asia, if they had never been there.

        In the 15th century, Semyon Dezhnev passed the strait, which was later called Bering, and you say the 19th century!
      2. Skiff-2
        Skiff-2 17 August 2013 19: 00
        +2
        Quote: Motors1991
        Especially if you recall the spreading cranberries of A. Dumas. In fact, Russia began to study Central Asia, Mongolia, the Far East in the second half of the 19th century, from where the British and the Dutch might have some kind of maps of Siberia, Central Asia, if they were there never been. Similarly, the father of history Herodotus drew his cards.

        But what about the Great Silk Road? Do you even remember who owned this way? ... yes, that same Middle Eastern people who was always persecuted - the community in northern China was formed even before Christmas, caravanserais (travel palaces for caravan travelers) stretched across the entire Great Steppe and to Europe itself, right up to Spain and England, but in this case, as without maps? And as for the English archives, England was created just for themselves by them (Cromwell), as an impregnable fortress (island) and a base of sea robbers, and they succeeded in that. By the way, under Peter the Great, a certain merchant of the Evreinov held the monopoly on trade with China and India — a cross, and after all, trogging was not only internal, but also to a very large extent transit.
        1. Motors1991
          Motors1991 17 August 2013 20: 14
          +3
          So the Great Silk Road went along the centers of civilization, Bukhara, Samarkand, Otrar, and they still haven’t disappeared. Here was the Kazan Khanate, Crimean, as Catherine didn’t erase them from history, but if you could believe it, you could easily. Stalin had a miserable pygmy in front of her, he only resettled three or four not-so-large people, and then stink, sow a lot, and then a huge country with cities, fortresses was multiplied by zero and no one remembers or knows anything. It is strange somehow.
          1. Skiff-2
            Skiff-2 18 August 2013 15: 40
            0
            The vast (but not densely populated) country with fortresses, cities and castles was multiplied to zero by the Uyghur Kaganate during its formation, then all the most ancient aristocratic families of Eastern Siberia were exterminated in the most total way - the fair-haired "steppe giants" (Moguls), carriers of the culture of the Proto-Slavic syllabic writing , a royal family of "trotting heroes" - the rulers of the Great Steppe, the kings of Eurasia.
            1. Motors1991
              Motors1991 18 August 2013 17: 34
              +4
              I don’t understand one thing, wars are always waged for possession of something: land, cities, natural resources, human resources, and God knows what, why did the Uighurs destroy everything cleanly? It’s not logical, who should receive tribute from, dig ditches, build walls? do you want the conquerors to do everything themselves? And also about Tartaria. Please explain to me why the Russian discharge books clearly indicate how many soldiers are sent to war, say with the Kazan Khanate, how many guns they have, who are the governors. It always says how much strength the enemy has, who their headed? And nowhere is nickname where Tartaria is not mentioned. But judging by the maps, this is a huge state and it could not but exert pressure on neighboring countries. The knock of hooves of the cavalry shocker of the Universe Shaker Genghis Khan was far ahead, from the tread of the armies of Tamerlane all Asia was trembling, including the Middle East and Egypt. And who was trembling from the treads of the legions of the Caesar of Tartary? There is a good Soviet film, “Sannikov’s Land,” it seems to me just about your Tartary. Who did not watch it, I recommend it.
    2. Setrac
      Setrac 17 August 2013 18: 04
      +3
      Quote: Dovmont
      For a long time, everyone has known about the dense fallacies of the West regarding Russia

      You think that in the West they are mistaken, it is not so! You are mistaken! In the West, they are not mistaken, but deliberately distort history, knowing that they are not writing the truth.
  • Boris55
    Boris55 17 August 2013 09: 50
    10
    It would be nice to start restoring our history by returning to us the pre-Petrine summer calculus. All the same, 5508 years stolen ... Modern storytellers (historians) write all their little books on the “works” of Schlösser, Byron and other nonsense ...
    Recently I bought the work of Lomonosov on the history of our state (reprint edition). I thought it was true, but no. It was published after the death of Lomonosov and after editing Schlösser ...
    And recently, Putin said that Russia coexisted over 4 thousands of years before the new era ...
    The one who controls the past controls the future, and the winners write the story.
    It turns out we are defeated and defeated not yesterday ...


    The State Historical Museum, on Red Square, has a globe in it, which also depicts Tartaria (1690 year).
  • Boris55
    Boris55 17 August 2013 10: 23
    +7
    And a little more video on the topic ...
    1. Skiff-2
      Skiff-2 17 August 2013 20: 14
      +6
      Quote: Boris55
      And a little more video on the topic ...

      This is it - all our Tatars are Russian, and when they are Russians they are so good! .. Here is my godfather - a Bashkir Tatar, even the surname Islamov, and you won't soon find another such Orthodox Christian, but why? - Russian because, today I came to visit. We were quarreled and divided by the one who wanted to rule over us, but among the noble families 40% have Tatar roots ... And we will deal with the Germans - they call themselves Deutsch, and we call them GERMAN !!!, because they are dumb, and when they spoke, then what? , eh? , that's what he, after all, it is not for nothing that they say "scratch the German properly, you will find a Russian ..., but hey, he will speak !!!"
  • Horde
    Horde 17 August 2013 10: 40
    +3
    Quote: Boris55
    Schlösser, Byron and other nonsense ...


    Bayer is a Russian historian of German origin
    Schlozer-Russian historian again from there laughing


    Quote: Boris55

    Recently I bought the work of Lomonosov on the history of our state (reprint edition). I thought it was true, but no. It was published after the death of Lomonosov and after editing Schlösser ...


    you confused again Lomonosov’s works were ruled by Miller, which was investigated by the parents of Academician Fomenko, for this they specially developed a method of INVARIANT text research.
  • Boris55
    Boris55 17 August 2013 10: 56
    +9
    Quote: Horde
    Bayer is a Russian historian of German origin


    Who spoke Russian poorly and did not know how to write and read Russian. (That one, that another, etc.) They were not born in Russia. They were brought to Russia.

    Who ruled Lomonosov - maybe I'm wrong. This is not the point, but the lie imposed on us to please someone.

    Find on the internet the national composition of the Academy of Sciences. I think it will be interesting and will remove many questions.
    1. Horde
      Horde 17 August 2013 11: 15
      +5
      Quote: Boris55
      Find on the internet the national composition of the Academy of Sciences. I think it will be interesting and will remove many questions.


      Boris, I’m on your side, just do not allow such mistakes, so that the traditions do not laugh.
      I read a lot of books, articles on history, for example, the last
      http://new.chronologia.org/polemics/bask.php
      Denis Bannikov conducted a study of the BASIC LANGUAGE and imagine a language that, according to academic science, is the MOST MISCEPTIBLE of the European languages, is in many ways similar to the Russian language, which of course is absurd from the point of view of this science.
      1. bask
        bask 17 August 2013 11: 31
        +4
        Quote: Horde
        Denis Bannikov conducted a study of the BASIC LANGUAGE and imagine a language that, according to academic science, is the MOST MISCEPTIBLE of the European languages, is in many ways similar to the Russian language, which of course is absurd from the point of view of this science.

        Hi Pavel hi .
        I read the comments and the article is very interesting.
        But excavations and isolation of the gene material are needed for research. Then you can definitely determine who the Russians are and who our common ancestors are.
        It's a pity Ross, it hasn’t been on the site for a long time, it has a lot of huge material on Arkaim.
        The Aria R1a1a gene is distributed among: 60%) Russian Old Believers, Kyrgyz and Brahmins in northern India;
        50% are Eastern Slavs: Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Poles, Czechs, Mordovians, Mari El, Udmurts, Tatars, Bashkirs, Altai, Pashtuns, Tajiks from Khujand, Pakistani Kashmir, as well as Luga Serbs.
  • Horde
    Horde 17 August 2013 10: 59
    -7
    Quote: Boris55
    And recently, Putin said that Russia coexisted 4 thousand years before the new era.


    Putin said something, he says a lot of things, for example, that Russia is for Russians, it’s dangerous, harmful, and they say such things, only idiots i.e. Russians
    Putin and people like him are no longer afraid of anything. The current historical paradigm is strong and stable, Putin’s petty stilettos, with which he maintains his broad-minded erudite look.
    Modern traditional historians have already lost their faith in believers that they can defeat their ideological enemies, as they say to alternative historians, which is completely wrong, because such historians as Morozov, Fomenko, Nosovsky, Alexander Kas, researchers from the website Consilium, CHRONOLOGY and there are real historians, not academic science, which deals only with facts that fit into the existing concept of history, the rest are either discarded, or how they are destroyed in the Middle Ages
  • Boris55
    Boris55 17 August 2013 11: 11
    +6
    Quote: Horde
    Putin said something, he says a lot of things, for example, that Russia is for russians .


    Lying.
    I'd love to see a link to the video where he talks about it.

    In the meantime, here's to you from me.



    Even we are not quite on the subject suffered ...
  • Horde
    Horde 17 August 2013 11: 20
    -3
    Quote: Boris55
    Lying.
    I'd love to see a link to the video where he talks about it

    tell a lie well please
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KcFQdLHL_w&feature=player_detailpage
    1. Boris55
      Boris55 17 August 2013 11: 34
      +3
      In "your" video, Putin talks about preventing the inflation of the national question in favor of one nation, which does not contradict the "my" video above laughing
  • Horde
    Horde 17 August 2013 11: 27
    -3
    Quote: Spade
    Enchanting. Do you realize what kind of game it is? Especially about Tobolsk?


    you probably didn’t even know about it?

    map of Siberian researcher Remezov 18th century


    learn materiel, history has already gone far ahead
  • gura
    gura 17 August 2013 11: 40
    +2
    From Minsk. Scientific nonsense. As an unnamed author (the remnants of conscience remained, probably), he did not pull the word "Tartarus" by the ears to his fabrications, that is, the underworld among the ancient Greeks, and did not populate it with the Russian ancestors! With the capital in Olympia! And Zeus - that in general, our Perun, also has fun with throwing lightning! Hilarious! But how many real discoveries are now! No, they stupidly publish all sorts of nonsense. People are eating! And he, judging by the pluses, does it.
  • BIGLESHIY
    BIGLESHIY 17 August 2013 11: 51
    +1
    Quote: Horde
    Putin said something, he says a lot of things, for example, that Russia is for Russians, it’s dangerous, harmful, and they say such things, only idiots i.e. Russians

    That is, WE are RUSSIAN according to your understanding UNDERSTANDINGS angry yes you are just a FOOT fool
    1. Horde
      Horde 17 August 2013 12: 23
      -5
      Quote: BIGLESHIY
      That is, WE are RUSSIAN according to your understanding UNDERSTANDINGS yes you are just a FUEL


      you yourself knock on the head, even though you watched the movie? -It’s not what I say, but Putin
  • Ross
    Ross 17 August 2013 12: 05
    +5
    Quote: Horde


    By the way, to say TATARIA the Romanovs who conquered Tartaria during the Pugachev war had already misinterpreted the word.
    right TARTARIA- T-Horde.
    At the heart of all states lies the Horde.
    It seems the picture is not inserted. I'll try to search again.


    The name TarTaria is based on 2's words: Tara and Tarh. In 220 km from Omsk there is the Tara river, dedicated to the Goddess Tara (aka Lada in Russia). The tarch in Russia was called Dazhdbog. It was the Vedic empire of Tara and Tarh. One of the capitals was located in the Omsk region. It’s very interesting to look at the names and positions of cities on the old Tarta Tartaria maps, you will be surprised to find the current city names — Tobolsk, Surgut, Perm, etc. during the time of Petrovsky Muscovy in Siberia. All of them were rebuilt after the conquest of Tartary by Catherine 2 on the ruins of ancient namesakes.
    1. bask
      bask 17 August 2013 12: 12
      +1
      Great ROSS, great buddy. You're on air now. And then none of ours is left. One Pasha.
      Quote: Ross
      Siberia's current city names are Tobolsk,

      Tobolsk is an interesting name, which means not in the know?
      1. Ross
        Ross 17 August 2013 12: 26
        +6
        Hi Basque, buddy. I’m rarely here now. I look through sometimes. My site doesn’t load on my iPad, and I often only travel with it.
        And he wrote about Tobolsk because before the war with Ekaterina there was 2 of Tobolsk, one small on the side of Muscovy and Big on the other side of the river, the capital of Moscow Tartaria. The matter is dark, because after the defeat, Catherine banned all her descendants from this story and archives and Pushkin wrote how difficult it is to find anything. Nicholas I personally was a censor, did not miss anything superfluous. That is, the defeat of Tartaria is a personal secret of the Romanovs.
        1. bask
          bask 17 August 2013 12: 47
          +1
          I see, don’t miss it.
          A lot of everything has been written on this topic. You do not know where the truth is. New excavations are needed, but they are not carried out.
          And most importantly, in my opinion, when the Chinese allow the excavation of their pyramids.
          Then it will be clear. Who are we and how many thousands of our civilization are years old.
    2. Horde
      Horde 17 August 2013 13: 16
      +3
      Quote: Ross
      The name TarTaria is based on 2 words: Tara and Tarh. 220 km from Omsk is the Tara River, dedicated to the Goddess Tara (aka Lada in Russia). The tarch in Russia was called Dazhdbog. It was the Vedic empire of Tara and Tarh. One of the capitals was in the Omsk region.

