Military Review

“Without Horde”

156
“Without Horde”The term was removed under the pressure of Tatar historians, who said that the term “kindles” and it is customary in the Republic of Tatarstan to consider Genghis Khan not as a bloody conqueror, but as a great reformer.


And God will change the Horde, my children will not have access to the Horde.
Spiritual certificate of the Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich.
April-May 1389


As it became relatively recently known, the term “Mongol-Tatar yoke” will disappear from school textbooks, according to which they will teach young “Russians”.

In itself, this fact would not have anything alarming or unpleasant - the term "yoke" is frankly unfortunate, humiliating and borrowed by the old historiography from the most murky source possible - the Polish historical essays.

The Poles considered themselves descendants of the ancient Sarmatians, everything that is located from them to the east - Tataria (recently this nonsense was revived in the writings of Fomenko-Nosovsky) and tried hard to instill this point of view on Russia in Western Europe. They regarded the Russians as “slaves by nature” and tried to designate the domination over them of the Horde by the offensive word from Roman historiography — iugum — yoke, yoke.

Every educated European, who knew Latin and read Titus Livius, immediately came to mind an episode in the Kavdinsky Gorge, when the Roman legions surrounded by Samnites were bound to go under the yoke for greater humiliation. However, the wise Samnite old men warned then: kill the Romans or let go in peace, but do not humiliate - they will return and take revenge. So it happened.

The disappearance of this emotionally loaded Polish borrowing from textbooks could only be welcomed, if not for one “but”. The causes and ideological context of this disappearance.

The seizure was made under the pressure of Tatar historians, who said that this term “kindles”, “does not contribute” and in general in the Republic of Tatarstan it is customary to consider Genghis Khan not as a bloody conqueror but as a great reformer.

“In Tatarstan itself, the Golden Horde is considered an empire, and Genghis Khan is not a conqueror, but a reformer,” said Rafael Khakimov, vice president of the Republican Academy of Sciences, who heads the Republican Institute of History. The Tatar historian motivates the removal of the term “Tatar-Mongol yoke” by the fact that Russia “should abandon the Eurocentric approach”, since it is a “Eurasian state”.

The deification of Genghis Khan and Batu in modern Tatarstan strikes me the most. It has nothing to do with either the “Russian” identity (with it, as we know, the authorities of Tatarstan have always had some difficulties) or with local nationalism.

The fact is that the title ethnos of modern Tatarstan are the descendants of the ancient people of the Volga Bulgars. It was a highly civilized sedentary people with a rich culture, controlling a significant part of the trade route “from the Varyag to the Persians”, which was the most important for the early Middle Ages.

One of the first in the territory of present-day Russia, the Bulgars accepted Islam, and this was the complex and cultural Islam of cities, akin to Islam of the Baghdad Caliphate, and not the simplified Islam of the steppe people.

In the 1236 year, Baty invaded Bulgaria, defeated it, interrupted a significant part of the population and plundered many cities. The Bulgars repeatedly rebelled against the power of the Golden Horde, and only the most brutal genocide broke their resistance. The winners were so cruel that they deprived the Bulgars of their name, they turned into "Tatars" - on behalf of the worst enemies of Genghis Khan, whom the Mongols subjected to systematic extermination.

The damage of the Bulgarians inflicted by the Mongols was much greater than the damage to Russia, and the cult of Genghis Khan or Batu for the people of Tatarstan is as strange as the cult of Sultan Murad I in Serbia or Adolf Hitler in Poland.

I personally have only one logical explanation. The chanting of the Golden Horde in Tatarstan is not so much a nationalistic as a neo-imperial character. The horde was a vast nomadic empire, stretching throughout the Volga region, the Don River, and even Transnistria.

And, perhaps, someone in Kazan is dreaming that one day this city will take the place of the ancient Saray, when the rule of the “Russian colonialists” will collapse. In this case, for the sake of such adventurist claims, inflate the cult of Genghis Khan and in fact is logical. For a life in the “multinational Russian Federation” or even for Tatar nationalism, such a cult is absurd. And for the descendants of the Bulgars, identifying oneself with the bloody steppe dwellers is simply humiliating.

Genghis Khan in general occupies too large a place in the history of Russia, inherited from the history of the USSR. It is possible that the great conqueror was indeed born on the territory of modern Russia, in a valley flowing between Mongolia and Buryatia of the Onon river, but this fact has not been established precisely - with equal probability he could have been born in Mongolia. However, all the historical activities of Temujin-Genghis Khan proceeded in Mongolia and China.

Surprisingly, Chingis himself did not make a single trip to the North. He personally commanded the invasion of Central Asia and the destruction of Khorezm, so his presence in the history books of the USSR was meaningful, but what he does in the history books of modern Russia as an independent character is not very clear. The invasion of Russia was not by Genghis Khan, not “the empire of Genghis Khan” (with it the Russians had only the tragic “airborne clash” on Kalka), but the Mongol empire created by Genghis Khan.

The decision to march on the West and the assignment of this march to Batu Khan was taken at a kurultai meeting after the death of the founder of the dynasty. If you follow the same methodology that Genghis Khan and his portrait got into our textbooks, in the sections on the 18th century, you need to give a detailed sketch of the Great French Revolution and put a portrait of Robespierre, since it was this Revolution that gave birth to Napoleon who invaded Russia in France.

Yes, and the history of the Great Patriotic War will have to start at least with the biography of Hitler's patron Field Marshal Ludendorff (the more so that the last one in the First World War had much more to do with Russian history).

The hypertrophied presence of Genghis Khan in our history is connected, first of all, with the dense ideological pressure in the XX – XXI centuries of the intellectual school of "Eurasians".

Gathered in Slavic-German Prague, seen from the Eurasian peoples except a janitor-tatar and a couple of Hungarians, Russian intellectuals tried to solve the problem: "how to justify the unity of the Russian Empire space in a condition when the king's power collapsed and the Third Rome lies in dust?".

That the great empire will be collected for a long time by communism or socialism, none of them believed, the West, as it was supposed to European intellectuals of the Spengler era, openly despised, and they decided to find an iron one, in the spirit of fashion in that era of geopolitics and historical geography, the solution: to declare Russia the historical successor of the empire of Genghis Khan and substantiate on this foundation the need for the unity of this space, the iron and aggressive imperial statehood with the "anti-Western" ideology.

Since the Eurasian movement was, first of all, political and only then historical and intellectual, then, speaking of history, we will find among the Eurasians the most traditional views. Let's say N.S. Trubetskoy speaks of the “Tatar-Mongol yoke”, which simultaneously both oppressed and “taught” the Russians to dominate Eurasia. True, the question arises, if we accept this concept, why only the Russians “learned” the Mongolian steppe, and where the steppek closer to them mostly learned nothing and were crushed and absorbed by the power of the Russian tsars?

The answer to this question is quite simple - no "Mongolian system" existed. There was a Chinese system borrowed by the Mongols, which was built, using the trust of Genghis Khan and especially Ogedei, a Chinese Khitan intellectual Ye-lii Chutsay. How the Mongols themselves ordered the lands they conquered is well known.

Noyons suggested that Ugedei cut the entire population of northern China, destroy cities and turn these lands into pastures. Ye-lii Chu-cai dissuaded Khan from this barbarism and proposed the creation of an administrative system, harmonious taxation, in general, everything that Eurasians liked so much in the Horde order. What the Russians learned from the Mongols in terms of state building (according to their own teachings of the Eurasians) (was there really such a “training” is a matter of long discussion) is not credit for Genghis Khan or Batu, but Ye-lii Chutsay.

One civilized sedentary book people — Russians — learned from another — Chinese. The role of the Mongols - the role of the communicator - here is similar to the one they played for the West, bringing Chinese paper, Chinese gunpowder and much more. However, unlike the West, which brought enormous benefits to the possibility of penetration along the Mongolian roads to China, Russia paid such a price for "training" that it was probably not necessary.

Eurasians, by the way, created a great deal from the bird language of the current semi-official ideology. Their texts are full of endless arguments about the "Eurasian brotherhood of nations", about the "multi-nation nation of Eurasia", in which the Russian people will have to act as a bond and cement. But if you look at their political program, expressed in the text “Eurasianism. The wording of 1927 of the Year ”, then we suddenly find there those Russian nationalist demands that even today many Russian nationalists formulate with caution:

“It is necessary that the current system in the USSR, imbued with the beginnings of internationalism and communism, be transformed into a supranational system on a national basis. A prerequisite for such a rebirth is the provision of opportunities for the Russian people to state-shaped national identity and the construction of a national state, the possibilities that they are actually deprived of at the present time. "

So modern Russophobia in the name of Eurasianism is a break with classical Eurasianism, which has never denied the state rights of the Russian people.

The next stage in the formation of our "Genghis Khan" was the work of a remarkable artist of the word and an outstanding thinker, the creator of the passionary theory of ethnogenesis Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov. I deliberately do not say “historian”, because Gumilev is exactly as a historian has always been presented, presented and will be numerous claims - for arbitrary treatment of facts, guessing of facts, the artist’s magnificent contempt for direct statements of sources in the name of the author’s “I see this.”

To the greatest extent, this concerns the large-scale historical myth created by Gumilyov about the relations between Russian and steppe peoples, about the anti-Western brotherhood of Russians and Mongols, about the almost non-conflict existence of peoples within the Golden Horde.

A detailed analysis of both the myth created by Gumilyov and the reasons that pushed him to do this is not necessary here - every reader can see the magnificent book by Sergey Belyakov “Gumilyov son of Gumilyov” - not only the fascinating biography of the learned son of two great poets, but also respectful, but strict and ruthless analysis of the "Mongolian myth."

Suffice it to say that it was Gumilev’s constructions that lay at the basis of the countless constructions of “Tatarstan historians”, “Eurasian historians” and banal metropolitan Russophobes, engaged not in research, but in the mystification of the relationship between Russia and the Mongols, Russia and the Horde.

Any indications of the enormous damage done to the Horde’s development of the Russian people, they categorically silence the “black legend” stub, launching explicit phantoms, such as the completely fictional “Mongolian detachment that determined the fate of the fateful Ice Massacre”, and reflections on the history of the Russian people are interrupted fictional Gumilyov design that Ancient Russia has no relation to Russia, and Russia and the Russian - this is a country and ethnicity, grown under the authority of the Horde.

In this paragraph, which represents a frank historical discrimination of the Russian people, both the “Eurasians” and the Ukrainian chauvinists, Russophobes, for whom the “Moskal” is not a Slav, but a Tatar and Finno-Ugr, and, paradoxically, the originators of the concept, fully agree. The new textbook, which gave the title of the first chapter of his essay with a light paraphrase of Gumilevsky's “From Russia to Russia”: “From Ancient Russia to the Russian State”.

The absurdity of these constructions is quite obvious. The history of Germany and the German people begin with Charlemagne, and even with Arminius, who beat the Romans in the Teutoburg Forest. The French made tremendous efforts to assimilate into their history the ancient Gauls. In China, it is possible that you will be jailed if you begin to preach the Gumilyov theory of changing many unrelated Chinese ethnic groups.

In the Russian case, we have a single historical tradition, one continuously developing national language (I don’t know how you are, I understand the Old Russian chronicles without any tension, and experts who mastered archeography also easily cope not only with printed but also with handwritten text), a single self-name and self-awareness. The fact that the geographical center of Russia in the Moscow period moved to the northeast is also not surprising.

The lack of movement of the capital is characteristic only for a few countries - England and France. The capital of Spain today is not Toledo, the capital of Germany is not Aachen, Poland is not Krakow, Sweden is not Uppsala. After the NATO-Albanian aggression and the rejection of Kosovo, Serbia lost the core of its statehood.

Gumilyov built a strange scheme from Russia and Russia with his own good intentions. Within the framework of his theory, which strictly limited the life of the ethnic group 1200 for years, the Russians, who emerged in the 9th century, should have completed their existence with the hardest obscuration. And taking our birth to the XIV – XV centuries, the author gave us a long “golden autumn”. He could hardly have imagined that his constructions would be used in the dirty propaganda game of shortening Russian history and, in proportion to this shortening, detracting from Russian historical rights.

The controversy over the particulars of the history of Russian-Horde relations would make this already not short text completely dimensionless. Therefore, I will allow myself to choose a different path - as briefly as possible, to present a systematic vision of that period of Russian history, which they now propose not to call the “Mongol-Tatar yoke” of its causes, course and consequences. All particulars will be commented in the course of lighting the whole.

***
The history of the huge space, which has now become a custom to call the Great Steppe, has a great turning point - this is the 4th century of our era, when at the European end of the Great Steppe the Huns emerged from the historical fog. Prior to that, for several millennia, most of Northern Eurasia was dominated by Indo-Iranian peoples (“Aryans” - as they were designated before the profanation of this word by the Nazis).

They were formed somewhere in the Urals, in the same area in the Sintashta archaeological culture area they mastered the construction of cities and metallurgy. Then the part went to the south, to Central Asia, Iran, India. The other part remained in the steppe, perfectly mastered horse breeding and the art of horsemanship and acquired the name of the Scythians in history. Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans succeeded each other, first in the role of masters of all Eurasia, then only its Western part.

With all the uniqueness of their culture and love of raids, they very constructively communicated with highly developed agricultural peoples, in particular, the Greeks who appeared in the Black Sea region. At the junction of cultures and economic structures, peculiar states and vivid cultural monuments arose, such as the Scythian gold created by the Greeks for the Scythians.

At the same time, in the east of Eurasia, near the borders of China, peculiar traditions of the Turkic and Mongolian nomadic peoples were being formed, which China plundered, quarreled with it, received from it a military response (of which the Great Wall of China was a part) or, on the contrary, tried to assimilate it culture

When the Chinese defeated the people of the Huns, part of it submitted to the Chinese, and then arranged a bloody time of troubles in the 4th – 6th centuries, compared with which the horrors of our European Great Migration simply turned pale, the second part of the Huns went west, turned into the Huns and pushed the beginning Great Migration, defeating the state is ready in the Northern Black Sea region.

