Military Review

Stolen story. Scythian antiquity of Russia

217
Stolen story. Scythian antiquity of Russia

September 8 Moscow celebrates City Day. And it would be very appropriate to recall that the territory of our capital was the most ancient settlement, which arose two and a half thousand years ago (5-4 centuries. BC. E.). It was located on the site of the current Filevsko-Kuntsevsky Park. Archaeological excavations have shown that it was a very powerful settlement, protected by arcuate shafts and ditches. During the excavation of the settlement, remains of pottery, bronze women's jewelery, sickles, grain graters, cereals, and pink-spit were found. The 3 wide road led neatly paved with smoothly rolled stones led to the top of the ancient city fortress. She spiraled around the slopes of the hill, and along it stretched a groove for drains.


“Of particular interest is the system of fortifications of the settlement,” we read on the local history site “Park Fili”. - Terraces on the slopes were aligned in the mainland in the early period stories fortifications, their edges were reinforced with stonework and powerful weaving from stakes with a diameter of 7 - 11 cm, protecting the terrace from erosion and creep. Such a system of anti-landslide weavers of a similar design has been used in the Moscow region up to the present. ” (“The Ancient Settlement -“ Cursed Place ”)

Note - "to the present"! It turns out that the Moscow region was settled in the deepest antiquity, and not some wild tribes there, but highly cultured builders of powerful and beautiful fortresses. This fortress is still lucky, but how many such sites remains buried and unknown? But, worst of all, there are almost no written sources about this antiquity. Although they should be in huge quantities. It seems that we were robbed, leaving some - yes, relatives, and loved ones - but only possessions.


Let's take at least our Russian chronicle "The Tale of Bygone Years", which is considered the basis for all historical studies on the history of Ancient Russia. On the rule of the "first" Russian princes, it speaks terribly. Even about Vladimir the Holy, who baptized Russia, and then - it was written somehow really quite obscenely small. And about what happened in the second half of his reign, in the period from 998 to 1015, nothing is written at all. And is this an accident? No, obviously, someone's skillful “scissors” worked here. It is known that in Russia, quite often, various foreign adventurers of all stripes felt very at ease. That there is only one company of German “enlighteners” (A. Schlozer, G. Bayer and others) who concocted a false “Norman theory” through the 18 century and made it the official historiosophical doctrine of the Russian state! And even if only the Germans are Normanists. (There is a lot to be remembered here. For example, the adventurer Paisius Ligarida, who was an agent of the Latin West and most actively aggravated the tragic religious schism in Russia.)

According to the Norman theory, the Russians borrowed their statehood from the Scandinavians, or rather, the latter implanted it here with their iron hand. In the future, this theory was rewritten in every way, offering a variety of versions - hard and soft. Well, where one thing is, there is another thing - serious, academic researchers began to study the influence of various peoples on the Slavs and came to the conclusion that our ancestors borrowed a huge number of the most important words. Are you good enough to see, from the Iranians we took the following words: “God”, “paradise”, “lord”, “hut”, “ax”, “lizard”, “chalice”, “grave”, “wine”. From the Germans - "prince", "knight", "regiment", "armor", "helmet", "shaft", "voivode". From the Celts - "servant", "pit", "cage", "cow". From Latin - "bath", "cat", "mill", "chamber", "ax". And this is only a small fraction, and so some transfers would be enough for a voluminous journal article. It seems that the pro-Slavs were completely without any idea, and they learned all the words from their neighbors. At the same time, it rests on the verbal similarity, but somehow forgotten is the fact that the linguistic community of Indo-European peoples takes place. Formerly, we all made up a single law, from where the striking resemblance actually came.

Yes, very often our historical science has followed and is following the idol of many “sovereigns of the minds” - the West. The West itself had its origins in antiquity and its barbarous Celto-German periphery, and could not tolerate the fact that the "backward" Russia-Russia has no less, or even deeper roots. They leave in Scythian and praskifsky antiquity, because the Scythians were our ancestors. And among them we can single out the pre-Slavic element, which, at a certain point in time, dominated all of Scythia. It is about chisels, Scythians-farmers, who differed from Iranian nomadic nomads.

By the way, the history of Europe itself is in many ways Scythian. For example, how many people know about the archaeological culture of the fields of burial urns, which belongs to Eastern, Scythian cultures? It originated in 13 c. BC er and for several centuries spread over the vast expanse from the Danube to the Pyrenees and the North Sea. Its carriers reached the British Isles, where they left their mark on the local culture. It is significant that the Irish (Celtic) saga of Goidel Glas (Goidel Green) tells about the long-standing migration of ancestors from “Scythia”. Or take, for example, the famous megalithic monument Stonehenge - according to established legends, it was built by Scythians. Moreover, experts believe that this structure has a “pre-Celtic” origin.

And what about the Celts? They began their grand expansion later, faced with the Scythians. Especially this confrontation escalated in 6. BC e., covering Central Europe. And already in 3 c. BC er the Gauls broke through the Carpathians, seizing the land, which is now called Galicia (this is very symbolic, given the local anti-Russian sentiment). They were not allowed to go further, but they still weakened Scythia, which, in many respects, led to its fall under the blows of the recently allied Sarmatians. It turns out that once the whole of Europe was inhabited by our ancestors - the Scythians. And only then we were ousted from there by the then Europeans, among whom are the Celts. About the confrontation of the latter with Rome, anyone knows, at least some diligent schoolboy. (At least, he knew - until the collapse of the education system.) But the centuries of the Scythian-Celtic wars remained a grand “white spot” of ancient history.

However, as much more. And this, in many respects, is the result of a long cultural-historical war of Western civilizers that has been going on for thousands of years, and they have imposed their own view of ancient history on the whole world and on our people. Moreover, much is not just distorted, but also destroyed. Here you are, such a question - ancient authors say that the Scythians had excellent laws written on copper tables, but where are these tables? And where, in general, their written records, which simply could not be - with such a lawmaking? Roman author Pompey Trog argued: "The Scythian tribe was always considered the most ancient, although there was a long debate between the Scythians and the Egyptians about the antiquity of origin ... The Scythians prevailed over the Egyptians and always seemed like people of more ancient origin." Herodot talked about the Scythian king Anacharsis, who the Hellenes included in the council of the seven greatest sages. There is evidence of Scythian letters to Asian rulers (in particular, to Darius). Diogen Laertsky mentions verses in the 800 lines written by the Scythian sage Anaharsis.

That is, the Scythians had their own writing, but for some reason they “did not reach”! What is this, some kind of caprice of nature, some kind of annoying accident? No, as Stanislavsky said, "I do not believe." We have obviously stolen much and much, both in the direct and figurative sense.

The presence of writing among the Scythians is indirectly confirmed by the existence of a developed urban culture. Scythians had numerous and powerful cities. Ancient authors almost do not write about them, moreover, Herodotus denied their very existence. Although it is obvious that the "father of history" meant the Scythians-nomads. At the same time, he described the huge (4400 ha) city of Gelon in the land of Budino, who were in Scythian orbit. (Many historians consider Budinov to be a Slavic ethnopolitical entity.) In addition, Herodot wrote about the Cimmerian city of Portman on the Don. And the Scythian cities of Karkinitida and Kardes mentioned Hekatei of Miletus.

But, of course, the richest information is provided by archaeologists, who have excavated many Scythian settlements. Researchers pay attention to the territory of “the settlement of Scythian plowmen (farmers) of Herodotus, which most experts consider to be basically Slavs and places between the middle currents of the Dniester and the Dnieper, as well as in the middle course of the Vorskla. Judging by the latest data, the Middle Pela basin should also be included here. ” (V. Yu. Murzin, R. Rolle "Scythian cities").

“It is in this region that a significant number of sites of ancient settlements and settlements are concentrated,” the authors report. - So, only on the territory of the Kiev-Cherkassy local version of this ethnocultural array, which stretched along the right bank of the Dnieper approximately 380 km, recorded 64 settlements, including 18 settlements. The settlements considered in size, design features of fortifications (earthen ramparts with wooden structures), layout, often quite complex, and other characteristic features stand out noticeably against the background of similar monuments of neighboring territories. This statement is all the more true if one considers the presence of three giant settlements in the Ukrainian Forest-Steppe. We mean the Big Khodosovsky, Karatulsky and Belsky settlements. Belsk ancient settlement, located on the high right bank of the middle reaches of the river. Vorskla is a complex system of fortifications - Eastern, Western and Kuzeminsky, united by a common shaft and moat of the Great Volsky settlement. Area more than 4000 ha, total length of shafts about 35 km. The Karatulsky settlement, which is located south of Pereyaslav-Khmelnitsky, is a complex of ramified ramparts and ditches, with a total length of 74 km, spanning the interfluve of the Dnieper, Trubezh and Supoi. The area of ​​the settlement is approximately 17 x 25 km. And, finally, the Great Khodosovo Settlement (Kruglik). Located on the southern outskirts of Kiev and has an area of ​​over 2000 hectares, surrounded by two horseshoe-shaped ramparts with a total length of about 12 km. However, MPKuchera believes that in ancient times there were ramparts that united not only the Great Khodosovsky, but also the Khotovsky and the Little Khodosovsky settlements of the Scythian era into a single system. In this case, this complex of fortifications is not inferior in scale to neither Belsky nor Karatuly ”. It turns out very symbolic - it turns out, Kiev had its predecessor, which existed even before our era! How can you not remember the Kuntsevo site of ancient settlement!

Of course, the greatness of Scythia did not originate from scratch. Its appearance was preceded not even by centuries, but millennia of development of the most powerful, but, alas, forgotten cultures. One of these cultures was Srednestogovskaya archaeological culture, which was established as far back as 5 in thousand BC. er in the forest-steppe between the Dnieper and the Don.

Srednestogovtsy were farmers and herders, and they were the first in the world to tame the horse, which was the most important contribution to human culture as such. In addition, they invented the wheel, which was another major turn in human life. “... For the time being, there seems to be no material remains of wheels in the monuments of the Middle-Aged culture,” writes I. Rassoha. - However, clear images of wheels and chariots on the Stone Grave under Melitopol are known. These images are convincingly dated precisely to the Eneolithic era, and they directly relate to the archaic period of the Middle Ages culture. Yes, and the finding of wheels in the Humelnitsa culture also serves as an indirect confirmation of the invention of the wheel earlier in the Middle-Eastern culture, since only there could the wheel be combined with developed horse breeding. This date coincides with the date of the first Indo-European invasion of the Balkan Peninsula ... Thus, the wheel appeared in Sumer somewhere on 500-1000 years later than in Eastern Europe. ” ("Ancestral home of the Rus")

On the basis of Srednestogovskaya culture, the Yamnaya culture arose, named after the type of burial: the dead were laid in a pit, over which a barrow was erected. This cultural and historical community is spread over the vast expanses from the Urals to the Dniester, and from the Caucasus to the Middle Volga region. Yamtsy were, first of all, cattle-breeders, while also engaged in farming and handicraft activities. Researchers talk about “fairly developed silica processing, the same can be said about bone processing (including for jewelry). In the process of making stone artifacts, a drilling and grinding technique was used. The overlap of the graves of stone-treated slabs and wooden slabs, anthropomorphic steles and wooden carts testify to the skills of working with stone and wood. Pottery, weaving, weaving were developed. ” (Ivanova S.V. “Social structure of the population of the Yamna culture of the North-Western Black Sea region”)

Pompey Trog wrote that the Scythians had dominion over the whole of Asia three times. The first period lasted one and a half thousand years and "Assyrian King Nin put an end to the payment." This data is confirmed later by the 5 historian. n er Pavel Orosy: "For 1300 years before the founding of Rome, the king of Assyria Nin ..., rising from the south of the Red Sea, in the far north, devastated and subdued Evksinsky Pont." And here it is easy to determine the time limits. “Comparing the dates (the founding of Rome - 753g. BC), we can assume that the Scythians dominated Asia in 36-21вв. BC, that is, in the early Bronze Age, - notes N. I. Vasilyeva. “But this time is the period of Yamna culture and its immediate predecessors, the time when the arias of the southern Russian steppes settled in all directions to the south, creating new kingdoms!” (“Great Scythia”)

The Middle and Yam culture is the same great Aryan empire. And by the Aryans here it is necessary to understand a single then still people who will give life to the Slavs, Indians and Iranians. They were the original, the very first Scythians. They, in fact, meant Pompey Trog, when he wrote about the first rule of the Scythians in Asia. As is obvious, we are talking about the state of the yamtsev, which was then at the zenith of its power. It is significant that this rule was recalled already at the beginning of the 17 century by Andrey Lyzlov in his “Scythian history”, where he claimed that the Scythians “Small and Great, the second and greatest part of the world, had the courage and possession of it from one and a half thousand years: the king of Egypt - even before the ages and the states of Nin the king of Assyria. "

Later, on the basis of Srednestogovskaya and Yamskoy cultures, other Proto-Scythian and Scythian cultures will arise. Ultimately, all this inheritance will go to Russia - Kiev, South, and then Moscow, North. However, it should be noted here that the foundations of North Russia were laid long before Kiev itself. “The Legend of Slaven and Ruse” (“1679 Chronograph of the Year”) tells about the powerful outcome of our ancestors from the Black Sea region, which was in the orbit of the most ancient Scythian cultures, and about the creation of cities (Slavensk Velik) in the Novgorod North.

So, our distant ancestors inhabited the current Great Russian lands at the beginning of 2 thousand BC. eh? Yes, just so, N. I. Vasilyeva and Yu. D. Petukhov pay attention to the fact that “just at the end of III - beginning of II millennium BC. er a huge array of territories of Central and Eastern Europe was occupied by so-called cultures of “cord ceramics”, which revealed a great unity. The common “lace ceramics” included the southern Azov-Black Sea territory and the northern forest territory; it stretched from the Baltic to the Kama basin. The impulses of the formation of a community of “lace ceramics” emanated from the south, from the southern Russian steppes ... This means everything was as it is written in the chronicles: the Russians came to the northern forests from the steppes of Great Scythia in the Bronze Age, and they belonged to Eastern European cultures ceramics ”(2200 – 1600 years. BC. E.). Announcement of the chronicle of the first Russian "cities", founded at the beginning of the II millennium BC. e., does not contradict the data of archeology: the then fortified centers, like the South Ural Arkaim, can be considered ancient settlements. ” ("The Eurasian Empire of the Scythians").

This remarkable observation must be supplemented - with an indication of the Fatyanovo culture, which was one of the divisions of the culture of corded ceramics (it is also called “the culture of battle axes”). This culture occupies the vast spaces of Ivanovo, Novgorod, Moscow, Tver, Smolensk, Kaluga, Kostroma, Ryazan, Tula, Orel, Nizhny Novgorod and Yaroslavl (Fatyanovo) regions. Strictly speaking, this is the territory of Moscow Russia, which will arise only after three thousand years! So deny after this cyclical history. Moreover, it should be noted that the representatives of the Fatyanovo culture were dominated by the Y-haplogroup R1a, which indicates their proximity to modern Slavs.


Fatyanovo culture-pottery of the era of corded ceramics (d.Fat'yanovo, Danilovsky district Yaroslavl.obl.)

So here! And about all this we have the most fragmentary data! Logic tells us that there has not been without malicious intent. This is regrettable, but do not despair. Much, for sure, is hidden away - and it will definitely return to its owner, the Russian people.
Author:
Originator:
http://zavtra.ru/
217 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Trapperxnumx
    Trapperxnumx 11 September 2013 08: 35 New
    31
    Regarding the writing of the Slavs. Cyril and Methodius in compiling the alphabet were based on the already existing writing of the Slavs. This is evidenced by the official church life of Saints Cyril and Methodius.
    In the same place in Korsun Saint Constantine found the Gospel and the Psalter, written in "Russian letters", and a person speaking Russian, and began to learn from this person to read and speak his language

    http://www.sedmitza.ru/text/997339.html
    1. Zhzhuk
      Zhzhuk 11 September 2013 11: 00 New
      +4
      not repelled and cut the alphabet
      1. Petrol
        Petrol 11 September 2013 11: 18 New
        +4
        I think that the information about the history (the chronicle of Slovenia) is not true (there is an opinion that the Slovenes (falcons-obsolete) used somewhere else at the level of the Upper Paleolithic this opinion of Vasnetsov ... in the painting Vityaz at the crossroads there is a stone (Mayak) ... so these Lighthouses throughout Europe in Asia meet with runic letters) here is a video of the type in the subject
      2. avd
        avd 11 September 2013 13: 39 New
        -1
        Well, when they repelled, then they pushed something out of her
  2. Iraclius
    Iraclius 11 September 2013 08: 42 New
    -18
    more precisely, the latter planted it here with their iron hand.

    The author has a superficial knowledge of the essence of the so-called. "Norman theory". It was supported and supported by many Russian scientists (Karamzin, Solovyov).
    For me, among other things, one of the main arguments of the Norman theory is the written testimony of Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus in the treatise "On the Administration of the Empire" (lat. De Administrando Imperio).
    The names of the Dnieper rapids in Russian (Russian) and Slavic languages ​​with parallel translation in Greek are directly quoted there.
    And it also indicates that the Slavs were tributaries of the Russians (Russians).
    And most importantly - for some reason, some commentators acknowledge the fact of the Horde yoke and the fact that our Russian princes received a label for reigning with the khans and paid tribute, but at the same time these same people begin to be contaminated by the fact that some new-coming Scandinavians led the aristocracy (it is possible that at the request of the people themselves) - this is a shame for Russia! What utter stupidity! And the fact that our kings deduced the pedigree from the Roman Caesars is also a shame? No, brothers - this is the whole story.