      Dear Eugene about the deep meaning of the word TARTARIA, many argue and put forward different versions. In general, I am inclined to the FIN version that Tartaria is a Westernist name, and this state was called simply the MOSCOW KINGDOM. By the way, have you preserved any artifacts from this old capital about which you write?
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 17 August 2013 18: 16
        +1
        Quote: Horde
        The words of TARTARIA are argued by many and put forward different versions. In general, I am inclined to the FIN version that Tartaria is a Westernized name, and this state was called simply the MOSCOW KINGDOM. By the way, have you preserved any artifacts from this old capital about which you write?

        There is an interesting pattern, all original countries have different names for the state and the capital. By the name of the cities, they call the provinces, or the countries that broke away from the mother country earlier.
    3. Skiff-2
      Skiff-2 18 August 2013 16: 56
      +2
      Quote: Ross

      The name TarTaria is based on 2's words: Tara and Tarh. In 220 km from Omsk there is the Tara river, dedicated to the Goddess Tara (aka Lada in Russia). The tarch in Russia was called Dazhdbog. It was the Vedic empire of Tara and Tarh. One of the capitals was located in the Omsk region. It’s very interesting to look at the names and positions of cities on the old Tarta Tartaria maps, you will be surprised to find the current city names — Tobolsk, Surgut, Perm, etc. during the time of Petrovsky Muscovy in Siberia. All of them were rebuilt after the conquest of Tartary by Catherine 2 on the ruins of ancient namesakes.

      The word Tatars consists of two: that - to chop and the macaws - warriors, i.e. Grunts - warriors, military class of the steppe ethnic group. And the state of Great Perm from time immemorial was known in Persia, and in India, and in the Middle East.
  • Horde
    Horde 17 August 2013 12: 21
    0
    Quote: bask
    Hi Paul.
    I read the comments and the article is very interesting.
    But excavations and isolation of the gene material are needed for research. Then you can definitely determine who the Russians are and who our common ancestors are.



    Andrew welcome!
    long time did not intersect on the site
    did you read the article on the site? but if there is a desire, read about the Basques, there is a lot of history that does not stand still, as academics want - this decrepit paradigm does not suit the RUSSIAN PEOPLE.

    1. bask
      bask 17 August 2013 12: 54
      +1
      Quote: Horde
      an article on a site? but if there is a desire, read about the Basques, there

      Hi, hello buddy.
      Quote: Horde
      did you read the article on the site?

      I read an interesting article, learned a lot.
      Throw off something new about the Basques ...
      We need to tackle the story altogether. Recently, so many new things have been published.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. bask
          bask 17 August 2013 14: 56
          +1
          Thanks, thanks for the link.
          Crosses with a crescent at the base.
          [media = http: //fesir.blogspot.ru/2011/01/blog-post.htm].
      2. Horde
        Horde 17 August 2013 14: 49
        0
        Quote: bask
        Throw off something new about the Basques ...


        please ...
        http://new.chronologia.org/polemics/bask.php
  • Slevinst
    Slevinst 17 August 2013 12: 22
    -2
    I’m not a historian and I don’t know history well since I didn’t study at school and now I understand that it’s not in vain. and I read such articles with pleasure. I have just a logical assumption about this tartaria. perhaps it was some kind of attempt to unite several states under one name or some kind of small principality began to wage successful wars, conquering villages and towns on vast expanses of land expanding their possessions to those indicated on the maps. then their ruler died or died, no receiver was found and this whole state fell apart very quickly.
    1. Setrac
      Setrac 17 August 2013 18: 22
      +2
      Quote: Slevinst
      then their ruler died or died, no receiver was found and this whole state fell apart very quickly

      A holy place is never empty. New receivers (Romanovs) were found with the living heirs of the old dynasty (Rurikovich).
      Apparently the main cause of the weakening of the empire was the general cooling on the planet, the vast northern territories (and eastern) became unsuitable for life, in addition, the northern sea route was closed, which broke the connection with remote territories.
  • Horde
    Horde 17 August 2013 12: 30
    +6
    Quote: bask
    Tobolsk is an interesting name, which means not in the know?


    Andrei, here's an image of the old Tobolsk, the only city beyond the Ural Mountains with a stone Kremlin



    pay attention to the pommels at the temples, they will CALMONLY remind you that the Crescent is a royal imperial symbol. In those days, CHRISTIANITY was different.
    1. bask
      bask 17 August 2013 13: 02
      +2
      Quote: Horde

      pay attention to the pommels at the temples, they will CALMONLY remind you that the Crescent is a royal imperial symbol. In those days, CHRISTIANITY was different.

      Honestly, such facts just do not fit my head.
      The crescent has always been a symbol of Islam.
      And now is there anything left of the Tobolsk Kremlin? And have there been modern excavations there?
      1. Horde
        Horde 17 August 2013 13: 21
        0
        Quote: bask
        Honestly, such facts just do not fit my head.
        The crescent has always been a symbol of Islam.


        not quite so DEAR Andrei, there’s something else. In those days EVERYTHING was different, both religion and speech, the Russians spoke not only in Russian, but also in Tatar, but even apparently in Arabic, though then (in Tatar, in it was not called Arabic), and the calendar was different (names of months, days in a week), and clothes, and architecture-towers. All this was wiped from the culture of our people by the Romanov Germans, starting from Peter.

        I advise you to read
        http://istclub.ru/topic/128-%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%
        B8%D0%B5-%D0%B8-%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D1%82/


        I found in neta a map of Moscow, what year and who the manufacturer is unknown, but the map is an interesting pity that it is SMALL, but even in this form it is visible that the Crescent symbolism prevails in Moscow churches i.e. Muslim. According to FIN, apparently this is exactly the time when the GENERAL RELIGION CHRISTIANITY has not yet been divided into the modern components of Orthodoxy, Islam, Catholicism.

        1. bask
          bask 17 August 2013 13: 34
          +1
          Quote: Horde
          components of Orthodoxy, Islam, Catholicism.

          Did you mean this.
          Here I do not agree. Islam is a completely different religion, different from Christianity.
          1. Horde
            Horde 17 August 2013 14: 22
            -2
            Quote: bask
            Here I do not agree. Islam is a completely different religion, different from Christianity.


            in general the question is very difficult
            the similarities between Orthodoxy and Islam are actually much more than it seems
            -KORAN -NAROK criticism in Russian allegedly the Koran was written by Boris Godunov
            - the architecture of mosques is mostly similar to Orthodox churches, and not to Catholic ones.
            -TEREM, PRISON, HAREM, in those days of HOME CONSTRUCTION in Russia the relations of the sexes were very strict. The girls were kept in towers before marriage.
            - Jesus is recognized as Islam, in the form of a saint
            -In Constantinople there are still untouched Orthodox churches. He says that for the most part Muslims have a benevolent attitude towards Orthodoxy.


            Enameled plate of the grave (cladding) of the count
            Geoffrey of Anjou (d. 1151), Le Mans. This provides one of
            the earliest images of the coat of arms and also shows
            the extent to which it is considered accepted by royal prerogatives.
            The inscription reads: "I swear with my sword, prince, the crowd
            robbers sent and your church vigilance
            has the world. "


            Well, here again, the symbol of the Crescent is now in France, but about 1151 the traditions certainly got excited. There are a lot of such symbols when Christians used seemingly Muslim symbols around the world

            -
            1. bask
              bask 17 August 2013 14: 37
              +3
              Quote: Horde
              in general the question is very difficult

              I agree. Today is very politicized.
              In the Ottoman Empire until the 20th century, about 40% of Christians lived, and there were no persecutions of any kind.
              Yes, Petya-1 blew up DOMOSTROY and the entire system of values ​​in Russia.
              Serving people (nobles) made slaveholders of their own people. Rus pumped migrants who seized power (nothing, does not remind). Everything resulted in the stratification of a single Russian people, both socially and ethnically (Ukrainians).
              Until now we disentangle.
              1. Horde
                Horde 17 August 2013 15: 53
                0
                Quote: bask
                Yes, Petya-1 blew up DOMOSTROY and the entire system of values ​​in Russia.
                Serving people (nobles) made slaveholders of their own people. Rus pumped migrants who seized power (nothing, does not remind). Everything resulted in the stratification of a single Russian people, both socially and ethnically (Ukrainians).
                Until now we disentangle.


                if you are interested about Peter, then here are absolutely new studies of the times of Tsar Alexei, Tsarevna Sophia and Peter's coming to power. The historian Alexander Kas has prepared for the release of the book "The collapse of the empire of the Russian tsars"


                http://istclub.ru/

                in brief, FIRST NOVELS- WAS PETER
                in Russia he was nicknamed ANTICHRIST
  • Ross
    Ross 17 August 2013 12: 34
    +3
    Quote: Horde
    Bayer is a Russian historian of German origin
    Schlozer -Russian historian again laughing from there


    For 10 years of living in Russia, appointed by the Romanovs (Germans are closer to their Germans) to write "Russian", or more correctly to tell a new Romanov story, these Germans never learned Russian!
  • ab_hybac
    ab_hybac 17 August 2013 12: 40
    +3
    ????????????????
    1. Horde
      Horde 17 August 2013 13: 13
      +1
      Quote: ab_hybac
      ????????????????


      what is not so respected?
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 17 August 2013 18: 28
        0
        Quote: Horde
        what is not so respected?

        I’ll pay attention, not China, but China, that is, these are two different states.
        1. svp67
          svp67 17 August 2013 18: 35
          +1
          Quote: Setrac
          I’ll pay attention, not China, but China, that is, these are two different states.
          And this fact has long been known. In antiquity there was both China and China ...
          1. Marek Rozny
            Marek Rozny 20 August 2013 22: 53
            0
            Quote: svp67
            And this fact has long been known. In antiquity there was both China and China ...

            all right. the Turks called the western part of modern China "Kytai" and the Turks and all kinds of Khitan and Mongols lived there. And those lands beyond the Wall, where the ancestors of the present-day Chinese ("han") actually lived, were called "Chin" (from the name "Qin"). This tradition was adopted by the Russians, but later the term Hina disappeared and the entire territory of the Qin Empire (namely, the Russians encountered it) was already called simply China. Without division into China and Chin (although Afanasy Nikitin did not confuse these concepts in his "Walking").
            The Europeans faced the Qin Empire from the sea, and the name Chin stuck with them (China, Chyna, Shin). The Europeans did not come across the concept of "Kytai".
    2. kvodrato
      kvodrato 24 November 2013 17: 14
      +1
      Chinese dragon and a left griffin with a beak
  • Horde
    Horde 17 August 2013 12: 42
    +3
    Quote: bask
    The Aria R1a1a gene is distributed among: 60%) Russian Old Believers, Kyrgyz and Brahmins in northern India;
    50% are Eastern Slavs: Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Poles, Czechs, Mordovians, Mari El, Udmurts, Tatars, Bashkirs, Altai, Pashtuns, Tajiks from Khujand, Pakistani Kashmir, as well as Luga Serbs.


    there’s a lot of writing about this gene now, and everyone is not lazy and who understands what it is and who doesn’t understand. It’s enough for me to see that the Russians have remained the WHITE RACE in the bulk and that all sorts of Tatar-Mongol conquests are stupidities of traditional history, in Russian, this so-called conquest did not appear in any way. And Ukrainians, malorosy, Belarusians, Serbs, are Russians artificially divided by Germans-kings with the main people. Divide and conquer - the main slogan of the WEST in the war with Russia was, is and will be
    1. Horde
      Horde 17 August 2013 13: 15
      0
      Quote: Horde
      in the war with Russia it was, is and will be

      said "... and will be" I hope that it will not
    2. bask
      bask 17 August 2013 14: 44
      +1
      Quote: Horde
      the Russians remained the WHITE RACE in the bulk and that all sorts of Tatar-Mongol

      There is a lot of foggy on this issue. Genetic studies have shown that in the Russians there are no genes of the Mongoloid race. But the blow to the 13th century, from the east, to the principalities of Kievan Rus was. Who inflicted it? Or was it the first civil war in Russia.
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 17 August 2013 18: 31
        +1
        Quote: bask
        But a blow to the 13th century, from the east, to the principalities of Kievan Rus

        Well, who could strike a Catholicized Western Slavs? East Slavs.
      2. poquello
        poquello 18 August 2013 21: 53
        +1
        Quote: bask

        There is a lot of foggy on this issue. Genetic studies have shown that in the Russians there are no genes of the Mongoloid race. But the blow to the 13th century, from the east, to the principalities of Kievan Rus was. Who inflicted it? Or was it the first civil war in Russia.