From that moment on, steppe Eurasia became the lot of the Turks, the Mongols, and the Ugrian nomads, who were often almost indistinguishable from them, who, however, migrating to Pannonia, parted and turned into the European nation of Hungarians. While at one end of Eurasia, the steppe people were tearing China apart, a short-lived, but Turu Khaganate that set the standard of the steppe empire was formed in the center, more and more wild people appeared on the borders of Europe — the Bulgarians were replaced by Bulgarians and obrens (impostors, who named themselves Avar "), Those - Khazars, Khazars - Pechenegs, and Pechenegs - Polovtsy.

Meanwhile, north of the Steppe, Russia began to develop in the forest-steppe and steppe zone. Historians and geographers of Eurasianism completely incorrectly determined the place of Russia in the geographical landscape of Eurasia, stating that the Russians were representatives of the “forest” in its imaginary centuries-old struggle with the “steppe”. The Russians lived in the forest because there it was easier to defend themselves from the steppe inhabitants, but the rivers were the true formative landscape of the Russian people.

The whole of northern Eurasia, from the source of the Neman to the mouth of the Amur, is a complex network of closely adjoining river basins, dragging ships between them without difficulty.

The Byzantines still noted among the ancient Slavs the tendency to live on rivers, lakes and swamps. However, in comparison with the Slavs, the Russian ethnos made an important adaptation discovery - the Russians learned not only to live comfortably in the flood plain, but also mastered long-distance strategic reconnaissance.

Most likely, we owe this Russian peculiarity to the combination of the Slavic and Varangian principles. Whether the Norsemen were Scandinavians, as the Normanists insist, or the Western Slavs, as the anti-Normanists claim, they were in any case representatives of the Baltic tradition of long-distance navigation, which experienced its golden age in the Viking Age. But if with the sea the Varangians were on “you”, so that they could even climb into Sicily, even into Iceland and America, then sailing along rivers with portages and rapids is a specific activity.

Therefore, the Vikings could not have mastered the route along the Russian Plain to Constantinople and Persia without the help of the local population. Thus arose the grandiose synthesis of the Slavic floodplain adaptation and the Varangian long voyages, which gave rise to the phenomenon of Russia.

Emperor Constantine Bagryanorodny left us a wonderful description of this synthesis, which turned the Russian rivers into the likeness of distant sea roads.

“Odnodorovki, coming to Constantinople from foreign Russia, come from Nevogardy, in which sat Svyatoslav, son of Russian prince Igor, as well as from the fortress Miliniski, from Teluits, Chernigogi and from Vysehrad. All of them go down the Dnieper River and gather in the Kiev fortress, called Samvat. Their Slavs, called Kriviteins and Lensanins, and other Slavs cut their trees in their mountains during the winter and, having discovered them, with the opening of the time when the ice melts, they enter the nearby lakes. Then, since they (the lakes) flow into the Dnieper River, from there they themselves enter the same river, come to Kiev, pull the boats ashore for rigging and sell Russam. The Russians, buying only the decks themselves, dismantle the old odnodretriki, take from them the oars, oarlocks and other gear and equip new ones. In the month of June, having moved along the Dnieper River, they descend into Vitchev, a fortress subservient to Russia. Having waited there for two or three days, until all odnodrevki approach, they move to the path and descend along the named river Dnieper ”.

Already from the beginning of the 9th century, long before the appearance of Rurik, the Khazars and Greeks felt the pressure of the aggressive river power of the Rus, perhaps already having the center of Kiev. The Khazars, who were then allies of Byzantium, asked the Greeks to send engineers to cover their northern borders along the Don. It was the lands around Kiev in the later tradition that were called “Rus”, and when they came to Kiev from Smolensk or Chernigov, they were said to “go to Russia”.

18 June 860, the Rus came under the walls of Constantinople (they were headed according to our chronicles Askold and Dir) and horrified its inhabitants. Deliverance was revered by a miracle. It is this event, and in no way the establishment of Ruriococracy in the north - the first significant event known to us in Russian history. It had countless consequences, like the beginning of the mission of Cyril and Methodius, which ended with the creation of Slavic writing.

The Byzantines were confident that they had succeeded in converting Christianity, and the greatest thinker, writer and orator - the father of Byzantine Christianity, Patriarch Photius, in his own way, glorified the appearance in the history of a new great people: “the so-called people who are many times famous and Growing up - those who, after enslaving the people who lived around them and, because they were too arrogant, raised a hand to the Romea power itself ... nowadays, however, they also changed the pagan and godless faith, which they had before, on a pure and Separate religion of Christians. "

Then, however, the Rurik dynasty that came from the north tried to appropriate the merit of the Tsargrad campaign to itself - a beautiful historiographic phantom appeared - Oleg's campaign against Tsargrad, incredibly successful, ending with nailing a shield on the gate, but ... for some reason not having any reflection in Byzantine sources.

The Byzantines not only did not hesitate to defeat themselves, but also described them with many details, and their silence speaks only about one thing: there was no campaign, it was composed to glorify Oleg compared to Askold and Dir and as a “preface” to trade agreements with the Greeks (Oleg, who was an outstanding politician, probably concluded these treaties).

The long period of military-trade relations of Russia with Byzantium through the Black Sea began, and the Arabs and Persians - through the Caspian Sea. Russia with great cruelty and aggression crushed obstacles in its path. The princes in Kiev subjugated the Slavic tribes (here, by the way, I must say a few words about the popular myth that “Kyiv princes sold their people into slavery” - princes sold not “their people” into slavery - living in Kiev and around it , for example, Vyatichi, who were considered tributaries, and not their people).

Svyatoslav defeated the Khazars, attacked the Volga Bulgars, defeated the Danube Bulgaria and threatened the Byzantine emperor that he would be thrown into Asia, leaving Europe alone (the first Russian European, whether someone likes it or not). But in the structure of the Russian expansion there was one really weak point - this is the steppe.

Just as not to beat each other to an elephant and a whale, it was just as difficult for a horse to cope with a horse. The Pechenegs cut the lower reaches of the Russian rivers, willingly working with chain dogs from the Greeks, who appreciated the fact that in the area of ​​the rapids the Russians who left their rooks were defenseless.

Let us again give the floor to Constantine the Porphyrogenitus: “The Russians cannot come even to this royal city of Romeev, if they don’t live in peace with the Pechenegs, either for the sake of war or trade, since, having reached the rapids on ships, if they do not pull the ships out of the river and do not carry them on their shoulders; attacking them then, the Pecheneg people easily turn to flight and arrange a massacre, since they cannot perform two works at the same time. ”

The Dnieper rapids cost the lives of Svyatoslav, and his son Vladimir, having become friends with Byzantium, having accepted baptism, used this to declare a great war to the steppe heathen (what was the ratio of trade interests, revenge for the father, hostility of the steppe, interference of external forces from Byzantium to Khorezm - we hardly ever know for certain). Anyway, it was the war with the Pechenegs that occupied Prince Vladimir most of his reign.

South Russia was covered with fortified cities. The Russian warriors massively transferred horses and mastered the methods of the steppe war; the archaeological materials left over from the Scythian-Sarmatian time — the Zmiev ramparts, which were poured and fortified, were put into operation. Saying “it is not good that there are few cities near Kiev,” Vladimir began a massive migration of Slavs from the north to build new fortresses.

The most popular Russian legend of those years was the legend about the founding of Pereyaslavl after a duel between the Pecheneg warrior and Kozhemyak Yan Isomar. Yaroslav the Wise continued the fight. After the general march of Pechenegs to Russia in the 1036 year, accompanied by an attempt to seize Kiev, the Pecheneg star began to decline: the steppeters quarreled with Russia and Byzantium to their misfortune and eventually 29 of April 1091 of the year cut out after the defeat whole people.

“One could see an extraordinary spectacle: an entire people, who was considered not tens of thousands, but exceeding any number, with their wives and children, completely died on that day,” wrote Anna Comnina. The day of this massacre was celebrated in Constantinople as the "Day of the Pechenegs."

Russia by that time the Polovtsians were already more concerned. Beginning with the 1055 year, they are attacking Russia more and more often. Their danger was all the more so because part of the fighting princes (first of all, the famous Oleg Svyatoslavich) willingly used the Polovtsian help in internal strife. However, the threat posed by the Polovtsy was still so serious - they plundered the cities, massacred the population, killed the monks of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra in 1096, and Vladimir Monomakh, the brightest and far-sighted of the Russian politicians of that era (and one of the greatest people in general) in Russian history) it was possible to gather in one anti-Crimean coalition all, including Oleg.

Monomakh has developed a brilliant strategy to fight the steppe. First, instead of the traditional summer war, he proposed to strike at them in early spring, when horses, emaciated after the winter starter, were powerless. Secondly, Monomakh decided to use the traditionally strong side of the Russians and conduct a landing operation on the river - while the Russian cavalry marched across the steppe, the Russian boats reached the rapids and landed troops at Khortitsa, who went deep into the Polovtsian lands on foot.

4 April 1103, in the Battle of Soutine, the Polovtsy were defeated, and they were dealt a crushing strategic blow. However, the threat could be completely eliminated only by ruining the steppe camps. And in 1111, a real crusade began (in Russia they were very interested in the deeds of the Crusaders for the liberation of the Holy Sepulcher and just in 1104 – 1106 they sent Abbot Daniel there, who was friendly received by King Baldwin of Jerusalem).

They rode in a steppe in a sleigh, then abandoned carts and heavy armor and appeared lightly in front of the city of Sharukan. They carried a cross in front of the army, priests sang tropari and kondaks ... and the gates of the city opened. There were many Christians in Sharukan, most likely Alans, and they friendly met their fellow believers. The decisive battle took place on 27 March 1111, the Salnice River. It was a difficult, bloody battle, which ended in the complete defeat of the steppe men.

The crusade of Monomakh broke the back of the Polovtsian aggression, although, of course, could not stop it completely - som could not beat the horse in the steppe. But the Russians proved that they are not easy victims and can give change. A balance was established in which the Russian princes could marry their women, maintain a strong alliance with the khans.

A community of "their unclean" —Torks, Berendeis, Pechenegs — who played an important role in the struggle for the Kiev table, was formed around Kiev. However, in the second half of the 12th century, the generation of Polovtsy, frightened by Monomakh, grew up; they struck the most sensitive blow of the considerably weakened Russian lands - they tried to block the way from Varyag to the Greeks in its steppe section.

In 1167, they attacked the caravans of the merchants of the “buckwheat”. Kiev princes had to put cordons to protect the river path. And in 1170, Prince Mstislav Izyaslavich again went to the steppe to the Polovtsian camps and made a terrible defeat. But by that time, the star of the new Khan, whose name is known to almost every Russian - Konchak, has already risen over the Seversky Donets.

If the campaign against Prince Igor Svyatoslavich could be explained - the Chernigov princes always wanted to return part of the Polovtsian lands to their principality, then the unique failure of this campaign, which deserved the attention of the chroniclers and the epic poet, was due to the refusal of Monomakh tactics - the Russians moved deep into the steppe in May, when the Polovtsians were the strongest.

Konchak turned out to be a good tactician who defeated Igor on his head, and a cunning diplomat, after the union and marriage that bound him (however, did the captive Vladimir Igorevich want to marry Konchakovna and how warm were his feelings for the khan's daughter - the story, unlike the opera, is silent). But Konchak was inclined no more than other steppe people towards the “Eurasian brotherhood” - the tragic fate of the city of Rimova on the Sula River speaks of this. He was besieged by the Polovtsi, bravely defended, but all those who did not manage to escape through the "Roman Marsh" (oh, how would Fomenko’s fantasy play out!) Were completely cut out.

In the first third of the 13th century, the Polovtsi were familiar and familiar enemies for Russians, who were either reconciled, fought, or went on campaigns against other opponents - the Hungarians. This relationship can not be called good neighborliness. On the contrary, even numerous marriages with the Polovchanka, even the Christianization of the Polovtsian part of the hostile tone of the Russian chronicles and the Lay are not in the least diminishing.

How would the story develop further - would the Russians turn the strategic situation on the border with the Steppe and break the Polovtsy, or the strategic balance would continue for many centuries without leading, however, to any “Eurasian synthesis” - it is impossible to predict.

But in 1223, the Mongols appeared in the Polovtsian Steppe, Desht-i-Kipchak ...
Author:
Originator:
http://www.vz.ru/
156 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 16 October 2013 08: 43 New
    +8
    Interesting topic...
    In general, in the Republic of Tatarstan it is customary to consider Genghis Khan not as a bloody conqueror, but as a great reformer.