    And there is nothing to be ashamed of. At least because all these first Varangians, although they were at first a little "nenashen", very quickly became them. Or the first campaigns against Byzantium, Khazaria and the Caucasus were not made by the Rurik? And their contribution to the history of the Motherland is much greater than that of other contemporary "Russian" politicians. So it goes...
    1. fzr1000
      fzr1000 11 September 2013 08: 56 New
      27
      And what can you say about the fact that in the excavations of Veliky Novgorod, there are obscenely few artifacts of North European culture (coins, shards, etc.), but for some reason there are many silver Arab coins and shards of local and eastern vessels, although, it would seem, where are the Arabs, and where is Europe? Do you know how much in 900-1000. AD Was there a Novgorodov in East Europe? At least three. And in which of them did the Rurikovichs come? And who were these same Rurikovichs? And were there even such leaders among the Normans and did they have a system that could bring something new to Russia and teach the "wild Slavs" anything? And besides the Emperor Constantine, give more sources. If you cite, you will see that all this evidence from Byzantium is at the level of, as they would say now, OBS. In short, it’s not shyness, but truth. And the truth in this matter is in great doubt. Klyuchevsky and Karamzin are just translators of one of the branches of the theory. Book translators.
      1. Iraclius
        Iraclius 11 September 2013 09: 10 New
        +2
        Active trade with the East - from there dirhams. The essence of the theory of Normanism is not to find out what nationality was Rurik, although this is important.
        The fact of borrowing statehood is not cultural, but political.
        More facts? No problem. Written evidence of Arab travelers about the presence of the rite of burning in the boat of the leader of the Rus. The remains of similar graves were found near Ladoga.
        Objects of Scandinavian origin were found in the Rurik hillfort, and in large numbers (symbols of Thor, figurines of warriors, etc.) All these facts are impartially set forth in the monograph of the Slavic M. Gimbutas.
        I am waiting for the "contra" arguments. All the facts from the article about the Iranian origin of Russia are far-fetched and do not stand up to criticism.
        The testimonies of Emperor Constantine VII can be trusted, if only because he lived in the first half of the 10 century, i.e. was almost a contemporary of those events. And why should he lie about the names of the rapids on the Dnieper? lol
        1. fzr1000
          fzr1000 11 September 2013 09: 21 New
          20
          I began to answer you in detail, then I stopped, there is no particular sense, and even opportunities due to work. I will answer briefly - there is no such thing as "well-known historical facts", but there is a concept of someone's interpretation of "well-known historical facts", such cases.
          1. Prometey
            Prometey 11 September 2013 12: 55 New
            +3
            Quote: fzr1000
            there is no such thing as "well-known historical facts", but there is a concept whose interpretation or interpretation of "well-known historical facts", such cases.

            Here you are 100% right hi
          2. avd
            avd 11 September 2013 13: 48 New
            +5
            "There is such a party!"
            Oh.
            "There are such facts!"
            And if there were none, then all the worse for the facts!

            Have you read a new concept of history for kids?
            So there are only "well-known historical facts".
          3. Iraclius
            Iraclius 11 September 2013 14: 13 New
            -1
            Let me disagree. There is such a thing as archaeological culture. If in one place during the excavation they find artifacts belonging to a certain culture, and then in another place, then this clearly indicates that similar peoples with a similar culture lived there or the same people. There are things in historical science that find general (or almost general) recognition in the scientific community. Over time, with the accumulation of factual material, the history is refined, corrections are made, or a new theory is developed that requires verification. At the moment, the Norman theory looks much more logical, elaborated and consistent than the anti-Norman and especially the East Iranian ones. So it goes.
            And do not tell me that history is not a science, because it is subjective through and through, and the truth is a question of interpretations. Any science is subjective. Even math. And Kurt Gödel (my reverence to the master!) Agrees with me on this.
            Again, I appeal to the testimony of Konstantin Porfirogenit - what is the use of lying to him that the Slavs are tributaries of the Russians?
        2. alebor
          alebor 11 September 2013 11: 14 New
          +5
          It is strange that the author is limited only to the Scythians. Indeed, both Neanderthals and recently discovered Denisovans lived on the territory of present-day Russia. Why not take the Slavs out of these "ancestors"? It would be much older.
        3. Bezarius
          Bezarius 11 September 2013 11: 29 New
          +6
          > In the Rurik settlement, objects of Scandinavian origin were found, and in large quantities (symbols of Thor, statuettes of warriors, etc.)

          And if after a millennium excavations are carried out in the territories of our modern cities, it turns out that the Russians did not live here, but the Japanese, Germans, Chinese, and so on.
          1. Iraclius
            Iraclius 11 September 2013 14: 21 New
            +2
            No, they will not say. I understand that this is an attempt to sneak, but it is very unsuccessful.
            The fact is that the ancient world did not know the concept of "globalization". Something similar began to emerge on the eve of the so-called. Disasters of the Bronze Age, but stopped because of the same disaster.
            Areas of resettlement of cultures are clearly identified. And if a lot of Scandinavian objects were found at the excavation site, this suggests that either they lived there, or their substrate was large and very significant. And this is a powerful argument in favor of Norman theory.
            1. stalkerwalker
              stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 14: 41 New
              +5
              Quote: Iraclius
              And this is a powerful argument in favor of Norman theory.

              I think the main problem lies in the word "Norman".
              The logical chain of Normans - Scandinavians (Danes, Swedes and Norwegians) causes disagreement at this level.
              Have the ingrained name "Varangian" (which also has no less weighty reasons), the question was not put so "acutely".
          2. Tverichanka
            Tverichanka 11 September 2013 20: 18 New
            +3
            Quote: Bezarius
            it seems that the Russians didn’t live here either, but the Japanese, Germans, Chinese

            And how many different denezhniki will find horror! And most of the American! Here spears will break - who lived here and who paid tribute to? Not to mention the names and titles.
        4. stalkerwalker
          stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 14: 36 New
          +5
          Quote: Iraclius
          Article minus for the lack of objectivity in the consideration of well-known historical facts

          Md-ah ...
          Especially, if you involve Stanislavsky with his "... I do not believe! ...". laughing
        5. Andrey78
          Andrey78 12 September 2013 00: 18 New
          +3
          My question is, how can I create something without having it? When were the Scandinavian states created? Norway - When large states began to form in Norway at the end of the 9th century. Denmark - King Knud the Great, by 1028, united Denmark, Norway and England under his rule. Sweden - Royal power intensified in the 14th century, and the territories of Northern Europe merged into the Kalmar Union. The union broke up after some time and, after a long war between supporters of independence and the Danish Oldenburg dynasty, King Gustav Vasa came to power in Sweden. (Adapted from Wikipedia). Rurik (d. 879) - the chronicler of the Novgorod principality in Russia, the Varangian, the Prince of Novgorod from 862 and the founder of the princely, which later became the royal, dynasty of the Rurikovich. but he came not an empty place. (Adapted from Wikipedia). But at the expense of the yoke there is no single answer. How many Tatars were when they conquered Russia? When a tribute was appointed, why did they send letters to the princes, quit ushkuynikov, otherwise they rob.
      2. Xay
        Xay 11 September 2013 15: 44 New
        0
        Very well answered, thanks.
      3. Tverichanka
        Tverichanka 11 September 2013 20: 13 New
        +2
        Quote: fzr1000
        Karamzin is just a translator of one of the branches of the theory.

        Quite right. And even there is an example in our time - imagine that in 1000 years archaeologists will find the works of Svanidze or Pivovarov. And what conclusions will they draw? So the "evidence" of any contemporaries of any era will always be far from the truth. But the evidence of cultural monuments is completely another order.
    2. Lapotnik
      Lapotnik 11 September 2013 10: 36 New
      15
      Karamzin is not a scientist, but a registered scribe. There is no evidence of his writings, from where and what he took, only travel expenses, but a lifetime salary up to the seventh generation the right a story.

      Norman theory is based on only one page inserted in the annals. Local studies of many scientists, taking into account geography, settlements and other things, completely refute this theory.

      Also about the Varangians - the word itself, and its meaning is originally Russian and has no relation to the Scandinavians as such.

      In their post they accused all dissenting people, and they themselves did the same - no evidence, no whole, a hodgepodge of myths and "I think so."

      PS You cannot believe what is written, there are many methods to logically explain or disprove theories. Well, what was written for a lot of money in general is zero trust, and this is exactly how the history of Russia was written by "scientists"
      1. Iraclius
        Iraclius 11 September 2013 14: 27 New
        0
        You pick up the words. These are now scribblers, and Nikolai Mikhailovich, besides the fact that my fellow countryman is also a great Russian writer, a reformer of Russian literature. A brilliant popularizer of national history.
        And he was appointed by Emperor Alexander I to the post of historiographer. Will you also blame Alexander for hating everything Russian? What nonsense are you talking about? History would be silent about the necessity and uselessness - you do not know it at all, if you have the nerve to pour Karamzin’s mud.
        1. Dovmont
          Dovmont 11 September 2013 17: 51 New
          +5
          The fact that Karamzin was a court historian who served the interests of the German princess on the Russian throne is an obvious fact! The fact that he was an ardent Normanist is also known to everyone! No one here is going to pour mud on your fellow countryman, he himself fell out in it in his lackey zeal.
      2. Gregazov
        Gregazov 11 September 2013 23: 53 New
        0
        I will not argue with you, since you are raising a political issue rather than a historical one. To reconcile the parties, I will refer to the excavations carried out by Tur Heyerdahl in the Rostov region. The great Norwegian found confirmation of his hypothesis that the Scandinavians (Normans, Vikings, ...) came from the Scythians, and Odin was a historical character, the king of one of the Scythian tribes, who took his tribe north from constant fights with the Greeks.
    3. baltika-18
      baltika-18 11 September 2013 10: 49 New
      13
      Quote: Iraclius
      She was supported and supported by many Russian scientists (Karamzin

      Well, still, Karamzin would not support. He was an ardent "Westerner", and his work "History of the State ...." is more literary, propaganda than historical. If you remember at the time of writing this work in Russia there was a dispute between two streams of "Slavophiles "and" Westerners ".
      1. Iraclius
        Iraclius 11 September 2013 14: 29 New
        +3
        Oga, but with a monument to Minin and Pozharsky, who put up the initiative? And about the journey of Russian Columbus - Athanasius Nikitin who wrote?
        Amazing Westerner! We would now have more Westerners.
        Why is the bias in judgments and the passion for labeling so offensive for Russian classics?
        1. baltika-18
          baltika-18 11 September 2013 19: 26 New
          +1
          Quote: Iraclius
          Oga, and the monument to Minin and Pozharsky with whose initiative they put

          Well, Minin and Pozharsky fit perfectly into the history of Romanov’s accession to the throne. Why not put it?
    4. Bezarius
      Bezarius 11 September 2013 11: 26 New
      11
      This garbage is your Norman theory and does not stand up to criticism.
      The Varangians are definitely a Slavic tribe. This is proved by the fact that there was a path from the Varangians to the Greeks. Norman ships could not pass there, only Slavic. Only the Slavs went there, which is also proved, for that path has long been explored, no remains of the Norman ships were found. Dot.

      Igo is also doubtful, allegedly 300 years held our lands, and so held that they did not leave any traces. Just like the Scythians.
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 11 September 2013 11: 44 New
        +2
        And who says they held? Slavs, if we consider the Norman theory true, was much more than the Varangians. The Bulgarians, there, are not opposed to considering the founder of their state as a steppe-Asparuh. And we are ashamed to have the first known prince from the Baltic.
        1. Marek Rozny
          Marek Rozny 13 September 2013 10: 43 New
          +4
          Quote: Basileus
          The Bulgarians, there, are not opposed to considering the founder of their state as a steppe-Asparuh.

          Even in Soviet childhood, my mother told me about Bulgarian documentaries who came to them in the Dzhambul region to make a film about Khan Asparuh (by the way, the Aspara River flows in the region). Then I didn’t get it that the Bulgarians forgot in Kazakhstan)))
          Indeed, the Bulgarians, despite their official positioning as Slavs, are proud of the fact that their first ruler was a Turkic-speaking steppe. And they do not come up with the idea that the historical Bulgars were supposedly Slavic Slavs, but they admit that the nomads who arrived in the Balkans ruled the local Slavs for a long time, giving them their name "Bulgars", but at the same time assimilating into the larger local Slavic community.

          The same thing happened with Varangian Russia ("Ruotsi" - "rowers", so called and still call the Finns and the Balts ... the Swedes. The Finns and Balts, before the Slavs, faced the sea daredevils from Scandinavia, then this word got into the lexicon of the Eastern Slavs)who first colonized the so-called. "Northern Rus", and then reached Kiev, taking it away from the Khazar Kaganate in the 9th century. The Scandinavian "gentlemen of fortune" passed on their name to the people they governed ("Russians" - "those who belong to the Russians"), however, they very quickly assimilated linguistically in the Slavic environment.
          By the way, I remind you that only those Slavs who obeyed these Varangians were called Russian.

          Z.Y. Iranians, who have their own remarkable ancient culture and history, will not be at all embarrassed by the fact that almost all the ruling dynasties in Persia were Turkic for almost a thousand years until the 20th century. The Türkic rulers turned into Persians in language and culture.
          Turkic, Mongolian / Syanbian, Manchu ruling dynasties in China turned into Chinese (in language and culture).
          So it is not surprising that the German-speaking Valdemar, Ingvara, Helga, Svendsleiva, Khleifra and others in the Slavic environment quickly became Vladimir, Igor, Svyatoslav, Gleb and Oleg. By the way, I remind you that the Slavs had completely different names - their Slavic (like those of the current Serbs).
          1. Basileus
            Basileus 13 September 2013 11: 49 New
            +3
            All this stems from the fact that the people absolutely do not represent the content of the Norman (in this case) theory. Nobody says that the Vikings brought statehood. The state cannot be created with a snap of the fingers - a substrate is needed, and it was available in Russia. The second erroneous thought is that the Russians were "under the Scandinavians", which is also incorrect, since a significant part of the ranks remained Slavs, while the Varangians were "invited" as an independent and disinterested force. That is, no one refutes the fact that Russia existed before the arrival of the Varangians, and that there was already, if not statehood, then exactly the ready-made foundations for its creation.
            So the main part of the criticism proceeds from the fact that the majority of opponents of the theory simply have a weak idea of ​​its content, and are offended by the facts themselves. All this applies to any other theory, according to which there are traces of external interference.
      2. fzr1000
        fzr1000 11 September 2013 12: 51 New
        +5
        It seems there is a theory that the Varangian is not a nationality or a people, but a mercenary-warrior from the North (relative to Byzantium)? And do not interfere here with Zadornov and other "historians" from the plow. This theory is more years old than the same Zadornov.
        1. stroporez
          stroporez 11 September 2013 16: 11 New
          +3
          Quote: fzr1000
          And do not interfere here with Zadornov and other "historians" from the plow.
          I agree, but the question remains, nowhere is it indicated that Rurik spoke to people through the interpreter. The meaning is not quite he is "alien"
    5. Dovmont
      Dovmont 11 September 2013 17: 19 New
      +6
      Well, if you have a deep knowledge of the Normanist theory, then you should know that the ethnonym "Russians" came from the Finnish "Ruotsi", ie rowers, you should not also cause mistrust and other nonsense about the so-called "way from the Varangians to the Greeks". The inconsistency of this theory was proved by several expeditions of enthusiasts carried out in the 70s-80s of the last century. The guys in kayaks went from Vyborg along the sea to the mouth of the Neva, then with big problems up to its middle course from there by dragging to the rivers of the Dnieper basin. Researchers have proved that large boats cannot reach the Dnieper from the Baltic Sea. But this is of little interest to the Normanists. Just as they are not interested in the fact that the forced Germanization of Scandinavia began only in the XI century. after the defeat of the Western Slavs in the South Baltic. So the code of "Scandinavian sagas" by the monk Snorre Sturlusson "Heimkrigl", beloved by the Normanists, written by him at the beginning of the XNUMXth century, is actually a translation of West Slavic legends into Early German, which is why there are so many Slavicisms. And the very name "Heimkrigla" is the Germanic vocalization of the Slavic "Earth is round" or "Zemlekrug". There are many more examples of the failure of Normanist theory, but this requires detailed and detailed tops.
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 11 September 2013 17: 40 New
        +2
        How do you unambiguously interpret the origin of the word "rus" and "russkie". The scientific community has not yet decided, but you know exactly where this word came from, and that this is the only correct option.
      2. Albert1988
        Albert1988 11 September 2013 19: 13 New
        +3
        Quote: Dovmont
        the ethnonym "Russians" comes from the Finnish "Ruotsi",
        Well, there is still heated debate about the origin of this ethnonym, and there is still no definite answer. But regarding the "Norman theory", even at the university, the teacher of the history of the fatherland expressed an interesting idea - the theory was created by the Romanovs with the sole purpose of bringing their genealogy to Octavian Augustus himself (they did it with big crooks, for this, by the way, the annals were not so sickly ). This allowed the Romanovs to stand on a par with the leading monarchs of Europe, who also sinned by actively claiming to be descended from the Roman emperors. So here is one thoughtless political move, and how much noise is now)
        1. stalkerwalker
          stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 22: 31 New
          +4
          Quote: Albert1988
          But regarding the "Norman theory", even at the university, the teacher of the history of the fatherland expressed an interesting idea - the theory was created by the Romanovs with the sole purpose of bringing their genealogy to Octavian Augustus himself (they did it with big crooks, for this, by the way, the annals were not so sickly )


          And if you believe "The Tale of Time Years, or Where the Russian Land Has Come From", the Slavs are direct descendants of Japheth. Nevertheless, it is this "list" that is used to this day, trying to consider the history of the Eastern Slavs.

