Never mind the archives?

Never mind the archives?Historical information we gain, as already mentioned, the source documents. Among them is the archival documents and books.

Depending on how the completed archives and libraries, which documents and books they received, what documents are destroyed, for what reason it is destroyed, you can judge the usefulness of the source base of historical science. Naturally, that have survived, not all historical sources, which were created in the past.

In practice, we have fragmented data, individual documents that were created before the XVI century. Case sources has become more or less uniformly to form after the invention of printing. The appearance of replicated media provides them with greater safety.

Handwritten documents and books were created and stored, usually in the monasteries. Most valuable to the state records were kept in princely palaces.

The first creators of world history are considered to be the bishop of Caesarea Eusebius Pamphili, St.. Jerome and Bishop un ponsky Augustine. World Chronicle was written by Archbishop Anthony of Florence in the middle of the XV century. Known chronicle Hartmann Schedel, Marcin Belsky, Jacopo Filippo Forest, Mark — Anionino Sabellino.

These works were compiled and reinterpreted in XVI — XVII centuries, Joseph Scaliger, who is considered the founder of modern history, and Dionysius Petavius. Adopted today ancient history conventionally called Scaliger, thus emphasizing that it is the work of several persons, of which the most famous Scaliger. Interestingly, the Scaliger brought his history to the "absolutely exact dates" of all major events in the history of mankind. He gave not only the year of the event, but also the month, day, and sometimes even the hour of the day.

The first Russian "Chronograph for the great presentation" (Chronograph — the Greek word which means "vremennik.") Was based on the Byzantine chronographs.

The oldest type of Russian chronograph presented "chronograph" in 1512.

Among the clergy there are theories to explain the power of Russia, its religious superiority, concentration after Byzantium was in Russia the true faith. Metropolitan Zosima in the late XV century calls to Moscow and the Russian land 'new Constantinople', that is the second of Constantinople. At the beginning of VI century Pskov monk Filofeem formulated the theory of "Moscow — the Third Rome."

In the third quarter of the XVI century, under the supervision of the Metropolitan of Moscow is made "Book of Degrees," which presents an immense portrait gallery of the Russian history.

The systematic collection of books and documents begins in XVII century. But it is not only and not picking up much of the editing and reworking.

In the official history of the XVII century was of great importance, "The Charter, approved the election to the throne the king and autocrat Mikhail Romanov, St. George's," which was made in connection with the election of Tsar Mikhail Romanov. The Zemsky Sobor 1613 "diploma" was a model who began to follow in assessing historical events noble historians.

The clerk Ivan Timofeev wrote "Annals days of kings and saints of Moscow …", praises Michael Romanov.

In 1617 and 1620 have created new, so-called second and third edition of "chronograph", which highlights the history of Russia in the world history. In the editorial of the XVII century "Chronograph" enriched by new historical sources, they are not only Russian chronicles, historical stories, but also chronicles the West. In the 20 — 30 years of the XVII century created "New Chronicle", released from circles close to Patriarch Filaret — founder of the Romanov dynasty.

Thus, we see a process of "rewriting history."

The establishment of formal historical works continued under Alexis. To this end, in 1657, a special order of the Address. At the head of the order was made clerk Timothy Kudryavtsev. Began an active collection of materials in different orders, libraries, monasteries, private individuals. Kudryavtsev's work continued clerk Gregory Kunakov. But, apparently, the work of this order on writing stories did not meet the required royal court. Order ceased to exist.

Successor of recorded history, compiling an order clerk Kazan Palace Fyodor Griboyedov. In the late 60's, he was "The history of the kings and great princes of the Russian lands", which was "The power of the pious and the righteous book of the Romanovs", that is actually performed the task given to the order of the notebook.

In 1672, the Embassy in order was prepared "Big State book, or the root of the Russian state" ("Titulyarnik"), containing portraits of Kiev and Moscow grand dukes and kings from Rurik to Alexis in chronological order.

In 1674 he published a synopsis — the first edition of the official version of Russian history.

Why all of a sudden in the XVII century begins active process of gathering and editing documents? How it all happened?

