Who was Prince Andrew Bogolyubsky?

Today, the personality of Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky is one of the rather controversial in stories Rus. Some experts speak of him as a tyrant and a bastard, while others aspirate, as if they mention something holy.

But be that as it may, the prince really was a great man. Unlike many others, he managed to understand in time that Russia needed a strong ruling arm. That only one person should have power over the whole vast country. Perhaps, if he had more like-minded people who managed to understand his plans, there wouldn’t be a terrible Mongol invasion that ousted Russia for hundreds of years in development — the Mongols couldn’t oppose an army that was ten times larger than any detachment could put up one or another prince against them. Well, with only two or three times the superiority of the nomads would have had very little chance of winning.

It is necessary to recognize the fact that Prince Andrew was able to distinguish himself in many areas - science, culture, religion, art, politics and, of course, military affairs.

Date and even year of birth of the prince unknown. Of course, there are different versions, but they are very different from each other. But on the whole, historians agree that he was born between 1111 and 1125. His father - Yuri Dolgorukiy himself - from childhood taught his sons to the skill of battle. Since the age of three, Andrei has been able to sit in the saddle, and the first is cold. weapon received even earlier. As shown by modern studies of his remains, he spent many hours in training. Colossal loads affected his physique - the humeral bones were twisted. Usually this was observed in knights who participated in battles, using not a classic combination - a shield and a sword, but two swords. As a rule, only the best warriors could afford such a style of battle, knowing for sure that they would be able to ward off an enemy blow with a sword and immediately counterattack a defenseless enemy.

In addition, Prince Andrew was different religiosity. It was to him in a dream that the revived icon ordered him to go to Vladimir, although his father bequeathed him to rule in Vyshgorod. During his life, Andrei financed the construction of more than thirty white-stone churches from his personal funds. It is necessary to take into account the fact that the white stone in those places was distinguished by its high cost. So the prince allocated just fabulous money. He also did not spare money for the arrangement and decoration of temples, the purchase of icons brought from Byzantium.

Prince Andrew was distinguished in the intellectual sphere. It is known that he was fluent in six languages. He had personal correspondence with Friedrich Barbarossa. Of course, he knew the history and geography of their places. Therefore, in general, the level of his intellect was in no way inferior to many modern academicians. Only with the difference that the heads of academicians are often crammed with completely useless information. But Prince Andrew knew only what he needed for a successful government. But he cannot be called a narrow-minded ruler either. He read Aristotle and Plato in the original, and also maintained contact with the most intelligent people who lived in Europe and some Asian countries.

Perhaps it was the unusual enlightenment that enabled him to realize to him the need for the unification of Russia earlier than others. Moreover, everything that is needed for a true leader who is able to lead the people - intellect, uncommon strength, courage, religiosity, and most importantly - faith in the correctness of their actions, came together in it.

Over time, he managed to gain considerable strength and publicly declared that Russia needed one ruler, the Grand Duke, and not only for the duration of the hostilities, but also in everyday life. Of course, many did not support him, not wanting to lose their independence. And among those who rejected him most ardently were the inhabitants of Kiev. That is why the city was dealt a terrible blow - the city was captured and given to the soldiers to be plundered. Yes, this behavior does not fit well with deep religiosity. However, this made it possible to demonstrate the power of the prince and stop further attempts at disobedience.

Alas, in the presence of like-minded people, the prince had a lot of opponents. Moreover, both explicit and hidden. That is why 12 July 1174, the prince was treacherously murdered. His weapon was stolen, after which a detachment of twenty opponents attacked him in his quarters. As shown by the examination carried out already in our time, he received 45 piercing blows - with daggers, swords, sabers and spears.

Also, a lot of controversy went until recently about the appearance of the prince. In the portraits, he looked like a strong man, with a narrow face, dark blond hair and a completely Slavic type of person. However, on the sculpture, it does not resemble the Russian - a poured Mongoloid: a wide nose, fleshy lips, narrow eyes and high eyebrows. But here modern science has come to the rescue. Seeing the restored porter, you could immediately understand - the sculptor was surprisingly inaccurate. Prince Andrey had a completely Russian appearance, without the slightest admixture of Mongoloid features.