          And the "dirty" methods of erasing history began to be widely used in the time of Nikita on the throne.
      3. stalkerwalker
        stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 22: 25 New
        +5
        Quote: Dovmont
        The failure of this theory was proved by several expeditions of enthusiasts carried out in the 70-80 years of the last century. The kayaking guys went from Vyborg by sea to the mouth of the Neva, then with big problems to its middle course from there dragged to the rivers of the Dnieper basin. Researchers have proved that on large boats from the Baltic to the Dnieper


        If you choose the summer period for such a "research" trip, then conclusions can be drawn without leaving the table, due to the sharp shallowing of the rivers. On the Amur today, for example, because of the flood, you can travel on an ocean liner. But it is clear to everyone that this phenomenon is temporary.
    6. Horde
      Horde 11 September 2013 23: 35 New
      +1
      Quote: Iraclius
      And it also indicates that the Slavs were tributaries of the Russians (Rus)


      Well, after all, this is not enough, we must also prove that these dew-Russes were Scandinavians


      Quote: Iraclius
      And most importantly - for some reason, some commentators recognize the fact of the Horde yoke


      you probably mean tataromongolskoe? according to TI, the horde later appeared, so there was no yoke ...
      1. stalkerwalker
        stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 23: 53 New
        +4
        Quote: Horde
        Quote: Iraclius
        And most importantly - for some reason, some commentators recognize the fact of the Horde yoke

        you probably mean tataromongolskoe? by TI the horde later appeared, so there was no yoke ..


        Horde, are you confused by what Iraclius calls this phenomenon?
        Or do you REALLY think that all the ancient Russian sources describing the invasion of the Tatar-Mongols are a "remake" of history?
        And how does one relate to the yoke - whether it is occupation, "compulsion to peace" or "run over by nomads", does not play a special role.
        I will say in advance that the ethnos survived this difficult test, and remained on the historical and geopolitical map of that time. It is unproductive to debate on the topic "In what way" or talk about the unpatriotism of those who "lay down" under the invaders.
        1. Horde
          Horde 12 September 2013 07: 13 New
          -2
          Quote: stalkerwalker
          Or do you REALLY think that all the ancient Russian sources describing the invasion of the Tatar-Mongols are a "remake" of history?


          So think all the HEALTHY people, historians Silence do not apply to them


          http://topwar.ru/31944-izvestnyy-flag-neizvestnoy-strany.html#comment-id-1415919

          http://topwar.ru/29260-batyy-posleslovie.html#comment-id-1248889
          http://topwar.ru/29262-pravda-rusi.html#comment-id-1239142
          http://topwar.ru/28837-asche-knyaz-osiroteet.html#comment-id-1219349
          http://topwar.ru/23945-russkaya-zemlya-pered-batyevym-nashestviem-problema-mongo
          lskogo-nashestviya-na-rus.html # comment-id-905414

          I can only give you from our resource a couple of dozen discussions over the past couple of years about the history of our state, where everyone is talking about the IMPOSSIBILITY of the Tatars and Mongols
          1. stalkerwalker
            stalkerwalker 12 September 2013 11: 36 New
            +5
            Quote: Horde
            I can only give you from our resource a couple of dozen discussions over the past couple of years about the history of our state, where everyone is talking about the IMPOSSIBILITY of the Tatars and Mongols


            At the time of mass access to all kinds of resources, when everyone can "roll" another nonsense without leaving home, and then "post" it on the Internet ... I'm afraid that such would-be researchers are more interested in mushrooms, imitating -archaeological activity laughing

            In all discussions about the "antiquity" of the Russian / Slavic civilization, I only meet accusations of the "falsity" of the Norman theory, accompanied by shouts of "it was not so!", "But this could not be!" And "crumbling a loaf" on Karamzin, Tatishchev and Solovyov with Klyuchevsky still smacks of "hunweibing", since NONE of the still existing theory of the origin of the Eastern Slavs COULD PROVIDE even more or less their own coherent theory.

            And further. An attempt to revise the history of the Eastern Slavs is impossible without revising the rest of the peoples and ethnic groups who have lived and are living in the neighborhood. And let the "learned men" do this, applying the appropriate techniques and methods. Klyuchevsky, in any case, did just that.
            1. Horde
              Horde 12 September 2013 20: 55 New
              0
              Quote: stalkerwalker
              when "roll" the next delirium, without leaving the house, anyone can, and


              you can roll any nonsense, but only it turns out on the Internet forums such a property becomes clearly manifested when you can easily recognize who is a friend and who is an enemy, who is smart and who is a fool, who sincerely came to talk about a painful one, and who is just an AGENT OF INFLUENCE - clearly therefore, when they say that they are writing "any nonsense" and does not even bother to read the links, then such a speaker is just a BREAKER who does not deserve either attention or trust. dissent, there were only urrying.

              Quote: stalkerwalker
              And already "crumbling a loaf" on Karamzin, Tatishchev and Solovyov with Klyuchevsky, even smacks of "hunweibing",


              these historians are already out of date can you imagine how such apologists of traditional history as Alexei Tolstoy with his "Peter the First" are outdated, how outdated is Pikul "with a pen and a sword", now Alexander Kas "The collapse of the empire of the Russian tsars" is in use .. ...

              1. stalkerwalker
                stalkerwalker 12 September 2013 21: 52 New
                +4
                Quote: Horde
                you can roll any nonsense, but only it turns out on the Internet forums such a property becomes clearly manifested when you can easily recognize who is a friend and who is an enemy, who is smart and who is a fool, who sincerely came to talk about a painful one, and who is just an AGENT OF INFLUENCE - clearly therefore, when they say that they are writing "any nonsense" and does not even bother to read the links, then such a speaker is just a BREAKER who does not deserve either attention or trust. dissent, there were only urrying.


                Thank you for deigning to answer, comrade, Mr. ardent patriot on the Internet.
                And here, on the forum, there is enough nonsense for me. And crawl on the links, fire.
                And even more so, to take into account such a reading.

                I ask again.
                Do you have a CLEAR AND DEFINED THEORY OF THE APPEARANCE AND DEVELOPMENT OF SLAVES AS AN ETHNOS?
                Yes or no?
                If YES - please be so kind as to briefly outline the main milestones, confirmed not by links of dubious origin, and not by operating archaeological cultures.
                1. Horde
                  Horde 12 September 2013 23: 03 New
                  0
                  Quote: stalkerwalker
                  A CLEAR AND DEFINED THEORY OF THE APPEARANCE AND DEVELOPMENT OF SLAVES AS AN ETHNOS?


                  Of course, it is clear to any normal person (not a historian) that the roots of the Slavs must be sought from Scythian ancestors. Scythians with their nomadic way of life are clearly the ancestors of the victorious Cossacks.
                  Since the traditions of the historical artifacts of PhiNa were written about the Count Urusov, how he dug up the mounds in the middle of 19, IT WAS simply DESTRUCTION of artifacts, destruction of the history of the Russian people. And we are told referring to Herodotus that the Scythians were Persians, there are old maps where The Arctic Ocean was called Scythian, what did the Persians do there? There is no official history of faith.
                  1. stalkerwalker
                    stalkerwalker 13 September 2013 00: 32 New
                    +5
                    Quote: Horde
                    Of course, it is clear to any normal person (not a historian) that the roots of the Slavs must be sought from Scythian ancestors. Scythians with their nomadic way of life are clearly the ancestors of the victorious Cossacks.
                    Since the traditions of the historical artifacts of PhiNa were written about the Count Urusov, how he dug up the mounds in the middle of 19, IT WAS simply DESTRUCTION of artifacts, destruction of the history of the Russian people. And we are told referring to Herodotus that the Scythians were Persians, there are old maps where The Arctic Ocean was called Scythian, what did the Persians do there? There is no official history of faith.


                    Thank you.
                    More than clear.
                    hi
    7. not good
      not good 11 September 2013 23: 40 New
      +2
      Lomonosov still fought with Norman theory, but, due to the dominance of the Germans at the Academy of Sciences, to no avail.
      1. stalkerwalker
        stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 23: 55 New
        +4
        Quote: Negoro
        Lomonosov still fought with Norman theory, but, due to the dominance of the Germans at the Academy of Sciences, to no avail.


        "... I am tormented by vague doubts ..." that someone just wants to stand on a par with a great man by any means.
      2. Evrepid
        Evrepid 12 September 2013 13: 10 New
        +1
        And now they’re fighting the genotype distribution map :)
        Although it clearly shows where the R1a1 genotype came from, from the Caucasus :) from the same "hated" Khazaria :)
        From Alans, Sarmatians, Scythians and Kemerians
        1. Basileus
          Basileus 13 September 2013 08: 07 New
          0
          So from the Khazar Turks or Scythian Iranians?
          1. Marek Rozny
            Marek Rozny 13 September 2013 12: 00 New
            +1
            Quote: Basileus
            So from the Khazar Turks or Scythian Iranians?

            R1a1 - very old haplogroup, which appeared even before the division into Türks, Persians or Slavs. The largest percentage of this haplogroup is among the Kyrgyz, Pamir Tajiks and some other Asian peoples. Then the Poles, Russians, etc. But this does not mean that the Eastern Slavs descended from the Kyrgyz or Turkic-speaking Altaians, of course. The owners of this haplogroup in prehistoric times lived on the territory of central Eurasia, when even the notion of Scythian did not exist. When the Scythians formed, they (Scythians) had long ago been culturally and linguistically different from the owners of the same haplogroup, who lived on Slavic lands. Those R1a1 who lived in the Steppe from Ukraine to Altai, from Siberia to Afghanistan - by the time the Scythians were formed Iranian-speaking settled residents. After they first tamed the horse, these people switched to a nomadic way of life, abandoning agriculture and their unique numerous cities, since livestock breeding (based on horses and sheep) at that historical time was the most productive and safe in terms of food. Nomads almost never have hunger. Herds and flocks provide the necessary amount of meat, milk (koumiss), material for clothing (leather, fur, felt), for the construction of camping dwellings (felt yurts), glue, thread, a bowstring and so on.
            Farmers are forced to hope for the favorable weather - this year there is a harvest, the next - no, and as a result, famine (the steppe territory of the CIS - in agrarian science is still called the "zone of risky agriculture", this is still not Greece and not the subtropics, where you can easily grow two crops a year).
            The ancestors of the Slavs and other Europeans could not keep large herds like nomads for geographical reasons. Only in the Steppe is it possible to keep horses and sheep relatively free. Conditions were different in the "Slavic lands".
            The ancestors of the Kyrgyz, Altaians, Kipchaks, and other Turkic peoples with the haplogroup R1a1 were Scythian nomads of Caucasian appearance. In antiquity, the proto-Turkic steppe tribes that emerged from present-day Mongolia assimilated these Eurasian nomads, the good of life and culture were similar due to living conditions. By the beginning of our era, Iranian-speaking nomads almost completely merged with Turkic-speaking nomads.
            Only a small part of the Iranian-speaking steppe-Scythians did not assimilate into the Turkic newcomers - these are the ancestors of today's Pashtuns. They were forced to retreat to the south, to the territory of modern Afghanistan, pushing the local aborigines into the mountains (later they themselves would be driven into the mountains by new waves of Turkic-speaking conquerors - "moguls" - the ancestors of the Hazaras and nomadic Uzbeks).
            Scythians have no significant relation to the Slavs. The Scythians lived in yurts, ate horse meat and drank koumiss. Their whole life is a military organization. Now Ossetians consider themselves descendants of the Scythians, but this is not so - they are the descendants of simply Iranian-speaking sedentary inhabitants.
            Yes, there was a small part Scythian farmers, and she really joined the composition of the Slavs. Only to achievements and failures Scythian nomads they have nothing to do with it. They are siblings, but not the same thing. The Scythian Pahari were assimilated by the Goths (Germans), Greek colonists, but mostly by the Eastern Slavs, who were squeezed out of Central Europe by the Germanic tribes.
            Scythian nomads never joined the Slavs. The exception is the ethnogenesis of the Cossacks, where the Scythian-Turkic ancestors stick out from all the cracks.
            1. Papakiko
              Papakiko 13 September 2013 23: 02 New
              -2
              Quote: Marek Rozny
              "moguls" - ancestors of Hazaras and nomadic Uzbeks

              The performance is over, the lights go out. Happy end.
              1. Marek Rozny
                Marek Rozny 14 September 2013 17: 41 New
                +3
                I did not understand why this phrase.
                The Turkic conquerors (for example, the wars of the ruler of Moghulistan - Babur) are the ancestors of the Afghans, whom we now call the Hazaras and Afghan Uzbeks. Some of these wars lost their language under the influence of local Persian-speaking peoples and now speaks the Persian dialect (now the Hazaras), others have retained the Turkic language (now - "Afghan Uzbeks").
                The Hazaras still call themselves the Moguls (or, as they now mistakenly write, "Mongols") and remember that they are the descendants of the warriors of Genghis Khan (more precisely, the Genghisids).
                ZY Afghan Uzbeks and Uzbeks of Uzbekistan are two big differences. Afghan Uzbeks are Turks, and most of the modern Uzbeks of Uzbekistan are descendants of the Turkic Sarts / Tajiks (with the exception of those Uzbeks who have retained the tribal division or are simply called "Kurama").
    8. nnz226
      nnz226 17 September 2013 21: 30 New
      0
      Yes, just when in the 9th - 11th centuries ALL Western Europe in their prayers asked to protect them from the raids of the Normans, in Lord Veliky Novgorod it was considered good form to go beyond the Varangian Sea, fill the muzzles of those Normans, and rob them well, especially when they are with prey from Western Europe will return. It is enough to study the history of the Golden Gate in the Church of St. Sophia in Novgorod, or read it in a somewhat humorous form from A. Bushkov. And to invite those to whom you regularly let the bloody yushka lead yourself is not comme il faut ... But with the Mongol-Tatar yoke it is a little more difficult, because they let us go. Therefore, they went to them for a label to reign. And as they accumulated strength, they won the Battle of Kulikovo and the standing on the Ugra, so they completely forgot about the labels, our ancestors let the "Eastern brothers" go. Again, the expression "Kazan orphan" makes it clear that they did not go to Kazan for labels, and this was the most powerful fragment of the Horde.
  3. Iraclius
    Iraclius 11 September 2013 08: 52 New
    +8
    And among them one can distinguish the Proto-Slavic element, which, at a certain point in time, dominated the whole of Scythia. We are talking about chipped, Scythian farmers who were different from the Iranian-speaking nomad nomads.

    From this place in more detail would be. Did I understand correctly that there were Iranian-speaking Scythians and non-Iranian-speaking Scythians? It becomes interesting. laughing
    About further nonsense about the Iranian roots of Russia did not read, forgive me the author! And I will explain briefly why - does the author know that the current Ossetian is the only descendant of the Scythian-Samat language? And now the question is - is any Slav able to understand Ossetian speech without a translator? Not. What is this talking about? That's right - the East Iranian peoples were neighbors, enemies, allies, anyone for the ancient Slavs, but not their ancestors. Article minus for the lack of objectivity in the consideration of well-known historical facts.
    1. Sirozha
      Sirozha 11 September 2013 09: 36 New
      -1
      Dear, the knowledge is most likely there, there is no desire to voice it. It's just that the article is clearly written to "pull by the ears" of his personal theory. So a person wants to write about the antiquity of Muscovy and invent some kind of incomprehensible power "Rus-Russia" ...
      But someone will believe! And with foam at the mouth will defend the truth.
      History is a harmful thing, as I want to turn so. Definitely there is truth to some extent, and there is truth in others, of which the author speaks of as untruth.
      Who knows who knows...
      1. avt
        avt 11 September 2013 10: 02 New
        +8
        Quote: Sirozha
        So a person wants to write about the antiquity of Muscovy and invent some kind of incomprehensible power "Rus-Russia" ...