        It is amusing to read all this, but nevertheless, from childhood there was perplexity why I cannot clearly distinguish between the fighting in the Kulikov’s fresco paintings.
    3. Albert1988
      Albert1988 17 August 2013 19: 29
      +1
      Quote: Horde
      It’s enough for me to see that the Russians remained the WHITE RACE in the bulk and that all sorts of Tatar-Mongol conquests are the stupidities of traditional history, in Russians this so-called conquest did not appear

      Hmm, I studied at school and then in my first year at Moscow State University that the Mongol conquest of Russia could be called conditionally a conquest - the Mongols (or Tatars) in general, the Horde did not settle in Russian territories en masse - they continued to roam the steppes, and in Russian cities only the governors lived - "Murza-Turzy" with the Basurmans and their guards, who mainly monitored the collection of tribute and the observance of the orders of the khans, if any. At certain intervals, they sent a messenger to the horde, if there was no messenger - that is, they threw off the governor - the horde went to burn the city. This is short and exaggerated. What evidence is there? The simplest thing is that with this type of "occupation" just a little admixture of those haplogroups that are common in the horde will remain, but! At the same time, there are many Russian nobles, leading their families from the Horde aristocracy - our historian Karamzin (the surname comes from the Horde title of Karamurz), General Karnilov also has Mongolian origin, the list goes on.
      Quote: Horde
      And Ukrainians-malorosy, Belarusians, Serbs are Russian artificially divided by the Germans, the kings with the main people. Divide and conquer - the main slogan of the WEST in the war with Russia was, is and will be

      It is also a little strange for me - the "German tsars", just like the Russian tsars, were engaged in gathering Russian lands, it was not very profitable for them to divide the nation - on the contrary, the problems were created precisely by differences, mainly in faith. And the tsars, even though they were already Germans, opposed this West very actively, remember how Russia was called the "Gendarme of Europe".
      1. Horde
        Horde 17 August 2013 20: 02
        +2
        Quote: Albert1988
        This is short and exaggerated. What evidence is there? the simplest thing is that with this type of "occupation" just a little admixture of those haplogroups that are common in the horde will remain


        and nothing was left of the Tatar-Mongol yoke, only the stupid, senseless faith of fans of traditional history.

        At the same time, there are many Russian nobles leading their families from the Horde aristocracy - our historian Karamzin (the name comes from the Horde rank karamurza), General Karnilov also has a Mongolian origin,


        no one argues with this, but this fact is explained only by the fact that the Russians were a BILINGUAL people.

        It's also a little strange for me - the "German tsars", just like the Russian tsars, were engaged in collecting Russian lands, it was just very unprofitable for them to divide the nation -


        they were not engaged in gathering, but in TAKING and SEPARATION at TARTARIA together with the USA. Fomenko and Nosovsky found out that Alexander 2 gave not only Alaska, but also Russian America, the future state of Oregon. Not at all, just like that. And Nikolashka 2 personally ordered to lay down arms in the Russo-Japanese War, when it was possible to defeat Japan on land. Tsaris Germans are enemies of the Russian people.

        Hmm, I studied at school and then in my first year at Moscow State University


        you were taught, like the rest, within the framework of the accepted concept
        1. Albert1988
          Albert1988 17 August 2013 20: 34
          +2
          Oh, sorry my friend Seryoga until the end of September in the Urals at his mother, otherwise he ate a dog at the exposure of Fomenko ...
  • Bezarius
    Bezarius 17 August 2013 12: 53
    +3
    I hope we can restore our story.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Slavs69
    Slavs69 17 August 2013 14: 34
    +1
    Hello everyone! Interesting article. The main thing that makes us think, look for other sources according to our heritage, and not stupidly rest against canonical history.
  • washi
    washi 17 August 2013 15: 18
    +3
    Well there was one one big country. With uniform laws, but tolerance of religions.
    Now ALL of this is hard to prove.
    Under the Koshkin-Romanov-Holstein-Gottorp and during the destruction of the true Russian Orthodox Church by Nikon, almost all documentary evidence was destroyed.
    You can of course find evidence in the analysis of the tales of the peoples of Siberia, Far East, and Central Asia. But who will believe fairy tales? If excavations in our territory are considered a hoax.
    Yes, we do not have Egypt. Try to cover the whole territory of archaeologists. It was during the Soviet era, when the remains were found, construction stopped and paid a premium, and now they are digging up cemeteries. Time is money.
  • LLIpaM
    LLIpaM 17 August 2013 16: 06
    +3
    Damn, as already tired of this sucking from the finger. Of course, in the History written in the books there are a lot of lies and inventions, but damn it is enough to make Russians (Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians one people) a super race and write stories about us ala "The Tale of the Great Ukrov", "Great" Germanic "Aryan race "and similar nonsense. Our people, and so, without any pseudo-stories, is a great people - we have always stood guard for good, justice, order; we have always fought with destructive conquerors and with the evil they carried; our inner spirit and our morality have always coincided with the divine commandments and natural laws, which carry the development of the soul and life, first of all, and not the body and base desires, like among Western peoples, finally we have the Greatest History of our state, which not one nation has Earth, it is enough to read even these our "edited" history textbooks.
    And in the text in this article, you can isolate such nonsense:
    1. The word Tartaria and Tataria are very similar, don’t you? And on the territory of Tartaria, it very much coincides with the Tatar-Mongol empire.
    2. "Even Peter I recognized the existence of Tartary," but he does not say that it existed in his time, it was before him, for example, during the Tatar-Mongol period, that is, again, Tartary is "Tartary", i.e. e. the union of states of the former empire of Genghis Khan - the Golden Horde, Blue Horde, White Horde, etc.
    3. Could it really be that if the Russian Empire, in alliance with the British, defeated Tartaria in the 19th century, it would not have slipped into historical chronicles, because at that time it would have been difficult to erase History as in the Middle and Ancient Ages, I’m not talking about that this event would have been inscribed in our chronicles, because it would have been a great victory over a powerful rival, and such victories always fit into the history of the victorious people, even if they were dishonestly won.
    1. Setrac
      Setrac 17 August 2013 18: 35
      +2
      Quote: LLIpaM
      those. Union of States of the former empire of Genghis Khan - Golden Horde, Blue Horde, White Horde, etc.

      You see, the Horde is a Russian word, the Mongols do not have this word, but the Germans, English, Swedes, etc. have this word and means:
      Horde - Army
      ordnung - order
      order - order.
      1. Albert1988
        Albert1988 17 August 2013 19: 34
        0
        I beg your pardon - did you ask the Mongols whether they have this word or not? we now have words for example "shed" - a purely Mongolian word, and a large number of our Russian mat comes from Mongolian words, which, by the way, proves that at one time we did not really like these Mongols ...
        1. Horde
          Horde 17 August 2013 20: 35
          0
          Quote: Albert1988
          I apologize - did you ask the Mongols if they have this word or not?


          asked if they had such a word. The self-name of the "Mongols" is OIRATY.
          1. Albert1988
            Albert1988 17 August 2013 21: 01
            -1
            Okay, but why couldn't we, the Russians, call them a "horde"? By the way, the word "oirats" is quite consonant with the word. And than:
            Quote: Setrac
            Horde - Army
            ordnung - order
            order - order.

            a person who knows the etymology of English well will tell you that "horde" and "order" are still not related words, although they are similar
            1. Horde
              Horde 17 August 2013 21: 19
              +1
              Quote: Albert1988
              a person who knows the etymology of English well will tell you that "horde" and "order" are still not related words, although they are similar


              that is, you do not believe your eyes, you prefer the opinion of "professional linguists", and these guys are close relatives of "traditional historians" and in general linguistics was created to hide the facts that European languages ​​came from Russian, for example
              LORD-L-Horde
              MILORD- MY-Horde
              PORTUGAL- P-ORDA-GALIA?
              PORTA - P-ORDA from here and the port
              1. Albert1988
                Albert1988 17 August 2013 21: 35
                0
                And whose linguistics can I ask? And what if an English linguist studying the etymology of English words tells me this? And how is it that the words consonant with Russian are a rather rare occurrence in the languages ​​of Western Europe, but very many Latin words are found even without spelling? And then - the English language is too primitive to come from Russian, the second most powerful and complex language in the world, the French have a completely unrealistic pronunciation, only the German language in phonetics is similar to Russian, but here everything is clear - the eastern regions of Germany were populated by Slavs, whom the Germans shamelessly assimilated, so this theory does not stick together
                1. Horde
                  Horde 17 August 2013 21: 44
                  +1
                  Quote: Albert1988
                  And whose linguistics can I ask? And what if an English linguist studying the etymology of English words tells me this? And how is it that the words in tune with the Russians are a rather rare occurrence in the languages ​​of Western Europe, but some Latin words are found even without spelling?


                  And what can English say about etymology? will refer either to Latin or to French almost nothing more ...
                  As for the words consonant with English and Latin, the sea is simply spilled

                  Fin book here about 2000 words of Latin and other European similar to Russian
                  http://chronologia.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=list&forum=DCForumID18&con

                  f = DCConfID1

                  link from the site New Chronology; there are about a thousand words similar to etymology.
                  so that Etruscan is RUSSIAN laughing
                  I like
                  evening-vesper (ang) they can’t even think of anything
                  1. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 17 August 2013 21: 58
                    +3
                    I agree with Latin, and I have French, but most of them are borrowed quite late and mostly specific terms, but they are, however, fully borrowed, but as for the consonant words, European languages ​​certainly have one root, there are 4 thousand, 5 years ago, proto-language apparently existed.

                    And here's a little more about the maps - I reached out to my friend the historian - he, unfortunately, cannot write long sms, from the Urals after all, but he wrote that the map where a certain Tartaria or Tataria is drawn is the result of the author’s ignorance, which is certainly from Western Europe, the situation in modern Siberia to him - he painted there actually a Mongol horde, within the borders assumed by him.
                    The truth is why modern Russia is actually a horde, but in no case whatsoever Tartaria, he promised to tell me in detail how he would return and give literature on this subject, if he did not forget of course, and therefore I suggest postponing the discussion for now)))
                    1. Setrac
                      Setrac 17 August 2013 22: 32
                      0
                      Quote: Albert1988
                      And here's a little more about the cards - I reached out to my friend historian

                      Don't have a buddy on Fomalhaut? Let's wait for his arrival! Turn on the time machine and find out everything.
                      1. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 17 August 2013 22: 48
                        0
                        Quote: Setrac
                        Don't have a buddy on Fomalhaut?

                        No, only in Pskov. in general, I'm sorry, but I did not show disrespect towards you, only disagreement with your point of view, it's a shame, you know.
                        But if you don’t believe me, I’ll ask the "friend from Fomalhaut" to register on the site as he will return from vacation, he will be interested.
                      2. Setrac
                        Setrac 17 August 2013 23: 00
                        +1
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        But if you don’t believe me, I’ll ask the "friend from Fomalhaut" to register on the site as he will return from vacation, he will be interested.

                        It's not about "believe or not", but the fact that when your friend can unsubscribe here, this topic will be in the "past" and no one will go to it. No discussion will work out. You here teased the people with some knowledge and into the bushes, like everything later.
                      3. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 18 August 2013 13: 36
                        0
                        Well, how it happened, and then this is not the last article on a similar topic on this site)
                2. Horde
                  Horde 18 August 2013 08: 06
                  0
                  Quote: Albert1988
                  The truth about why modern Russia is actually a horde, but in no case whatsoever is Tartaria


                  TARTARIA- T-ARTA / T-Horde
              2. Albert1988
                Albert1988 17 August 2013 22: 28
                0
                I have a question - if the "canonical" history were not true, why only Fomenko and Nosovsky paid attention to this? Why is there not a whole trend that would thoroughly prove the fallacy of modern historical science? Forgive me, but in principle I do not believe in world conspiracies ...
                And one more thing: if some mathematician mathematically analyzes the skeletons of a modern dolphin and an ichthyosaur and declares that it is one and the same creature, and that we must throw out 100-65 million years of evolution that separate these creatures, then evolutionary biologists they’ll just look at such a person as an idiot - everywhere there are subtleties, small details that are visible only to a specialist who is competent in each specific field, and there will be only one amateur and person from the outside, here you are, dear Horde, who is by profession?
                1. Setrac
                  Setrac 17 August 2013 22: 46
                  +2
                  Quote: Albert1988
                  I have a question - if the "canonical" history were not true, why only Fomenko and Nosovsky paid attention to this?

                  Not only Fomenko and Nosovsky paid attention, the list is long from memory: Kolyuzhny, Morozov, there are more famous people, for example - Lomonosov.
                  Quote: Albert1988
                  Why is there no whole current that would thoroughly prove the fallacy of modern historical science?

                  There is movement, but! Traditional history writes history for the authorities, what they are told is what they write and the evidence is driven. Who really needs it? Not to those in power - that's for sure. The more "ancient" the history of this or that state - the later it was written, but the most "ancient" - the Ukrainians, with their own history. The same applies to religion, Catholics are the youngest, a few centuries ago they were just sectarians, then there was an "Ecumenical Council" and oops, the most ancient religion.
                  P.S. I wrote ykry, but the system was redirected to Ukrainians, but this is not correct, these concepts are not equal.
                  1. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 17 August 2013 23: 01
                    0
                    Quote: Setrac
                    Not only Fomenko and Nosovsky paid attention, the list is long from memory: Kolyuzhny, Morozov, there are more famous people, for example - Lomonosov.

                    OK, what about my skeleton analogy? This, by the way, is an important question - a question of methods! The wrong method can give the wrong result, it recently became clear in my native field that some methods that were considered accurate only yesterday actually produce very big errors - and as a result we see that there is some kind of phenomenon, but it really isn’t when looked at by a wider and more precise method. Now a bunch of articles flew into tartarara)))
                  2. Setrac
                    Setrac 17 August 2013 23: 10
                    +2
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    OK, what about my skeleton analogy? This, by the way, is an important question - a question of methods!