    And who is next in this list of REFORMERS - Napoleon, Hitler?
    Of course, without reform and great talent, creating a huge empire out of nothing is impossible. But probably it’s worthwhile to admit that it cost a lot of blood.
    As for Russia, archaeologists clearly distinguish between the time before the "arrival" and "after" those "reformers". If before their arrival, craftsmen flourished in the country, there are a lot of magnificent products made of gold, iron, and obviously local craftsmen (ornaments, patterns are characteristic), then after a century for three "like a cow licked its tongue" - nothing ... All the same, probably it is worth recognizing that for someone these "reforms" were a blessing, and someone embodied them ringing with shackles and going into captivity, far from home ...
    1. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 16 October 2013 08: 47 New
      +4
      Another census of history.
      1. kavkaz8888
        kavkaz8888 16 October 2013 09: 58 New
        +2
        Rather, another scan of opinions for the next census
        1. Ingvar 72
          Ingvar 72 16 October 2013 10: 35 New
          +1
          Quote: kavkaz8888
          Rather, another scan of opinions for the next census

          It is also an option. drinks
        2. Vasia kruger
          Vasia kruger 16 October 2013 11: 11 New
          0
          More likely another confusion ...
      2. Sakmagon
        Sakmagon 17 October 2013 05: 00 New
        0
        The Poles considered themselves the descendants of the ancient Sarmatians, everything that is located from them to the east is Tataria (recently this nonsense revived in the writings of Fomenko-Nosovsky)

        With the author, everything is clear ... other people's laurels do not allow to sleep peacefully.
        Learn materiel, dear author!
    2. 6 sunrise 9
      6 sunrise 9 16 October 2013 09: 17 New
      +5
      Well, what about in Belarus they already do not consider Napoleon an invader and the war of 1812. domestic. In Ukraine, youth-fascists ziki march through the streets of Kiev, throwing and glorifying the UPA. The Tatars, too, need "their heroes" in the fight against the "m.s.k.o.l.yam.and" so they cling to Genghis Khan ... who had nothing to do with the Tatars.
      1. vladimirZ
        vladimirZ 16 October 2013 09: 24 New
        11
        The nationalist elite of Tatarstan is gradually and purposefully pursuing an anti-Russian policy, with the ultimate goal of leaving Tatarstan from Russia. It is impossible not to see this.
        Therefore, everything anti-Russian, including the "Tatar-Mongol yoke", the roles of Genghis Khan, Batu, the Golden Horde, causes their rejection and disagreement with the Russian interpretation of events.
        The Kremlin’s policy of hushing up and pacifying nationalists of small nations in assessing historical events, a compromising position with them, will inevitably lead to even greater concessions in other issues, and God forbid, a bloody division between the peoples of our country.
        1. dark_65
          dark_65 20 October 2013 17: 02 New
          0
          Where the hell will this narrow-film format be separated? What are these common borders, make an analogue of Lesotho, and let them hang out next.
      2. Fastblast
        Fastblast 16 October 2013 10: 43 New
        +3
        You might think that in Russia there is no zigging youth
        Do not tell, there are nationalists in every country.
        1. Field
          Field 16 October 2013 11: 31 New
          +2
          nationalists and fascists, these are usually different concepts and different people
          1. Fastblast
            Fastblast 16 October 2013 11: 41 New
            0
            I know.
            what are you trying to say?
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. DEfindER
        DEfindER 16 October 2013 15: 22 New
        +4
        Quote: 6Sunrise9
        so they clung to Genghis Khan .. who had nothing to do with the Tatars.

        But he had nothing to do with the Mongols either, in all the chronicles, the people uniting the lands into a golden horde were called not Mongols, but "Moguls" ie great, and had nothing to do with the Mongoloid race at all.
        For example, the well-known portrait of Genghis Khan where he is a Mongol dates back only to 1748, i.e. 500 years after the life of Genghis Khan himself:
        Genghis Khan














        and for example, drawings of a contemporary of Genghis Khan, Marco Polo for some reason, no one is considering, for example, this is “The wedding of Genghis Khan to the kingdom”:
        “The wedding of Genghis Khan to the kingdom”














        Or a bust of Batu Khan in Turkey:
        "Bust of Batu Khan, located in Turkey"














        As they say, there is something to ponder over, if not for all these contradictions in official history, Fomenko’s research and other legitimate doubts would not have appeared.
        1. a52333
          a52333 16 October 2013 15: 53 New
          0
          Quote: DEfindER
          research Fomenko

          AHA. there is the most interesting episode of when (and where) Jesus lived. And let the "historians" try to explain clearly WHY THE CROSS VISITS STARTED IN THE 11 CENTURY AND WHY IN ISTANBUL
          1. _Siberian_
            _Siberian_ 17 October 2013 10: 11 New
            +1
            Fomenko is not a historian but a mathematician.
            Many statements are controversial, only in the office. history of problems is full.
            You can argue for a long time on this topic and come to nothing.
            Each generation writes and rewrites the story for themselves, and what was really afraid of us not knowing there.
            PS: current version ...
            crying

            PS: PS: The state of Mongolia appeared only in the 1930-s, when the Bolsheviks came to the nomads living in the Gobi Desert and informed them that they were the descendants of the great Mongols, and their "compatriot" had created the Great Empire in due time, which they very surprised and delighted. The word "Mughal" is of Greek origin, and means "Great." The Greeks called this word our ancestors - the Slavs. It has nothing to do with the name of any nation (N.V. Levashov, “Visible and Invisible Genocide”).
        2. tomket
          tomket 16 October 2013 23: 58 New
          0
          Of course, a bust of contemporary Chingiz Khan installed. not otherwise.
      5. _Siberian_
        _Siberian_ 17 October 2013 10: 01 New
        0
        And then the Mongols know about the great fellow countryman? laughing
    3. riding
      riding 16 October 2013 11: 00 New
      +4
      And you read the materials of the conferences of young historians, when the science of archeology rejected the traditional claims about the cities defeated by the Mongols, when the reasons for the decline were explained, for example, by the removal of the city from new trade routes. There are studies in which the fate of Southern Russia (where Daniil Galitsky came from) and East (Alexander Nevsky) are traced in detail and very convincingly, and conclusions are not in favor of the southern lands, where desolation was observed.
      And it’s unlikely that it will be possible to throw Genghis Khan’s name out of the history of Russia, not only the Mongols, Kazakhs, Tatars claim the right to see him as a great ancestor. In the works of Sidorov, Bushkov and others, an attempt is made to see the Slavic roots behind the name of the great commander and reformer.
    4. Setrac
      Setrac 16 October 2013 11: 26 New
      +3
      Quote: svp67
      And as for Russia, archaeologists clearly distinguish between the time before the "arrival" and "after" those "reformers".

      This was invented by GERMAN historians.
      Quote: svp67
      If before their arrival craftsmen flourished in the country, there are a lot of magnificent products made of gold, iron, and obviously local craftsmen (ornaments, patterns are characteristic), then after a century for three "like a cow licked with her tongue" - nothing ...

      These "baptists" walked with fire and sword, the horde had nothing to do with it.
      1. svp67
        svp67 16 October 2013 11: 32 New
        0
        Quote: Setrac
        These "baptists" walked with fire and sword, the horde had nothing to do with it.

        "Horde" is not "ORDA", but on the site of ancient Russian cities they dig up "ashes" full of skeletons of people of the "Caucasian race" and "Asian race" with traces of violent death and, accordingly, many fragments of weapons and "armor", as "European", "Russian" and "Eastern" types, as well as purely "Asian" ... So, it is very difficult to oppose SUCH facts, to object to something ...
        1. xtur
          xtur 16 October 2013 13: 56 New
          +3
          Can you provide links to such works?
        2. DEfindER
          DEfindER 16 October 2013 17: 22 New
          0
          Quote: svp67
          "Horde" is not "ORDA", but on the site of ancient Russian cities "ashes" are being dug out, full of skeletons of people of "Caucasoid race" and "Asian race" with traces of violent death

          But the capital of the Horde, the city of Sarai is located near Volgograd, and there were no Asians, there were Turkic and Slavic peoples, and if the excavations with the skeletons of the Asians were real, then it means the Horde itself fought off the raids of some Mongol tribes, which by the way is quite real could be..
        3. Setrac
          Setrac 16 October 2013 19: 28 New
          +2
          Quote: svp67
          but on the site of ancient Russian cities they dig up "ashes" full of skeletons of people of the "Caucasian race" and "Asian race" with traces of violent death and, accordingly, a lot of fragments of weapons and "armor", like the "European", "Russian" and "Eastern" types , and purely "Asian" ...

          These are your dreams, mainly the skeletons of Europeans, and the nomads did not produce their serious weapons at all.
        4. _Siberian_
          _Siberian_ 17 October 2013 10: 19 New
          +2
          The defense of Kozelsk. Thumbnail from the Russian chronicle

          If you look closely, then the muzzles and stand on the other hand are the same.
          And the main Basurman with a red beard and a crown ...
          PS: Hu and S Genghiszan?
          belay
    5. Ruslan_F38
      Ruslan_F38 16 October 2013 15: 40 New
      +2
      “In Tatarstan itself, the Golden Horde is considered an empire, and Genghis Khan is not a conqueror, but a reformer,” said Rafael Khakimov, vice president of the Republican Academy of Sciences, who heads the Republican Institute of History. The Tatar historian motivates the removal of the term “Tatar-Mongol yoke” by the fact that Russia “should abandon the Eurocentric approach”, since it is a “Eurasian state”.

      The deification of Genghis Khan and Batu in modern Tatarstan strikes me the most. It has nothing to do with either the “Russian” identity (with it, as we know, the authorities of Tatarstan have always had some difficulties) or with local nationalism.
      - Khakimov is a nationalist who hates everything Russian, who does not believe, study the works of the main ideologue of the Tatarstan government, since the network is full of them. However, he is the same terry Tatar nationalist as the entire Tatarstan "elite" and of course the power that allows Khakimov and the rest to be so. This census of history was imposed on Moscow in connection with the fact that once again the authorities of the Republic of Tatarstan have played out the national card - either there will be no yoke, or you will catch the Wahhabi and nationalist chaos in the heart of Russia. Well, what about our power? And the weak selling power of the GDP gulped and swallowed! Congratulations to all - we have a new history of the country again! I advise you to read the new history of Tatarstan, there are many interesting things.
      By the way, I tried to repeatedly publish articles on VO on this topic - they constantly wrapped up what suddenly happened?
      Get acquainted with the processes taking place in Tatarstan: http://www.rusbeseda.ru/index.php?topic=1947.0
      1. alex86
        alex86 16 October 2013 20: 29 New
        +1
        Some addition: probably all this talk
        Quote: Ruslan_F38
        “In Tatarstan itself, the Golden Horde is considered an empire, and Genghis Khan is not a conqueror, but a reformer,” said Rafael Khakimov, vice president of the Republican Academy of Sciences, head of the Republican Institute of History
        somewhere they go, Tatar nationalism exists separately from the Russian-speaking population of Tatarstan (this is what I say as a resident of Kazan), but the main reasons for the periodic pulling out of "the bug of Tatar nationalism", in my opinion, are more primitive - the Universiade was held, there is a lot of money at the World Cup they will not give - either another reason for squeezing money out of Moscow is needed (but it is indecent to spend the millennium of Kazan more than once every 25 years), or pulling out a "nationalist threat", especially since Minnikhanov did not show himself anything special in front of Moscow. So, while all this is just a tool for making money.
  2. Mature naturalist
    Mature naturalist 16 October 2013 08: 45 New
    14
    I don't like articles like this. After all, for sure the author did not sit in the archives and did not rummage through the primary sources, but compiled something from other articles, came up with something himself ("I think so ... (c))
    Here Zadornov rummaged, and it turned out that with Rurik everything is not as it is customary in traditional history ...
    1. alebor
      alebor 16 October 2013 10: 34 New
      -4
      Quote: Mature Naturalist
      Here Zadornov rummaged, and it turned out that with Rurik everything is not as it is customary in traditional history ...

      laughing It is wonderful! Indeed, why not write a textbook on the history of Russia to comedians Zadornov, Petrosyan and Vinokur and other major specialists? And Zadornov in general for his services to the study of history and philology could be appointed president of the reformed Academy of Sciences.
      1. Pit
        Pit 16 October 2013 11: 00 New
        +3
        Quote: alebor
        And Zadornov in general for his services to the study of history and philology could be appointed president of the reformed Academy of Sciences.

        Do not judge a person only from your bell tower.
        You have the same blinkered outlook on the world order
        like the vast majority of the population of our country.
        In us for almost a millennium, the memory of ancestors was burned out.
        And if Zadornov is wrong in something, then this is not a reason to jerk.
        He’s at least trying to figure out the past, and not stupidly nudge
        academic sources.
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 16 October 2013 19: 32 New
          0
          Quote: Pit
          And if Zadornov is wrong in something, then this is not a reason to jerk.

          Zadornov is a well-known Russophobe, the only plus to him is that he is an ideological Russophobe and not corrupt (for money).
    2. Pit
      Pit 16 October 2013 10: 41 New
      0
      Quote: Mature Naturalist
      and it turned out that with Rurik everything is not as it is accepted in traditional history ...

      And with the Tatar-Mongol Yoke, the same thing.
      Even if there were such powerful and glorious warriors, and their
      generals, talented to the core, the question is how steppe
      tribes so quickly learned to fight, in a forest zone, how are they
      quickly learned how to besiege the fortress walls and where did they take such
      I’ll break through food for the whole gang if people tried to escape from them
      At once. And their campaigns, judging by the history, were far from two-week.
      Further, if they were able to organize such a great empire, then which
      still not one written evidence of them has been found
      existence in the "Mongolian" language, even if they
      in Russian.
      As for me, they cannot be non-Tatars, not Mongols. The same
      the most Slavs, they just came from behind the Urals.
      And all this booze began, after the Christianization of Kievan Rus.
      Tatar "historians" should be read, in the archives and
      Western writers of those years.
      They called us Tatars and Mongols, from the words "Tartaria is the land of Tarkh
      and containers "and" Mogul - great "
      1. Djozz
        Djozz 16 October 2013 12: 38 New
        +2
        Not so long ago I described something like this under the article "Lithuanian Rus", so Kazakh "historians" almost devoured me, it turns out they are entirely "noble" descendants of Genghis Khan!
        1. Lindon
          Lindon 16 October 2013 12: 47 New
          +4
          Genghis Khan was probably Russian - just why did he start the capture from China, Khozrem and only at the end took up the Russian principalities on Kalka?
          1. svp67
            svp67 16 October 2013 12: 56 New
            +1
            Quote: Lindon
            Genghis Khan was probably Russian - just why did he start the capture from China, Khozrem and only at the end took up the Russian principalities on Kalka?

            In those places where Genghis Khan was from, many ancient burials of EUROPEOID people have already been found in our time. So, that Russian is not Russian, but there is a description that he was tall, bearded and blue-eyed, left by contemporaries. And if this is true, then we simply don’t know much from the ANCIENT history of our planet.