        Russia was just that, and Poklonnaya Hill in Moscow, or rather, in the settlement on this site, naturally was not a mountain, but was a place of worship. With regards to Moscow as the capital, it became not so long ago, a fact known but not particularly advertised, even in the time of the Donskoy the main place - the residence of the prince was Kostroma and Rostov the Great, now the Rostov Kremlin has been declared a monastery for the sake of new history.
        Quote: Iraclius
        And it also indicates that the Slavs were tributaries of the Russians (Russians).
        And most importantly - for some reason, some commentators acknowledge the fact of the Horde yoke and the fact that our Russian princes received a label for reigning with the khans and paid tribute, but at the same time these same people begin to be contaminated by the fact that some new-coming Scandinavians led the aristocracy (it is possible that at the request of the people themselves) - this is a shame for Russia!
        And no one denies - the tribute is a completely understandable tax on defense, it was paid to the Khazars, and gangs of Scandinavians were also hired, and the Byzantine Empire was the same. described in "The Ruin of the Russian Land" then there appeared what then the self-proclaimed Romanov dynasty called the yoke. Self-proclaimed - not humiliation, but a statement of the fact of many years of struggle for the throne, quite comme il faut, a widespread phenomenon in "enlightened" Europe.
        1. Iraclius
          Iraclius 11 September 2013 14: 05 New
          +2
          I'm talking about the same thing. If there is a tribal union, there is land, but there is no political and military force, then the easiest way is to ask the neighbors who are authoritative in these matters to be "ruled out". Even then, they understood that today they are strangers, aliens. And tomorrow we will concoct dynastic marriages, learn the language and adopt customs. And hop! - they are already ours, their own in the board.
          I do not understand why some even quite sincere patriots of Russia are so sausage on the possibility of this fact.
          1. stalkerwalker
            stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 14: 54 New
            +4
            Quote: Iraclius
            I do not understand why some even quite sincere patriots of Russia are so sausage on the possibility of this fact.

            Raises the level of patriotic self-awareness.

            The topic is old, but it comes up regularly. The main arguments of the opponents of the Varangian-Scandinavian history of Russia are certain artifacts and the slogan "This can not be, because it can never be!", With subsequent accusations of historians and historiographers in the absence of patriotism. Reception is old but comfortable. Hence, NIF and their followers are born.
            1. Flooding
              Flooding 11 September 2013 16: 01 New
              0
              Quote: stalkerwalker
              The topic is old, but it comes up regularly. The main arguments of the opponents of the Varangian-Scandinavian history of Russia are certain artifacts and the slogan "This can not be, because it can never be!", With subsequent accusations of historians and historiographers in the absence of patriotism. Reception is old but comfortable. Hence, NIF and their followers are born.

              Correctly. But if we take the available interpretations as an axiom, then the development of history as a science if it does not stop, then it will be extremely slowed down.
              Is there really no worthy scientist besides NiF who had and has a different point of view? Starting, for example, with Lomonosov.
              And the point is not at all in kvass patriotism. Any theory passes from the category of entertaining to the category of noteworthy with the accumulation of a certain evidence base. And there are arguments. And very significant. Why shrug them off instead of trying to figure it out?
              1. stalkerwalker
                stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 16: 26 New
                +4
                Quote: Flood
                And there are arguments. And very significant.

                Often the arguments are followed by artifacts, which are trying to "attach" as part of the puzzle, instead of the established one.
                More popularly know the topic Iraclius, Basileus. I'm so amateur ... hi
          2. bomg.77
            bomg.77 13 September 2013 00: 59 New
            +1
            Quote: Iraclius
            I do not understand why some even quite sincere patriots of Russia are so sausage on the possibility of this fact.

            They deny our ancestors in wisdom and by their inventions make them not quite distant politicians. As the saying goes, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions."
            1. stalkerwalker
              stalkerwalker 13 September 2013 01: 05 New
              +5
              Quote: bomg.77
              They deny our ancestors in wisdom and by their inventions make them not quite distant politicians. As the saying goes, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions."

              Yes, these are "Trotskyists" from history - "We will destroy the whole world of violence (read the classical interpretation of historical processes) ...".
              But now nothing succeeds in creating ...
              1. bomg.77
                bomg.77 13 September 2013 01: 32 New
                +1
                Quote: stalkerwalker
                Yes, these are "Trotskyists" from history - "We will destroy the whole world of violence (read the classical interpretation of historical processes) ...".
                But now nothing succeeds in creating ...
                Rejecting without offering something in return .. Our liberals act and say the same words, if you look closely.
                1. stalkerwalker
                  stalkerwalker 13 September 2013 01: 35 New
                  +5
                  Quote: bomg.77
                  Rejecting without offering something in return .. Our liberals act and say the same words, if you look closely.

                  I can not agree.
                  hi
                  1. bomg.77
                    bomg.77 13 September 2013 01: 51 New
                    +1
                    Quote: stalkerwalker
                    I can not agree.
                    drinks
        2. Marek Rozny
          Marek Rozny 13 September 2013 12: 23 New
          +4
          The natives of the present Moscow region are Finno-Ugric tribes. Even the name of the city itself is Finno-Ugric (there are several interpretations, but they are all non-Slavic).
          With the arrival of the Rurikovichs, the Russian people began expansion, incl. to the lands of these harmless "Moscow" Finno-Ugric people, who very quickly assimilated into the arriving Slavs. Then the same fate befell the "Leningrad" Finno-Ugric, Volga and others.
          The Russian pre-revolutionary historian Klyuchevsky, who is difficult to blame for unpatriotism or amateurism, had a phrase that the Great Russian people consisted of 2/3 of the mixture of Slavs and Finno-Ugric.
          The native inhabitant of the Leningrad region is still a classic Finno-Ugric type. The same Putin, for example.
          Back in the 19th century, Russian ethnographers easily identified the Russian interlocutor only by his face - a Russified Mordovian, a Slav, or a Russified Tatar. Now the picture of the "Russian face" has completely blurred, Russians perceive almost anyone who speaks Russian without an accent as a natural Russian (unless, of course, he has a pronounced Mongoloid, Negroid, or some other face).
          In a word, ancient settlements on the territory of Moscow are not related to the Slavs, they are Finno-Ugric inhabitants. The Slavs appeared there only during the time of the Rurikovich during the growth of the power of the Russian principalities.
      2. repytw
        repytw 11 September 2013 15: 20 New
        +5
        The truth is that the great Ukrainians built the Egyptian pyramids, foreseeing the Muslim future of Egypt, came to the banks of the Dnieper and squeezed the wild Mos-Cal tribes built Kiev. smile
      3. Dovmont
        Dovmont 11 September 2013 17: 35 New
        +3
        This article is based on the works of Yu.D. Petukhov devoted to the ethnogenesis of the Slavs, where he used materials on ethnography, archeology, linguistics and linguistic analysis, anthropology, paleogeography, mythoanalysis, and historiography. The work is very interesting, read it! I am sure that you will change your opinion on some well-established historical views. This article is an attempt by the author to grasp the immense, in a small article to immediately cover a wide range of controversial topics.
      4. Tverichanka
        Tverichanka 11 September 2013 20: 27 New
        +4
        Quote: Sirozha
        invent some kind of incomprehensible power "Rus-Russia" ..

        But everything is in order with the history of ancient ukrov, right? Well, no doubt, 140 thousand years is the point!
    2. Flooding
      Flooding 11 September 2013 10: 29 New
      +4
      Quote: Iraclius
      And I will explain briefly why - does the author know that the current Ossetian is the only descendant of the Scythian-Samat language?

      Then explain the following, how can one come to this conclusion without having a single written source in the Scythian language?
      1. Iraclius
        Iraclius 11 September 2013 14: 01 New
        +4
        How not? There are many proper names in Latin and Greek transcription. There are significant literary monuments of the Sogdian language (letters from Mount Mug), there are relics of the East Iranian languages ​​- Ossetian and Yagnob. And there is such a science as comparative linguistics, which, using well-known methods, makes it possible to reconstruct disappeared languages.
        And believe me, as a philologist, the laws by which languages ​​change are no less severe than the laws of, say, thermodynamics.
        In any case, any specialist will confirm to you that the differences between East Iranian languages ​​and Old Slavic / Old Russian are enormous. And this means only one thing - what I have already said above.
        1. Flooding
          Flooding 11 September 2013 14: 32 New
          +3
          Quote: Iraclius
          There are many proper names in Latin and Greek transcription. There are significant literary monuments of the Sogdian language (letters from Mount Mug), there are relics of the East Iranian languages ​​- Ossetian and Yagnob.

          I am not a linguist, but in my opinion only the mention of names looks reasonable. What does the Sogdian language have to do with it?
          Was he related to the Scythian? Can you say this with complete certainty?
          And even more so, it is not clear why the Ossetian, which has survived to our times, should be drawn to the issue if the secret of the Scythian language is covered in complete darkness.
          Better write: I think or assume. But do not wishful thinking.
          1. Iraclius
            Iraclius 11 September 2013 14: 45 New
            +2
            Unfortunately, I can not afford to spend time on lectures on philology and comparative linguistics. There is a lot of literature on the East Iranian languages ​​- go for it, everything is painted there. Why the current Farsi is not Pahlavi. Why is the present dari not Sogdian? Why are the lambsters the last surviving relic of the northeastern Iranians in Gorno-Badakhshan.
            Sogdians are direct neighbors of the Priyaksart Saks. Sogdiana - 19 satrapy in the inscription of Darius the Great. In addition, in Persian literature there are also many names of Scythian leaders.
            In addition to personal names, there is a massive layer in toponymy. Finally, there is the Scythian-Sarmatian dictionary of Abaev. Quite small. If the memory does not change, then there are about 150 words.
            So there is no desired. There is persistent research work.
            1. Flooding
              Flooding 11 September 2013 15: 46 New
              -1
              Quote: Iraclius
              In addition to personal names, there is a massive layer in toponymy. Finally, there is the Scythian-Sarmatian dictionary of Abaev. Quite small. If the memory does not change, then there are about 150 words.

              George Dremin
              "Scythian-Sarmatian" dialects and "Scythian" dictionary by V.I. Abaeva

              What conclusions can be drawn as a result of a critical understanding of the material outlined in the essay by V.I. Abaeva? It is obvious that the Scythian vocabulary, even in the form in which it has survived to this day, does not fit entirely into the Procrustean bed of ideas about its exclusively "Iranian" origin. The situation with the Scythian language turns out to be more complicated than it seems to the supporters of the "Iranian language" of the Scythians. Operating with "Iranian" names from the epigraphic monuments of the Northern Black Sea region, Abaev managed to recreate part of the Sarmatian or Alanian vocabulary. However, there is no reason to call a dictionary composed of lexemes obtained in a similar way "Dictionary of Scythian words".

              http://kladina.narod.ru/dremin/dremin.htm#2
            2. Valentine
              Valentine 11 September 2013 19: 43 New
              +1
              Yes, but Abaev himself is an Ossetian and he was based, as you rightly noted on the Greek transcription of Scythian words.
  4. Basileus
    Basileus 11 September 2013 09: 32 New
    +9
    Funny of course. At first I thought that the content of the article, with a remarkably adequate start, did not match the title, but after it was said about skillful scissors, it became clear that my guesses were wrong.

    A simple parallel with Fili. There is such a city in the Trans-Urals - Arkaim. He is already four thousand years old. Next, by author:
    It turns out that "any region where there are archaeological monuments from 2 thousand years old" the land was inhabited in the deepest antiquity, and not some wild tribes there, but highly cultured builders of powerful and beautiful fortresses. This settlement was still lucky, but how many such settlements remain buried and unknown? But, worst of all, there are almost no written sources about this antiquity. Although they should be in huge numbers. It seems that we were robbed, leaving some - yes, relatives, but loved ones - but just belongings.

    For example, if we use the author's logic, the Bashkirs, it turns out, existed 4 thousand years ago and built powerful settlements. Even if not the Bashkirs themselves, then their ancestors or "teachers". Digging into history is, of course, interesting, but let's operate with facts, not speculation.
    And there is nothing wrong with the fact that the Slavic states arose only a little more than a thousand years ago. Germanic too. Look at how the political map of the world has changed in a hundred years, and history operates with numbers much larger. Some peoples always gave way to others, someone came, someone left, only great dust remained from great people, and prosperous empires turned into deserts. And no matter which of your ancestors, where and how you lived, it is important who you are and the country in which you live.
    1. Papakiko
      Papakiko 11 September 2013 11: 01 New
      +4
      Quote: Basileus
      And no matter which of your ancestors, where and how you lived, it is important who you are and the country in which you live.

      It is short and concise as follows: Ivan Rodsta non-remembered.
      Then Elizabeth and Vinzorov are cherished and respected.
      Rockefellers, Morgan, etc. they will not share your tenets with you.
      There is no future without the past.
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 11 September 2013 11: 59 New
        +1
        And what is better, not to remember kinship (Russia, by the way, arose in the XIV-XV centuries, it was then that Great Russia began its journey, on the fragments of old and decrepit Russia - most of its history is well known) or to be ashamed of it? Are Bulgarians ashamed of the steppe-Asparukh? No! But we are ashamed to have such a "spot" in history as Rurik. We need to come up with some Scythians in order to seem older. What for? To scratch your CHSV? The Romans at one time also tried to somehow establish themselves, elevating themselves to the Trojans, so as not to be descendants of shepherds from the banks of the Tiber, and in the XNUMXth century they only had to sing the past, for in the present they were no longer anything. No analogies?
        1. Papakiko
          Papakiko 11 September 2013 23: 33 New
          +2
          Quote: Basileus
          And what is better, not to remember kinship or to be shy?

          Personally, to me, how Russian-Scythian-Cimmerian is ashamed of the deeds of Grandfathers and great-great- and great-great .... not to the client, but even quite the opposite proud of them.
          But the fact that kinship and the clan memory of surnames, clans is torn and destroyed by the Romanovs categorically depresses.
          Quote: Basileus
          Russia, by the way, arose in the XIV-XV centuries, it was then that Great Russia began its journey, on the fragments of old and decrepit Russia - most of its history is well known

          Yeah sho you say belay .
          Are you not a fan of Miller, Schlozer, Karamzin and other amorphous Romanov-Hessian and Rhine?

          Quote: Basileus
          But we are ashamed to have such a "spot" in history as Rurik. We need to come up with some Scythians in order to seem older.

          Zadornov will give you a detailed answer to this question in his project "Rurik-Lost Truth" .http: //www.youtube.com/watch? V = oMjT8fNrO8E

          Quote: Basileus
          The Romans at one time also tried to somehow establish themselves by elevating themselves to the Trojans so as not to be descendants of shepherds from the shores of the Tiber, and in the XNUMXth century they only had to chant the past, because in the present they were nothing of themselves.

          And why did you get the idea that they represented something, subtracted in books or moved in time and personally saw it?

          Delirium deliberately on both sides of the barricade of history and the truth is between them! hi
          1. Basileus
            Basileus 12 September 2013 13: 54 New
            +1
            Russian-Scythian-Cimmerian

            How nice to come up with ancestors.

            Are you not a fan of Miller, Schlozer, Karamzin and other amorphous Romanov-Hessian and Rhine?

            Surnames are capitalized. Even the names of those people whom you for some reason do not like. By the way, unlike you, these people have formed a harmonious adequate theory based on documents, not speculation and desires.

            And why did you get the idea that they represented something, subtracted in books or moved in time and personally saw it?

            I like how people do not want to believe documents, but they are happy to come up with a story that suits their taste.
            1. Papakiko
              Papakiko 13 September 2013 23: 07 New
              0
              Quote: Basileus
              I like how people don't want to believe documents

              What kind of documents do you issue?
              Open chronicle or fairy tales about megaRim?
              Quote: Basileus
              but they are happy to come up with a story that suits their taste.

              yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, this is what we come up with about the Etruscans, Rusinov, Loch Ness monster, marginal signs, etc.
              Give the medal to yourself in the name of your name. wink
              1. Basileus
                Basileus 14 September 2013 09: 15 New
                0
                What is documented is confirmed, oddly enough.

                Actually yes, you come up with. After all, the decrypted Etruscan inscriptions are so Russian ...
                1. Papakiko
                  Papakiko 14 September 2013 10: 34 New
                  0
                  Quote: Basileus
                  What is documented is confirmed, oddly enough.

                  I am surprised at the likes of you.
                  If you agree and 100000% share the accepted historical mess, why don’t you accept the whole assortment of new traffic, because there is an exceptional truth-truth !?
                  And why over the past 800 years, the Saxons, paddlers, gishpani and many other varieties have resolved, assimilated, which would be logical given all European wars?
                  Only our roots are non-isomorphic with the easy flow of geyropa institutions.
                  Continue to believe in other gods. hi
                  1. Basileus
                    Basileus 16 September 2013 08: 22 New
                    0
                    Do you believe in alien gods. The gods that you invented for yourself and in whom you want to believe. Are you a descendant of the Cimmerians? So the Cimmerians are those who have left. Those who stayed may well be your ancestors)) Scythians who fought with the Cimmerians? And how do you confirm? Etruscan? The Etruscan language is something not Slavic at all. Yes, and Etruscan assimilated by the Latins. So which of them are your ancestors? Two people who left present-day Russia, or one who did not live in the forests? You yourself write better than the Sumerians in your ancestors - you will become even more ancient.

                    If you like to believe in fairy tales - by golly, believe it. Believe that the Germans buried artifacts that confirm the so-called official story. Believe that they faked all the documentary evidence. Believe in any heresy that alternative-historical graphomaniacs will feed you. You can believe in anything, but without confirmation, the fairy tale will remain a fairy tale.

                    As for your infringed dignity, I can say that it is better to believe in Venets from Venice, which were much more likely to be part of the Slavs or Proto-Slavs, than in Etruscans, who have nothing to do with us at all. And venets are an example of the fact that the Slavs themselves quite existed long before our era, were no more backward than other modern peoples and appeared on the historical stage earlier than others. This, at a minimum, will be unfounded.
  5. Boris55
    Boris55 11 September 2013 09: 46 New
    22
    The entire history that we know is written in line with the Biblical concept. Everything that does not correspond to it is recognized as heresy and is subject to destruction. Its destruction continues to this day - the Taliban in Afghanistan, "rebels" in Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt, Syria ... Libraries, museums, churches are robbed and burned.