                    Exactly the methods are the Achilles heel of traditional history!
                    What - such "scientific" methods were used in the 17-18 centuries when writing the general chronology? My answer is - none - they wrote what the Pope ordered without any scientific component, "from a lantern." Scaliger mastered such sciences as Kabbalah, numerology, astrology (not to be confused with astronomy). However, the modern "scientific" methods on closer examination are not so scientific.
                  3. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 17 August 2013 23: 26
                    +1
                    Quote: Setrac
                    Scaliger owned such sciences as Kabbalah, numerology, astrology

                    Well, this is understandable - then science was exclusively descriptive in the absence of an analytical approach
                    Quote: Setrac
                    However, the modern "scientific" methods on closer examination are not so scientific.

                    But I do not agree with this - modern methods of studying history - have already taken a significant step forward, especially since, as I wrote here, modern historical analysis is based on a compilation of the results of many studies - the age of documents can be set very accurately, even the composition of the ink with which they are written and the technology of making paper or parchment, and all this can say a lot to those who understand this, but Fomenko, with all due respect to him, in history, an amateur, an amateur can also be lucky, just like Schliemann, only about Schliemann unearthed the jewelry and at the same time destroyed the real Troy, and what he took for it was an older settlement, and serious historians immediately saw that the jewelry in Schliemann’s find belong to different eras, so any science can play a trick on amateurs. I mean that Fomenko could find real inconsistencies, but at the same time it is absolutely wrong to interpret them.
                  4. Setrac
                    Setrac 17 August 2013 23: 44
                    +1
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    the age of the documents can be set very accurately, even the composition of the ink with which they are written and the technology for making paper or parchment, and all this can tell a lot to those who understand this

                    And again, I do not agree with you. The age of the document can be set exactly ONLY if the date and time stamp are indicated on it. Unfortunately, historians - the humanities - do not understand the sciences in technology, either. For example, we all know from history about the Bronze Age, but bronze is an alloy of copper with some metals, in our case it is tin. But tin is a fairly technologically advanced product in the ancient world, it wasn’t produced because they didn’t know how, but historians don’t know that!
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    Fomenko, with all due respect to him, in history is an amateur

                    Fomenko is a mathematician and applied mathematical methods to the information available, and mathematics is the basis of all sciences.
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    an amateur may also be lucky, as to Schliemann

                    Luck has nothing to do with it, it was necessary to "find" Troy, she was "found". It doesn't seem strange to you that the locals do not find anything, but "interested" people come and oops, a discovery! It's a lie.
                  5. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 18 August 2013 00: 26
                    0
                    Quote: Setrac
                    Unfortunately, historians - the humanities - do not understand the sciences in technology, either.

                    Maybe they don’t understand, but only who prevents them from consulting with specialists? By the way, if they need to determine by which technology some subject was completed, then they do so, if they are good historians, of course. Mathematics is the basis of all NATURAL sciences, in the humanities it is applicable to a limited extent, and as I said - getting a result is not enough - you need to correctly interpret it, and the method must be applied skillfully, especially not in your own field.
                    Quote: Setrac
                    Luck has nothing to do with it, it was necessary to "find" Troy, she was "found". It doesn't seem strange to you that the locals do not find anything, but "interested" people come and oops, a discovery! It's a lie

                    "local" could simply not show interest in the ancient ruins, unless of course they found gold there, and Schliemann, indeed the locals could tell where there are some large ruins, so he compared with what he knew about the position of Troy and found what he found.
                    Quote: Setrac
                    But tin is a fairly technologically advanced product in the ancient world, it wasn’t produced, because it didn’t

                    Do you think you didn’t? Apparently, the ancient world was not developed at all, so take Rome, for example, the engineers there could build magnificent structures that are even now considered architectural masterpieces, and then the Middle Ages - a sharp drop in the technological level for obvious reasons. but Roman civilization is well preserved, but more ancient? so that we can reliably say that the ancients were able, but we cannot say that they were not able, since we do not have complete information)
                  6. Setrac
                    Setrac 18 August 2013 08: 08
                    +1
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    Do you think you didn’t? Apparently, the ancient world wasn’t developed, so take Rome, for example, the engineers there could build magnificent buildings, which even now are considered masterpieces of architecture

                    Back to mathematics, the Romans had Roman "numbers", which are not numbers, but are hieroglyphic designations of numbers, they had no such thing as zero, Roman numbers can only be counted up to a hundred. Roman numbers can only be added and subtracted, it is impossible to count in a column in Roman numerals. At the same time, monumental construction requires high knowledge of mathematics.
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    "locals" could simply not show interest in the ancient ruins, unless of course they found gold there

                    It is you who adjust the data to the existing theory, if you couldn’t read this fortune-telling on coffee grounds.
                  7. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 18 August 2013 11: 22
                    +1
                    Quote: Setrac
                    Back to mathematics, the Romans had Roman "numbers", which are not numbers, but are the hieroglyphic designation of numbers,

                    I don’t agree - Roman numbers are not hieroglyphic but alphabetic numbers, and take off you can even perform operations, and you can count them, already much more than up to 100, up to 1000, AND UP to 100000, although the numbers are long in my opinion them, and mathematics was at their highest level. What about the Egyptians? here they have exactly hieroglyphic images of digital figures, but nevertheless - what knowledge in geometry and astronomy! Yes, and Indian numbers arose in India not yesterday. Therefore, do not underestimate the ancient world - ancient civilization and the Ancient East were much more developed scientifically than it might seem to us.
                    Quote: Setrac
                    It is you who adjust the data to the existing theory, if you couldn’t read this fortune-telling on coffee grounds.

                    I’m not guessing - I’m just reasoning: civilization died a long time ago, a couple of ruins remained from it, bothering then these lands were inhabited by other peoples who did not show interest in the cultural values ​​of their predecessors, and sometimes even destroyed them - there’s a modern example of the Taliban in southern Afghanistan as then in the early 2000s seem to have blown up unique Buddha statues.
                  8. Setrac
                    Setrac 18 August 2013 11: 30
                    0
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    I do not agree - Roman numerals are not hieroglyphic but alphabetic numbers, and take off you can even perform operations, and you can count them, already much more than up to 100, up to 1000, AND UP to 100000

                    This in modern times, based on the decimal system of calculus, Roman numbers brought to higher values.
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    What about the Egyptians? here they have exactly hieroglyphic images of digital figures, but nevertheless - what knowledge in geometry and astronomy! Yes, and Indian numbers arose in India not yesterday. Therefore, do not underestimate the ancient world - ancient civilization and the Ancient East were much more developed scientifically than it might seem to us.

                    Let me draw your attention to the fact that no one in the world has "their" numbers, everyone uses the so-called "Arab" (although Western propaganda made them Arab, these figures have nothing to do with the Arabs). They write in different ways, in letters, ligature, hieroglyphs, but the numbers are the same, and no one has their own version of the numbers, even if they are not used anymore. Therefore, the reference to the mathematicians of antiquity is inappropriate.
                  9. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 18 August 2013 11: 56
                    0
                    Comrade, in Rome there was a unique incomplete non-positional number system with a restriction on the numbers in descending order, the letters were used: IVLCDM Each letter had a different meaning, each digit corresponded to the position number of the letter. For example, the number 400 is CD, the number 900 is CM, the number 449 is CDXLIX. And - the data on these figures are taken, among other things, from ancient Roman documents, in modern times no one expanded the Roman numeral based on the decimal model - because Cho is simply not possible - these are different systems, and why should this be done if there were already full numbers Arab - and you're right - they are not Arab but Indian! If it turns out I can find their original images - there the value of the figure was determined by the number of angles - 0 - round, no corners, 1 - as you see 1 corner, 2 - in the original it was written almost like the letter Z - 2 angles, etc.
                    And it is not surprising that there are no numbers - the numbers of Greece and Rome were inferior to the more convenient Indian ones who came to Europe through the Arabs, but the Europeans did not have their own numbers as such - they were barbarians no matter how, civilized ours)))
                  10. Setrac
                    Setrac 18 August 2013 12: 08
                    +1
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    the data on these figures are taken, among other things, from ancient Roman documents

                    And again we return to the "ancient" documents, the antiquity of which is impossible to verify. You believe it, but it is not true.
                  11. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 18 August 2013 12: 27
                    +2
                    Forgive me, but rather you believe in the impotence of modern scientific methods - it seems strange to me - how did people learn to manipulate genes, but they cannot determine the age of the ancient parchment? Archaeologists are also not fools, they have modern chemistry and physics on their side, so by questioning these methods, by the way, they are accurate, and not "empty humanitarian fabrications" (I myself hate them) - you automatically question our natural science knowledge, which is 50% based on modern mathematics ...
                    Which incidentally is addressed by Fomenko quoted by you ...
                  12. Setrac
                    Setrac 18 August 2013 12: 33
                    0
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    Archaeologists are also not fools, they have modern chemistry and physics on their side, so by questioning these methods, by the way, they are accurate, and not "empty humanitarian fabrications" (I myself hate them) - you automatically question our natural science knowledge, which is 50% based on modern mathematics ...

                    It is difficult to discuss abstract "scientific" methods, there are many of them, which ones do you think are accurate?
                  13. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 18 August 2013 12: 41
                    0
                    The most common and polished method used to establish
                    the age of the most ancient objects - carbon analysis, used to give a huge error, but now after numerous "upgrades" it allows you to set the age almost up to + -50 years, up to hundreds of years for sure, this is the simplest example, and I will paraphrase you - google)
                  14. Setrac
                    Setrac 18 August 2013 12: 51
                    +1
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    carbon analysis

                    Undoubtedly, at the moment this is the most accurate method, but it contains a system error. The carbon isotope content in the atmosphere is set as a constant, but this is not correct, it is a variable. Moreover, the difference may not even be many times, but by orders of magnitude.
                    Take, for example, the era of dinosaurs (here they giggled about it). A piece of amber was found frozen in the time of dinosaurs, an air bubble was found in it, and so, the air density in the bubble was eight times higher than in the modern atmosphere. But if the atmosphere density is eight times higher, then at the same level of cosmic radiation, the percentage of the carbon isotope will be correspondingly eight times lower, which will give a corresponding error when conducting radiocarbon analysis.
                  15. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 18 August 2013 13: 14
                    +1
                    Modern science has been able to deal with such mistakes for a very long time,
                    The corresponding amendments are simply introduced into the calculation, this is what I meant by the word "upgrades"
                    and here it’s a little wrong - the atmosphere was not 8 times denser than now, during the Mesozoic, there was 35% oxygen, instead of 21% now, this explains the presence of such a large terrestrial fauna then))
                  16. Setrac
                    Setrac 18 August 2013 13: 32
                    +2
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    and here it’s a little wrong - the atmosphere was not 8 times denser than now, during the Mesozoic, there was 35% oxygen, instead of 21% now, this explains the presence of such a large terrestrial fauna then))

                    It was said specifically about the density of the atmosphere, regardless of its chemical composition, but this is not important, this is not the only factor affecting the content of the carbon isotope in the atmosphere.
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    Modern science has been able to deal with such mistakes for a very long time,
                    The corresponding amendments are simply introduced into the calculation, this is what I meant by the word "upgrades"

                    During this "upgrade", historians adjust the result to the specified parameters, that is, they cheat, at least they admitted to cheating.
                  17. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 18 August 2013 13: 43
                    0
                    Nobody, believe me, cheated - just nobody wants to, naturally admit that a mistake crept into his work, but those who found it openly changed the dating of many historical artifacts - and on the basis of this, many concepts were changed.
                    And I wanted to say that the statement about the density of the atmosphere is nonsense, it could be 1,5 times higher or less, if the atmosphere is 8 times denser, then these are completely different conditions, the usual land life cannot exist in them
                  18. Setrac
                    Setrac 18 August 2013 13: 49
                    0
                    Quote: Albert1988
                    in them the usual land life cannot exist

                    Well, we don’t know what the dinosaurs became extinct from?
                  19. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 18 August 2013 14: 02
                    +1
                    We don’t know for sure, but we know that they became extinct for at least 8-10 million years, and that at the same time very interesting groups of living organisms appeared - mammals, birds and angiosperms, they coexisted for some time, but then began global climate change - an increase in its zonality, a general decrease in temperature and humidity, small dinosaurs simply did not withstand competition with mice and birds (which came from them), and angiosperms replaced the gymnosperms, which undermined the food base GOVERNMENTAL dinosaurs, and since all the major organisms evolve very slowly because of the long reproductive cycle and small population size, they were unable to adapt to changing environmental conditions.
                    Plus, the cooling of the climate - a decrease in the area of ​​forests, the number of algae in the seas - a drop in the oxygen content in the air - which means that large dinosaurs could not grow to normal sizes, i.e. the beginning of degradation.
                    This, of course, is exaggerated and simplified, but in general these are the most modern ideas