So, the prince was killed in 1174 year, failing to complete the unification of Russia. And in only half a century the Mongols came ... So, if Prince Andrey could unite Russia, perhaps the history of our country would follow a completely different scenario ...

Comments

[ZHORA]

Here he is a truly Russian hero with Mongol slanting eyes, and Kiev, as a Mongol, has plundered
. "... For two days Suzdal, Smolensk and Polovtsians plundered and burned the" mothers of Russian cities. "Many Kievites were taken prisoner. In monasteries and churches, soldiers took not only jewelry, but all the holiness: icons, crosses, bells and vestments The Polovtsi set fire to the Pechersk Monastery. "Metropolia" St. Sophia Cathedral was plundered along with other churches. "And in Kiev there was groaning and toughness on all people, and unabated grief."

It is worth recalling that Suzdal or Woodland did not belong to Russia since it was inhabited by the Finogoug peoples, the whole of Meri, etc. and was controlled from Kiev by the Kiev stooges.

"... Prince Andrew had a completely Russian appearance, without the slightest admixture of Mongoloid facial features ...."))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) )))))))
The reconstruction of the remains suggests otherwise, and even what kind of appearance it might have been for the son of Polovka))

But one thing is undoubtedly the first Russian prince from him and the Moscow state began, attempts to cling to the history of Kievan Rus (although the term was not incorrect Kievan Rus was just Rus, the term Kievan was artificially introduced by historians) look as if the United States would try to lead its own a story from the Celtic tribes of Britain.

[Order]

Zhora, stop you reveling in your own exclusivity and inventing your own story. The marriages of the ancient Russian princes with the daughters of the surrounding Turkic peoples were very common and politically motivated, hence the appearance and nothing shameful here. As for the ruin of Kiev, it is necessary to take into account the historical reality of that period, namely the feuds of princes, in fact a civil war for power and seniority in the lands of ancient Russia. And if you think that the Kiev or Chernigov princes did not go on campaigns and did not ruin the cities of North-Eastern Russia, then you are a naive person.

[ZHORA]

At a time when from 50 to 150 thousand citizens lived in Kiev, there were 15 thousand inhabitants in the "urban-type settlement" Paris, and 20 thousand in London. At this time, frogs croaked in the Altai bog, two hundred years later a village "Moscow" arose here, which in translation from Old Finnish means "wet place". Around the "wet place" in dense forests and fields lived up to twenty different ethnic, multilingual tribes of the Finno-Ugric-Tatar-Altai ethnic groups. Vyatichi, Radimichi, Golyad, Krivichi, Mary, Perm ... Only the Perm tribe had some kind of original writing. Later, the written language of the Perm people destroyed the Orthodox clergy. Brought to the distant outskirts-colony of Russia by the Kiev warriors, artificially created on the basis of the Old Bulgarian language (Church Slavonic), brought together and assimilated two dozen different ethnic tribes.