            And he took up the "Russian principalities" not for the Kalka, but for the fact that his ambassadors were brutally killed in Kiev, who suggested that the Kiyans not intercede for the "Polovtsy" with whom the "Tatar-Mongols" were waging a difficult war.
            And the murder of ambassadors, all the more deliberate, is a "casus bell ..." otherwise your state WILL NOT BE RESPECTED BY ANYONE ... Why should it be considered that our diplomat was beaten in the face or kidneys in Holland, not as a "person", but "as an envoy and part of the RUSSIAN STATE"
            1. Lindon
              Lindon 16 October 2013 13: 26 New
              +5
              Quote: svp67

              In those places where Genghis Khan was from, many ancient burials of EUROPEOID people have already been found in our time. So, that Russian is not Russian, but there is a description that he was tall, bearded and blue-eyed, left by contemporaries. And if this is true, then we simply don’t know much from the ANCIENT history of our planet.


              Caucasoid signs are also among the Khalkha-Mongols.
              Description of Genghis Khan where did they get it? invented yourself or kept a candle?
              The grandson of Genghis Khan ordered a portrait of his grandfather several decades after his death and hung it in the palace - there is not a EUROPEOID.
              Genghis Khan's appearance is mostly fiction - there is no reliable information.
              When Genghis Khan was Kalka, Kiev and the Russian principalities were already at Batu.
              1. svp67
                svp67 17 October 2013 04: 45 New
                0
                Quote: Lindon
                invented yourself or kept a candle?

                Thank God with electricity, in spite of all the concerns of Chubais, we are all right, so candles are not needed ...
                I won’t argue for a long time, here is an interesting image - Bust of Batu - Khan, set in Turkey in the city of Soghut. The dates on the monument correspond to the time of the existence of the Golden Horde and a quote from the annals of Rashid ad-Din, an Arab historian
                The third son was Yesugei Bahadur, who is the father of Genghis Khan. [Tribe] kiyat-burjigin comes from his offspring. The meaning of “burjigin” is “blue-eyed”, and, oddly enough, those descendants that have so far come from Yesugei Bahadur, his children, and his Uruguay 260, mostly blue-eyed and red. This is due to the fact that Alan-Goa at the time when she became pregnant, said: “[At night] before my eyes [suddenly] there appears a radiance in the image of a red-and-blue-eyed man, and leaves!”

                Some time later, in the aforementioned year, Genghis Khan was born under a happy omen. He held in his palm of his right hand a small clot of caked blood, like a piece of a shriveled liver. On the tablet of his forehead [there were] obvious signs of the conquest of the universe and world power, and from his face emitted rays of happy fate and power.


                The Secret Legend of the Mongols says
                § 21. “But every night, it happened, through the chimney of the yurt, at the hour when the light inside (went out), 1 happened to come to me a light blond man; he strokes my womb, and his light penetrates into my belly. leaves like this: at one o'clock; when the sun and the moon converge, scratching, leaves like a yellow dog. Why are you talking all nonsense? After all, if you understand all this, it will come out that these sons are marked with the seal of heavenly origin. How could you chat about them how about those who are coupled with mere mortals? When they become kings of kings, khans over everyone, then only ordinary people will understand all this! "

                Then everyone understands how he wants, but the portrait of Batu Khan, the grandson of Genghis Khan, says a lot - the damn Mongol is NOT visible ...
            2. romb
              romb 16 October 2013 13: 29 New
              +3
              These remains (with a mixed racial type) have nothing to do with the Slavs. The Slavs and their ancestors, during the early Xiongnu period and up to the time of Attila, lived in the territory of central Europe. Later, as a result of the action of the Germanic tribes, a separate group of Slavs was forced to "move" eastward, up to the lands of the Finno-Ugric peoples.
              Purely hypothetically, most likely archaeological finds may have some relation to the ancestors of the Hungarians and several other nomadic peoples.
              1. DEfindER
                DEfindER 16 October 2013 17: 42 New
                +1
                Quote: romb
                The Slavs and their ancestors, during the early Xiongnu period and up to the time of Attila, lived in the territory of central Europe. Later, as a result of the action of the Germanic tribes, a separate group of Slavs was forced to "move" to the east

                You quote Klyuchevsky, and he built everything on the basis of the works of German historians who wrote the history of Russia in the 18th century. Seeking to show that the Slavs are not an independent nation but a branch of the German ..
                Quote: romb
                may have some relation to the ancestors of the Hungarians and a number of other nomadic nationalities.

                Well, call us descendants of the Hungarians, the people who have practically no influence whatsoever on the history of mankind and the Russian people who repeatedly turn the tide of the history of the planet ..
                1. romb
                  romb 16 October 2013 18: 30 New
                  +2
                  Specific question:
                  - When did the Slavs live on the territory of modern Buryatia, Mongolia and Altai?
                  - If you think that they were there, then can you confirm your point of view?
                  I ask in advance, only without scanned manuscripts of the deceased Atlantis, witnesses from Gibberborea or any references there to the captain’s magazine from the Nibiru starship.hi
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                    1. Lindon
                      Lindon 16 October 2013 19: 26 New
                      +3
                      Do you even understand that Andronos culture was 2-3 thousand years before our era !!!
                      In southern Siberia, Kazakhstan and Altai, there are such logging burials.
                      But already in the 2-3 centuries before our times, European signs began to be replaced by Mongoloid ones.
                      This is the result of the Great Migration, the era of the invasion of the Huns from Mongolia to the Roman Empire.
                      3-5 century BC is already the period of the Scythians-Saks-Sarmatians.
                      With the advent of Genghis Khan, the Mongoloid characters are already beginning to dominate - he drove the tribes he had broken from Mongolia. Now, on the site of the Andronovo culture, the Turan race lives - European and Mongoloid mixed 50 / 50 with deviations of course.
                  2. hrych
                    hrych 16 October 2013 19: 10 New
                    +2
                    Afanasyevskaya culture - the South Siberian archaeological culture of the Bronze Age (III — II millennium BC). The name of the culture came from Afanasyevskaya Mountain (near the village of Bateni in Khakassia), where in 1920 the first burial ground of this culture was investigated.

                    In addition to the main region - Altai (Elo 1-2, Bike 1, Peshcherkin Log, etc.) and the Khakass-Minusinsk depression, the distribution area of ​​the monuments includes East Kazakhstan, West Mongolia and Xinjiang.

                    Presumably, the culture was created by migrants from Eastern Europe, in particular, the bearers of the ancient pit culture, assimilating the local population. It was replaced by the Karasuk and Okunev cultures.

                    The heirs of the Afanasyevites were tribes of the Tagar culture, which survived to the III century. BC e. [3], according to another version, the Tagars were Scythians, and the descendants of the Afanasyevites were Tochars, whom it was the Scythians-Tagars who forced out to Xinjiang. Most scholars associate the Afanasyev culture with (proto) Tochars.

                    Afanasyevtsy were carriers of the protoeuropeoid anthropological type.

                    In the third millennium BC, there was still no division into Indo-Aryans, Irano-Aryans, Slavs, Etruscans, etc., this happened a thousand years later, but the fact that the Afanasyevites are carriers of the haplogroup R1a (Y-DNA) confirms anthropology and archeology , and unequivocally says that the Slavs are direct descendants of the Afanasievites.
                    1. romb
                      romb 16 October 2013 19: 46 New
                      +1
                      You dug too deep, so you can easily reach the Olduvai protoculture.)))
                      Therefore, in order to prevent speculation, I indicated a predetermined time interval:
                      during the early Huns and until Atilla.

                      Since it is believed that some time after the emergence of the early barbarian kingdoms and the collapse of the Hunnic state, information began to appear about individual, presumably Slavic tribes or the union of tribes - Wened (s), Antes (?), Etc. living in central and partially in southern Europe.
                      Speaking specifically about your data, today the descendants of these early cultures can be wherever possible and be anyone, for example, easily, some kind of Jamsut from Tajikistan, who is scrambling at construction sites of the Moscow Region, or heir to the English lord, tracking his genealogy for dozens of generations back.
              2. Setrac
                Setrac 16 October 2013 19: 40 New
                0
                Quote: romb
                These remains (with a mixed racial type) have nothing to do with the Slavs.

                Indo-Europeans who have lived in Russia since the beginning of time are undoubtedly the ancestors of the Russians. And all these Hungarians, Finns, Mongoloids are late aliens. But you undoubtedly know the history of the Slavs better than the Slavs themselves wassat .
                1. romb
                  romb 16 October 2013 19: 56 New
                  +3
                  And where did the Hungarians come from, or maybe just the opposite - did they leave the territory on which modern Russia exists today?
                2. Arman
                  Arman 26 December 2014 17: 31 New
                  0
                  But you (Russians) know the history of the Kazakhs better than the Kazakhs, because you “confidently” affirm the statelessness of the Kazakhs.
              3. svp67
                svp67 17 October 2013 04: 46 New
                0
                Quote: romb
                To the Slavs, these remains

                Maybe, but you must admit that people are about 2 meters tall, as they are not associated with the Mongols ... and their faces are not Asian ..


                1. romb
                  romb 17 October 2013 11: 02 New
                  +2
                  Everything is simple, and without mystification.
                  Tohars, they are yueji - Indo-Iranian people who lived in Central Asia, to a large extent in the XUAR. They were squeezed by usuns.
                  Subsequently, the Kushan Empire was created, the territory of which was vast - it included northern India in the south and bordered on China in the northwest and Parthia (a little later with the Sasanian state) in the west. In fact, it was defeated by the Sassanids, and destroyed by the white Huns.
                2. kok_bori
                  kok_bori 17 October 2013 21: 53 New
                  +3
                  There is a proven fact in history that the Türks initially had a Caucasian appearance, but then in the process of how they fought with China and flew to their territory, they certainly captured their most beautiful women, as a result of which they began to manifest themselves over time, Mongoloid signs, and among the Chinese so far, women are mostly so-so
          2. romb
            romb 16 October 2013 13: 02 New
            0
            And he took up the Slavs, to a large extent, only because of the disagreement of a certain part of the Kipchaks to join the fraternal Mongol power. What in aggregate, with the Mongol-Naiman graters, and the act of treachery - when the Kipchaks killed the Mongolian ambassadors in Otrar and caused open conflict between them.
          3. Setrac
            Setrac 16 October 2013 19: 35 New
            -2
            Quote: Lindon
            Genghis Khan was probably Russian - just why did he start the capture from China

            Ancient China has nothing to do with the current China, and vice versa, the current China does not relate to ancient China in any way.
            1. romb
              romb 16 October 2013 20: 06 New
              +1
              Geographically - no, because during this time has expanded very thoroughly. Historically, yes. The word China comes from the word Kytay - kydan, i.e. re-name of the Khitan tribes. hi
            2. Lindon
              Lindon 16 October 2013 20: 11 New
              +2
              Also, the Great Wall of China - these were Martians.
              1. romb
                romb 16 October 2013 20: 18 New
                -1
                They are lying! It was built by the great space race of the Russes, who ran out of fuel in a starship, when they explored the primitive cultures of earthlings. So they went to various undeveloped nations to show the wonders of their scientific progress. It was hidden for a very long time, but now the veil of secrecy is beginning to open a little.
          4. _Siberian_
            _Siberian_ 17 October 2013 10: 30 New
            -1
            Fragment of the icon of St. Sergius of Radonezh "Battle of Kulikovo". It clearly shows that the same warriors are fighting on both sides. And this battle is more like a civil war than a war against a foreign conqueror.

            Taken from here: http://www.liveinternet.ru/users/3166127/post138581456/
        2. ekzorsist
          ekzorsist 17 October 2013 19: 45 New
          0
          Here you are absolutely right !!!
          Kazakh "history" now, either through drunkenness, or having smoked fresh Chuy grass in large quantities, such stories are written out by the "great" Kazakh people ... wassat that you are simply amazed - it’s like a human being.
          And they push all this nonsense in all seriousness into textbooks, which they try to teach in schools ... and they teach!
          And what kind of "opuses" come across there - "... the great state of Kazakhstan played a huge political and economic role not only in Central Asia, but throughout Central Europe at the dawn of mankind and especially in the Middle Ages ...", but the most interesting when you really start to understand their history - they infuriate and immediately start screaming about the exclusivity of the Kazakhs, as descendants of the great Chingizids, the heirs of Genghis Khan, direct relatives of the great Timur, etc.
          1. kok_bori
            kok_bori 17 October 2013 21: 46 New
            +1
            Quote: ekzorsist
            Kazakh "history" now, either by drunkenness, or having smoked fresh Chuy grass in large quantities, such stories are written out by the "great" Kazakh people ... that you simply wonder - it's like a man perlo
            Especially when you consider the fact that the majority of these "Istoryug" come from the southern regions and distant auls, where hemp hemp heaps and more (Chuy valley, for example), and the corresponding level of education and culture.
  3. Lindon
    Lindon 16 October 2013 08: 48 New
    +5
    Poor story - how much more will be rewritten.
    They make a servant out of her to please the political views of the Kremlin.
    Either we are Europeans from the Vikings-Varangians, then Eurasians from Ivan the Terrible with the Principality of Moscow.
    When will there be an impartial view of history?
    1. tungus
      tungus 16 October 2013 09: 33 New
      +6
      Quote: Lindon
      When will there be an impartial view of history?