                    And in general, in my opinion, in my opinion, it’s better not to write anymore - otherwise, if our distant descendants see these comments, they will decide what we wrote in the column laughing
  • Albert1988
    Albert1988 18 August 2013 12: 04
    +1
    In Rome there was an incomplete non-positional number system - using letters to display numbers. They used letters in their system: IVLCDM Each letter had a different meaning, each digit corresponded to the position number of the letter. that is, the numbers 400 - CD, 900 - MS, 555 - DLV, etc., there was a rule for large numbers - not to write 100500 letters to denote large numbers - the Romans came up with an original move - the horizontal line above the number increased the value 1000 times for example, VI with a horizontal line on top - there are 6000, etc.)
    Arabic numerals - a long-known fact came to Arabs from India - the meaning of the number corresponded to the number of angles in it 0 - no round corners, 1 - 1 corner, 2 was written almost like the letter Z - 2 corners, naturally these numbers turned out to be more convenient than Roman or Greek , here is Europe, just getting out of the barbarism, and they accepted)
    "They go around in different ways, in letters, in ligature, in hieroglyphs, but the numbers are the same, and no one has their own version of the numbers, even if they are not used anymore."
    And forgive me - what should be "your version" - the fundamental laws of mathematics are the same for everyone, from the moment the ancient man began to count using his fingers. and when they were not enough - to make notches on a tree, knots on a rope, etc., so it is natural that the numbers like one, two are the same for everyone, and the entries will differ, and the number systems too.
  • Setrac
    Setrac 18 August 2013 12: 42
    0
    Quote: Albert1988
    And forgive me - what should be "your version"

    I’ll clarify that no one has their own version of the designation of the numbers of the top ten, ALL took the well-known version and shifted to their writing, but the external similarity was preserved, basically.
  • Albert1988
    Albert1988 18 August 2013 12: 56
    0
    Hmm, have you seen the Egyptian numbers? only the first 3 and then the Roman ones coincide, but the Indian ones? They are not similar to the Roman and Egyptian in general and at the same time are more convenient.
    Then, who canceled the association? A person learned to count on fingers at the beginning, here are the first numbers associated with fingers or sticks.
    And yet - who canceled relations between nations? People have been in contact since ancient times and willingly borrowed from each other what they liked or what they thought was useful, so they could borrow a convenient record of numbers)
    And a little more - a concept such as convergence is familiar to you, this incidentally directly refers to my example about the skeletons above in the comments - when completely different creatures in the same conditions can come to the same appearance, so different cultures can create something the same. given that these cultures have 1 root, albeit very ancient)
  • Setrac
    Setrac 17 August 2013 22: 20
    +3
    Quote: Albert1988
    the eastern regions of Germany were settled by Slavs, whom the Germans shamelessly assimilated

    And before that, the Gauls, Iberians, Etruscans assimilated, the list is long.
    Quote: Albert1988
    only German in phonetics is similar to Russian

    This suggests that the Germans separated later than others.
  • Setrac
    Setrac 17 August 2013 22: 13
    +1
    Quote: Albert1988
    a person who knows the etymology of English well will tell you that "horde" and "order" are still not related words, although they are similar

    A thinking person will immediately understand that the "knowers" are lying to him.
    Horde - order, order, basis.
    Chord - straight line, base, support.
    An order is a system, order of movement of ships.
    This is one and the same word.

  • Setrac
    Setrac 17 August 2013 22: 17
    +1
    Quote: Albert1988
    Okay, but why couldn't we, the Russians, call them a "horde"?

    Because the Slavs living on the Dnieper called the Slavs living in the upper Volga - the Zalesskaya Horde, the so-called Russian - Russian.
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 17 August 2013 22: 19
      0
      Can I link to the source?
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 17 August 2013 22: 35
        0
        The link can be found, read recently, but for the sake of the person who refers to the absent (and maybe nonexistent) friend, I will not do this.
        Google "zalesskaya horde".
        1. Albert1988
          Albert1988 17 August 2013 22: 41
          0
          [
          Quote: Setrac
          but for the sake of a person who refers to an absent (or maybe nonexistent) friend, I will not do this.

          In vain you are so, I can, of course, google, but I try to respect my opponent) and I ask for the link because I myself became interested), and not for any other reasons ...
          1. Setrac
            Setrac 17 August 2013 22: 53
            0
            Quote: Albert1988
            In vain you are so, I can, of course, google, but I try to respect my opponent) and I ask for the link because I myself became interested), and not for any other reasons ...

            I just "otmazatsya" if I find it, but not the fact that this will be the source from where I found out. Moreover, when searching, I will use the same search engines as you.
            http://www.istrodina.com/rodina_articul.php3?id=4933&n=195
            1. Albert1988
              Albert1988 17 August 2013 22: 55
              0
              So they would have said right away, but I’ll look about the Zalessky horde, then we will discuss enough)
  • Cpa
    Cpa 18 August 2013 18: 04
    0
    Quote: Horde
    they asked if they didn’t have such a word

    among the Mongols, the Horde has a tent of a khan (literally, a bet). Words in different languages ​​should not be embarrassing, given the common proto-language. For example, the word mother is common to many different language families: executioner-Alach (Mong-killer, butcher), doctor-avrach (Mong), wooden (ang) -mod (Mong.
    roar), arigato (yap.thank you) -brigat (port.-same), bear (English) -ber (staroslav.-bear) -ber (ancient German), swell (toy, beauty) -
    tsa "tsa (Mong.-beauty), initiative (first, beginning in Russian) -in Irish moonshine-pervach
    1. Horde
      Horde 18 August 2013 18: 23
      0
      Quote: KPA
      the Mongols Horde - the tent of the khan (literally, rate). General in different languages


      not about the Horde, but about TARTARIA, YES MONGOLIA
  • Cynic
    Cynic 17 August 2013 19: 30
    +3
    Quote: LLIpaM
    Damn, as already tired of this exhaustion from the finger.

    So I'm also tired of the appearance of whistleblowers and guardians like devils from a snuffbox!
    As something is laid out not in accordance with the main mood of comments on the forum, it is obligatory that a forum member who does not have a long history of being on the site, but who has many comments at once, many at once!
  • LLIpaM
    LLIpaM 17 August 2013 16: 06
    +2
    Further, it must be said that this is nonsense, when they claim that the "Tartars" are Russians, and that Genghis Khan was not there, and it was the Russian-Tartars who captured China, Central Asia and Kievan Rus, and Genghis Khan was not a Mongol, but our "Ivan", again from the article:
    1. "Marco Polo, traveling across Asia told that he visited the ruler of Tartary Kublai", well, Kublai is a Slavic name :).
    2. We'll see further when Marco Polo lived. His years of life on Wikipedia are 1254-1324, which again coincides with the heyday of the Mongol empire.
    And finally, let's speculate if Russia really originates from Tartaria, if the Russians are Tartars, and we conquered China, Central Asia and Kievan Rus, then it doesn't seem strange to you that the population of Siberia and the Far East is about 40 million people, which is much less than in Central Russia, and if we compare the ratio of the number of people and the area of ​​the territory in which it lives, then a GIANT QUESTION arises: "Where did these Tartars-Russians go?" Was it possible that the ancient Tartars-Russians, who lived in the Ancient and Middle Ages, were destroyed by "point genocide" by China, or maybe the Mongols, or were they simply tied up and peacefully transported up to one person to the territory of the Russian Plain? Or maybe even fantastic things happened - the ancient Russian Tartars were destroyed by a meteorite, or an alien virus, or maybe a mysterious nuclear explosion happened? Well, the second version really seems to be nonsense, after all, other peoples of Siberia survived and from this another circumstance "follows" that the Tartars were not Russian, because if they were Slavic in appearance, would the Yakuts, Chukchi and other Asian peoples of Eastern Russia have would such clear Asian features of appearance, would there really not have been a great mixing of peoples, or the ancient Tartar Russians were nationalists and considered other peoples inferior? And where is the archaeological evidence that the Tartars were Russian? There is none of them! Or do you still think that it is Putin, the agent of the West, who gives the order to destroy this data ?! And our school History gives logical answers to all this - indeed, if Siberia was conquered by Yermak and the Cossacks, Russian people gradually moved to it from the central part, then the current number of Siberia and the Far East will turn out to be quite logical.
    1. Setrac
      Setrac 17 August 2013 18: 46
      +2
      Quote: LLIpaM
      Well, yes Khubilai Slavic name :).

      Well, tell us which Slavic names at least a few pieces?
      Quote: LLIpaM
      Or maybe fantastic things happened - the ancient Tartars-Russians were destroyed by a meteorite

      The "ancient Tartars" are still Russians, and they are Russians still living on their own lands.
      Quote: LLIpaM
      indeed if Siberia was conquered by Ermak

      Ermak may have conquered Siberia, but the question is, for whom? For in the 17th century Peter the Great was fighting for the Volga region (this war was bashfully called the Stepan Razin uprising), and Catherine the Second was fighting for the Urals (the so-called Pugachev uprising).
      Quote: LLIpaM
      indeed, if Siberia was conquered by Ermak with the Cossacks, Russian people from the central part gradually moved to it, then the current number of Siberia and the Far East will turn out to be quite logical.

      The population of a given territory is determined by living conditions, which are more severe in Siberia than in the Volga region or, especially, in the Kuban.
      1. chehywed
        chehywed 18 August 2013 14: 21
        -1
        Quote: Setrac
        For in the 17 century, Peter the Great was fighting for the Volga region (this war was bashfully called the Stepan Razin uprising), and Catherine the Second was fighting for the Urals (the so-called Pugachev uprising).

        Respected Setrac, and is it nothing that Peter the Great was born a year after the death of Stepan Razin? And he became a king (independent) even after 17 years?
        I hope that someday you will understand that a historical remake is more harmful for Russia than a falsified (in your opinion) official History.
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 18 August 2013 14: 37
          +1
          Quote: chehywed
          Dear Setrac, is it nothing that Peter the Great was born a year after the death of Stepan Razin? And he became king (independent) after another 17 years?

          It's okay, Peter the Great found the end of this war, and Peter the Great in general is a muddy and incomprehensible person.
          Quote: chehywed
          I hope that someday you will understand that a historical remake is more harmful for Russia than a falsified (in your opinion) official History.

          This is a controversial issue, there is only one official history, but there are many remakes, it is clear that ALL remakes cannot be true, the question is who and in whose interests is rewriting history. But the fact that the Germans wrote a "bad" history to the Russians is a documentary fact.
          1. chehywed
            chehywed 18 August 2013 14: 52
            0
            Quote: Setrac
            and in general, Peter the Great is a muddy and incomprehensible person.

            Why? Everything is clear with him. Another thing is that the story is good for all kinds of remake, that everything can be called into question, even what happened yesterday and there are thousands of witnesses and documents.
          2. chehywed
            chehywed 18 August 2013 15: 08
            -1
            Quote: Setrac
            But the fact that the Germans wrote a "bad" story to the Russians is documentary fact

            And where did you see this document? For the development of Russia, the Germans made more of other Russians, and even if they had completely written ALL of Russia's history (which is very unlikely), it turns out that they magnify Russia and the Russian people, and do not reduce everything to a thousand-year history of the massacre of Russians and Russians .
            1. Setrac
              Setrac 18 August 2013 15: 46
              0
              Quote: chehywed
              And where did you see this document?

              This document is called "history textbook".
              Quote: chehywed
              For the development of Russia, the Germans made more other Russians

              Let's clarify the deeds of the Germans (it is more correct to say the Germanic peoples).
              A huge contribution to the development of Russia from 1941 to 1945.
              Intervention
              World War I
              The war against Russia as part of Napoleon's army
              Troubles
              Battle of the Ice
              The Battle of Kulikovo
              A lot of fucking has been done, and these are only major acts and that is not all.
              1. The comment was deleted.
              2. chehywed
                chehywed 18 August 2013 16: 19
                +1
                Well, surnames Wittgenstein, Tol, Baggovut, Minih, Richter, Totleben, etc.Are they telling you anything?Sofia Augusta Frederick Anhalt-Zerbstin which Russia has achieved unprecedented authority, and which ONE IN ALL EUROPE was not afraid and bent over England. Do not confuse the Germans, for whom Russia became the second Motherland and many of whom gave their lives for it, with the policies of the states of Prussia, Germany, the Millennium Reich ... of various Orders. By the way, what about the Kulikovskaya Battle?
                1. Setrac
                  Setrac 18 August 2013 16: 25
                  0
                  Quote: chehywed
                  Sofia Augusta Frederick Anhalt-Zerbst

                  The murder of her own husband, the heir to the throne, whom she later slandered, is a dubious achievement. Ta TBAPb
                  1. chehywed
                    chehywed 18 August 2013 16: 31
                    +2
                    But after all, the husband somehow was not Russian and despised all Russian. Do you now defend him ... Or do you think that he would be better on the throne?
                    1. Setrac
                      Setrac 18 August 2013 16: 56
                      -1
                      Quote: chehywed
                      But after all, the husband somehow was not Russian and despised all Russian. Do you now defend him ... Or do you think that he would be better on the throne?

                      And who told you about this? Those who killed him. They lied to him not childishly. What a bastard he wanted to serve as a guard, wherever he could, so that the army would defend his homeland! And what kind of achievements did Catherine the Second herself have?
                      1. chehywed
                        chehywed 18 August 2013 17: 12
                        +1
                        Quote: Setrac
                        And what kind of achievements did Catherine the Second herself have?

                        Well, at least that by the time of accession to the throne, she spoke Russian well, and continued to study the language, unlike her husband, about whom everything was said above.
                      2. Setrac
                        Setrac 18 August 2013 17: 23
                        0
                        Quote: chehywed
                        Well, at least that by the time of accession to the throne, she spoke Russian well, and continued to study the language, unlike her husband, about whom everything was said above.