    Vladimir is a clear sun, he removed the Slavic gods from the temples and "planted" his own ...

    Peter I, the great, collected all the books that still remained, supposedly for the census, and no one else saw them. I collected from the churches all the old bells with the faces of the Slavic gods, supposedly there weren’t enough guns ... About how the Germans wrote a story for us - it was already discussed more than once ...

    Why are archaeologists and historians all over the world looking for, and finding, the ancient roots of their origin, and only Russians are it forbidden? Why does the history of the people living on the territory of modern Russia begin from the end of the 9th century - first of Christianization? What "wild tribes" of the north defeated the armies of Cyrus, Darius, Macedonian?
    And they still beat them - Napoleon, the Germans ... but they all climb and climb ...

    There are many questions, and the Academy of Sciences, which stands guard over the Biblical concept of the development of the world, does not give answers to them, and different theories multiply ...
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 11 September 2013 09: 55 New
      +5
      Why all over the world archaeologists and historians are looking for, and find, the ancient roots of their origin, and only the Russians are forbidden? Why does the history of the people living in the territory of modern Russia begin from the end of the 9th century - first Christianization? What kind of "wild tribes" of the north defeated the armies of Cyrus, Darius, Macedon?

      Scythians. Not wild, but quite civilized for their time.

      There are many questions and the Academy of Sciences does not give answers to them.

      And there are also a bunch of answers - the main thing is to have interest and not be interested in the fact that the story is certainly the way you want to see it. For example, you should not suck out of your finger the "Slavism" of the Scythians or the Iranian origin of the Slavs.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Tverichanka
      Tverichanka 11 September 2013 21: 56 New
      0
      Quote: Boris55
      only Russian is prohibited?

      100500
    3. stalkerwalker
      stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 22: 35 New
      +5
      Quote: Boris55
      Why all over the world archaeologists and historians are looking for, and find, the ancient roots of their origin, and only the Russians are forbidden?

      Who is forbidden?
      And just do not need to pretend to be an offended child who, instead of learning the multiplication table, begins to invent it. As a result, with different results each time.
  6. erased
    erased 11 September 2013 09: 51 New
    +7
    Everything that happened before the 10-11th century AD e. - covered in darkness. There are almost no reliable sources, only the latest records and the dubious reliability of the annals. And up to the 13th century, most sources extremely contradictory describe what is happening. So, how and where it happened, who built what and why - is a mystery. Versions can roll the sea, which, in fact, amateurs and do.
    1. krpmlws
      krpmlws 11 September 2013 15: 24 New
      +6
      Quote: erased
      Everything that happened before the 10-11th century AD e. - covered in darkness. There are almost no reliable sources, only the latest records and the dubious reliability of the annals. And up to the 13th century, most sources extremely contradictory describe what is happening. So, how and where it happened, who built what and why - is a mystery. Versions can roll the sea, which, in fact, amateurs and do.
      Well, we have philologists, Basileus, for example, who know the origin of the Ossetians. But the Russians have some slippery people, they seem to be there, but they come from nowhere, just a mystery with seven seals. And they are certainly wild, of which the Normans they made us happy and have dominion. And they have no doubts, that’s what worries us, they are ready to defend the hypothesis drawn by the ears with foam at the mouth, raising it to the rank of unquestionable truth — that's why it’s dreary. I’d like to ask the philologist where the Slavs come from ? Just don’t need to fill it in, that it’s the type of people that emerged from the alloy of certain peoples, cultures and does not have its own central, genetic root.
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 11 September 2013 15: 36 New
        +3
        Please bring proof that I said something about Ossetians. But you will not find it, because not being able to answer for your words, you can only pass on to the person.

        My only difference from those who love to drag history by the ears is that I don’t have a burgurt from the fact that my people have not existed for over a hundred million years.
        1. krpmlws
          krpmlws 11 September 2013 17: 22 New
          +2
          Quote: Basileus
          Please bring proof that I said something about Ossetians. But you will not find it, because not being able to answer for your words, you can only pass on to the person.

          My only difference from those who love to drag history by the ears is that I don’t have a burgurt from the fact that my people have not existed for over a hundred million years.

          I apologize, confused with Iraclius / There is no answer about the origin of the Russians. The Ivanes, who do not remember kinship, appeared out of nowhere, came across words from everywhere, Normanism in short. Does this story satisfy you? I don’t.
          1. Basileus
            Basileus 11 September 2013 17: 36 New
            +1
            You have vague ideas about normanistics.
      2. erased
        erased 11 September 2013 16: 13 New
        +6
        I myself do not know the origins of Russian roots. Apparently the basis was Slavic with an admixture of northern and southern blood. Western blood should also be added here. It makes sense to lead the Russian statehood from the first tsars - not even the great princes. This is the beginning of the 15th century. Until then, the lands were divided. Although the size of each principality often exceeded the size of the European kingdoms. The times of Tsars Ivanov - 3 and 4 (judging by the usual count) - the era of the formation of statehood. There was Muscovy. But there was also Great Lithuania - more than 80% of Slavs. There was Veliky Novgorod - an independent union. By the middle of the 16th century, Muscovy expanded its borders. The whole world called us Muscovites or Rus. The country was sometimes called Rusia. According to the rules of their language, they wrote Russland or Russia. After the turmoil and the arrival of a new dynasty of the Romanovs, to please the West, and perhaps due to illiteracy, the country began to be called Russia. With two "S" and with "O" instead of "Y". The Rus gradually became Russians. But the people were the same as a hundred, three hundred, a thousand years ago. Someone came here, injected their blood. In the Ryazan region there is the city of Kasimov, Tatars have been settled there since the 15th century, they still live there, having long become related to the indigenous population. Aren't they Russians? With the further expansion of the possessions of Rusia - Russia received new people - Khanty, Mansi, Chuchkas, Karelians, Bashkirs, Udmurts, and dozens of others. In the 18th and 19th centuries, Asian expansion added indigenous peoples. And they all lived in Russia!
        You can compare the expansion of the same England in India and the expansion of Russia in Asia and the Far East. Did everyone hear about the suppression of the sepoy rebellion? How guns shot rebellious? This is the English version. What Russian do they all know. Hospitals, schools, railways, industry. From a Western point of view, this is a mistake. Subjugated peoples should spread rot.
        Who can be considered Russian? Yes, even a Martian. If he lives in Russia, knows its laws and culture, respects and complies with the customs and principles of the hostel. Russian is a nationality. But there are also nationalities - Tatars, Mordovians, Chuvashs. They are also Russian but their root. Pitting people of one country is stupid, unless, of course, this is a purposeful policy. What we see the last 20 years.
        And all the more stupid to hear the argument that the Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians are different nations. Before the revolution, these three territories were called - Great Russia, Little Russia, and White Russia. One root - Russia! But with great desire, even fraternal peoples can be quarreled. What is happening now.
        1. werevolf75
          werevolf75 11 September 2013 21: 08 New
          +2
          good hi very competently ...
        2. sarmat-4791
          sarmat-4791 12 September 2013 22: 59 New
          0
          you say the right words, man ...
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. Mshir
    Mshir 11 September 2013 09: 57 New
    +9
    I read the article and comments, and once again became convinced of the truth of the quote: Russia is a country with an unpredictable past!
    1. Dovmont
      Dovmont 11 September 2013 18: 10 New
      +2
      Well, Churchill noticed this, and he knew what he was saying.
  9. Ross
    Ross 11 September 2013 10: 40 New
    +4
    So here! And about all this we have the most fragmentary data! Logic tells us that there has not been without malicious intent. This is regrettable, but do not despair. Much, for sure, is hidden away - and it will definitely return to its owner, the Russian people.


    No wonder. Having seized power from the Russian tsars, the Germans, the Romanovs, ordered a rewriting of Russian history for themselves. It was Catherine who attracted these Shletsers and K, who could not speak Russian either ...
  10. Asan Ata
    Asan Ata 11 September 2013 10: 58 New
    12
    History textbook in Russian schools: Scythians - Turkic Kaganate - Russian Statehood... What is the contradiction? Yes, that's how it is. Now. I have not looked into books, but already happy. And in the 18-20th centuries, your history was not just rewritten - it was simply invented. By the ears of Peter the Great, Europe became the stepmother of Russia. Your great Russian language (thanks to Pushkin and other great poets and writers of the 19th century, who turned it into a living language) was created in the 17-18th century, again to please Europe. Old Russian (remember this?) - this was your native language, but you will not understand it now, it is very different: "The Word about Igor's Campaign" was created in it, read it (though it was rewritten several times).

    So if this happened, then who needed it?

    Planned destruction of the Great Steppe. Conceived by Catholics in the 4th century, frightened by the Huns, it is realized to this day. Split up. Make strangers to each other. Set against each other. Let loose. Destroy.

    Knyaz - translated from Turkic - aristocratic, sleek, neat, squeamish man.
    Az Yesim the king - in translation from Turkic - call me the king.
    Kovtushenko - kovtush enyky - translated from Turkic - son of Kovtush (Ukrainians also preserved Turkism).
    There is not enough paper to cite such examples.

    The great steppe was the ancestral home of the Russians. And if the forests sheltered you in the past, then the steppe spirit, the wide soul in you remained. Christianity, German kings, the pro-European nobility made an attempt to turn you into Europeans, but can you teach a steppe stallion to a narrow stall? wink
    1. Flooding
      Flooding 11 September 2013 11: 07 New
      +5
      Quote: Asan Ata
      Knyaz - translated from Turkic - aristocratic, sleek, neat, squeamish man.
      Az Yesim the king - in translation from Turkic - call me the king.
      Kovtushenko - kovtush enyky - translated from Turkic - son of Kovtush (Ukrainians also preserved Turkism).
      There is not enough paper to cite such examples.

      You persistently push the opposite thought. Maybe these are just words not of Turkic origin, but borrowed from the Slavic language?
      I was especially pleased with "I am the king".
      1. Asan Ata
        Asan Ata 11 September 2013 11: 46 New
        -1
        It’s just that these words are still in use today, but you don’t, on the one hand, and on the other hand, try to translate these words from Russian.
        1. baltika-18
          baltika-18 11 September 2013 12: 19 New
          +7
          Quote: Asan Ata
          and on the other hand, try to translate these words from Russian.

          And why translate them, if these are Russian words?
          1. Basileus
            Basileus 11 September 2013 12: 26 New
            -2
            Tsar is the Russian word? You are not from the adherents of Zadornov, for whom all the words are Russian?
            1. Asan Ata
              Asan Ata 11 September 2013 12: 36 New
              -2
              You would say "I am Radmir". What does the origin of the word "king" have to do with it?
              1. Basileus
                Basileus 11 September 2013 12: 46 New
                +4
                So I’m not commenting on your message) The person above writes that:
                these are russian words


                Well, "is" is more like "is" rather than "is [e] m"
            2. baltika-18
              baltika-18 11 September 2013 13: 17 New
              11
              Quote: Basileus
              Tsar is the Russian word? You are not from the adherents of Zadornov

              No, not one of Zadornov's adherents, although a wonderful satirist, I am one of other adherents. I am one of the adherents of the Russian language. Before a person learned to write, he learned to speak. And he described the nature around him, himself, natural phenomena, primary labor actions. And these words were simple, referring to the so-called words with a two-letter root. The number of these words in all languages ​​is approximately the same, according to various estimates from 800 to 1000 words. And the word "king" here is associated with such a natural phenomenon as dawn at sunrise sun. And the sounds "z", "c", "s" refer to the same group according to the place of formation in the human speech apparatus, that is, they can easily pass into each other. Compare what words in different languages ​​mean such as "sir", " sir "," sar ". With the word" king "they have the same basis, semantics are similar. Here the transformation from the word" dawn "is obvious. Because a natural phenomenon existed before man, and kings appeared later.
              1. Basileus
                Basileus 11 September 2013 13: 25 New
                +2
                Do you have any other options that would be convincing enough, how convincing is the dominant theory with the king-Caesar? Well, that is, something other than an "obvious" transformation.
                1. baltika-18
                  baltika-18 11 September 2013 15: 37 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Basileus
                  Do you have any other option

                  To make it clearer, you need to consider the pair "tsar" and "tsaritsa." Classically, "tsarina" is a derivative of "tsar". But this is a very controversial statement. In Russian there are words such as lightning, zaritsa. These are natural phenomena. always drew analogies, the ancients were also not alien to this. Whom could they call that in their circle when they worshiped the Sun. Naturally, someone is the first significant, at least the one who rises first at sunrise. And the ancient saying exists, "who is early rises, God gives him. "And given that matriarchy is primary and more ancient, it is highly probable that the word tsarina is primary, derived most likely from the word" zarynitsa ". And the fact that the word" dawn "is native Russian confirms the bush formed by this word : dawn, dawn, lightning, dawn, dawn. There is no such thing in any language.
                2. baltika-18
                  baltika-18 11 September 2013 16: 42 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Basileus
                  convincing dominant theory with the king-caesar?

                  And how is it convincing? Ask yourself where did it come from and how did the word "Caesar" come from? We see the root -zr- (dawn). We write "caesar" in Latin. What do we see? Sounds "Caesar". The same root -zr- ( -cr-).
                  Finally, why the Roman emperors were called "Caesars" or, more correctly, "Caesars".
                3. baltika-18
                  baltika-18 11 September 2013 19: 23 New
                  +4
                  Quote: Basileus
                  Basileus

                  And finally one more time. Let's write down the word "caesar" in Latin "caesar" and read it written in Russian. We get "Sae Zar (Sar)", which is clearly a distorted sound of the Russian expression "this is the king" (this is the king). What other proofs are needed ?
                  1. Basileus
                    Basileus 11 September 2013 20: 29 New
                    -1
                    Any, except those that you can think of out of your head. With Zadornov it was not in vain that they began.
                    1. baltika-18
                      baltika-18 11 September 2013 21: 01 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Basileus
                      Any, except those that you can think of out of your head. With Zadornov it was not in vain that they began.

                      Then answer why the emperors in ancient Rome were called "Caesars"? I gave an explanation that you think is wrong. Your version. At the same time, answer the question why the name Claudius (lame) is very common among these very emperors. What are these quirks?
                      1. Basileus
                        Basileus 11 September 2013 21: 57 New
                        0
                        Well, you probably know better than me why they were called that.

                        There were two Claudias. Apart from the generic name of the emperors of the first "dynasty" and members of the patrician clan of Claudia, who became emperors. Aurelius, for example, was more.
                      2. baltika-18
                        baltika-18 12 September 2013 11: 07 New
                        0
                        Quote: Basileus
                        Well, you probably know better than me why they were called that.

                        There were as many as two Claudius. Apart from the generic name of emperors

                        Yes, that's right.
                        Now Latin. "Clau (v) dius", if we apply the Russian transcription we will see that the word is a compound "slav" and "dius" or "diy". Interesting, isn't it?
                        By the way, Diy is another name for Zeus, as well as the word well known in Russia, Yaroslavl region-Dievo Gorodishche, Perm Territory-village Diy, and such a word as “miracle.” “Slav” is the beginning of the word “Slavs” or “glory”. the Latin words "teos" (god) and "deus" have the same root.
                        So the situation is not only with the word "Caesar" and "Tsar", but also in other words. There is clearly nothing to do with lameness.
                      3. Basileus
                        Basileus 12 September 2013 13: 58 New
                        +1
                        You know, one of my ancestors was called Islamgul, which translates as "Servant of Islam". His son received a surname in honor of his father, and over time there were many Islamgulovs. And the service of faith is clearly not to do with it.
          2. Albert1988
            Albert1988 11 September 2013 19: 19 New
            +2
            Quote: baltika-18
            And the word "king" here is associated with such a natural phenomenon as dawn at sunrise

            Well, there is also a theory that "king" is a shortened "caesar"
            1. baltika-18
              baltika-18 11 September 2013 21: 28 New
              +2
              Quote: Albert1988
              Well, there is also a theory that the "king" is a shortened "Caesar"

              My version.
              This is king-these king-Cae Sar-caesar-Caesar (Caesar).
              The path was just that, it is logical considering that the ancestors of the Romans were Etruscans. And Etruscan inscriptions are deciphered only with the help of the Cyrillic alphabet and no more.
              1. stalkerwalker
                stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 22: 41 New
                +6
                Quote: baltika-18
                .A Etruscan inscriptions are deciphered only with the help of the Cyrillic alphabet and no more.

                And what, have already been decrypted?
                Believe me, I myself will be glad if the current champignons can do this. But this will not mean at all that we are their descendants and ethnic successors.
        2. Galinanp
          Galinanp 11 September 2013 14: 03 New
          +2
          Basileus Today, 12:26 ↑
          Tsar is the Russian word? You are not from the adherents of Zadornov, for whom all the words are Russian?

          Tsar is a Russian word, it is a borrowing of the word Caesar.
    2. Flooding
      Flooding 11 September 2013 12: 22 New
      +4
      Quote: Asan Ata
      It’s just that these words are still in use today, but you don’t, on the one hand, and on the other hand, try to translate these words from Russian.