      Never.
      Who rules the present - that corrects the past to manage the future (C).
      And it will always be so.
      1. hrych
        hrych 16 October 2013 10: 22 New
        +9
        Historical science previously relied on chronicles that sinned with bias, but nevertheless their value is priceless. Beginning with the Roman Catholic Church aspiring to world domination, the information war against all began and continues to this day. However, the exact sciences: archeology, anthropology, and now the possibility of decoding DNA in many respects confirm the ancient chroniclers and completely refute the false, first of all Russophobic, official history, plastered in the West and continued by the hominternists and other scum.
      2. v.lyamkin
        v.lyamkin 16 October 2013 10: 51 New
        0
        Yes, read J. Orwell
    2. Djozz
      Djozz 16 October 2013 12: 39 New
      -2
      We are waiting from the Kazakh historians!
      1. Lindon
        Lindon 16 October 2013 12: 52 New
        +4
        Read the Chinese - they have been writing their history for over 5 thousand years.
        Genghis Khan they have a deity and worship him.
        I understand that the Russians don’t understand how the empire of Genghis Khan was created and some kind of nomad barbarians broke everyone in their path.
        1. Djozz
          Djozz 16 October 2013 13: 20 New
          +2
          Chinese "historians" 5 thousand years old, have mercy! This is what happened in China since 1772. The Manchu rulers undertook a collection of all the books ever published in China. A few years later, 3457 titles were issued in a new edition. In fact, this was a grandiose falsification of history. (World History. Vol. 19 of the USSR Academy of Sciences)
    3. Setrac
      Setrac 16 October 2013 19: 44 New
      -2
      Quote: Lindon
      Poor story - how much more will be rewritten.
      They make a servant out of her to please the political views of the Kremlin.

      The Vatican has been rewriting history since the 15th century, what does the Kremlin have to do with it? The Kremlin is defending itself in this information war; the West is tailoring history for itself.
    4. Atash
      Atash 16 October 2013 20: 53 New
      +2
      “If we remove all lies from history, it’s not a fact that there will be only one truth: it may happen that nothing will remain” or something like that, Stanislav Lets.
      1. _Siberian_
        _Siberian_ 17 October 2013 11: 07 New
        0
        I absolutely agree.
    5. _Siberian_
      _Siberian_ 17 October 2013 11: 02 New
      0
      Astana, Kazan, Paris, London, Rome, etc., etc.
  4. 6 sunrise 9
    6 sunrise 9 16 October 2013 09: 00 New
    +5
    And nothing can be done, while in the head of Tatarstan non-Russians terry nationalism will rise, mixed with true islam which is in Avganestan and Saud. Arabia. So I liked Zhirik's speech, yes, I understand he is balabol, but he is right - under the Russian Empire there was no nat. republics - Tatarstan, Bashkirtostan, Kazakhstan, Armenia, etc. There were provinces and in each province there was a Russian governor and all sorts of nat. speeches stopped. The arrival of the Bolsheviks destroyed the entire policy of the Republic of Ingushetia for the cultural and social unification of peoples. But many Tatars, Armenians and even Poles later called themselves Russians and at the same time did not renounce their nationality - Russian Tatar, Russian Pole, Russian Bashkir. With the advent of Bolshevism, the process of splitting into nat began. republic and this is what caused the collapse of the USSR. The modern Russian Federation also stepped on this rake and if there is nothing to change, sooner or later it will get "in the head".

    Bottom line: We need to eliminate the nat. republics and make them provinces / regions. Plant in the head of the Russian. To begin socio-cultural unification as in the time of RI.

    PS I expect a lot of minuses from the Tatars, Bashkirs, etc. and the inhabitants of individual nat. states like Kazakhstan, Armenia and so on.
    1. Lindon
      Lindon 16 October 2013 09: 14 New
      +5
      Zhirik is a clear clown, but you are already a provocateur.
      RI died as it did with the Ottoman Empire. At least the Bolsheviks were able to recreate it in a new form of the USSR - with a new ideology of "friendship of peoples". Only the provocateurs Gorbachev and Co. broke up.
      Let's continue to work for their owners for the euro.
      1. 6 sunrise 9
        6 sunrise 9 16 October 2013 09: 26 New
        -3
        Quote: Lindon
        RI died as it was with the Ottoman Empire
        fool

        RI died as a result of a revolution arranged by the Bolsheviks and windows. disappeared after losing in a civil war by the biological guards.


        Quote: Lindon
        The Bolsheviks were even able to recreate it in the new form of the USSR


        But having created the nat. republic and writing that everyone can leave the union ... sooner or later it would have happened. And thanks to these clever people, we can now "admire" the nationalist formations - Armenia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and so on.

        If we do not do it as it was in the times of the Republic of Ingushetia, then soon we will be able to “admire” Tatarstan, Bashkirtostan, Ingushetia, Dagestan, and so on.
        1. Lindon
          Lindon 16 October 2013 09: 45 New
          +4
          Quote: 6Sunrise9
          RI died as a result of a revolution arranged by the Bolsheviks and windows. disappeared after losing in a civil war by the biological guards.


          I understand Fursenko and the Unified State Examination led you astray.
          RI died from the February Revolution - the Bolsheviks have nothing to do with it.

          The Ottoman Empire died a little later - in the First World War. RI simply did not live to see its end - internal problems - the February bourgeois revolution put an end to it. The Bolsheviks simply seized power from the bourgeoisie.
          You need to read Marx there everything was predicted in advance and the imperialist war and revolution.
          1. 6 sunrise 9
            6 sunrise 9 16 October 2013 10: 02 New
            -2
            RI did not die, she was transformed into state. Russian at least the White Guards believed so, and this did not mean the possibility of creating nat. subjects. So enough to evade it was the Bolsheviks who allowed the creation of internal borders within the state.
          2. Pit
            Pit 16 October 2013 11: 20 New
            +2
            Quote: Lindon
            You need to read Marx there everything was predicted in advance and the imperialist war and revolution.

            Now think about who Marx was and who he worked for.
            And who financed the February and October revolutions?
            Who financed both World Wars?
            And why was all this done?
            If you can put these questions into one, then you won’t have to wait long for an answer.
            Everything is aimed at the collapse of Russia, by any means. And the same reform Fursenko, dictated from the same source as all of our wars and revolutions.
            Like the USSR, RI did not die, they were systematically destroyed, and now they are trying to destroy the Russian Federation in the same way.
            And yet, no matter how clown Zhirinovsky was, he says more effective things than all our rulers, together with their offices over the past 20 years. Although he, too, is still a balabol.
          3. avt
            avt 16 October 2013 11: 42 New
            +1
            Quote: Lindon
            RI died from the February Revolution - the Bolsheviks have nothing to do with it.

            Well, let's pick up a revolutionary banner on the fly without letting it fall.
            Quote: Lindon
            The Ottoman Empire died a little later - in the First World War.

            Exactly as the Austro-Hungarian and German were "dismantled" by the winners, and the Russian itself was waiting for the same fate, but the Bolsheviks turned the tide with a quite unifying IDEA, against which no methods were found. It was then that the bet was made on the well-forgotten old - The "Promethean" movement, the Poles traditionally dealt with it .. The main defendants in Katyn were reassured, and the Germans, on the basis of their agents, formed nationalist units. But the virus is still alive and the USSR, weakened by the party top of the CPSU, who sold its own ideals, finished off the country and ideology.
          4. Setrac
            Setrac 16 October 2013 20: 17 New
            -1
            Quote: Lindon
            You need to read Marx there everything was predicted in advance and the imperialist war and revolution.

            You still offer Brzezinski to read.
            1. Lindon
              Lindon 16 October 2013 20: 36 New
              +4
              One must know the works of enemies.
        2. MstislavHrabr
          MstislavHrabr 16 October 2013 10: 14 New
          +2
          It was not the Bolsheviks who destroyed the Russian empire, but the provisional government (a corrupt elite). The same corrupt liberal reformers who ruined the Soviet Union. Until February 17, less than 1% of Russia's population knew about the Bolsheviks. Eight months of plundering nat. wealth and the collapse of the country and ... the Bolsheviks simply raised the power lying under their feet ...
      2. _Siberian_
        _Siberian_ 17 October 2013 11: 16 New
        0
        Only MUTUAL respect, without sticking out our own, for the most part invented and sucked from the finger of exceptionalities can make us good neighbors ...
        And feuds, enmity and mutual claims, further nationalism and fascism make us weak, vulnerable.
        PS: look for someone who is beneficial to push us with our foreheads ...
    2. 12061973
      12061973 16 October 2013 09: 22 New
      +4
      Quote: 6Sunrise9
      Need to eliminate nat. republics and make them provinces / regions. Plant in the head of the Russian

      you first plant in the Kremlin Russian, and then think about the national republics.
      1. 6 sunrise 9
        6 sunrise 9 16 October 2013 09: 34 New
        -6
        In the Kremlin, and so the Russians are sitting ... the problem than these Russians think.

        And nat. republics need to be eliminated.
        1. Lindon
          Lindon 16 October 2013 09: 48 New
          +7
          If you call for a civil massacre in Russia, then I take my words back, you are not a "provocateur." You are an enemy of the people!
          1. 6 sunrise 9
            6 sunrise 9 16 October 2013 09: 56 New
            -3
            If you do not remove nat. Republic it will be the 2nd state collapse into specific nationalist principalities !!!!! And as during the collapse of the USSR there will be massacres and ethnic cleansing, so the enemy of the people here are YOU.
            1. Lindon
              Lindon 16 October 2013 10: 44 New
              +6
              The article for inciting ethnic hatred is shining for you boy.
              Quote: 6Sunrise9
              Plant in the head of the Russian.

              Well done - take from the shelf 100 Euro - earned.
              1. Fastblast
                Fastblast 16 October 2013 11: 07 New
                +3
                He is not for money, but for a kiss in Opu, the Fuhrer’s relics work. ideological.
                1. 6 sunrise 9
                  6 sunrise 9 16 October 2013 14: 56 New
                  -2
                  Go watch a movie on YouTube - "kill the Russian in yourself" and be proud of the fact that you are "Ukrainian" and say thank you to the Austrians and Germans for thinking of your nationality.
                  1. Fastblast
                    Fastblast 16 October 2013 17: 00 New
                    +3
                    and throw me a ridge goodbye

                    How's your nationalist antsway zigheil?))

                    You are not even Russian, but ...
                    1. 6 sunrise 9
                      6 sunrise 9 16 October 2013 17: 05 New
                      0
                      No, they are erecting monuments to the Nazis, go for a walk "great ukr".

                      And do not forget who called you "Ukrainian", and be proud of it.
                      1. Fastblast
                        Fastblast 16 October 2013 17: 13 New
                        +1
                        and you’re hitler on your chest
                        By the way, I assume that you also have a tattoo with an idol in your heart :)

                        ps by the way, I’m the greatest Ukrainian, so you should be proud to communicate with me!))
                      2. 6 sunrise 9
                        6 sunrise 9 16 October 2013 17: 38 New
                        -2
                        Quote: Fastblast
                        ps by the way, I’m the greatest Ukrainian, so you should be proud to communicate with me!))


                        "Ivan you, kind of not remembering" and I have nothing to answer in essence, yes? Be proud that you were called Ukrainian by the Germans and Austrians L.O.Kh.
                      3. Fastblast
                        Fastblast 16 October 2013 17: 53 New
                        +1
                        Listen, thoroughbred, what questions are such and answers.
  • Essenger
    Essenger 16 October 2013 11: 13 New
    +5
    Quote: 6Sunrise9
    Need to eliminate nat. republics and make them provinces / regions.

    It is better to eliminate the Russian Federation and give freedom to Tatarstan, Bashkiria, etc. How do you like it?

    When writing, think with your head.
    1. 6 sunrise 9
      6 sunrise 9 16 October 2013 11: 47 New
      0
      But, and all Russians in Bashkria and Tatarstan must be destroyed, and a systematic genocide must be carried out. After all, they interfere with the creation of "Vilika Tataria".
      By the way, at the time of the disconnection of Kazakhstan, there were even more Russians in Kazakhstan than Kazakhs ... but you were "lucky" to be ruled by an alcoholic, now the Tatars and Bashkirs have problems:
      1) The share of Russians in these republics is significant.
      2) It’s not the drunk who rules and no matter what Putin’s vryatli he’ll just allow Tatarstan and Bashkirtostan to disconnect.
      3) Losing interest in Islam, under the influence of Russian culture. Disbelieve? And you vkurse that more than 350.000 Tatars are Orthodox?
      4) There is a mutual assimilation of the Tatars / Bashkirs / Russians ... as they say, if you spit in Russian, you will get into Tatar, so the Natsik will have strong problems due to mixed marriages.
  • Nomad
    Nomad 16 October 2013 09: 05 New
    +4
    I wonder who in general this Kholmogorov is, so that, like walking, criticize L. N. Gumilyov.
    1. 12061973
      12061973 16 October 2013 09: 25 New
      +2
      Kholmogorov is a skinhead and a Natsik in one in a French jacket and a cane ...
    2. hrych
      hrych 16 October 2013 10: 02 New
      +7
      And who is Gumilev? The same man, unrecognized by historical science, who at one time put forward the theory of ethnogenesis, which has not received recognition before, is now absolutely refuted, first of all, by the latest discoveries in decoding DNA and in drawing up a map of the ways of peoples where there is no place for desires and fabrications, there is only the exact the science.
      1. Djozz
        Djozz 16 October 2013 12: 46 New
        0
        And also a stupid theory of passionarity of peoples! M doesn’t seem like he is Saharov of that time!
      2. xtur
        xtur 16 October 2013 14: 16 New
        +4
        this theory is not refuted by anything; on the contrary, empirical studies have confirmed it — read the work of K. Ivanov, a student of L. Gumilyov.

        This is a completely different question - between the Orthodoxy and Catholicism there is a theological discrepancy regarding man. Modern Western Scientific Concept of Closed human atom / individual it simply continues the Catholic concept of man as a closed system, rethought it to a human atom.
        Therefore, this concept does not fundamentally coincide with the Orthodox concept, according to which a person is open systemwho he is according to the theory of ethnogenesis. Passionary is an open system.