                        I also speak Russian, no one calls me Great the Great, this is not an achievement.
                      3. chehywed
                        chehywed 18 August 2013 17: 33
                        0
                        Quote: [b
                        Setrac [/ b] I also speak Russian, no one calls me Great

                        But what about the Great Russian People? laughingSetrac, in my opinion you have exhausted the arguments in the dispute. Didn’t it seem strange to you that arguing that the Germans had ruined the history of Russia, do you prove to me that Karl Peter Ulrich Golshtein-Gottorpsky is better than Sofia Augusta Frederick Anhalt-Zerbst?
                      4. Setrac
                        Setrac 18 August 2013 17: 42
                        0
                        Quote: chehywed
                        Do you prove to me that Karl Peter Ulrich Holstein-Gottorp is better than Sofia Augustus Frederick Anhalt-Zerbst?

                        No need to distort, the conversation began with the German woman Catherine II, and Karl Peter Ulrich Golstein-Gottorpsky got into this dialogue as one of the achievements of Catherine the killer, regardless of its merits and demerits. There were many such "guardians" of Russia.
                      5. chehywed
                        chehywed 18 August 2013 18: 03
                        +2
                        Quote: Setrac
                        No need to juggle, the conversation began with German Catherine 2

                        Our conversation began with Peter the Great and S. Razin. And to reproach Catherine, what was commonplace in her time ... And she didn’t kill him.
                      6. Setrac
                        Setrac 18 August 2013 18: 09
                        -1
                        Quote: chehywed
                        And she didn’t kill him.

                        Well, of course not her, others killed, on her orders.
                      7. chehywed
                        chehywed 18 August 2013 19: 49
                        0
                        Quote: Setrac
                        Well, of course not her, others killed, on her orders.

                        Yes, even so. On the orders of the Russified Germans they strangled a German who did not give a damn about Kunersdorf, Zorndorf, Palzig led Russia out of the victorious Seven Years War, gave Frederick East Prussia, who had already sworn allegiance to Russia, and sent a Russian corps to help him. the German population doubled, enormous territories were joined, dozens of cities were laid down. And what would happen with her stupid husband, I think there is no need to explain.
                      8. The comment was deleted.
  • Cpa
    Cpa 18 August 2013 17: 21
    +4
    Quote: Setrac
    Well, tell us which Slavic names at least a few pieces?

    Stavr, Kuksha, Lel, Fun, Rada, Maki, Berendey, Ratibor, Yaroslav, Vladimir, Vsevolod, Ar
    Istarch, Buyan ...
    1. Alex 241
      Alex 241 18 August 2013 17: 30
      +6
      And the most historically famous: Relight and Oslyabya.
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 18 August 2013 17: 48
        -2
        Dear KPA and Alex 241, the question was not for you, but I will answer.
        Now name the heroes of the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945 in Russian names. Let me remind you that before that there was a statement that the name Khubilai is not Russian.
        1. Cpa
          Cpa 18 August 2013 18: 20
          +3
          You are right, the vast majority of modern Russian names are of Greek, Latin and Jewish origin.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 18 August 2013 18: 27
            +4
            Because there are holy calendar.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • LLIpaM
    LLIpaM 17 August 2013 16: 08
    +4
    Honestly, it’s already boiling to read this nonsense about the super-races of peoples, including us Russians, so I wrote so much. If my arguments seemed insufficient to someone, then I’ll advise everyone not to immediately believe in the crazy myths about their state, first always turn on your head logically reflect on it, read the story, compare all the data received and then you can definitely tell yourself where the complete nonsense is, where the truth is , and where there really are doubts.
    For myself, I realized the following - the whole World History really has many blank spots, a lot is twisted and embellished in it, a lot is unsaid, but I still consider it not an "alternative" history, not American comics, but still our General World Chronology , Common Human History. As for the Russians, I wrote about this at the beginning of my commentary. We are a great people, we have a great history and I am glad that I am Russian, that we have a multinational state, thanks to which we have taken a lot of good from other peoples, as well as given them many good features. And as for Tartaria, according to my logic, I believe that it was the empire of Genghis Khan, the empire, and subsequently the totality of the allied states of the Tatar-Mongols. As for the facts why it disappeared so quickly, and how it so "easily" conquered countries, it is quite appropriate to recall the same Roman Empire, to recall that in those days there were many small states, that alliances between neighboring rulers were fragile, including Kievan Rus was a conscientious state, Russian princes more than once fought against each other in alliance with the Mongol-Tatars, and as for the technological devices of the Tatars - catapults and others like them, so no one canceled the mercenaries, in the same Kulikovo battle on the side Mayamaia had foreign troops, take the same Genoese infantry.
    1. Horde
      Horde 17 August 2013 17: 24
      -1
      Quote: LLIpaM
      Honestly, it’s already boiling to read this nonsense about the super-races of peoples, including us Russians, so I wrote so much

      . As for the Russians, I wrote about this at the beginning of my comment. We are a Great People, we have a Great History and I am glad that I am Russian, that we have a multinational state, thanks to which we took a lot of good from other nations, as well as gave them many of our good features.


      that you are RUSSIAN, as you very zealously object to RUSSIAN HISTORY, it looks very strange, how can you explain the large number of old maps with toponyms such as TARTARIA, Scythia in the 17-18th centuries or Gallia, have you seen such maps?
      Generally Russian, which states that Russia could not and can be great, most likely not Russian, but some sort of GUSSKY

      , but still our World Chronology, Human History


      Well, I was right. YOUR story is precisely the PAN-HUMAN COMMON MAN WITHOUT NATIONALITY. Only such a story DOES NOT NEED THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE.
    2. Setrac
      Setrac 17 August 2013 18: 52
      -1
      Quote: LLIpaM
      in the same Kulikovo battle on the side of Mayama there were foreign troops, to take the same Genoese infantry.

      On the side of the Romanovs, all of Europe fought against the old dynasty, which is interesting, during this war the population of Europe decreased by 30%, and no cooling or pestilence was recorded (17th century).
      1. chehywed
        chehywed 18 August 2013 23: 02
        -1
        Quote: Setrac
        during this war, the population of Europe decreased by 30%, and no cooling or pestilence was recorded (17 century).

        Sergey, have you heard about the Thirty Years War in Europe? Wallenstein, Tilly, Prince Conde, Gustav Adolf, leather guns, Lutzen ...
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 18 August 2013 23: 09
          +1
          Quote: chehywed
          Sergey, have you heard about the Thirty Years War in Europe?

          Heard, but I would like to hear your objections.
          1. chehywed
            chehywed 18 August 2013 23: 13
            -1
            Quote: Setrac
            Heard, but I would like to hear your objections.


            Well, it was precisely as a result of the Thirty Years' War that the population of Europe declined by 1 / 3. What about the Romanovs?
    3. Cynic
      Cynic 17 August 2013 20: 01
      +2
      Quote: LLIpaM
      Honestly, it’s already boiling to read this nonsense about the super-races of peoples, including us Russians,

      Yes, it seems like an article that we know that we know nothing!
      So you yourself how can you comment on the availability of these cards?
      1. Albert1988
        Albert1988 17 August 2013 21: 14
        +4
        I can comment on the presence of these maps (and there are not so many of them) - just a demonstration of the author’s ignorance of political geography.
        By the way, another interesting fact - the story of the great Tartaria was actively exaggerated at one time ... by the Americans !!! And why? Yes, the conclusion is obvious - Tartaria (that is, Siberia) was conquered by the Romanovs Russia (that is, the European part of modern Russia) - hence the conclusion: to restore historical justice, separate Siberia into an independent state, that the Siberians (to whom my grandmother belongs) are separate people with its own political and cultural tradition, different from the people of European Russia - the dark slaves of the German tsars.
        So you begin to doubt which version of the story is false and destructive ...
        This opinion, of course, is American, but you yourself can clearly see for yourself
  • Albert1988
    Albert1988 17 August 2013 19: 54
    +2
    I read the article, it’s written well, only there is one big BUT that I learned from a good friend - the historian: One can affirm anything in modern historical science (and just like in any other) only on the basis of the fact, and what is the fact in stories? That's right - a document, written evidence, or an archaeological find. But here, strictly speaking, cultural studies, archeology, art history, etc. are connected. So, based on the presence of necessarily numerous facts, the historian can draw any conclusion. As for the facts of the existence of a powerful state of a vast state on part of the territory of modern Russia - even if it will be called the Great Tartaria, then there are too few of them to reliably, I emphasize - to make a reliable conclusion about its existence.
    As for the "canonical" history, there are also many myths about it, many historical myths are exposed by the same academic historians. So, for example, it has been proven that Rurik was not a Varangian (that is, a Scandinavian), but the most natural Slav, ours in a simple way). Petya the first, too, at one time ordered to eliminate many chronicles. and why? That's right - to turn your ancestor, nicknamed the Mare, into a citizen of Roman descent Kombila, leading his family not to anyone else, but to the first Roman emperor Octavian Augustus! Oh how!
  • Ross
    Ross 17 August 2013 21: 31
    +4
    Quote: Horde
    Well, here again, the symbol of the Crescent is now in France, but about 1151 the traditions certainly got excited. There are a lot of such symbols when Christians used seemingly Muslim symbols around the world


    Dear Pavel!
    Until this time, Islam was considered one of the branches of Christianity. Turks also talk about this. With the advent of the Salafis, the Saudis Islam has changed.
    1. Horde
      Horde 17 August 2013 21: 51
      0
      Quote: Ross
      Dear Pavel!
      Until this time, Islam was considered one of the branches of Christianity. Turks also talk about this. With the advent of the Salafis, the Saudis Islam has changed.


      THIS IS THERE was such a Christian heresy Arianism in Romea, hence Islam went
      1. Yarbay
        Yarbay 18 August 2013 08: 24
        +1
        Quote: Horde
        THIS IS THERE was such a Christian heresy Arianism in Romea, hence Islam went

        Why heresy?)))
        Under King Offe in England, they minted on coins: “Muhammad is the Prophet of the One God!
        And similar coins were minted on the territory of today's Russia!
      2. Yarbay
        Yarbay 18 August 2013 11: 21
        +1
        Quote: Horde
        hence Islam went

        "... Today in many museums you can find Russian medieval weapons and armor with Arabic inscriptions. Let's open the fundamental publication" The State Armory Chamber ", which contains photographs and descriptions of precious items stored in the Armory Chamber of the Moscow Kremlin. Here is the ceremonial damask helmet of the Moscow tsars, the so-called "Erichon cap". ... "The helmet is decorated with precious stones, diamonds, rubies and emeralds" - comments on the exhibit Anatoly Fomenko. It is known that the "Erichon cap" was covered with a gold notch and jewelry in 1621 by RUSSIAN MASTER NIKITA DAVIDOV from the city Murom, the chief master of the Moscow Armory. On the surface of the helmet you can clearly see the image of the royal crown with an eight-pointed Orthodox cross, applied in gold. On the nose arrow of the helmet there is an enamel image of the Archangel Michael. And around the edge of the helmet there is a belt of Arabesque Arab sayings, enclosed in frames. arabesque canonical arabicthe inscription is placed: "Va bashshir almminin" ("And please the believers"). The translation of the inscription was made at our request by a profound connoisseur of the Arabic language and Arabic culture T.G. Chernienko. He noted that this is a frequent EXPRESSION FROM THE QURAN ... "Another exhibit of the State Armory Chamber of the Moscow Kremlin is a knife of Prince Andrei Staritsky, son of Ivan III, made by Russian craftsmen at the beginning of the 7021th century. There is an inscription in Russian on it, certifying owner: "Prince Ondrei Ivanovich, summer 1513" The date here is given according to the church era, from Adam, and means 1670 AD The blade of this knife also has an Arabic inscription. On the helmet of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich made in 2 by the Russian master Gregory Vyatkin applied Arabic inscriptions that are quotes from the Koran and read: “There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” Along the bottom of the helmet there is a whole verse from the Koran, 256 sura, 255 (XNUMX). The saber of F.I. made in the XVI century, about which historians write as follows: ... "F. I. Mstislavsky also owned a large saber, as evidenced by the Russian inscription on the crown of the blade. On a wide damask blade, Arabic inscriptions are engraved in gold. One of them says: "There will be strong protection in battle." A significant part of Russian medieval weapons were literally covered with Arabic inscriptions. This is confirmed by a detailed study by E.A. Eliseev, who made an inventory of edged weapons of the Armory. It turned out that medieval Russian sabers were in most cases supplied with Arabic inscriptions and were indistinguishable from Turkish ones. There are almost no RUSSIAN inscriptions on old Russian sabers, although the saber has always been considered the original Russian weapon and was made in Russia in huge quantities
        Y. Elkhov "Was there a Tatar-Mongol yoke in Russia"
        1. Horde
          Horde 18 August 2013 12: 19
          0
          Quote: Yarbay
          ... Today in many museums you can find Russian medieval weapons and armor with Arabic inscriptions. Let's open the fundamental publication "The State Armory Chamber", which contains photographs and descriptions of precious items stored in the Armory Chamber


          in the Armory, I was twice seen and the Jericho Hat and the Monomakh Hat and I hope I looked good at the weapon.
          for example, a coin by Dmitry Donskoy



          Here is Dmitry Donskoy's coin. On one side there is an inscription in Russian: Grand Duke Dmitry; on the other in Arabic: "Sultan the highest Mohammed Uzbek Khan"
          What kind of Muhammad is this? Over this riddle, historians and new historians of the FiN group fought. But they could not give a clear answer. Well, the official version is the imitation of the Horde’s money and the transfer of their names to coins ... Although it’s not even clear in chronology why Dmitry turned out to be Uzbek Khan Sultan Mohammed ... Khan Uzbek lived even before Dmitry Ivanovich TI-chronology ...
          So in those days, during the time of Dmitry Ivanovich and later before the Petrine reforms, ALL RUSSIANS had Tatar middle names or nicknames. Therefore, Prince Dmitry had the Tatar nickname Muhammat. Therefore, it is very likely that the Russians were BILINGUAL people. Arabic was also used in Russia, possibly , as a sacred language for worship. That is why there are so many Arabic inscriptions on Russian weapons.
          1. Yarbay
            Yarbay 18 August 2013 13: 21
            0
            Quote: Horde
            So in those days, during the time of Dmitry Ivanovich and later before the Petrine reforms, ALL RUSSIANS had Tatar middle names or nicknames. Therefore, Prince Dmitry had the Tatar nickname Muhammat. Therefore, it is very likely that the Russians were BILINGUAL people. Arabic was also used in Russia, possibly , as a sacred language for worship.