During archaeological excavations of Christian (!) Cemeteries of the 16-17th centuries on the territory of the former Moscow principality, the study of skulls, it turned out: among those buried, 44 to 53 percent belong to the Asian type. Not European! Not Slavic! The noun Muscovites (Muscovites) - by the name of their capital city from the 15th to the beginning of the 18th century was called an ethnic conglomerate of the Finno-Tatar-Altai peoples. In Europe and the Asian empire of the Golden Horde, the territory inhabited by this ethnic conglomerate at that time was called "Muscovy". People, consisting of more than a dozen different ethnic tribes, were summarized as "moxel".
When did the "Moxel" tribes miraculously become our Slavic brothers? Not miraculously, but by decree of the Tsar of Muscovites Peter 1. In 1713 he issues an order, sends it through Menshikov to Ambassador Dolgoruky to Copenhagen: "In all chimes (periodical European magazines) they print our state in Moscow, not in Russia, and for that, if you please this is to prevent the Russians from printing, about which and other things it is written to all courtyards (embassies). " The euphonious name of her people was finally consolidated by the princess from Germany, Catherine II, who became empress, who wished to rule not over ... - we will keep silent for tolerance - but over the "civilized European people".
And one more "discovery" personally for ....., the whole world has known about it for a long time. Only one people on our entire planet deserves to be included in the Guinness Book. All peoples are called names, names, nouns. Who! - Bulgarians, Poles, French, British, Jews, Papuans. But not by adjectives. Whose, what? - "Bulgarian", "Polish", "Jewish", "Papuan". According to the tsar's order, the descendants of the "moxeli" who became Slavs have borne the general name for three centuries. Not a noun (who?), But an adjective. Whose are you? Russians. What are you? Russians. Because three centuries belonged to Kievan Rus. After the conquest of Batu by the hordes for almost two centuries, the Rostov-Suzdal princes went to bow to the khans of the Golden Horde for the right to rule. As a result of the "great turmoil" (as the period of internecine wars in the state of the Golden Horde is designated in Russian historiography), the central power in the ZO gradually passes to Moscow and a new state is created, the principality of Moscow, then the Moscow kingdom. What imperial itch seized the "new Slavs" afterwards is well known to everyone.

[Pancho]

"Perhaps, if he had found more like-minded people who were able to understand his plans, the terrible Mongol invasion, which threw Russia for hundreds of years in its development, simply would not have happened - the Mongols would not have been able to oppose an army, the number of which was dozens of times greater than any detachment, who could put one or another prince against them. Well, with only two or three times the superiority, the nomads would have very little chance of victory. "These tales about the" yoke "have already gotten. And if it were not for the Mongol invasion, then we , following the author's logic, would they have already flown to Jupiter?

[Sirius]

I do not agree with the author.
The first one. He was on an excursion in Vladimir and the Bogolyubsky nunnery, where the prince was killed. And he drew attention to small details: Father Prince Yuri Dolgoruky and his retinue, having arrived in Vladimir, subordinated the boyar group of the city by force. Forced to pay tribute. And this act was fixed by the marriage of his son, Andrei, with the daughter of the main boyar of the city. Think marriage was voluntary? And was the bride happy to marry the enemy of her father and brothers?
In general, listening to the guide, a parallel arose with the 90s: in the same way, the "brothers" of the groupings led by "authorities" went to the "arrow" and divided territories, found out who was "protecting whom". I am convinced that the princes were driven by the desire to be the first among all the princes of Russia. And this could only be achieved by subordinating everyone and everything. Like a wolf pack. And patriotic impulses have nothing to do with it. They were on the Kulikovo field, with a huge external threat such as the Golden Horde.
But I was distracted. So who killed Andrei Bogolyubsky? Those who Andrei and his father Yuri took away from many years ago. Even an honor. In those days, there was a custom of blood feud between genera. Like now in the Caucasus. So who are they: traitors or avengers? And if the avengers, then what kind of enemies are they of the Russian Land?
I asked the guide: "Did the prince know his entourage?" I knew! And therefore he built his residence, that is, a monastery with a fortress wall, 20 km from Vladimir. Because the townspeople were hostile to him! And the prince lived under constant protection, and they attempted more than once. The conspirators simply outwitted the guards.
Second. Read Lev Nikolayevich Gumilev. Especially "Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe". In his books, in accordance with the theory of ethnogenesis, it is very logical and popular to explain the reasons for the catastrophe of 1237-42. And the united Russia would also have fallen before the wonderful military machine of that time: the Mongol-Tatar tumens with tremendous discipline, training, weapons and combat experience. Just as the giant China fell, which could "overwhelm with their corpses", and the former Khorezmshah is much stronger than all the Russian principalities combined, and the united Polovtsy, and the Volga Bulgaria, etc.

[Denis]

graphomania, write to write at least something
"and if only and now if", subjugal moods - the basis of history?

but with the Mongol invasion we stand steadfastly
how many were there according to their sources, but each one has more than one horse?
then the locust flock would have had the effect, where does it go?
everything devours and dies of hunger
A. Bushkov stated that the invasion of civil war, with the transformation of the Mongols