        Therefore, Western science will never be accepted passion theory
        1. Djozz
          Djozz 16 October 2013 14: 45 New
          0
          Consequently, yesterday the people were passinar, and nowadays there is apparently no cosmic radiation affecting one people today, and tomorrow another! By the way, the Higher Attestation Commission refused Gumilev, in the doctoral degree of geographical sciences, on this problem!
          1. xtur
            xtur 16 October 2013 15: 26 New
            +2
            cosmic radiation has nothing to do with it, this is one of the possible reasons.
            And for the work in which K. Ivanov proved the manifestation of the statements of the theory of ethnogenesis of L. Gumilyov on the example of the Non-Chernozem region, he received a doctorate in geography
        2. Setrac
          Setrac 16 October 2013 20: 25 New
          +1
          Quote: xtur
          this theory is not refuted by anything; on the contrary, empirical studies confirm

          Ha, empirically proven theory, yes you're a comedian.
          1. xtur
            xtur 17 October 2013 13: 45 New
            +1
            > Ha, empirically proven theory, you're a humorist.

            as if I had a reference to the work of K. Ivanov, for which he received his doctoral dissertation in the USSR.
            But you are probably not a reader, you are probably a writer
  • Nomad
    Nomad 16 October 2013 09: 09 New
    +6
    Quote: svp67
    As for Russia, archaeologists clearly distinguish between the time before the "arrival" and "after" those "reformers". If before their arrival craftsmen flourished in the country, there are a lot of magnificent products made of gold, iron, and obviously local craftsmen (ornaments, patterns are characteristic), then after a century for three "like a cow licked with her tongue" - nothing ...

    So nothing? For three hundred years they did not produce anything, did not build, did not create works of art? Hard to believe. Where did you get this? It looks like a stamp from "Stories on the History of the USSR" for grade 5.
    1. MstislavHrabr
      MstislavHrabr 16 October 2013 10: 16 New
      +2
      Oddly enough, but most of the monasteries in Russia appeared precisely in the Iga period ...
      1. svp67
        svp67 16 October 2013 10: 18 New
        -1
        Quote: MstislavHrabr
        Oddly enough, but most of the monasteries in Russia appeared precisely in the Iga period ...

        Nothing strange, religion and all its attributes were under the protection of the power of the "reformers", so people left where they could feel more protected ...
        1. Corsair
          Corsair 16 October 2013 12: 22 New
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          Nothing strange, religion and all its attributes were under the protection of the power of the "reformers", so people left where they could feel more protected ...

          In addition, monasteries were not only spiritual centers and, but also fortifications ...

          Clickable Image:
          1. svp67
            svp67 16 October 2013 12: 24 New
            0
            Quote: Corsair
            but also fortifications ...

            LEGAL, which at that time is not a little important. Yes, and it is worth remembering the heroes of the field Kulikov - Peresvet and Oslyablyu, monks ????? But in fact, the soldiers of the patriarchal squad ...
      2. _Siberian_
        _Siberian_ 17 October 2013 11: 42 New
        0
        MstislavHrabr
        Oddly enough, but most of the monasteries in Russia appeared precisely in the Iga period ...

        Was it?
        ... If we analyze historical facts, it becomes obvious that the "Tatar-Mongol yoke" was invented in order to hide the consequences from the "baptism" of Kievan Rus. After all, this religion was not imposed in a peaceful way ...
        ... And here is the baptism of Russia? - some may ask. As it turned out, very much moreover. After all, baptism took place in a far from peaceful way ... Before baptism, people in Russia were educated, almost everyone knew how to read, write, and count. Let us recall from the school curriculum on history, at least, the same “Birch bark letters” - letters written by peasants on birch bark from one village to another ...
        ... People saw what happened after the “baptism” in neighboring countries, when under the influence of religion a successful, highly developed country with an educated population plunged into ignorance and chaos in a matter of years, where only representatives of the aristocracy could read and write, and that’s far Not all…
        ... If before the “baptism” in the territory of Kievan Rus there were 300 cities and 12 millions of inhabitants, then after the “baptism” there were only 30 cities and 3 million people! 270 cities were destroyed! 9 million people were killed! (Diy Vladimir, “Orthodox Russia before the adoption of Christianity and after”).

        Taken from here: http: //www.liveinternet.ru/users/3166127/post138581456/
  • Vadim-Skeptic
    Vadim-Skeptic 16 October 2013 09: 18 New
    +3
    The initiative of "Tatar historians" (read British scientists) is an intelligence service of public opinion, which, with further development, will become a provocation. But provocation is a prerequisite for separatism, which, in principle, is a call to violate the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation.
  • a52333
    a52333 16 October 2013 09: 20 New
    +5
    When will there be an impartial view of history?
    Never again, only if we find the library of Ivan the Terrible. Another "sausage" me. Here is the author so smart and
    read titus libya
    and Gumilyov. Okay. I believe.
    But
    nonsense in the writings of Fomenko-Nosovsky
    supported by numbers with questions that are not so easy to answer.
    Mongol-Tatar yoke. (by the way, if the Tatars are controversial from the Tatar - you can call the Mongol-Kyrgyz) Okay - to the author. Here Genghis Khan leads an army of five hundred thousand sabers (ABOUT THE TWO) + convoy, etc. No. Fomenko is a mathematician and he found the answer to the question better than historians. THIS IS UNREAL. There are not enough resources either for horses or people. So was the boy (from the point of view of? Iga? ?? And control in the head of historians: there was no Galileev among you, they rewrote it taking into account the interests of the "customer." As a result, the story turned into an honest station girl. To our great regret.

    My "compliments" to the author.
    1. Djozz
      Djozz 16 October 2013 12: 50 New
      +1
      Realizing that 500 thousand horsemen is nonsense, but the "scientists" are inclined towards the figure of 30 thousand + 3 horses, they are ashamed to further reduce the army!
      1. a52333
        a52333 16 October 2013 13: 20 New
        +1
        That's why they are inclined to believe that there were raids, and HERE is a BIG question.
    2. Fin
      Fin 16 October 2013 14: 23 New
      +1
      Quote: a52333
      There will be no resources for any horses or people. So was the boy (in terms of? Iga??

      This is a version of Bushkov, and quite interesting.
      1. Djozz
        Djozz 16 October 2013 14: 49 New
        +1
        This version of any sane person!
  • ando_bor
    ando_bor 16 October 2013 09: 31 New
    0
    Emotions alone, the real story is free of emotions.
    By giving an emotional assessment you are depriving yourself of the opportunity to understand the realities,
    the roots and causes of historical processes, and history is happening today.
  • Nix13
    Nix13 16 October 2013 09: 32 New
    +2
    Genghis Khan as a hero of Tatarstan is really strange. Again to the question of the common values ​​of Russia ...
    And the author is a young man. Maybe he did not sit in the archives, but his theory is harmonious, no worse than others. Even in one paragraph, the Normans and the anti-Normans reconciled)))
  • Valery Neonov
    Valery Neonov 16 October 2013 09: 57 New
    +5
    So, Americans are exceptional, Tatars, Kazakhs, Tajiks, Huns, Usuns, Chukchi, Mongols ..... not to mention the Ainu (and they will start) and the Mustache "the most" ...., that's where the SLAVS GIVE TO ... OH, the time is near, WE ARE BORED WITH THESE ... About "God's chosenness".
  • aidarko
    aidarko 16 October 2013 10: 06 New
    +9
    Scientists have proven that the Chuvash and Tatars are direct descendants of the Volga Bulgars. I can prove by references to works. Genetically, we, Kazan Tatars, are very far from even Kazakhs, we have almost no (1,6%) C3 gene that unites all descendants of Genghis Khan, besides, the genetic picture coincides by 50% with the Eastern Slavs, more with Ukrainians, and everyone has a common us Scythian-Sarmatian, Finnish and Scandinavian. So this vice president is a provocateur and collaborationist, Mongol-Tatars are invaders and oppressors, we have nothing in common with them. I even entered the census as Bulgars, the name "Tatars" is historically erroneous. By the way, we were called that, Bulgars, up to the 1920s.
    1. a52333
      a52333 16 October 2013 10: 33 New
      +1
      AHA, I recently encountered a Bulgarian at work. Cossack Zaporizhzhya one to one. A blond-haired, blue-eyed man with a drooping mustache. good
    2. Setrac
      Setrac 16 October 2013 21: 44 New
      -1
      Quote: aidarko
      Scientists have proved that the Chuvash and Tatars are direct descendants of the Volga Bulgars.

      Write correctly - proved by BRITISH scholars?
      1. aidarko
        aidarko 17 October 2013 11: 37 New
        +1
        No, by European scientists, the scientific work is called "The Western and Eastern Roots of the Saami — the Story of Genetic
        “Outliers” Told by Mitochondrial DNA and Y Chromosomes "

        URL:
        http://download.cell.com/AJHG/pdf/PIIS0002929707618928.pdf
    3. godun
      godun 17 October 2013 12: 31 New
      0
      I would like to add that the Tatars, the Volga Bulgars, were named Genghis Khan, in honor of their sworn enemies and did not really stand on ceremony with them ... Moreover, their love for Genghis Khan is incomprehensible.
  • hrych
    hrych 16 October 2013 10: 10 New
    +6
    “Scythian gold” created by the Greeks for the Scythians.
    This thesis always amuses me, the characteristic Scythian gold jewelry of the animal style is found from the Far East to England, and in Greece they find only ceramic pots with paintings where the Greeks run without pants and that's all, the famous "Agomemnon mask" belongs to the "Mycenaean" - pre-Greek culture ...
    1. Djozz
      Djozz 16 October 2013 12: 53 New
      +2
      Me too!
  • major071
    major071 16 October 2013 10: 19 New
    +5
    Tatars, Tatarlar (self-name), Tatars (English, French), Tataren (German) - the titular nation of the Republic of Tatarstan within the Russian Federation. Tatars speak the Tatar language of the Kypchak subgroup of the Turkic group of the Altai language family. In the Tatar language, Western (Mishar), Middle (Kazan-Tatar) and Eastern (Siberian-Tatar) dialects are distinguished. The literary language was formed on the basis of the middle dialect. Until 1927, the Tatars used Arabic graphics, replaced in 1927 with the Latin alphabet, and in 1939 with the Russian Cyrillic alphabet with the addition of special characters. Tatars are divided into 3 main ethno-territorial groups: Tatars of the Middle Volga and Ural regions, Siberian Tatars, Astrakhan Tatars. In addition, there is a separate group of Polish-Lithuanian Tatars. The Crimean Tatars, by virtue of their ethno-historical development, are considered a separate people. The Volga Tatars are divided into 3 groups: Kazan Tatars, Mishars and Teppyar, Kasimov Tatars form an intermediate group. Siberian Tatars are divided into 3 groups: Baraba, Tobolsk, Tomsk. Astrakhan Tatars are also divided into 3 groups: Yurt, Kundra Tatars and Karagash, close to Nogais. The traditional occupation of the Tatars is arable farming, among the Astrakhan Tatars - cattle breeding and melon farming. Tatars are Sunni Muslims, with the exception of small groups of Kryashens and Nagaybaks, converted to Orthodoxy in the XVI-XVIII centuries. According to the anthropological type, the Kazan Tatars are Caucasians, part of the Astrakhan and Siberian Tatars belong to the South Siberian type of the Mongoloid race.
    By the anthropological type, the Kazan Tatars are Caucasians,

    From the encyclopedia "Around the World"
    1. Alibekulu
      Alibekulu 16 October 2013 12: 58 New
      +5
      Quote: major071
      . According to the anthropological type, the Kazan Tatars are Caucasians, part of the Astrakhan and Siberian Tatars belong to the South Siberian type of the Mongoloid race.
      The Siberian Tatars, like the Astrakhan Tatars, have little in common with the Tatars of Tatarstan. In general, modern Tatars are not identical with the historical “Tatars” of the Golden Horde.
      But, at present, the Tatars are carrying out their own, so to speak, the imperial project of a "big Tatar nation", i.e. strive to include (record) and Siberian and Astrakhan Tatars in the Kazan Tatars. By the way, the Bashkirs would have been recorded, they just are not given))).
      By the way, the question is, what modern ethnos can be considered a direct descendant of the "Tatars" of the Golden Horde, that is, Ulug Ulus ??? !! wink (I’ll make a reservation right away, I don’t think Kazakhs)))
      Quote: 6Sunrise9
      while the head of Tatarstan non-Russians will rise terry nationalism
      The Tatars are well-structured in the composition of, shall we say, the Russian super-ethnos, and their elite is superbly integrated into the Russian elite. At present, the Tatars have removed the idea of ​​secession from the Russian Federation to the storerooms and, moreover, are positioning themselves as the 2nd nation of Russia. Confirmation of this is at least the fact that the Tatars themselves fought for the title of "the third capital in Russia."
      Thanks to the fact that the Tatars and their elite have renounced separatism, they receive very tangible dividends. Of course, as Chechens, they do not receive "tribute". But for "good behavior" from the visible "niceties" - the Universiade, the 2018 FIFA World Cup, and so on. and just enough to visit Kazan and Tatarstan and compare with the situation in other regions of the country ...
      1. Zymran
        Zymran 16 October 2013 13: 02 New
        +5
        Quote: Alibekulu
        By the way, the question is, what modern ethnos can be considered a direct descendant of the "Tatars" of the Golden Horde, that is, Ulug Ulus ??? !! wink (I'll make a reservation right away, I don't consider Kazakhs)))


        Nogays, Kazakhs, Bashkirs, part of the Uzbeks, Astrakhan and Siberian Tatars.
        1. major071
          major071 16 October 2013 13: 18 New
          +4
          If you look at the tricks, then for sure the Kazakhs and Bashkirs. Tatars - they are slightly different, but they are also hit. laughing
        2. Alibekulu
          Alibekulu 16 October 2013 13: 21 New
          +2
          Quote: Zymran
          Nogays, Kazakhs, Bashkirs, part of the Uzbeks, Astrakhan and Siberian Tatars.
          Kazakhs - Ak Orda, Siberian Tatars - Kok Horde, Bashkirs - Bashgirds (Madjars) - if it's rude ..
          According to Nogail and Astrakhan, of course, the question is open .. recourse
        3. aidarko
          aidarko 17 October 2013 11: 45 New
          +3
          The Bashkirs lived before the arrival of the Mongolo-Tatars, but genetically they are very far from the Bulgars / Kazan Tatars, despite their close proximity, which is strikingly closest to the Celts, Basques, Albanians and Iberians.
          As for the Siberian Tatars, I completely agree, they say about our language, they say, beautiful, but nothing is clear. smile
  • Nevyatoy
    Nevyatoy 16 October 2013 10: 20 New
    +3
    But in 1223, the Mongols appeared in the Polovtsian Steppe, Desht-i-Kipchak ...