      "I am the king" to translate from Russian into Russian?
      1. Asan Ata
        Asan Ata 11 September 2013 12: 24 New
        +1
        About that and speech - that from Old Russian it is translated "call me tsar". As well as from the Turkic.
        1. Flooding
          Flooding 11 September 2013 12: 51 New
          +4
          Quote: Asan Ata
          About that and speech - that from Old Russian it is translated "call me tsar". As well as from the Turkic.

          I am - I am.
          So I’m talking about that. What a bunch of Russian words in the Turkic.
          1. Basileus
            Basileus 11 September 2013 13: 04 New
            +2
            Gygygy. "Issem" is a Persian word, maximum - a common Iranian. So do not flatter yourself.
            1. Flooding
              Flooding 11 September 2013 14: 34 New
              +1
              Quote: Basileus
              "Issem" is a Persian word, maximum - a common Iranian. So do not flatter yourself.

              No joke understood? Or need to be explained? Like what caused it? Go up the branch - laugh.
              1. Basileus
                Basileus 11 September 2013 14: 58 New
                0
                You yourself suggested that there are a lot of Russian borrowings in the Turkic languages, and you said it for the first time in all seriousness. There are indeed a lot of borrowings, but they fall already during the period of Russian rule.
                And now the joke. Well, just a joke, so a joke, what really is there.
                1. Flooding
                  Flooding 11 September 2013 15: 38 New
                  -1
                  Quote: Flood
                  You persistently push the opposite thought. Maybe these are just words not of Turkic origin, but borrowed from the Slavic language?

                  Are you talking about this? Look at this phrase from a different angle.
        2. Galinanp
          Galinanp 11 September 2013 14: 05 New
          -2
          Asan Ata Today, 12:24 ↑
          About that and speech - that from Old Russian it is translated "call me tsar". As well as from the Turkic.

          Then it turns out that the Türks are an Asian branch of the Slavs.
  • avt
    avt 11 September 2013 11: 23 New
    +4
    Quote: Asan Ata
    Az Yesim the king - in translation from Turkic - call me the king.

    It is good that you remember that Az is in Russian I, well, the first, in Russian, especially noticeable on old icons, sometimes they wrote without a part of vowels and together, the words went in one line. So prince is a compound word, horse is kn and az. The first among equal horsemen, the real military rank, in contrast to the "administrative" ones, was the kagan and the king, and the kagans and the Kiev rulers were called, not only Khazar, by the way, one had to meet the spelling of this title as konaz.
    Quote: Asan Ata
    aristocratic, sleek, clean, squeamish man.

    So these are the realities of the Middle Ages - baths, they require a real resource, fuel, water and relatively capital buildings. In a "nomadic" culture that does not fit. Or it will be necessary to admit that there was no such. By the way, the "Mongolian writing" appeared only after Genghis took the throne of a completely normal state of the Uighurs, real, not nomadic, and their writing became the basis for writing, , Mongolian chronicles " request War of Thrones - Presbyter John, the last Christian ruler of the Uyghur kingdom, did not leave an heir in a straight line.
    1. Asan Ata
      Asan Ata 11 September 2013 11: 39 New
      -2
      On the stele of Kultegin, the Turkic kagan of the 8th century, there are inscriptions in the Turkic runic script. With the advent of Islam, as it should be, the runic letter was destroyed as barbaric, only rare examples remained.
      What kind of horses are in the forest? In a forested environment, the horse's hooves begin to hurt and exfoliate (this is the nail, actually), the horse dies. Therefore, forest people had a rarity.
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 11 September 2013 12: 21 New
        +9
        What kind of horses are in the forest? In a forested environment, the horse's hooves begin to hurt and exfoliate (this is the nail, actually), the horse dies. Therefore, forest people had a rarity.
        Funny theory.
        You tell this to deer, moose, wild boars and roe deer. Especially moose who like to swam along the swamps and floodplains of the rivers. Or do you think they have hoofed prostheses made of wood-insensitive materials?
        By the way, bears, wolves and all kinds of foxes there too. After all, their blunt, fixed claws are also a nail, not a stainless steel.
        wassat
        1. romb
          romb 11 September 2013 12: 52 New
          -1
          By the way, bears, wolves and all kinds of foxes there too. After all, their blunt, fixed claws are also a nail, not a stainless steel.

          There is only a significant difference, the animals you indicated do not go on these very claws / nails wassat
          1. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 11 September 2013 13: 03 New
            +3
            There is only a significant difference, the animals you indicated do not go on these very claws / nails
            The argument is not convincing.
            But the listed herbivores go. There are more of them, by the way. After all, they are not at the top of the food pyramid. Why did you modestly omit the mention of them? Is it because they do not fit into this funny theory?
            In this case, it’s important not whether the nail substance is 100 percent loaded or not. The contact of this substance with soil and moisture is important. What can cause soaking, grinding, or an increased risk of infection by microorganisms from soil and water. And after that, the weight can reach the hoof.
            However, having hooves and claws from the same material as horses, having a very active lifestyle and not a name for caring for a person, animals in the forest somehow live and thrive. If people do not bother.
            1. romb
              romb 11 September 2013 13: 35 New
              -2
              The argument is not convincing.

              If he is not so convincing, then why do horses need horseshoes? Why bother if you could have completely safely done without them.
              Nevertheless, one should not forget that the hooves of these animals are a layer of the epidermis, with all the consequences that follow from this.
              1. abrakadabre
                abrakadabre 11 September 2013 13: 43 New
                +4
                If he is not so convincing, then why do horses need horseshoes? Why bother if you could have completely safely done without them.
                Horseshoes are needed then, that the horse works for a person and is urged by him on various substrates. Horseshoe protects against mechanical abrasion. Or do you think it can protect against moisture? The importance of shoeing increases when a horse is used on hard, dry soils. In soft forest litter, this is not so topical. As an illustration, you can personally do an experiment:
                Try barefoot for half a day to walk along the soft grass or sand of the beach. And then the same amount on stony soil, such as mountain slopes. Compare the result.

                Nevertheless, one should not forget that the hooves of these animals are a layer of the epidermis, with all the consequences that follow from this.
                But wild ungulates have no forest zone, aren't they?
                1. romb
                  romb 11 September 2013 13: 51 New
                  -1
                  Horseshoe protects against mechanical abrasion.

                  Optional abrasion. From any external influences, including cracks in the horn walls and for better adhesion to the surface.
                  But wild ungulates have no forest zone, aren't they?

                  And have you seen a lot of wild horses in the forests of the Eurasian continent?
                  1. abrakadabre
                    abrakadabre 11 September 2013 14: 11 New
                    +1
                    And a lot of them died from forest living conditions? And not from hunters and reduction of range?
                    1. romb
                      romb 11 September 2013 14: 52 New
                      +1
                      And a lot of them died from forest living conditions?

                      I’m also wondering: have the predators ate all the horses in the forests? Only those who were able to escape in the desert in time were left.))))
                      We will be serious. In general, it is generally accepted that the habitat of horses (according to their evolutionary development) is the steppe, but not forests. Therefore, you can safely address this issue to Mother Nature ....
                    2. abrakadabre
                      abrakadabre 11 September 2013 15: 11 New
                      0
                      Therefore, you can safely address this issue to Mother Nature ....
                      What for? Everything is clear to me here. If you notice from the discussion. Let my opponent investigate this question;)
      2. Basileus
        Basileus 11 September 2013 13: 46 New
        -1
        deer, elk, wild boar and roe deer

        All of them are suddenly artiodactyls.
        1. abrakadabre
          abrakadabre 11 September 2013 13: 53 New
          +4
          All of them are unexpectedly HOOT. And their hooves from the same substance as the horse. Tarpan, exterminated by man, which is considered to be a full-fledged ancestor of the homely horse, and whose forest subspecies lived gloriously in the forest for many millennia, was equidistant.
          This is the main thing.
          So what?
          1. Basileus
            Basileus 11 September 2013 14: 06 New
            +2
            And the fact that they came to this hoof in different ways, and to mix them is silly. And their hooves are arranged differently. In artiodactyls, they are more resistant to stress.

            I did not say anything about the forest. Then a friend defends the swamp theory of the ethnogenesis of the Slavs)
            1. abrakadabre
              abrakadabre 11 September 2013 14: 21 New
              +4
              In this case, the marshes in our country are inseparable.

              Allow myself to re-quote from the beginning of the hint What kind of horses are in the forest? In the forest, the horse's hooves begin to hurt
              And I will answer: They live normally. How WILD Forest Trapan lived until it was exterminated. Like the semi-wild herds of Buryats, they now live on grazing in the natural zone, where forests and swamps are quite abundant. As throughout the Middle Ages, they themselves multiplied and multiplied under the supervision of a person in the much more marshy Finland or on the territory of the Siberian Khanate (which Yermak Timofeevich tickled).

              Evolution is evolution, and the composition of the hooves is the same. This means that resistance to basic environmental influences (abrasion, soaking, mechanical strength) is also the same. In the conditions of a soft substrate of forests and marshes, just attrition and shock load on the joints during movement.

              So you can debate about the evolution of pair-and-hoofed animals. But the initial message about some special deadly forest conditions for the horse, to put it mildly, is incorrect.
              1. chehywed
                chehywed 11 September 2013 20: 19 New
                +2
                Quote: abrakadabre
                Like the semi-wild herds of Buryats, they now live on grazing in the natural zone, where forests and swamps are quite abundant.

                abrakadabre, with all due respect to you, I’m forced to intercede for the Buryats. I don’t argue, the guys are original (see photo)
                Despite the fact that as an ethnic group they developed only at the end of the 19th century, they already have a city - Ulan-Ude. Perhaps someone still lives "on grazing in the natural zone", but believe me, if there is, then not much.
                Sincerely.
                1. Basileus
                  Basileus 11 September 2013 20: 29 New
                  +1
                  The Buryat horses were meant, not the Buryats themselves))
                  1. chehywed
                    chehywed 11 September 2013 20: 50 New
                    0
                    Quote: Basileus
                    The Buryat horses were meant, not the Buryats themselves))

                    Basileus, that’s why the Internet is bad, that if you don’t stick emoticons after each letter, they won’t understand the joke.
    2. avt
      avt 11 September 2013 12: 25 New
      +3
      Quote: Asan Ata
      On the stele of Kultegin, the Turkic kagan of the 8th century, there are inscriptions in the Turkic runic script.

      Speaking of Turkic runes, you still tell Europeans, Germans and Scandinavians in particular. Well, give a translation as an example. And you can also add an Etruscan letter here.
      1. romb
        romb 11 September 2013 12: 46 New
        +2
        And what surprises you in the runic?
        Türkic runic writing is so named by analogy with Germanic scripts.
        This method of writing information on a stone was the easiest: a significant part of the letters look like lines and semicircles drawn at different angles - vertical, horizontal, etc.
      2. romb
        romb 11 September 2013 15: 32 New
        +1
        ... Well, give an example of the translation ....

        Need text and translation of runic writing?
        You are welcome!
        http://irq.kaznpu.kz/?lang=r&mod=1&tid=1&oid=15&m=1
  • Alibekulu
    Alibekulu 11 September 2013 19: 17 New
    +1
    Quote: avt
    presbyter John, the last Christian ruler of the Uyghur kingdom.
    As it were, the notorious "presbyter John" is the Kereite ruler Tooril, but not the Uighur. (Togoril, Togrul;? - 1203), better known under the title of Wang Khan. The Kereites adopted Nestorian Christianity in 1007.
    Accordingly, the consonance of the name of the Chinese title of VAN (prince), which Togrul granted and the fact that he was a Christian, led to the birth of a beautiful legend about Elder John and his powerful Christian state ..
    After the rout of Chingiz Khan, part of the Kereits fled to the territory of South-West Siberia and North Kazakhstan, where it formed the so-called Taibuginov yurt. The capital was Tyumen (Chimgi-Tura). Subsequently, in Russian sources it is known as the Siberian Khanate.
    Echoes of those events of the XIII century can be found in GF Miller's "History of Siberia"
  • Basileus
    Basileus 11 September 2013 12: 00 New
    +2
    Do you yourself understand Polovtsian?
    1. Asan Ata
      Asan Ata 11 September 2013 12: 26 New
      +1
      Of course. This is one language - Turkic.
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 11 September 2013 12: 41 New
        +3
        Belarusian is also Slavic, but not everything is clear in it. In the same way with Old Russian.

        For example, I understand the Crimean Tatar or Kazakh only in details. And you are so confidently talking about Polovtsian)
    2. romb
      romb 11 September 2013 12: 49 New
      +2
      The Codex Kumanikus test is quite understandable for most representatives of the Turkic peoples.
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 11 September 2013 12: 59 New
        +2
        Approximately at the same level as The Lay of Igor's Campaign. This is what I wrote:
        this was your native language, but you will not understand it now, it is very different: "The Word about Igor's Campaign" was created in it, read

        The "Word" is as clear to me as the "Code" is on a cursory reading.
    3. alone
      alone 11 September 2013 22: 56 New
      +2
      Quote: Basileus
      Do you yourself understand Polovtsian?


      if you speak Kazakh slowly. then I am an Azerbaijani who understands him without a translator hi
      one language, different dialects
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 11 September 2013 23: 12 New
        0
        Well, you turned it down, with one language. If so, then Russian and Czech are one language) But much is clear, I do not argue. Although I have already explained why I asked this question, above.
        1. stalkerwalker
          stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 23: 27 New
          +5
          Quote: Basileus
          Quote: Basileus
          Do you yourself understand Polovtsian?

          if you speak Kazakh slowly. then I am an Azerbaijani who understands him without a translator
          one language, different dialects


          Quote: Basileus
          Well, you turned it down, with one language. If so, then Russian and Czech are one language)


          And so it is.
          All Slavic languages ​​are also similar. And in the Czech Republic and Poland, through the 3-5 day of your stay, you will begin to easily understand speech and read signs, running line on TV.
  • Alibekulu
    Alibekulu 11 September 2013 18: 43 New
    +2
    Quote: Asan Ata
    Kovtushenko - kovtush enyky - translated from Turkic - son of Kovtush (Ukrainians also preserved Turkism).
    There is not enough paper to cite such examples.
    In the books of Lev Gumilyov: “Our ancestors were friends with the Polovtsian khans, married the“ red girls of the Polovtsian, (there are suggestions that Alexander Nevsky was the son of a Polovtsian woman), they adopted baptized Polovtsy on their own, and the descendants of the latter became Zaporizhzhya and Sloboda Cossacks, replacing the traditional Slavic suffix "ov" (Ivanov) to Turkic "enko" (Ivanenko)».
  • Tverichanka
    Tverichanka 11 September 2013 22: 03 New
    +1
    Quote: Asan Ata
    , But can you teach a steppe stallion to a narrow stall?

    And for this, special thanks! More precisely, you will not say.
  • Marek Rozny
    Marek Rozny 13 September 2013 12: 57 New
    +2
    Asan Ata, let me disagree with you about "I am".
    The verb "is" (meaning "to exist", "to be") is considered in Russian philology to be the only word that has survived in the Russian language for 2000 years.
    Remember, in German and English there is always a verb in a sentence? "I am king "," You are king "." Ich bin Koenig "," Du are Koenig ". In the Slavic language, initially, too, there was always a verb in a sentence, such as" I am a doctor "," You are an engineer. "The forms of the verb" is "changed as well as in the Germanic languages ​​-" Az I AM king "(literally," I am the king ")," Goy you thou well done "(" You are young people ", remember how it was in Russian fairy tales?). However, later this obligatory verb practically disappeared in colloquial speech." I am the king "," We are students "," They are enemies. " the verbs disappeared completely, only the “infinitive” remained - “is.” By the way, the dash in this case (“I am a student”) must be put, the dash means that in this place the verb “is” must be. ...

    About Turkisms in the Ukrainian language - I agree. About 5000 Turkisms in modern Ukrainian. This is partly a borrowing from the Turks, Caucasian Turks, Crimean Tatars, but most often - the remains of the speech of assimilated Turkic-speaking steppe dwellers (Kipchak Cumans, Khazars, Torks, Berendei, Pechenegs and others). Rurikovichs in whole families (tens of thousands of people) settled the Turks on their lands (however, these steppe dwellers lived there even before the arrival of the Varangians to Russia), so that they would carry out military service. With the spread of Christianity, the assimilation of nomads with the Slavs began, as a result, widespread Ukrainians (especially southern and western - that is, steppe) often look like a typical "Tatarva"))) But the eastern and northern Ukrainians retained the Slavic phenotype.
  • Strezhevchanin
    Strezhevchanin 11 September 2013 11: 06 New
    +4
    November 15 - Islamic New Year.
    Buddhist New Year - Sagaalgan - February 11.
    February 8, January 26 Tu B'Shvat - New Year of the Trees of the Land of Israel.
    There’s nothing to write about ours, well, just the New Year and all ..... Santa Claus’s birthday, damn it, we celebrate the week.
    Mayan New Year. those on March 22nd (although here we can say that this is a starry start, Aries), well, to hell with it!
    During all this time, not one or two hillforts with signs of high culture and civilization have been excavated, horseradish knows which shaggy years, but we continue to stubbornly teach that: before Rurik, all Rusichs hung on trees !? I don’t already know who needs to ask this question, so that things move off the ground !!!
    1. Asan Ata
      Asan Ata 11 September 2013 11: 42 New
      +3
      Islamic chronology in a different way, not from the birth of Christ. Turkic New Year March 22, the day of the spring solstice. By the way, you really feel the new year with the advent of spring!
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 11 September 2013 12: 04 New
        +4
        In fact, he is primarily Persian, he is only borrowed by the Turks.
        1. Marek Rozny
          Marek Rozny 13 September 2013 09: 47 New
          +1
          Quote: Basileus
          In fact, he is primarily Persian, he is only borrowed by the Turks.