            Sorry of course!
            But this is a very funny and completely illogical conclusion!
            If Islam is a heresy, then why write sentences from the Koran everywhere! ???
            Muhammad is not a Tatra name !!
            Now you have already agreed to the point that the Russians spoke Arabic))))
            1. Horde
              Horde 18 August 2013 14: 38
              0
              Quote: Yarbay
              If Islam is a heresy, then why write sentences from the Koran everywhere! ???


              you please don’t juggle I didn’t say that Islam is heresy, I said that there were many sect branches in Christianity and Christian and all sorts of others, which were called heretical. And between Islam and Arianism there are many similarities, let's say religions are both quite ascetic, the Arians from Romea fled 4-6th century to Arabia and the time of the emergence of Islam and the functioning of Arianism coincide, and not only that, but also much more.

              Now you have already agreed to the point that the Russians spoke Arabic))))


              a huge amount of Russian weapons with arabesques allows us to draw just such a conclusion, otherwise why would Russian gunsmiths use the language of the people living thousands of kilometers from Russia. Or do you want to draw your own conclusion about Russian weapons? By the way, you know who VASHKEVICH N.N. is he is a teacher of Arabic at the Institute of Military Translators, and so he just established that between Russian and Arabic there is a STRONG SACRAL COMMUNICATION these languages ​​seem to complement each other.
              http://nnvashkevich.narod.ru/kng/SYSJAZ2007/appli1.htm
    2. Yarbay
      Yarbay 18 August 2013 08: 29
      +3
      Quote: Ross
      Until this time, Islam was considered one of the branches of Christianity. Turks also talk about this. With the advent of the Salafis, the Saudis Islam has changed.

      Such Turks do not say)))
      Quote: Ross
      With the advent of the Salafis, the Saudis Islam has changed.

      Nonsense!
      The Salafis are now blogging thanks to the Anglasaks for something blather)))
      But the fact that the cross was not a purely Christian symbol, but was also a symbol of the Türks and their faith in one God-Tengri is a fact!
  • sigdoc
    sigdoc 17 August 2013 23: 59
    +1
    so you can get to the point that we ourselves don’t like it, like the extermination of the Indians by the Americans, only with us
  • Yarbay
    Yarbay 18 August 2013 08: 12
    0
    *** Oddly enough, the dragon on the imperial flag of Tataria remotely resembles the dragon on the flag of Wales, although the colors are completely different. But this is a topic for heraldry specialists ... *** -on the coat of arms of Iceland, a dragon (Lung), an eagle (Kushan) and a bull (Oguz) are symbols of the royal Turkic dynasty!
    an honorable dish for distinguished guests among the northerners-Icelanders is the head of a ram; they, not afraid of the ban of the Church, drank and drink koumiss and ayran!
  • Iraclius
    Iraclius 18 August 2013 09: 46
    +3
    The author of the article is either kidding or a frank order is fulfilling. It can be seen with the naked eye, then the apologist of Fomenkovism. Among the comments, only a couple of authors found who retain common sense in their reasoning. The rest is horror! Tobolsk is the capital of the empire of Tartaria. wassat
    I'm not going to pickle for too long, just give a few examples. I have a book about "discovering" islands that ... never existed. For example, the land of St. Brendan, which throughout the Middle Ages and until 1755 was stubbornly applied by cartographers to all maps. The funny thing is that some of the "islands" roamed on geographical and pilot maps as much, blzhad, until the end of the enlightened XIX century! laughing To anyone interested, you can yourself find many examples of such confusion - a direct consequence of the limited knowledge of a person about the world around him. And what, supporters of the New Chronology will also argue that the "evil zhydy" islands were also ordered to be hidden? laughing
    In the 21st century, it seemed to many that the general availability of information would make discoveries in science easier and faster. There it was. A host of greedy quacks, amateurs, amateurs, healers, New Chrenologists, Petrikov, sorcerers and other evil spirits and obscurantists instantly drew in, which forced the RAS to create even a special commission to combat pseudoscience - an unprecedented thing in Russia and the USSR! This is a direct consequence of the long-term, chronic fierce pohrenizm of the country's leadership in the organization of education and science. I read the comments of the majority and I understand that Roberto Vacco is damn right and the New Middle Ages is approaching with all its frightening attributes.
    Widespread illiteracy, fascination with horoscopes and astrology, mysticism, running after "sensational theories that tear off the veils ..." and unwillingness to learn oneself, using modern achievements of science and technology.
    The question about the "Tartar Empire" is a classic example of such obscurantism that wanders from century to century. Overgrown with mythical details, details that supposedly give this myth believability. And many fall for it. And for stubborn Natsiks of all stripes this is a huge scope for "activity".
    By the way, yes. The author was mistaken. Tartaria existed until the 1936 year.
    Since here is the expedition report - Fleming P. News from Tartary: a journey from Peking to Kashmir. - New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1936. laughing
    The geographical darkness, medieval obscurantism of the West and their poor knowledge of the realities of continental Asia turned out to be incredibly tenacious. Ironically, it is in Russia.
    Read more about Tartaria ...
    1. Yarbay
      Yarbay 18 August 2013 09: 55
      0
      Quote: Iraclius
      Since here is the expedition report - Fleming P. News from Tartary: a journey from Peking to Kashmir. - New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1936.
      The geographical darkness, medieval obscurantism of the West and their poor knowledge of the realities of continental Asia turned out to be incredibly tenacious. Ironically, it is in Russia.
      It can be seen therefore, and for a long time Russia was called the country of barbarians))))))))))))
      Like there are some tartars)))))))))))
      1. Iraclius
        Iraclius 18 August 2013 10: 09
        +1
        It remains a mystery to me why the author of the article does not appeal to the geographical authority of ancient Greek geographers in the same way. Claudius Ptolemy, for example. There all Eurasia is Scythia. laughing
        Tartaria, Tartaria ...
        And, I forgot, Claudius is not an authority for the new Khrenologists, for "Almagest is lying". laughing
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 18 August 2013 10: 35
          -3
          Quote: Iraclius
          It remains a mystery to me why the author of the article does not appeal to the geographical authority of the ancient Greek geographers in the same way.

          Because the ancient Greek and Roman written sources came to us in the form of copies, the originals are lost, appeal to the copies is a bad manners. laughing
          1. Iraclius
            Iraclius 18 August 2013 18: 47
            +2
            Yes, what are you? laughing And on what basis is the current geometry based? Or math in general? Or did the ancient Egyptian builders kindly roll personally for you, sir, your achievements into the everlasting super concrete? So that the clumsy Cynics-Setraks in the 21st century with their mighty crowbars would smash this carapace and find its original manuscript with true knowledge under its fragments? So yes? Isn’t it funny?
    2. Horde
      Horde 18 August 2013 12: 41
      0
      Quote: Iraclius
      The rest is horror! Tobolsk is the capital of the empire of Tartaria.


      you would dear, than throwing such words would be better to read the BRITISH ENCYCLOPEDIA to the BRITISH 1774G there clearly says that the capital of TARTARIA is TOBOLSK



      [/ Center]
      1. Iraclius
        Iraclius 18 August 2013 19: 04
        +1
        Horde! Let us be adults living in the 21st century! Otherwise, I will begin to seriously prove to you again the Ptolemaic picture of the world. The one whose denial suffered Bruno, Copernicus and Galileo. There, too, everything was quite beautiful and harmonious.
        1. Horde
          Horde 18 August 2013 19: 46
          +1
          Quote: Iraclius
          Horde! Let us be adults living in the 21st century! Otherwise, I will begin to seriously prove to you again the Ptolemaic picture of the world. The one whose denial suffered Bruno, Copernicus and Galileo. There, too, everything was quite beautiful and harmonious.


          do you at least know how tradition is, i.e. traditional historians wrote their history? this is how Scaliger read the "ancient" chronicle of some kind of Thucydides - scary ancient, it is not clear how it survived before him, but not the essence that describes the war of Athens with Sparta, how to calculate the time? well at least the historical marks remained - eclipses. Strained means our home-grown scientist-scholast and calculated that it was hell knows when two thousand years ago with a hook. Since then, it has become the custom to consider these calculations made by an illiterate monk as a starting point for ancient events. And another monk, no less "learned" monk Petavius, made the calculation in the same "astronomical" way of the Nativity of Christ according to which the whole world lives.
          There was only one problem. SMALL-LITERATE MONKS MYSTERED in their calculations and moreover. How could they correctly calculate if in those days to multiply, yes was there a problem to divide?
          Fomenko and Nosovsky, using all the most perfect mathematical apparatus, plus all the wonders of modern computing technology, corrected the monks. Only now the traditions rested on the horn.
          1. Iraclius
            Iraclius 18 August 2013 20: 16
            +3
            Horde! I carefully read your post. Earlier, I carefully studied the works, uh, sorry, opuses, gentlemen Fomenko and Nosovsky.
            And there isn't. No not like this. I very rarely use a capsule, but here it is - THERE IS NO MATHEMATICAL APPARATUS. There's a dumb fit of extremes to sampled facts. This has long been clearly proven by experts in a series of articles "Antifomenko". Read on and enjoy.
            In addition, the official (moreover, one-sided !!!) discussion of academic science with financial science in 2002 was discontinued due to the lack of response from opponents of financial science. What are you talking to me about?
            1. Setrac
              Setrac 18 August 2013 21: 44
              0
              Quote: Iraclius
              rda! I carefully read your post. Earlier, I carefully studied the works, uh, sorry, opuses, gentlemen Fomenko and Nosovsky.

              YOU, traditions, jump down to Fomenko and Nosovsky, but when the traditional history was written, there was no such gentlemen. All traditions bypass the slippery question - on the basis of what and how was the generally accepted chronology written?
              And all the constructions of the traditionalists — the dog of the dog — are without evidence of the correctness of generally accepted chronology.
  • Iraclius
    Iraclius 18 August 2013 09: 59
    +4
    I apologize for the harshness, but this stupidity is already starting to annoy.
    To all supporters of conspiracy theories and "the authorities hide!" I recommend reading the account of the journey of Richard Chancellor in 1553 to Russia. It is desirable in the original, so that all the nonsense from the head off completely. From this year, the actual diplomatic relations between the two countries begin. And then they are rather fragmentary. Chancellor's report is an Englishman! - not a word is said about any Tartary, but it is said about Muscovy. About Ivan Vasilyevich - Tsar of All Russia.
    Blyad, a medieval English traveler, is more competent than most pseudo-explorers of the 21st century. Russian! Shame, pooh ... fool
    1. Setrac
      Setrac 18 August 2013 10: 31
      -3
      Quote: Iraclius
      recommend reading Richard Chancellor's travel report

      It may be enough to study the history of your country from foreign sources, and whose source is English! A lying, hypocritical nation, a nation of murderers, thieves and robbers, and you propose to believe this source?
      Shame, pooh ...! negative
      1. Iraclius
        Iraclius 18 August 2013 11: 11
        +1
        Actually, what was required to be proved. The apologists of New Khrenology are characterized by amazing selectivity in the choice of facts and sources. Dutch cards, therefore, can be trusted, but the official report of an Englishman, who personally visited Russia in 1553, cannot. An Englishwoman and then began to shit? And I thought that it was not profitable for someone, but for an "Englishwoman" to describe in the report a centralized, unified state - Moscow Russia, and Ivan IV - the sovereign of All Russia.
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 18 August 2013 11: 24
          -2
          Quote: Iraclius
          Englishwoman and then start to spoil?

          In the 16th century, an Englishwoman had already spoiled completely, your sarcasm is inappropriate.
          Quote: Iraclius
          And I thought that it was not profitable for someone, but for the "Englishwoman"

          You cannot know what was beneficial to the "Englishwoman".
          Quote: Iraclius
          Apologists for New Chrenology are characterized by stunning selectivity in the selection of facts and sources.

          You make a choice between the new chrenology and the old chrenology, I suggest you stop hrenologii.
          Quote: Iraclius
          Dutch cards, therefore, can be trusted, but the official report of the Englishman, who personally visited Russia in 1553, is impossible.

