Before February 23rd, in order to occupy the coming weekend, I decided to visit the bookstore. From childhood he loved two directions in literature. This is science fiction and a military history genre, although recent trends convince me that these two genres will soon merge. Since S. Lukyanenko has already pleased us with the latest "Dozor", I immediately go to the department of historical literature. What do writers offer to a connoisseur of the material printed word? I walk past the shelves with the books of "the most truthful man on earth" V. Rezun and his company: M. Solonin, Beshanov and others. I walk past abominations like "Penalties on the Seelow Heights" and stop at a field that has not yet been explored for myself. The field is almost like Kulikovskoye, it is an ancient Russian history. Here I will digress to clarify why I stopped here.
Recently, notes and opinions about white spots in ancient Russian history have become more common. It would seem that the school curriculum provides all the answers to any questions that arise, but, as they say, there is an "opinion". And one of the most significant opinions is the "new chronology for all" A. T. Fomenko. What does not suit Anatoly Timofeevich and just a huge number of truth-lovers? Consider the so-called "controversial" issues of the "Mongol-Tatar yoke". Since A. T. Fomenko, as, by the way, V. Rezun and M. Solonin, in every possible way emphasize that they are not historians, they do not work with archives and draw their conclusions using "simple peasant logic" and available information, then we will also follow their rules in controversial moments.
So, at the beginning of the story, we are given links to foreign ambassadors and merchants who tell us about the strange things of Moscow, which are not at all Moscow but Tatar, for the country of Tartary. How should we relate to such sources? I think it will be interesting to know that in the West, Russia and Ukraine were often called the country of the peoples of Gogi and Magogi - the peoples that Satan will call at the end of time. Although a little earlier, the Scythians were associated with these peoples. Well, what about the cards with Tartary? I think that lovers of maps will appreciate, for example, the map of Heinrich Mainzinsky, where the Tanais (Don) river flows on the border of Europe and Asia, and the country of dog-headed people is marked there. On the 1550 world map of the enlightened French cartographer Pierre Desselier (Dieppe cartographic school) in the northeast of Muscovy in the Colmogor region, a miniature of a Russian hunter-fisherman dressed in skins is placed, instead of a bow and arrows he already has a gun in his hands, but instead of a face with a dog's muzzle …
After such descriptions of Muscovy, you somehow no longer wonder why a foreign merchant does not distinguish Tatars from Slavs. The author's surprise about European caftans in Russia also does not find a response, in fact, they did not walk around Ryazan in Greek tunics and Roman togas. Further, the author does not understand how the Mongols could leave their weapons to the enslaved Russian wars, and they roamed freely among the Tatars, without making any attempts to attack the enslavers. Should we be surprised at such bungling of the Tatars? Let's remember the Turkish Janissaries. The Janissaries (Turkish yeniçeri (yenicheri) - a new warrior) - the regular infantry of the Ottoman Empire in 1365-1826. The Janissaries, along with the Sipahs and Akinji (cavalry), formed the basis of the army in the Ottoman Empire. They were part of the kapykuly regiments (the Sultan's personal guard, which consisted of slaves and prisoners). Janissary troops also performed police and punitive functions in the state. The Janissary infantry was created by Sultan Murad I in 1365 from Christian youths 12-16 years old. That is, it turns out that Christian children have become punitive for their own peoples!
And then there are mysterious furious miniatures for traditional history from Russian chronicles, in which the Mongols are indistinguishable from the defending Russians! Well, let's accept for a while the postulate that the Mongols and the Russians were practically one people. Here, as they say, I lost heart, but in order to finally believe, I decided to find other miniatures. In all the same Russian chronicles, there was a miniature dedicated to the Trojan War, but a strange thing, on it the Trojans and Greeks were completely indistinguishable from the Russians and Mongols from the aforementioned miniatures. So, are the Russians Trojans, or is it just that the artist had such a manner of performing miniatures?
Let's turn to other engravings. Here we are given a picture of the battle of the Hungarians on the bridge with the Mongols, and again the question is, which of them is who? Too much the Mongols resemble Teutonic knights or knights-crusaders, moreover, there is a crescent on the banner of the Mongols. It turns out that the Mongols are Muslims? No, it's just that the knights who defeated the Muslims are depicted here, and thus received the right to heraldically depict the crescent.
If we look at another engraving depicting the same battle of Lenz, but dating from 1630, we will be surprised to see the Ottomans fighting on both sides in characteristic Muslim turbans. If you look at how their opponents portrayed the Mongols, then it turns out to be a completely amazing thing! In Chinese miniatures, the Mongols are indistinguishable from the Chinese. In Persian engravings, Persians in battle are indistinguishable from Mongols. And in the "Siege of Baghdad" picture, the defending Arabs are indistinguishable from the Mongols. But for some reason none of them look like Russian princes. In Japanese prints, the Mongols are indistinguishable from the samurai. So what happens? Either the Mongols possessed fantastic mimicry: they became like two peas in a pod, from tactical tricks or to catch up with fear, or there was an invasion of dark entities from the Looking Glass!
It is surprising that the author does not know the name of Genghis Khan - Temuchin.
And, of course, the author could not resist the hairpin in the direction of the Russian Orthodox Church. Sergius of Radonezh, Peresvet and Oslyabya did not seem to exist at all. The annals contain news of the total extermination of the black and white clergy during the capture of cities. In particular, during the capture of Suzdal, the Mongol-Tatars "old monks and nuns, and priests, and the blind, and the lame, and the hunchbacked, and the sick, and all the people were killed, and the young monks and nuns, and priests, and get, and deacons and their wives, and daughters, and sons, they carried away all to their camps. " Among the representatives of the clergy were courageous people who fulfilled their duty to the end. In the Assumption Cathedral, which was set on fire by the Mongol-Tatars, Vladimir Bishop Mitrofan died, and the Ryazan and Pereyaslavl bishops were killed by the nasty ones. In this difficult time for the country, the church acted as the guardian of the national culture. It was the church that remained a single organization for all Russian lands, Orthodoxy was the banner of the struggle against all infidels.
But the idea that the Russian lands paid tribute in blood to the Horde by recruits sounds absolutely blasphemous and wild. Refusal to pay such a grant led to punitive expeditions, during which blood was sometimes shed, but this was from the category of excesses. The excess was good - the burning of old Ryazan, the total extermination of the Kiev population, the storming of Kozelsk.
What is the purpose of the author, slandering the memory of ancestors? About five years ago I came across a book on a similar topic, where in the conclusion the author urged us Russians to abandon our vast territories and cook, as they say, in our own juice, in a small Russian state around Moscow!
A. T. Fomenko, apparently, is not a bold enough author and so far he simply offers to get acquainted with the "new chronology for everyone." And the price of such a book is now 390 rubles. The conclusion that I draw for myself is that the traditional story is much more acceptable for the family budget, and therefore I take from the shelf a book with the memoirs of veterans, where there is no place for falsification and profiting from the feelings of patriots.