          All right. Nauryz (March 22) was noted by the ancient Iranian-speaking inhabitants - that they are settled Persians, that nomads are Saks (Central Asian Scythians). The Proto-Türks had their own analogue of the new year, which was celebrated on December 22 (25) - on the day when the sunny day begins to grow. After the alien Turks assimilated the Scythians-Saks 2500-2000 years ago, Nauryz became the legacy of the Turkic world. Until now, only Iranians, Tajiks, Afghans and Turks celebrate it (except for Turks, Tuvans, Yakuts - there is practically nothing from the Scythians in their culture).
          With the spread of Islam in the Turkic environment, the original New Year in December disappeared (although the non-Muslim Nauryz survived quite well, despite the discontent of the Arabs), however, some Turks still celebrate the December New Year (Karachun) - these are northern Turks and Hungarians.
          Iranian Nauryz is so entrenched in the culture of the Turkic peoples that it is considered to be considered by them to be originally their own. But how else, if the Türks celebrate it for more than 2000 years. Not to mention that the lion's part of the steppe Türks is genetically derived from the Central Asian Scythians, who celebrated this holiday in the depths of history.
      2. avt
        avt 11 September 2013 12: 17 New
        +4
        Quote: Strezhevchanin
        Mayan New Year. those on March 22nd (although here we can say that this is a starry start, Aries), well, to hell with it!

        Quote: Asan Ata
        Islamic chronology in a different way, not from the birth of Christ. Turkic New Year March 22, the day of the spring solstice. By the way, you really feel the new year with the advent of spring!

        Do not worry and do not pull the blanket over yourself, the Slavic New Year also began with the spring solstice. So what? This is the oldest tradition, so far recorded as the earliest among the Sumerians. The tsar made an oath not to break the calendar. The year Was 360 days - according to the number of degrees of the circle of the Sun, 12 months, 30 days in them. And the oncoming days did not count - they were declared holidays. That is how we got four permanent holidays in the Sun - opposition and equinox and floating - it appears in February, then disappears. Well, now the deck has been stashed and the New Year has been announced after December - the tenth month, well, and earlier - with the adoption of Christianity in Russia in general from the creation of the world, September was considered. ,, Navruz "
        1. Marek Rozny
          Marek Rozny 13 September 2013 09: 51 New
          +2
          Quote: avt
          Muslims still have a holiday with a characteristic "Arabic" name "Navruz"

          I will correct: Nauryz is a non-Muslim holiday. Arabs and others have never celebrated or celebrated it. Moreover, given free rein to the Arabs, they would generally have banned it in non-Arab countries, since from the point of view of "their" Islam, this is a pagan holiday. Nauryz (Navruz, Nooruz, Novruz) is an Iranian word, literally "New day". It is noted exclusively by Iranian-speaking peoples and Central Asian Turks (including Azerbaijanis).
    2. Tverichanka
      Tverichanka 11 September 2013 22: 31 New
      +2
      Quote: Strezhevchanin
      Mayan New Year. those of you

      Sorry, but I’m forced to correct you. The zodiac in this case has nothing to do with it. In March there is the spring equinox. In Russia, too, earlier the New Year began with the spring equinox .... But for the rest, I completely agree.
  • maklaut007
    maklaut007 11 September 2013 11: 25 New
    +6
    When they begin to tell me about the wild Slavs, which Western civilization literally revived, in the form of Rome, Greece. I ask one question - What about the Slavic calendar according to which today is 7519 and which is older than the Romans and Greeks, not to mention the wild Germans and other Celts. So this date is from the conclusion of peace. That is, the history of the Slavs is much more ancient. Petya, who was the first to hide this figure to please the West. But she is. They may object to me, but where is the civilization of the Slavs, since it has been for so many years. Well, as a result of that war, the territories of the Slavs were depopulated. We don’t know what kind of weapon was used, if even today the Chinese are afraid of us at the genetic level. It is possible that the remnants of the people degraded and only after thousands of years, the Slavic nation has grown, giving the roots to the rest of the world. And again, going to the next stage of destruction. Now from the black monkey. In the event of a nuclear war, the world will again fall into gathering and nomadism. Ancient historians call our territory GARDARIKA. The country of cities. And cities, it is both age and culture. Returning to our history, we see one thing. The Russian Orthodox Church and the Slavophobic encirclement of Russian tsars did everything. to destroy our history. This world needs Russia only as a resource. So is this world of Russia needed ??
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 11 September 2013 12: 07 New
      +2
      Hehe, you apparently asked so illiterate that they could not answer you? If you were interested in the origin of the "Slavic" calendar, you would know that you invented it in the West, so unloved by you, in order to find out on the basis of data from the Bible when the act of Creation took place. Moreover, the dates of the creation of the world are mass, since each interpreted the Bible differently. The Byzantine interpretation came to Russia along with the new religion.
      1. baltika-18
        baltika-18 11 September 2013 16: 58 New
        +2
        Quote: Basileus
        If you were interested in the origin of the "Slavic" calendar

        The present ancient Slavic calendar is an indicator calendar, cyclic. The year in it was recorded in three numbers. Indict - changed from 1 to 15, the circle for the sun - from 1 to 28, the circle for the moon - from 1 to 19. These three numbers are 15,28 and 19 are mutually simple, that is, any combination of them is repeated through a number equal to their product 7980. The cycle of the ancient calendar was 7980 years.
        1. Basileus
          Basileus 11 September 2013 17: 19 New
          +2
          What does this have to do with it? It was about the so-called. "Constantinople era", which maklaut007 refers to as the Slavic calendar.
          1. sarmat-4791
            sarmat-4791 12 September 2013 23: 23 New
            0
            this is the last used reckoning, terminated by the decree of Peter I, now 7521 years from SMZH on it
            1. Basileus
              Basileus 13 September 2013 08: 10 New
              +1
              It's not about that at all. And that the author considers him Slavic, although this is a Christian calendar.
    2. stalkerwalker
      stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 22: 46 New
      +5
      Quote: maklaut007
      What about the Slavic calendar according to which 7519 is today and which is older than the Romans and Greeks, not to mention the wild Germans and other Celts.

      And you read "The Tale of Time Years ..." or comments to it.
  • Boris55
    Boris55 11 September 2013 11: 26 New
    +2
    Here is another view, Sidorov:
    Scythians Sarmatians Alans Goths Antes Huns Türks Ugras Rus Slavs = Barbarians

  • Vladimirets
    Vladimirets 11 September 2013 11: 31 New
    +1
    "This culture occupies vast areas of Ivanovo, Novgorod, Moscow, Tver, Smolensk, Kaluga, Kostroma, Ryazan, Tula, Oryol, Nizhny Novgorod and Yaroslavl (Fatyanovo) regions"

    Damn, in the Vladimir region in those days no one lived, or maybe there was its own civilization. what
    1. stalkerwalker
      stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 22: 53 New
      +5
      Quote: Vladimirets
      Damn, in the Vladimir region in those days no one lived, or maybe there was its own civilization.

      As in the interfluve of the Volga and Oka ...
      In light of the "newly discovered circumstances", I would like to ask the new discoverers of the Slavs - how to interpret their positions for the Ugric-Hungarians-Magyars? How did they end up in those "primordially" Slavic lands, before moving to the lands of Pannonia (and not only them)? How did the mushrooms grow after the rain? Or will the Dacians-Romanians, Bulgars-Bulgarians and the same Ugrians be reckoned among the Slavic family again?
      And most importantly.
      Who of the followers of the "new look" on Slavic history has defined the Slavs as such?
      1. sarmat-4791
        sarmat-4791 12 September 2013 23: 29 New
        0
        they turned out to be in transit, few peoples relocated, looking for a better land for their children, especially since it was not so long ago. And not "passing through" - Chud, Merya, Mordovians, Komi, hoods, etc.
        1. stalkerwalker
          stalkerwalker 13 September 2013 00: 38 New
          +5
          Quote: sarmat-4791
          turned out to be

          Yeah ...
          Hungarian express with a trailed Bulgarian wagon ... laughing
  • avt
    avt 11 September 2013 12: 02 New
    +6
    Quote: Asan Ata
    What kind of horses are in the forest? In a forested environment, the horse's hooves begin to hurt and exfoliate (this is the nail, actually), the horse dies. Therefore, forest people had a rarity.

    laughing Oh how! Well, the Slavs didn’t know horses for sure, for them it was marvelous, well, as for the Indians in the time of Columbus, they plowed the land on bears, the horses were brought to us only with the “Mongol yoke” - they enlightened, and before that they probably didn’t plow - they were engaged in gathering, they went straight out of the cities and collected everything that they didn’t fall. Or maybe there were no cities? And how then with the "yoke" to be dashing assaults? No, this is quite consistent with the "classic story" about the origin of the Slavs from who knows what swamps ... laughing
    1. Asan Ata
      Asan Ata 11 September 2013 12: 29 New
      +2
      The horse is definitely sick when his hooves are in a humid environment, ask the veterinarians. I don’t know about moose. hi Please, if you are interested, understand the essence of what I said above, do not fuss over trifles, plz.
      1. avt
        avt 11 September 2013 13: 04 New
        +4
        Quote: Asan Ata
        The horse is definitely sick when his hooves are in a humid environment, ask the veterinarians.

        In the conditions of a sedentary, especially developed agricultural civilization, there is no need to keep horses all year round and other large-horned and small animals on the “street” have farm buildings and fodder reserves. This is confirmed by real life right up to the mechanization of agriculture. for the basis that the ancestors lived in swamps and there was no such country called "enlightened" Europeans and their component Scandinavians like "Gardarika", that is, a country of cities, then yes, in the swamp, where "historians" constantly push us, the horse will definitely die
        1. Basileus
          Basileus 11 September 2013 13: 15 New
          +1
          You have some wrong historians. The eastern Slavs lived in the forest, and in the forest-steppe, and in the steppes, and used to live. Well, without swamps in any way - still a component of the landscape. Could you share quotes that say that they lived only in swamps and more - nowhere?
        2. abrakadabre
          abrakadabre 11 September 2013 13: 18 New
          +3
          that is, a country of cities, then yes, in a swamp, where "historians" are constantly pushing us, the horse will surely die
          Forest subspecies of tarpan nEgoduE over your words. True looking at you only from the pictures. But forest living conditions have nothing to do with it - stupidly exterminated by man.

          Excerpt from the encyclopedia: "The forest tarpan was exterminated in Central Europe in the Middle Ages, and in the east of the area - in the 1814th-XNUMXth centuries; the latter was killed in XNUMX on the territory of the modern Kaliningrad region."
        3. Vladimirets
          Vladimirets 11 September 2013 14: 22 New
          +4
          Quote: avt
          the swamp, where the historians are constantly pushing us, the horse will definitely die

          In Yakutia, for example, horses live normally. We adopted the habit of overgrowing from musk oxen for the winter, reindeer hooves in the winter from under the snow to hoof grass, they eat the stew at a time. smile
          1. Basileus
            Basileus 11 September 2013 14: 30 New
            +1
            They always hoofed her. In the steppe - including, therefore, the horse was the first to graze in winter.
      2. consul
        consul 11 September 2013 17: 32 New
        +1
        Quote: Asan Ata
        A horse is definitely sick when his hooves are in a humid environment.


        This problem is solved by timely care and a dry stable. In our village some still keep horses, and in the neighboring village the stud farm was (alas ... collapsed). And in old photos camels came across))).
  • Cormorants
    Cormorants 11 September 2013 12: 34 New
    0
    I would like to inquire, "History according to Fomenko and Nasovsky" has the right to life, how do you feel about this story? I just looked and it's hard for me to believe in it!
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 11 September 2013 13: 09 New
      +9
      From Fomenko read his works on mathematics. After all, a world-class specialist.
      Buy pies from the baker, not from the garbage man.
      Repair the car in the workshop, not the dancers.
      Improve your health with doctors, not with a sculptor or photographer.
      And you will be happy.
      If you do the opposite, then a lot of inexplicable and wonderful things will happen in your life.
      laughing
      1. avd
        avd 11 September 2013 14: 08 New
        +2
        "Specialists built the Titanic" - have you heard?
        Typically, your "message" works. But not always.
        Our doctors will be treated - it will be more expensive for themselves.
        To learn from our teachers is to discourage the craving for knowledge at all.
        Not always. Among them there are high-class specialists and, not ironically, ascetics, knowledgeable experts and infinitely devoted to their work. But as a system ...
        1. abrakadabre
          abrakadabre 11 September 2013 14: 41 New
          +5
          In addition to the Titanic, experts have built the entire modern material world: What is on you. What you sit on, sleep on, what you touch most of the time during the day or what you see.
          So your foolishness is an attempt to avoid discussion by one of the methods of "a set of oratory and polemical methods and means that allow you to mislead the audience and win them over to your side" - this is the definition of the term "Demagoguery".

          Our doctors will be treated - it will be more expensive for themselves. And yet you will not deny that if you or your child get sick, you will see a doctor, and not, for example, in the hospital or the construction department?
          Or do you drive it to kindergarten to repair your car?
          Or, to repair your apartment, do you go not to a household store or to a construction market, but to fortune-tell to a gypsy or to a butcher's shop?
          And so on on the list ...
      2. Marek Rozny
        Marek Rozny 13 September 2013 09: 56 New
        +2
        Quote: abrakadabre
        From Fomenko read his works on mathematics. After all, a world-class specialist.
        Buy pies from the baker, not from the garbage man.
        Repair the car in the workshop, not the dancers.
        Improve your health with doctors, not with a sculptor or photographer.
        And you will be happy.
        If you do the opposite, then a lot of inexplicable and wonderful things will happen in your life.

        Wonderful and witty answer!)
    2. baltika-18
      baltika-18 11 September 2013 13: 28 New
      +1
      Quote: Cormorants
      I would like to inquire, "The story of Fomenko and Nasovsky" has the right to life

      My opinion: They are right that history is full of repetitions and is shorter than it is commonly believed. Their version of events is just an assumption, a version, and quite interesting. In some ways I personally agree with them, in some things I do not. in the end, the classic version of history is also nothing more than a version. So everyone decides for himself which version of events to accept until the Lord God appears on earth and dots all the and's. wink
    3. avd
      avd 11 September 2013 14: 02 New
      +6
      Oh, you just can’t imagine how hard it is to believe in some things ...
      Earth is not flat.
      The sun is not the center of the earth.
      The Romanovs are not Russian (by blood).
      Lenin is not the most humane man of the XNUMXth century
      Stalin is not the coryphaeus of all sciences.
      Brezhnev is not the greatest writer and commander.
      Academicians of the Russian Academy of Sciences are not scientists, but administrators and officials from science (as a rule)

      And specifically about Fomenko - a talented mathematician, a talented graphic artist (but here I am not an expert), an endlessly hardworking and stubborn researcher who is not afraid to "get into" someone else's field, delve into and understand.

      And how much he is right in his hypotheses and conclusions - I would very much like to know from historical scholars (so far they only manage to find out which Fomenko is bad)
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 11 September 2013 14: 51 New
        +4
        And how much he is right in his hypotheses and conclusions - I would very much like to know from historical scholars (so far they only manage to find out which Fomenko is bad)
        The thing is that the reaction of Fomenko himself to the initial criticism of his theory was somewhat inadequate. Still, the luminary recognized in mathematical circles was reasonably pointed out that history is a slightly different discipline, in which his title of academician is zero. Gradually, mutual criticism was gaining momentum in the format: "I am a star, and all historians were uneducated, weaving a worldwide conspiracy" and the response "Teach a fool, only spoil it.
        Unable to defend his theory within the academic framework, Fomenko was chosen a populist path: widespread propaganda and appeal to the public.
        And then all manner of tearing covers and the revealers of universal conspiracies came running.
        That's it.
      2. Iraclius
        Iraclius 11 September 2013 14: 53 New
        +2
        The one-sided discussion with academic science was terminated in 2002. FIs have withdrawn themselves from proving the validity of the "theory" invented by them, which, as it were, symbolizes.
        1. abrakadabre
          abrakadabre 11 September 2013 15: 16 New
          +4
          But who is interested in the general public? And how many will push to make reasonable conclusions? ..
          Alas...
          The same half of the publications in the yellow press will be lost. The RenTV channel will go bankrupt. And the magazines? And all sorts of "researchers"? You are pushing them into existence from hand to mouth. Or worse, go to work.
      3. Tverichanka
        Tverichanka 11 September 2013 22: 47 New
        +1
        Quote: avd
        so far they only manage to find out which Fomenko is bad)

        In my purely amateurish opinion, Fomnko’s view is not bad and not good. He just expresses his point of view. For a moment, is this what we are doing on the forum? But we consider ourselves entitled to do this, and even as right, we argue to direct insults ... Why is Fomenko deprived of such a right? It is always better to know as many different points of view as possible than to stupidly insist on one. A lot of scientific discoveries took place precisely because someone ceased to agree with the generally accepted point of view and at the initial stage often underwent obstruction, and then it turned out that the person was right ....... Fomenko, in any case, makes you think about many things. And this is already not bad.
        1. baltika-18
          baltika-18 12 September 2013 12: 36 New
          0
          Quote: Tverichanka
          Tverichanka

          Bravo, Tverichanka Nina!
          Well said. good love
          1. sarmat-4791
            sarmat-4791 12 September 2013 23: 38 New
            0
            Baltika is also great, well-reasoned
  • avt
    avt 11 September 2013 13: 05 New
    +2
    Quote: Cormorants
    I would like to inquire, "History according to Fomenko and Nasovsky" has the right to life, how do you feel about this story? I just looked and it's hard for me to believe in it!