          As you yourself noticed - "Englishwoman" crap, but there is no expression "Dutchwoman" crap, undoubtedly Dutch sources of trust are more than English, but also not a fountain.
          1. Iraclius
            Iraclius 18 August 2013 11: 35
            +2
            Mr. Setrak - it’s not so open! You do not like the official version of a centuries-old centralized, powerful state with a capital in Moscow and you need some kind of abstract education, populated by unknown tartars? Which in the 17-18 centuries. engaged in internecine strife? Why not Gogami and Magogami? Or maybe the Decembrists are the last tartars and there were those who defended the independence of their homeland? Look how much tip I give you - there is no end to work! lol
            1. Setrac
              Setrac 18 August 2013 11: 49
              -1
              Quote: Iraclius
              You do not like the official version of a centuries-old centralized, powerful state with its capital in Moscow

              Heh, where did you get such a state? According to traditional history, Moscow became the capital of Russia in 1917, under the Romanovs St. Petersburg was the capital for several centuries, under the Rurikovichs the capital also "ran" around the country, Moscow, Kiev, Vladimir ... enough for now, where is the centuries-old state with its capital in Moscow ?
              Quote: Iraclius
              You do not like

              We do not like the story sewn with white thread, the deception that even amateurs see.
              Quote: Iraclius
              Which in the 17-18 centuries. engaged in internecine strife?

              Troubles, the "uprising" of Pugachev, the "uprising" of Razin - this is not internecine strife in your opinion? However, there were also more minor "uprisings". These "internecine strife" ended with the execution of the usurpers in 1917.
              1. Iraclius
                Iraclius 18 August 2013 18: 54
                +1
                And where did you get the idea that the history of my Fatherland is "shit"? Huh? From the works of pseudo-scientists who do not even bother to clearly substantiate how they got this New Chrenology?
                Peasant uprisings are part of the history of Russia, but by no means some kind of pseudo-empire of Tartary. She never was. Where are the coins mentioning such a country? Where are the mentions of the names of the kings / princes / emperors of "all Tartaria"? Where are the names of the country itself on coins and letters? Desirable in both western and eastern sources. Where? This blzhad great "Empire" could not leave a "trace" about itself exclusively in the form of psychedelic and illegible scrawl on western illiterate geographical maps, on the basis of which today's Novokhrenologists often speculate. Or not?
                1. Setrac
                  Setrac 18 August 2013 21: 49
                  +3
                  Quote: Iraclius
                  Of the works of pseudo-scientists who do not even bother to clearly substantiate how they got this New Chrenology?

                  The New Chronology is an invention of private individuals, history books are not written on its basis, traditional chronology is the same invention, unproven, but ALL history is written on the basis of it.
                  That is why I do not believe historians, I do not understand on the basis of what it was written. Justify the accepted chronology.
        2. TuKta
          TuKta 19 August 2013 05: 48
          +2
          they already began to crap in the 13th century if they read the Novgorod chronicles .... they did not benefit from the alliance of the Hansa with the Russians ... there are reports somewhere ... I will not search, you are an excellent historian, as I understand it, you will find
    2. Cynic
      Cynic 18 August 2013 20: 04
      +1
      Quote: Iraclius
      Chancellor's Report - Englishman! - not a word is said about any Tartaria, but it is said about Muscovy.

      Recently, an article was immediately laid out on the topic of such a great, keeper, journey through Russia, so there is not a word about KIEV!
      We conclude that mass falsification of history, or will we try to understand why?
      hi
  • Alexandr0id
    Alexandr0id 18 August 2013 12: 33
    +7
    Novochrenological bacchanalia continues and acquires new followers. cards of tartaria, dog-headed people and other superstitions again crept out of the Middle Ages. it is useless to prove something to supporters of strange theories; this is not cured.
    1. Setrac
      Setrac 18 August 2013 12: 54
      +1
      Quote: Alexandr0id
      , dog-headed people and other superstitions

      Dog-headed people are a historical fact, the guardsmen of Ivan the Terrible wore a dog's head on the saddle and could well be called "dog-headed". The fact that you misunderstand the eyewitness accounts is your problem, not the chronicler.
  • Peaceful military
    Peaceful military 18 August 2013 12: 36
    +2
    In general, no one has ever denied that the Genghisites ruled beyond the Urals either. I don’t see a sensation.
  • Albert1988
    Albert1988 18 August 2013 13: 31
    +1
    Eh, I suggest that all the participants curtail the discussion, since it has already passed from the category of the subject to the category of the world outlook, and they do not argue about the world outlook, as well as about tastes ...
  • Peaceful military
    Peaceful military 18 August 2013 13: 48
    +3
    PS
    For some reason, no one paid attention (well, or I didn’t see those who paid attention, sorry) to the name Tartar, which is fundamentally different from the Tatars.
    Tartar (dr. Greek Τάρταρος) - in ancient Greek mythology - the deepest abyss, as well as its divine personification, located under Hades, in the bowels of the Earth ...
    Hence the Russian, in tartarara ...
    Actually, it’s clear that we Russians were (and are) barbarians for them (Varvaras (Greek: β дрρβαρος, barbaros - “non-Greek, foreign”), then the territory beyond their understanding is Tartaria.
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 18 August 2013 14: 13
      +3
      Here! Here! Great observation, comrade!
      It is quite possible that this space was simply designated as a kind of "land of barbarians" - "Barbarian" ... "Tartaria"
      1. chehywed
        chehywed 18 August 2013 14: 34
        +2
        Quote: Albert1988
        It is quite possible that this space was simply designated as a kind of "land of barbarians" - "Barbarian" ... "Tartaria"

        Or like land, about which there is either little or no reliable information. Given the speed of news distribution at that time, it is more likely.
  • Isk1984
    Isk1984 18 August 2013 19: 46
    +7
    I myself am from Orenburg, and there is reason to speak of at least such a fact as the Pugachev Uprising, so that Dear forum users do not fall into fairy tales, as it were, there were specific stories about those events in my family that someone was a soldier in the Orenburg garrison, and one of the Cossack villages, so the city of Orenburg in the year 1773 was blocked by the rebel army of the Yaitsky Cossacks, peasants, Bashkir detachments, Mordovians .... under the leadership of Emelyan Pugachev, and it seems like no Tartar army was noticed it wasn’t near, so if we are looking for t artaria must be sought at an earlier period, this is not an offense to anyone, but for the sake of seeking the truth ...
  • Letterksi
    Letterksi 18 August 2013 22: 43
    +2
    When an article begins with a crafty phrase "it's no longer a secret to anyone" or "old-timers won't even remember this," then you don't want to read further. But I read it all the same. The usual muddy "order". Minus.
    1. Marek Rozny
      Marek Rozny 20 August 2013 23: 05
      0
      LetterXi, shake my hand;)
  • SlavaP
    SlavaP 18 August 2013 23: 53
    +2
    Relax, comrades ... our whole life is a part of a large computer super-game (see "The Matrix"), so complex that various "bugs" such as boots petrified a million years ago, a skeleton on the moon, etc., often pop up ... with "Tartaria".
    But seriously - until the 18 century, nobody seriously dealt with geography, everything that lay a little further to the East (North, South, West) was indiscriminately called something very obscene: Tartaria, Atlantis, Terra-Incognit, etc.
    1. Horde
      Horde 19 August 2013 00: 22
      0
      Quote: SlavaP
      hello, comrades ... our whole life is part of a large computer super-game (see "The Matrix"


      Wachowski brothers shared a terrible secret with you?
      1. SlavaP
        SlavaP 19 August 2013 22: 33
        0
        Exactly. And it was in a pub called St. George on the outskirts of the capital of Western Tartary, the heroic city of Reading.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Gorinich
    Gorinich 19 August 2013 11: 55
    0
    How many "copies are broken" reminds the argument of the blind about what an elephant looks like. There are only two written sources, but there are a lot of interpretations. The chronology has been sucked out of the finger, and they consider it a dogma ... In my opinion, the past is even more difficult to see than the future ...
  • Gomunkul
    Gomunkul 19 August 2013 12: 53
    +2
    "A nation that does not know its history is doomed to extinction." (if memory serves, the statement belongs to Bismarck). Why, when it comes to the history of Russia, Russia, always give everyone foreign documents confirming this or that event? Maybe someone remembers from the school course that the Trans-Urals (ie Siberia and the Far East) were depopulated due to the massive migration of peoples. But what caused the people to run from there? hi
  • Garyk701
    Garyk701 19 August 2013 13: 36
    +5
    Didn’t I understand for Tartaria in the 18th century ??? Personally, in the collections of the Tobolsk Electronic Archive, I read documents from the Tobolsk Consistory from my ancestors dated 1754, which clearly states that my ancestor swore allegiance to His Imperial Highness and others in 741. To the heir Peter Fedorovich ... Where was the capital of Tartaria then in Tobolsk ???
    1. Cynic
      Cynic 19 August 2013 18: 36
      0
      Quote: Garyk701
      Didn’t I understand for Tartaria in the 18th century?

      located in the northern part of the south of the Tyumen region, at the confluence of the Tobol River in the Irtysh.
      Founded in 1587, the center of Russian colonization of Siberia, the discharge city of Siberia at the end of the 1708th - beginning of the 82th centuries, the seat of the leading Siberian governors throughout the XNUMXth century, in XNUMX-XNUMX. administrative center of the Siberian province.

      And now just information
      The first Omsk fortress was founded in 1716 by a Cossack detachment under the command of I. D. Buchholz, who went to expand and strengthen the borders of the Russian Empire by the personal decree of Peter I. Omsk served as a border fortress to protect against nomadic raids, until 1797 it was a prison.
      In the XIX century, Omsk became the center of the first West Siberian, and then the Steppe Governor General (Steppe Territory), covering a significant part of Western Siberia and the north of modern Kazakhstan.

      hi
      1. Garyk701
        Garyk701 20 August 2013 06: 38
        +3
        Dear Cynic, I know where the Tyumen region is and where Tobolsk for I live in Kurgan, which was directly based on the same Tobol and is still located there.
        I have been studying the names of my ancestors for several years. So, most of my ancestors were the watchmen of these places Tyumen, Ishim, Kurgan districts of the Tobolsk province with the earliest mention of them in the archives from the 1750s. I have never met a document in the Tobolsk archive where the concept of Tartary sounded. Maybe sometime before Yermak ... Again the Tatars still live in our area and 300 years ago were subjects of the Sovereigns of All-Russian Emperors ...
        Mb according to the logic of foreign cartographers, we have a Tatar region and it’s supposed to call us Tatarstan ...
        I have a saved map of Tartaria from 1706, it shows Tartarie Moscovite and below Royaume de Siberie (Siberian Kingdom). Even Ivan the Terrible said that he had many kingdoms of all kinds ... Perhaps the kingdom had some kind of flag, but subjects were the Tsar of Moscow.
        1. Cynic
          Cynic 20 August 2013 18: 49
          0
          Quote: Garyk701
          I know where the Tyumen region is and where Tobolsk for I live in Kurgan, which was founded directly on that Tobol and is still located there.

          Sorry, but blame you for not knowing, especially after your words
          Quote: Garyk701
          my ancestor swore allegiance to His Imperial Highness in 741, etc. Heir Peter Fedorovich ...
          , this is the height of cynicism ( laughing ) which I have not reached and I will hardly reach, unlike some members of the forum who have quite noble nicknames.
          I just wanted to draw your attention to the fact that from Tobolsk (founded in 1587) to Omsk (founded in 1716) our ancestors walked long enough.
          By the way, in the Omsk region there is the city of Tara (1594), somewhere halfway between Tobolsk and Omsk!
          So why ? Could it be worth considering ?!
          By the way, that laid out aerial photography is the territory of the Omsk region, if you remember wink
        2. nik69
          nik69 19 June 2015 16: 44
          0
          Quote: Garyk701
          Again Tatars

          I advise you to familiarize yourself with this document before http://baltavar.narod.ru/Galoba.html
  • Garyk701
    Garyk701 20 August 2013 06: 53
    +1
    By the way, if you look at Wikipedia, it will become clear why a flying kite is depicted on the flag of Tartaria http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartar
    Tartar (dr. Greek Τάρταρος) - in ancient Greek mythology - the deepest abyss, as well as its divine personification, located under Hades, in the bowels of the Earth, where after Titanomachy Zeus overthrew Kronos and the Titans, and where they were guarded by the long-standing giants of Hekatonheheira, (before them the entrance to Tartar was guarded by a bloodthirsty flying snake named Kampa) ...
    1. Marek Rozny
      Marek Rozny 20 August 2013 22: 59
      +2
      maybe everything is much simpler? read Turkic mythology. Serpent (flying serpent, idahar dragon) is a revered mythical creature among the Turks. In some Turkic peoples, the snake was generally a totem animal. You can not even climb into the jungle, but read at least Bashkir myths.
      so you can not even remember the Greeks. For the Türks ("Tatars"), a flying serpent is a creature standing "one step down" after the She-wolf-progenitor. Plus there was also the cult of the Gyrfalcon (Falcon).
      1. Garyk701
        Garyk701 21 August 2013 06: 31
        0
        Ironically, among the Russians, one of the most revered saints is Yegoriy Pobedonosets, depicted on the icons as a rider conquering, again, a flying serpent.
        But not a wolf ...
        By the way, why then on the coat of arms is not a she-wolf, but a snake, since she is the most revered animal among the Turks?
  • warriordima
    warriordima 12 June 2015 05: 46
    0
    Thanks for the article, very interesting))