    It is worth noting here that, for example, Schliemann found Troy by completely trusting Homer's Iliad, which many considered a myth. But here's what's interesting. Neither in ours, nor in Mongolian legends (fairy tales), not a single line or mention of the Mongol invasion has been preserved. Although such great events must have been captured in the folklore of the peoples involved.
    In all the ancient texts the Horde is mentioned, but if I am not mistaken there is no mention that it is connected with the Mongols. We have not found the mass graves of people of the Mongoloid race, they are not. Unless the Mongols took each corpse to themselves. We have many words and things that emerged from relations with the Tatars (for example, the words Tower - Tatar BASH- head, Horse, and many others). But do we still have words of Mongolian origin?

    Quote: svp67
    As for Russia, archaeologists clearly distinguish between the time before the "arrival" and "after" those "reformers". If before their arrival craftsmen flourished in the country, there are a lot of magnificent products made of gold, iron, and obviously local craftsmen (ornaments, patterns are characteristic), then after a century for three "like a cow licked with her tongue" - nothing ...

    But one can argue with that. We have 2/3 of the monasteries built during the dawn of the Golden Horde. But what really disappeared for three centuries is the annals. For some reason, there are very few of them that should have been during the reign of the Horde. Judge for yourself 2/3 of the monasteries built by the horde. Monks usually kept records. But where are they. The Horde freed the Orthodox Church of Taxes and guarded it. It would be logical to assume that church officials should have erupted in a stream of annals and other scribbles, because the church was not going through the worst of times.
    1. hrych
      hrych 16 October 2013 10: 51 New
      +7
      These chronicles were burned by the first Romanovs and Nikon under the guise of reform. The main reason for the struggle with the rightful heirs to the throne, if the descendants of Ivan IV were killed, then the number of descendants of the tsars Ivanov and Vasiliev, tobish of the Ruriks was estimated at hundreds if not thousands. And the low-born Romanovs are descendants of a certain Mare from the Western Slavs, hence their Westernist moods. The patriarch was Filaret in the world Fedya Romanov, who knocked out the hat of Monomakh on his minor son, Misha Romanov, who so usurped the throne during confusion during the turmoil and bickering at the Zemsky Sobor. The Russian Orthodox Church was the preserver of history and, most importantly, metric, clan records, so the Romanovs seized their clan to the throne and destroyed the metric records of possible competitors, and the chronicle died with them, one hope for the appearance of the Grozny Library. This is the essence of the split, and not stupid disputes about double and triple fangs.
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 16 October 2013 21: 52 New
        +2
        Quote: hrych
        This is the essence of the split, and not stupid disputes about double and triple fangs.

        The question of fingers is not idle, not abstract. Let me remind you that three fingers mean the trinity - the god of the father, the god of the son and the god of the holy spirit. Three hypostases of God symbolize the three facets of man
        god father is mind
        god son is the body
        god holy spirit - soul.
        From the point of view of the Catholic there
        heavenly father - mind
        man on earth is the body.
        There is no holy spirit in Western religion. Western religions reject the soul no less, it is the religion of the devil. And look at them - immoral, spiritless villains.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. hrych
          hrych 17 October 2013 03: 51 New
          +2
          The basis of all the icons and canons of the image of Christ was "The Savior Not Made by Hands", kept in New Rome (by Greek falsifiers in robes called Constantinople) and was nothing more than a folded "Turin" cloak, when it was stolen by the crusaders, then I suppose why earlier Orthodox Romans chose this gesture because two fingers are clearly visible on the right hand. This is probably why the masters of the Renaissance, who saw this shrine, also depicted this gesture in paintings, although Catholics do not use it.

          1. hrych
            hrych 17 October 2013 04: 10 New
            +3
            The rest of the fingers are pressed to the palm, of course - these are the consequences of being nailed to the cross, and not something meaningful gesture. Christ Himself was against the symbolism of pharisaism and obscurantism, and did not impose any gestures, taught one very modest prayer (Our Father) and everything that the "Good News" testifies to.
            This is my guess, I can be very mistaken. Forgive me, Lord!
            1. hrych
              hrych 17 October 2013 04: 30 New
              +2
              Approximately this position of the fingers.
      2. _Siberian_
        _Siberian_ 17 October 2013 11: 58 New
        +2
        The library of Ivan IV the Terrible I think fell first ...
        1. hrych
          hrych 17 October 2013 14: 52 New
          +2
          Ivan possessed the gift of prophecy and placed it in forged boxes, filled everything with wax, prepared for storage for hundreds of years, and the cunning one was small so that they could be found so simply.
    2. Djozz
      Djozz 16 October 2013 12: 59 New
      +3
      "Iliada" is a very dubious document from the point of view of historians, Schliemann himself called the city on the Hisarlik hill Troy without proof! He really wanted to believe it.
  • 3935333
    3935333 16 October 2013 10: 42 New
    +1
    interestingly written, our story is messy
  • vlad.svargin
    vlad.svargin 16 October 2013 10: 50 New
    +3
    As it became relatively recently known, the term “Mongol-Tatar yoke” will disappear from school textbooks, according to which they will teach young “Russians”.

    Do it right. The author interprets the story in his own way. But you need to look at history soberly.
    The Mongols themselves did not retain any recollections of the events of their ancient history; they only remember that their original camps were located along Karulan to the headwaters of the rr. Nonny and Arguni
    And they learned the word "Mongolia" already in the XNUMXth and XNUMXth centuries. Before that, this territory was inhabited by small cattle-breeding tribes. It was only later that they "were helped to compose a story about belonging to the great Mongols." Mughals lived in the south of Central Asia, Pakistan, Afghanistan and were part of the empire of the union of the Scythian tribes (by the way, defeated Alexander the Great north of Kabul) of Great Tartary, which included Russia. And one of the rulers was Genghis Khan (according to the chronicles of European eyewitnesses, he was a man with a fair beard and blue eyes, in contrast to modern beardless Mongols). On our territory there was an ordinary civil war since the time of Prince Vladimir between the provinces of this empire. In the end, ended in favor of Muscovy, which became after the unification of Russia. One nation was divided into nations with different religions and even with different languages ​​and already with different cultures, genetically similar. And practically we have nothing to share, we have one story and we have common heroes. And the fact that over time various modern historians and descendants of Miller and Schlötser (opponents of Lomonosov) have spun in their favor and the benefit of the West is on their conscience.
    1. Alexandr0id
      Alexandr0id 16 October 2013 14: 38 New
      0
      aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa !!!!!!!!!!!!!
      what is it like ???
      where do you come from such scholars?
      Quote: vlad.svargin
      The Moguls lived in the south of Central Asia, Pakistan, Afghanistan and were part of the empire of the Union of Scythian tribes (Incidentally, defeated Alexander of Macedon north of Kabul) of Great Tartaria, which included Russia

      it happened in some parallel universe, apparently, are you from there?
    2. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 17 October 2013 02: 37 New
      +1
      Quote: vlad.svargin
      (According to the chronicles of European eyewitnesses, this was a man with a light brown beard and blue eyes, unlike modern beardless Mongols).
      Chronicle is good, only one mention and in a direct translation does not sound like it wanders on the Internet. From site to site, from site to site. Sometimes it seems that a new science was born, why sharpen an archaeological scraper under the hot sun, there are a lot of links on the Internet as the main argument, but the fact that they are rumors of rumors is of little concern to anyone. Why do we need the source? first discovered in the information field, the tenth thing laughing This is faith (from a small letter, of course)
  • alebor
    alebor 16 October 2013 11: 22 New
    0
    Quite good article. Unlike many others published on this site, the article is based on historical facts, and not on sucked out of the finger conspiracy theories about "insidious substitution of history", "conspiracy of evil scientists" and other bazaar gossip. At the same time, the current near-Kremlin Eurasians who are trying to present Russia, a Christian European country, with European culture, European traditions, European Slavic Russian language and the European Russian people, as some kind of semi-Asian territory, drag us somewhere to Asia, to the Kyrgyz and Uzbeks, have been criticized. ... (And what of the fact that Russia has vast Asian territories? Weren't the British or French in the XNUMXth century Europeans, when their overseas possessions were larger than European ones? It's not a matter of quantity, but quality: culture, traditions, self-awareness and stories).
  • rugor
    rugor 16 October 2013 12: 34 New
    0
    Horde, Horde .... AND US!
  • MIX58
    MIX58 16 October 2013 12: 39 New
    0
    The fact is that the titular ethnic group of modern Tatarstan is the descendants of the ancient people of the Volga Bulgars.

    This is for sure. According to Karamzin (and until now no one could really refute him). The Volga Bulgars were formed by two ancient tribes "Yuft" and "Safyan".
    ... the truth is the only reasonable and sensible one by E. Kholmogorov, for everything else resembles the recent revisionist production of Mr. Lyubimov at the B. Theater (Borodin’s music was taken as the basis of his concept ...) Prince Igor ... (the story is taken from Kholmogorov for basis of his concept)
    .... sorry I can not put 100 --- (minuses) ....
  • vahatak
    vahatak 16 October 2013 12: 51 New
    0
    The article is a huge plus, and to all Russians (Russians) who laugh at the tolerance of Europeans, a big hello.
    1. MIX58
      MIX58 16 October 2013 15: 07 New
      +1
      Quote: vahatak
      The article is a huge plus, and to all Russians (Russians) who laugh at the tolerance of Europeans, a big hello.

      Nice man, and when you write the word Russians ... the dearest at school did not teach you the Great and the Mighty correctly ??????? About "tolerance" --- "gayropeans" ..... and go - -There ..... A man of the third grade .. Yes, and a man, or are you "tolerast" ..... exclusively chosen ?????
    2. _Siberian_
      _Siberian_ 17 October 2013 12: 04 New
      0
      I don’t laugh Russian at them, I despise Russian tolerasts ...
  • Djozz
    Djozz 16 October 2013 13: 08 New
    +2
    I have a question? During the so-called "Tatar-Mongol" yoke, hundreds of thousands of artisans of the Slavs, Khorezmians, etc., were captured and taken prisoner, where their descendants in Mongolia went, that all assimilated is doubtful. Look at the USA and the Caribbean countries, there are often descendants of blacks from Africa mulattoes, Creoles and the like!
    1. Lindon
      Lindon 16 October 2013 13: 33 New
      -1
      The Chinese became like the descendants of the Mongols themselves.
      And you thought they evaporated?
      1. Djozz
        Djozz 16 October 2013 13: 43 New
        +2
        YOU, this is in kind, or such a joke of humor!
        1. Lindon
          Lindon 16 October 2013 14: 14 New
          0
          The capital from Mongolia was transferred to Beijing after full conquest - when describing the Khubilai court - there are references to numerous artisans, merchants, guards, etc.
          What happened to the Mongols and others after 300 years in China is known to everyone - assimilated.
          1. Djozz
            Djozz 16 October 2013 14: 52 New
            +1
            So, the blacks did not assimilate, having kept the racial primal signs in their descendants, and where did the capital Karokorum go!
            1. Lindon
              Lindon 16 October 2013 15: 01 New
              +1
              Pushkin retained the racial attributes of his grandfather Ganibal from Nigeria - his contemporaries often compared him with a monkey of envy of course.
              But what kind of blacks does Genghis Khan talk about?
              The capital has moved!
              1. Djozz
                Djozz 16 October 2013 15: 43 New
                +4
                YOU are kidding me or don’t understand what I wrote about! I wrote about black slaves in America and their descendants! And where does A.S. Pushkin and his ancestor Hannibal from Northern ABISSNII!
                1. Lindon
                  Lindon 16 October 2013 19: 13 New
                  0
                  The press office of the Russian National Library reported: “It seems that Pushkin’s historical homeland is the territory located south of Lake Chad in northern Cameroon.
                  Cameroon, Nigeria, Chad - this is the blackest Africa.
                  Abyssinia is Ethiopia. Ethiopians mix blacks with Europeans.
                  Ibrahim Hannibal - was a black man, not an Ethiopian. If he were an Ethiopian, he would impersonate a semi-European mulatto. Ganibal was the blackest black.
    2. Alexandr0id
      Alexandr0id 16 October 2013 14: 42 New
      +3
      no one drove the Slavs and Khorezmians into Mongolia, why such inverted logistics? the Chinese, the Tanguts, the Jurchen were dragged into Mongolia, they are much closer. and the Slavs were driven to the Volga, to the all-Union construction of a barn, or to the Italians for sale in Crimea.
      1. Djozz
        Djozz 16 October 2013 15: 37 New
        +1
        Where is the gold and mat of value from the plundered peoples!
        1. Lindon
          Lindon 16 October 2013 18: 47 New
          0
          The widow of Pushkin - Goncharova took to the murderer of her husband Dontes and gave birth to six children.
          1. Djozz
            Djozz 17 October 2013 11: 04 New
            0
            Dusya, you embitter me! The wife of Dantes was the sister of the widow of Pushkin, nee Goncharov!
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Alexandr0id
    Alexandr0id 16 October 2013 14: 33 New
    +3
    Kazan Tatars are certainly descendants of the Volga Bulgars, but not only. the fact of the matter is that in the 13-14 centuries there was a confusion of the conquered with the conquerors and the new Volga-Tatar ethnic group spoke already in Kipchak, and not in the archaic Bulgarian. therefore, it is quite reasonable that the present Tatars consider themselves descendants of the Golden Horde.
    the need for a single history textbook for the whole of russia is a moot point. in fact, the peoples living in the federation have been united by a common history with the Russians in the last few centuries - the Volga peoples from the 16th century, the Urals and Western Siberia from 17, the North Caucasus from 19, and Eastern Siberia - from 20. respectively, the Tuvans are much closer the history of Mongolia than Russia, and actually there is nothing to do with Alexander Nevsky, Peter the Great and Kutuzov. I don’t personally understand how this can lead to uniform educational standards, let the horse (minobr) think it has a bigger head.
    1. Djozz
      Djozz 16 October 2013 14: 54 New
      0
      Previously, local history was taught in schools, that's the whole problem!
    2. Setrac
      Setrac 16 October 2013 22: 00 New
      +1
      Quote: Alexandr0id
      Kazan Tatars, of course, the descendants of the Volga Bulgars