    Do not blindly believe. Read, analyze and compare. Everything is known in comparison.
    1. avd
      avd 11 September 2013 14: 09 New
      +3
      So.
      "Believe" is the church, please.
      With the rest - to understand, think, check ...
  • vkrav
    vkrav 11 September 2013 13: 13 New
    0
    The death penalty was not widespread among the Slavs - Rod is one big family ... The worst punishment is exile. So, Moscow was built on the site of the outcast settlement.
  • Xay
    Xay 11 September 2013 14: 08 New
    0
    But centuries of Scythian-Celtic wars remained a grandiose "white spot" of ancient history.
    Well, not exactly "white spots", there is a history of China that partially describes
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 11 September 2013 14: 55 New
      +5
      Millennia of conflict between Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons are also not detailed in any way. With dates, names, places of skirmishes and victorious eating of defeated enemies.
      So what?
  • Strezhevchanin
    Strezhevchanin 11 September 2013 14: 40 New
    +5
    Quote: vkrav
    Moscow is built on the site of a rogue settlement.

    And I think London to this day hi
    1. Tverichanka
      Tverichanka 11 September 2013 22: 52 New
      +3
      Quote: Strezhevchanin
      I think Londo

      I would even continue, almost the entire island! Yeah, they moved all the dregs there and pushed them away .... And now it’s a pity that we didn’t drown! How much better the world would be!
  • repytw
    repytw 11 September 2013 15: 15 New
    0
    Quote: fzr1000
    It seems there is a theory that the Varangian is not a nationality or a people, but a mercenary-warrior from the North (relative to Byzantium)? And do not interfere here with Zadornov and other "historians" from the plow. This theory is more years old than the same Zadornov.


    And Varyazhsky, the sea was called because mercenaries came out on the shore from the sea in a crowd, so according to Pushkin A.S. The Varangians, the people recognized by historical science, are a bunch of documentary evidence of this, including the Roman ones.
    1. avt
      avt 11 September 2013 17: 27 New
      +1
      Quote: repytw
      The Varangians, the people recognized by historical science, are a bunch of documentary evidence of this, including the Roman ones.

      Here, too, is an interesting play on words. On the one hand, the vandalous gangs of Scandinavians who were engaged in robbery, the sale of stolen goods and mercenaries were called Vikings. Well, such a gang will moor and who are they for peaceful settlers? Enemies, heaps - Varangians, even a strike - that may have come up near Moscow dashing mercenaries of the Varangians - disagree and Fryazino appeared, but here he may have had enough. But the German when he wrote verses about the heroic deed of the heroes from the cruiser Varyag, quite specifically wrote in German - Viking. Well, the Baltic and Ruyan-Buyan were clearly their patrimony, regardless of the Slavs living there, they did not differ in modest temper, and again for many they were enemies - Varangians.
      1. Marek Rozny
        Marek Rozny 13 September 2013 10: 10 New
        +1
        "Varyag" ("Varyazi") is a Slavic interpretation of the North German word "waering" - a military mercenary (usually German-speaking).

        "Fryag" ("fryazy") is the Slavic name of the Romanesque Europeans (from the word "frank").
  • avt
    avt 11 September 2013 15: 17 New
    +4
    Quote: vkrav
    So, Moscow was built on the site of a rogue settlement.

    Well, of course, even then the locals conceived, for example, to deprive the kiyans of gas at the future Great Dock.
    Quote: Strezhevchanin
    And I think London to this day

    As I already wrote, the Don is Slavic river, the river on the islands is not transparent, muddy, dark. In general, the Thames and the city are deep in the bosom of the river, with access to the sea, in short - 3,14 Zdarechensk. Well, the population is accordingly selected from other places sent to Ginetalia.
    1. stalkerwalker
      stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 15: 50 New
      +7
      Quote: avt
      with access to the sea, in short - 3,14 zdarechensk. Well, the population is accordingly selected from other places sent to Ginetalia.

      ++++! laughing
  • Drosselmeyer
    Drosselmeyer 11 September 2013 15: 52 New
    +4
    After such articles one gets the impression that in Russia they want to "raise" their "prototypes". It is now fashionable for us to draw the genealogy of Ukraine from the Trypillian culture.
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 11 September 2013 17: 23 New
      +3
      This is some way to assert itself for young empires, apparently. This was also the case in early imperial Rome, when legends appeared about escaping Trojans led by Aeneas. It was in the Commonwealth, where the gentry considered itself the descendants of the Sarmatians.

      By the way, from the second theory and the one voiced by the author, the dislike of the Poles and Russians is clear - the ancient enmity between the Sarmatians and the Scythians))
  • Drosselmeyer
    Drosselmeyer 11 September 2013 15: 53 New
    +1
    After such articles one gets the impression that in Russia they want to "raise" their "prototypes". It is now fashionable for us to draw the genealogy of Ukraine from the Trypillian culture.
    1. Valentine
      Valentine 11 September 2013 20: 56 New
      +2
      Why artificially snake your people, culture? At the old, everything is already behind, ahead only weakness, insanity and death. The future is in the hands of the young and the daring. Why invent a ghostly gray-haired grandeur for yourself when your real here is under the nose - the greatest empire of all time and peoples who triumphed in the greatest war of all time and people.
      1. sarmat-4791
        sarmat-4791 12 September 2013 23: 47 New
        0
        "the greatest empire of all times and peoples, which won the greatest war of all times and peoples" - I agree, but not completely. It is not necessary to invent, but to restore, because we know very little about our antiquity, there are some pieces of information that need to be collected painstakingly, analyzed, put forward theory-versions, discussed, someone is engaged in excavations, restores. You must not forget, as well as about the Great Patriotic War!
    2. tomket
      tomket 11 September 2013 21: 34 New
      0
      I just read your koment, an amusing case, because present-day Ukraine was formed by conquering the lands of the Lithuanian principality (present-day Belarus) that were deserted and depopulated due to the Batu invasion in the 14 century in the Golden Horde. Actually, the backbone of the people who lived there and the Ukrainians claim to be connected with was lost. What national heritage can Ukrainians talk about ???
  • George
    George 11 September 2013 19: 45 New
    +2
    I read the article, comments.
    Comments are more informative than the article, but everything came together in a heap, you can’t figure it out without a hundred grams, and even that is unlikely.
    To be honest, I also dislike "our story", written by the Germans, according to which we immediately moved from huts and dugouts to the wards, but now there are so many interpreters and just historians who give out alternative versions at incredible speed and with an incredible, famously twisted plot. Sometimes you don’t understand fantasy or real?
    Tell me who is in the subject of good books on the topic under discussion.
    1. chehywed
      chehywed 11 September 2013 21: 32 New
      0
      Jora, School History textbooks published before the 1991 year.
      1. George
        George 11 September 2013 21: 53 New
        +1
        Thanks Vova.
        1. chehywed
          chehywed 11 September 2013 22: 14 New
          0
          good ,Any time. laughing
  • Bosk
    Bosk 11 September 2013 19: 54 New
    +1
    I often ask myself the question "What kind of catastrophe should have happened that erased the ancient history of the Slavs", because the only thing that is one hundred percent left from those times ... these are probably only fairy tales and epics, although on the other hand science does not stand still, excavations are underway , something is happening in the archives too, so there must be some glimpses.
  • vvvvv
    vvvvv 11 September 2013 20: 30 New
    +1
    Author, "Yamnaya culture", not "Yamskaya" ... It is unforgivable ...
    By the way, Achilles was a Scythian.
    1. stalkerwalker
      stalkerwalker 11 September 2013 22: 56 New
      +6
      Quote: vvvvv
      Author, "Yamnaya culture", not "Yamskaya".

      "Coachman, do not drive the horses ... along Tverskaya-Yamskaya ..." laughing
  • Savva30
    Savva30 11 September 2013 21: 23 New
    +1
    If you add everything that is written on this topic, your head will go round. Around some experts. I just don’t understand which key question we are trying to find the answer to. In my opinion, we are simply distracted from reality. I personally admit the whole story, because I just can’t verify its truth. Of course, an information war was fought against us, it always has been. Surely she touched on the story ...
    But maybe we will deal later with fact-finding. There are problems above the roof, discord is useless to us ...
  • tomket
    tomket 11 September 2013 21: 28 New
    +3
    In Ukraine, recently homegrown national historians have discovered PROTOUKROV who lived in Ukraine almost 10 thousand years ago. and so, is it true that even half of those present here, including the author, like some kind of homeless, homeless people rush about and are ready to cling to whatever, even Scythian culture and history, if only to dissociate themselves from their roots with the past ???
  • Horde
    Horde 11 September 2013 23: 22 New
    0
    Or take, for example, the famous megalithic monument Stonehenge - according to established legends, it was built precisely by Scythians. Moreover, experts believe that this building has a "pre-Celtic" origin.


    about stohenge - a strong suspicion that this thing was built in the 19-20th centuries, as a TOURIST object. Now plaster is falling off it, well, under it is concrete ... and so everywhere in Egypt, in balbek the reinforcement of the "stone" sticks out, what kind of antiquity is this?

    1. tomket
      tomket 11 September 2013 23: 34 New
      +2
      Caesar then, apparently, is also quite our contemporary, once described Stonehenge.
      1. Horde
        Horde 11 September 2013 23: 37 New
        0
        Quote: tomket
        Caesar then, apparently, is also quite our contemporary, once described Stonehenge.


        what are you referring to?
        1. tomket
          tomket 11 September 2013 23: 45 New
          +1
          the question is, are the British so stupid that they would not be stuck with concrete or sprinkled with a fawn? and where did the fragments of the crumbling stone go, or what’s up there, you’ll run over an Internet and stumbled upon a dozen of the same black and white photographs and everything, like the sensation on the net, doesn’t smell like that, why?
          1. Horde
            Horde 11 September 2013 23: 51 New
            0
            Quote: tomket
            poll, are the British so stupid that they would not be stuck with concrete or sprinkled with a fawn?



            stuck up, it just got worse next to the megalith disabled person, the pebble with the repair shows that the CEMENT was closed up




          2. Horde
            Horde 11 September 2013 23: 56 New
            0
            Quote: tomket
            like a sensation in the network does not smell about this, why?



            from Egypt, why doesn't it smell? Damn him knows the people in the West do not care for what to goggle ...
            however, if you make a repair restoration, it will still be different, a lot of pictures have been done, it will only get worse, and the plaster will pour in ... laughing
            1. tomket
              tomket 12 September 2013 00: 08 New
              +2
              these are actually only these photos that walk, if with the bas-relief, to hell with it, the same British were repeatedly caught in the Egyptian artifacts craft, then stonehenge, how is it! the photo clearly has a modern design and no one leads the ear! either a banal photoshop, well, or the world at the end has already turned into ruminants and can no longer be saved.
            2. tomket
              tomket 12 September 2013 00: 13 New
              +1
              although as an option, some kind of really remake in some kind of theme amusement park.
        2. tomket
          tomket 11 September 2013 23: 58 New
          +1
          Caesar - Gali War
    2. chehywed
      chehywed 12 September 2013 00: 10 New
      +1
      Quote: Horde
      Now the plaster is falling off it, and underneath it is concrete ... and so everywhere in Egypt, in balbek, reinforcement made of "stone" sticks out, what kind of antiquity is this?

      Well, if you also lay out the photos, where you are holding on to the fixtures on the Baalbek veranda, or peeling off the stucco from Stonehenge, or rather a video ... then there are simply no words.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Horde
        Horde 12 September 2013 00: 27 New
        0
        Quote: chehywed
        cling to the fixtures on the Baalbek veranda, or peel off the stucco from Stonehenge, or rather a video ... then there are simply no words.


        cinema Sklyarova last minutes 1h 2min
        1. tomket
          tomket 12 September 2013 00: 42 New
          +2
          and Baalbek remake?
          1. stalkerwalker
            stalkerwalker 12 September 2013 00: 53 New
            +7
            Quote: tomket
            and Baalbek remake?


            "... - and on the ruins of the chapel ...
            - what, did I destroy the chapel too? ... "
            laughing
        2. chehywed
          chehywed 12 September 2013 00: 57 New
          0
          HordeThanks for the video. Honestly. It’s too late to watch it in its entirety, so I ran in “pieces.” At the beginning they ask the question: did the Romans build it or not, in the middle there is a mass of incomprehensible dug up and at the end they say: Who knows ... But, what is this "remake" I have not yet seen.
          1. Horde
            Horde 12 September 2013 06: 46 New
            0
            Quote: chehywed
            It’s too late to watch it whole, therefore


            Quote: chehywed
            But, what is this "remake" I have not yet seen.


            I wrote to you to watch from 1 hr min, there about armature in the stone of the balbek
  • vanderhaas
    vanderhaas 12 September 2013 04: 26 New
    +1
    The question is not on that edge: well, they stole it (or blundered themselves), now you won’t return it. If this (what was stolen) is desperately needed, then how can I find a replacement? Why does a man need the story of his people? For correct prediction, so as not to make mistakes, which were created in the past. If there is no information, intuition is necessary. And it’s better that all Russ have: genetic memory. The question is how to strain this thing, how to use it.
    And to grieve for what is lost, only time to lose.
  • erg
    erg 12 September 2013 05: 17 New
    +3
    The author of the article is misleading. He is either not familiar with Norman theory, or he deliberately lies. Nor was there any imposition of statehood by the Normans in Russia, according to the same theory. In the Middle Ages, in many countries, including Russia, it was customary to invite aliens, including foreigners, to the highest public office (in modern language). This custom was also in Novgorod, which persisted for a long time. Moreover, such a ruler was greatly limited power. In the same Novgorod and in later centuries, it was forbidden for the invited prince to have property within the city limits. In fact, the invited rulers, served as arbitrators in resolving disputes, stood at the head of the local army, etc. The real power was in the hands of the city elite in the person of the local aristocracy and wealthy citizens, sometimes relying on the rest of the people. It was believed that the invited ruler would be less susceptible to corruption. For example, the same thing existed in Italian city-republics. So, that the invited Rurik had very limited power and his further expansion, this is not the result of his unauthorized decision, but the policy of the then Novgorod elite. Rurik was, in fact, only a tool. Simply, when it was written about that time, the power of the princes was more solid and unquestioned, and many genera of the aristocracy preferred to consider the origin from Rurik. So they attributed to him excessive independence. By the way, the incorrect interpretation of those events abroad, may not necessarily be a malicious intent, but simply banal ignorance. So in the 19th century, the German Köhne, who was in Russian service, incorrectly composed the coat of arms of the Romanovs. Not knowing the peculiarities of the Old Russian language, he incorrectly read the description of the ensign of the boyar Romanov, on the basis of which he created the coat of arms. Having made the main figure of the coat of arms - the griffin, while on the ensign the main figure was a black eagle. And yet, there is nothing wrong with borrowing foreign words. After all, we adapt these words to the rules of our language, forcing them to change. But we don’t pronounce it unchanged, or worse, do not change the rules of our language for them. It is this feature that speaks of the power of the language and of its perfection in front of others. So, even Bernard Shaw recognized the primitiveness of the English language, in comparison with others, including the Russian languages, offering a bonus to someone who improves English.
  • Doctorleg
    Doctorleg 13 September 2013 17: 30 New
    +3
    Quote: erased

    You can compare the expansion of the same England in India and the expansion of Russia in Asia and the Far East. Did everyone hear about the suppression of the sepoy rebellion? How guns shot rebellious? This is the English version. What Russian do they all know. Hospitals, schools, railways, industry. From a Western point of view, this is a mistake. Subjugated peoples should spread rot.
    .


    About the guns, you need to be more careful. Ermak, probably, went to Siberia without weapons and conquered the land by hospitals. The same can be said about Central Asia (the capture of Kokand), and about Poland, where the uprising was also suppressed by weapons, and not hospitals. Well, the British also built hospitals and the elite of the colonies was educated at European universities. After many countries gained independence in the 50s and 60s, their living standards tended to decline, and infrastructure was collapsing. What is this talking about? Yes, nothing. It’s just not so simple. And do not go where they do not ask.
  • mithridate
    mithridate 14 September 2013 11: 35 New
    0
    history has been rewritten many times and has always been rewritten to please the next rulers who came to power. Therefore, different historians interpret the same event in different ways (and only if previous written sources have survived). So we will never know what really happened. Archaeological finds are very fragmented and, again, how to interpret them.
  • prom
    prom 26 May 2014 10: 37 New
    0
    Everything is beautifully said, but ....