      With a slight movement of the hand, by reading Russian B (c) as Latin B (b), the Volgars turn, the Volgars turn, the Volgars turn into Bulgarians.
  • Agent 008
    Agent 008 16 October 2013 15: 05 New
    +7
    Dear some commentators, a huge request: please do not escalate the passion, do not write that Tatarstan was going to almost leave the Russian Federation ... Guys, I live ALL my LIFE in Kazan, it is an ordinary Russian city, no different from others ... Yes, we have a LOT of nationalists who from time to time for some reason excite people in pursuit of their own goals ... But believe me, they don’t decide ANYTHING, they CAN’T AFFECT anything, more on Tatarstan LEADERSHIP ... Somebody needs these speculations on the topic of history in order to trouble bring to the relations of the Tatars and Russians ... Nothing will come of these provocateurs! And to frenzied nationalists (who are all over the country), besides rallies, nothing more is ALLOWED! In general, it’s normal with us here ... And for those who pump it, I’ll say: it's good to stir up, calm down ... Rashid wrote (living all his life in Kazan and knowing the REAL situation).
    1. MIX58
      MIX58 16 October 2013 16: 21 New
      +1
      .Yes, we have a LOT of nationalists who from time to time for some reason excite people, pursuing some of their goals.

      Dear - you have a big plus! ... (although - to be more precise ... well, they are not "nationalists" ... they are extremists !!!) And it is not the People who excite them, but work out their 30 pieces of silver .... Yes, and these are not their goals, but those who promised them these 30 pieces of silver .... The question is ... and they will receive them ????
  • Atash
    Atash 16 October 2013 21: 05 New
    +2
    Quote: 6Sunrise9
    RI died as a result of a revolution organized by the Bolsheviks

    RI died before the revolution, which was a consequence of the death of RI. The Bolsheviks did not even overthrow the tsar; they were generally idle at that time. The Bolsheviks deservedly gained political weight due to the Kornilov rebellion, with which the Mensheviks of Kerensky could not cope.
    The national policy of the Bolsheviks led to the fact that Russia in the form of the USSR became a powerful power that it had never been before. And the Republic of Ingushetia collapsed as a result of pursuing a colonial policy imposed by Europe in its east, following the European model.
  • Atash
    Atash 16 October 2013 21: 13 New
    +2
    Quote: 6Sunrise9
    Need to eliminate nat. republics and make them provinces / regions

    It was unrealistic even then, so RI fell apart.
  • Atash
    Atash 16 October 2013 21: 15 New
    +4
    Quote: 6Sunrise9
    Russians are already sitting in the Kremlin ...

    This is in question by the way. Under national bully
  • Atash
    Atash 16 October 2013 21: 33 New
    +8
    Those who consider Genghis Khan to be a Mongol should, according to the present times, immediately put a "two" in history. Russians called all steppe Turks Tatars, from Kazan to present-day Tashkent. Nice generic title, by the way. Russians and Tatars (in a generalizing sense) are one unique community: two ethnic groups, two languages, two religions, at the same time, as it were, one people. Europe has always needed to separate these two halves and rule as usual. For a long time she succeeded, hence the imposed historical myth about the yoke and the "Mongol" of Genghis Khan. What did the Bolsheviks do? In fact, they separated Russia from Europe with an "iron curtain" and connected it with its east, the Tatars (again in a generalizing sense) with the Soviet Union and received historically unprecedented results. The Horde was the same as the USSR, only the capital, the center were slightly to the east. The official rejection of the myth of the "yoke" is a very good symptom for Russia.
  • Atash
    Atash 16 October 2013 21: 46 New
    +3
    Quote: svp67
    Nothing strange, religion and all its attributes were protected by the power of the "reformers"

    Definitely, before the Horde, churches were regularly plundered by dashing princes and Cossacks. Under the Horde, ALL religions, without separation of any, were declared inviolable. The Horde labels received by the church were then a headache for Ivan the Terrible in his attempts to secularize. Have you ever heard that the church "sounded the alarm", raised the people to fight the "Horde invaders"? Strange, yes, if the yoke was in reality?
  • Atash
    Atash 16 October 2013 22: 03 New
    +4
    Quote: major071
    If you look at the tricks, then for sure the Kazakhs and Bashkirs. Tatars - they are slightly different, but also hit

    Something strange, sorry. I don't know about the Bashkirs, but the Kazakhs, by cunning, never stood next to the Tatars. "When the Tatar was born, the Uzbek cried" - anecdote. More for fun:
    "God: Was your wife a Tatar? I was worn out, poor, during life, go to heaven.
    Jew: - And I was twice married to a Tatar!
    God: - Go to hell, you will find it good there too. " laughing
  • Atash
    Atash 16 October 2013 22: 28 New
    +4
    Quote: alebor
    Russia, a Christian European country, with European culture, European traditions, European Slavic Russian language and European Russian people

    This Europe was given to you, what is good in it? They even learned how to use coal from us Asians, so they didn’t wash at one time when they nearly burned all their forests for firewood. Learned from the Arabs, learned about the same ancient Greeks from Arab scholars. Well, Czechs, Poles - Slavs, so what? They gnaw your throat at the first opportunity. Tatar (a generalized term), of course, the same thing can be cut off by the Russian neighbor, but in a purely personal way, so to speak, wink , without any ethnic context, with no more enthusiasm than cutting off another Tatar. Pan-Slavism is the same nonsense as Pan-Turkism. There are steppe Turks (geographically from "ethnic" Tatars to Kazakhs), who are not friends with other Turks at all, but for some reason they are always, if not together, then side by side with Russians. If Russians are Slavs, then they are Turkic (or better, Tatar) Slavs, or vice versa Slavic Türks-Tatars.
  • Thunderbolt
    Thunderbolt 17 October 2013 00: 34 New
    -3
    Already from the beginning of the XNUMXth century, long before the appearance of Rurik, the Khazars and Greeks felt the pressure of the aggressive river power of the Rus, which may have already had the center of Kiev.
    It is true that these brave deeds are reflected in numerous written sources, recorded good
    But in 1223, the Mongols appeared in the Polovtsian Steppe, Desht-i-Kipchak ...
    But for this, a special thank you to the author, no matter what union of enslaved tributaries the Royal Mongols acted (by the way, they are still sitting in place, China has not swallowed them))), so that the glory of the descendants of Genghis Khan is not worth sharing. Of course, it is worth to determine the place of your people in History, but these "nuggets of knowledge" are not interesting for real historical science. Orda in Mongolian, like 10 centuries ago, means --- Constellation, other versions look pseudoscientific and politician. Long live Sukhe Bator, the great Mongol and a loyal friend of the Soviet people !!!
    1. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 17 October 2013 00: 45 New
      -1
      But what is wrong. The interpretation hurt or the statements are not true?
  • Ross
    Ross 17 October 2013 01: 03 New
    -1
    Quote: Setrac
    Quote: svp67
    but on the site of ancient Russian cities they dig up "ashes" full of skeletons of people of the "Caucasian race" and "Asian race" with traces of violent death and, accordingly, a lot of fragments of weapons and "armor", like the "European", "Russian" and "Eastern" types , and purely "Asian" ...

    These are your dreams, mainly the skeletons of Europeans, and the nomads did not produce their serious weapons at all.

    Absolutely right! Itself was during excavations in the 200 region, km south of Surgut.
    There is a reserve where the land now belongs to the Hunt. In the floodplain of the Yugan River - about 100 km of the river - about 300 settlements, where the excavations are entirely Slavic utensils and clothes. The Khanty themselves say that 800 years ago, when they came here from China, white "Iron" people lived on this land.
  • Nevyatoy
    Nevyatoy 17 October 2013 10: 07 New
    +2
    Quote: alebor
    Quite a good article. Unlike many others published on this site, the article is based on historical facts.

    Well, you certainly bent it. Facts? A fact is a phenomenon or event that has taken place. Just here there is a debate about whether or not these or those events took place. This article is a hypothesis; it is not based on anything, as well as the rest of the comments. The history of Russia is still based on methods and technologies far from the 21st century. Modern proponents of the official version do not want to attach and evaluate in aggregate the information received today by more advanced technologies. For example, the study of DNA codes. At present, it is possible to turn to exact sciences, rather than free interpretations of surviving chronicles, to solve the historical problem. Exact sciences can give an answer. Could the Mongols have come to Russia at all, have they come? But for some reason, modern historians are in no hurry to turn to exact sciences, to attract techies. Most likely because then they will have to throw away their diploma and doctoral work.
    1. Djozz
      Djozz 17 October 2013 11: 16 New
      +1
      All right! Who wants to admit hacking. An off-topic example, but very indicative: Remember how many disputes and dramas played out about the drop in water levels in the Caspian Sea, how many candidates and doctors defended this issue, and the result of the PPC, the water level in the Caspian has a cycle, now it is increasing! That's the whole hell!
  • Nevyatoy
    Nevyatoy 17 October 2013 11: 08 New
    +1
    Quote: Thunderbolt
    But for this, a special thank you to the author, it appeared and no matter what union of the enslaved tributaries the Royal Mongols acted (by the way, they still sit still, their China has not swallowed))), so that it is not worth sharing the glory of the descendants of Genghis Khan.

    Quote: Thunderbolt
    But what is wrong. The interpretation hurt or the statements are not true?


    Yes, only the most interesting thing is that the present Mongols themselves learned about this at the beginning of the 20th century from Soviet representatives and preachers of communism. Before that, they did not know about it. Even none of them led their genealogy from Genghis Khan or any of the Horde. But our nobles all the time indicated their genealogy from the Horde.
    Moreover, since 1312 Islam becomes the State religion of the Horde. Explain then why the Mongols at the time when they were told that they were the descendants of Genghis Khan, Shamanism and Buddhism prevailed. By 1956, the share of Muslims was only 4%, and that was due to the emigration of Kazakhs to the western regions of Mongolia. and they simply pointed a finger at the modern Mongols - "you will be the descendants of the Great Conquerors." And there are no attachments to this, only contradictions.
  • aidarko
    aidarko 17 October 2013 11: 30 New
    0
    Quote: Setrac
    Quote: aidarko
    Scientists have proved that the Chuvash and Tatars are direct descendants of the Volga Bulgars.

    Write correctly - proved by BRITISH scholars?


    No, by European scientists, the scientific work is called "The Western and Eastern Roots of the Saami — the Story of Genetic
    “Outliers” Told by Mitochondrial DNA and Y Chromosomes "

    URL:
    http://download.cell.com/AJHG/pdf/PIIS0002929707618928.pdf
  • kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 17 October 2013 12: 49 New
    0
    Russia, its people and its history, since the time of "cutting a window to Europe", are constantly subjected to attempts by Western and pro-Western "historians" to distort or completely destroy the real HISTORY and replace it with a surrogate beneficial to the West! The tree dries up when its roots are cut down, and so does the people: destroy his history and all the end is inevitable! It is not for nothing that in Russia all the traitors and accomplices of enemies were called “Ivans who do not remember kinship.” It’s funny to read the fabrications of the new Tatar “historians”: they puffed out their cheeks and declared that they were descendants of the Bulgars, and now they agreed to the point that they are the descendants and heirs of their worst enemy, Genghis Khan. They apparently forgot one very important commandment: "Shooting into the past with a gun, you will get an answer from a gun!" Marvelous are thy works, O Lord!
  • godun
    godun 17 October 2013 13: 41 New
    +3
    Russia is the only country in the world with an unpredictable past.
    1. kartalovkolya
      kartalovkolya 17 October 2013 15: 20 New
      +1
      Each new government is trying to rewrite history for themselves, and this is fraught ...! And about the only thing you are somewhat wrong, but all of Europe rewrites its history to look white and fluffy. And they represent us as bloodthirsty monsters, they forgot that in just one Bartholomew’s night, about a hundred thousand Huguenots were slaughtered, and for the entire reign of Ivan the Terrible -there will not be ten thousand! And the Great French Revolution almost depopulated a number of provinces, and especially Vandeyu! And according to their history, this was a breakthrough in democracy! Let's not talk about the bonfires of the Inquisition, which we practically did not have!
  • The comment was deleted.
  • dark_65
    dark_65 20 October 2013 17: 23 New
    0
    I would like to ask a question, but the answer is obvious to me, you all, have you ever seen a living Mongol, a Buryat, not a refined provincial from Ude, but a living, smelly, real one.
    Can you really imagine all this complex structure of biology? Tatars grieve according to Genghis, banderlogs from the Baltic states demand compensation, the Kyrgyz-Kaisak horde (it’s the world behind the scenes laughing ) is indignant at the ethnic name of chocks. How long will my spirit be in dismay, when will I just live quietly in my country?
    Maybe I should still feel ashamed for the conquest of Chukotka?
    We are at home, or this communal kitchen will dictate the conditions.
    Azerbaijanis send notes of protest, for 38 kicks to Zeynalov, the Dutch are swaying excesses from apartments, .. where is the limit?
    whose hut is called Russia.