Describing the XVII century, Archpriest George Florovsky in his book "Ways of Russian Theology," wrote that it was the age of the "critical", not "organic" era in Russian history. It was the age of the lost balance, age of surprises and volatility, a century of unprecedented and unheard of events … I do not sleep, most frightened … All frustrated, move. And the soul itself has shifted … ends this frightened century apocalyptic spasm, terrible attack apocalyptic fanaticism. He disagrees with the fact that there is still more to portray the XVII century, in contrast to the age of Peter as the "pre-reform period," as the dark background of great changes …

In his opinion, the fatal issue of the Moscow XVII century, the book on the right, was in fact a much more difficult and complicated than it seems … usually Moscow spravniki once were involved in all the contradictions of handwritten stories. Around the young Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, said G. Florovsky, combines powerful circle that the process of fixing old books. Among correctional books include royal confessor — Archpriest Stefan Vonifatevicha, royal nobleman FM Rtischeva etc. From Kiev invited "teachers" for reference. Then came in 1649 Epiphany Slavinetsky, Arseny Satanovsky next year Daskin Ptitsky. At the same time, reprinted in Moscow Kiev books: "Grammar" Smotritsky and even "short" "Catechism" Peter Graves (1649). In the "Helmsman" 1649 — 1650's so-called 51 th chapter is taken from the missal Graves (Western origin). In the same years was compiled so-called "Kirillov's book" and republished Kiev "The Book of the faith." On Mount Athos in tow this time Russian books. As noted by G. Florovsky, "the initiative of church transformation occurs from the king, in a low-key thrust resisting patriarch. The reform has been resolved and thought out in a palace. "

In 1652 Patriarch Nikon is. Nikon, according to G. Florovsky, is one of those strange people who do not like the person, but temperament. And instead of the idea of a person or a program. The Ecclesiastical Reform Nikon contemporaries spoke and wrote many contradictory. He did not know Greek, but it was "almost morbid tendency to redo everything and pereoblachat Greek — as in Peter's later passion of all or disguise all in German or — Dutch. They have in common is also the strange lightness break with the past, this unexpected bezbytnost, deliberate and contrived in action … Grekofilstvo Nikon was not a return to the basics of the paternal, not even the return of Byzantium. The "Greek" lured his rank greater solemnity, festivity, splendor, wealth and well-being of the visible. " G. Florovsky rightly notes that opponents Nikonova cope with the foundation insisted that equated the new book "Greek novopechatannyh with the Germans, with the books and the lame pokidnyh … Home acuity Nikonova" reform "has been a sharp and wholesale denial of Old Russian rank and ritual. Not only it replaced with a new, but declared false, heretical, almost wicked. " On the big cathedral in 1667, where 14 of the 30 bishops were foreign, old Russian rite was "suspected and convicted, under a terrible baptism."

Russian church was condemned old man as ignorance and recklessness, as suemudrie and heresy. Under the pretext of universal completeness Old Russian New Greek replaced. According to G. Florovsky — "it was not opinion the Greek Church, it was the opinion of the itinerant" Greek "… the bishops."

As noted by the Russian historian Sergey Platonov, after the Troubles participation of foreigners in Russian life is becoming more sensitive. During the years of the Troubles, they are so spread Muscovy that have become familiar to every Russian. G. Florovsky correctly noted: "Here we are not random and unconnected facts, but it is a fact relationship. And not that it is important that in the XVII century Moscow turnover are different western trivia and details. But change is the style or "ritual life" changed psychological skills and needs, we introduce a new "polites" king.

Wave of "scribes of history" was growing. Among them was, for example, Simeon. It was a pretty ordinary Ruthenian pedant, or scribe, but very clever, quirky and controversial in the affairs of everyday life, managed to become highly and firmly in a puzzled Moscow society (he is here in 1664), or rather, at the Moscow court, as the poet or virsheslagatel, as a learned man, for all orders. He first taught clerks "on Latino" by Alvaro inevitable, then became a teacher of Tsarevich Alexei and Fedor. He was the king of speech, wrote a solemn "declaration" of the king.

With the coming to the throne of the Romanovs to give the order to the monasteries to collect documents and books in order to correct them. And people were going to "book on the right". Thus, in November 1616, Archimandrite Dionysios, cellarer Palitsin Abraham and all the brethren of the Trinity monastery received the Tsar's letter: "We decree had been taken to us in Moscow, from the Trinity Sergius Monastery, kanorhist Elder Arseny, but the village priest Ivan Klementieva to correct books print and Potrebnika … And we — continues the king — this patch potrebnika entrust you, Archimandrite Dionysios, and with thee Arseny and Ivan and other spiritual elders and reasonable … "(SM Soloviev Reading and stories on the history of Russia. M. , 1989.)

In these years, we have begun the audit library book collections and archives. Documents often simply destroyed.

Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich in the middle of XVII century, commanded to bring him all the capital in the books on the history of Russia, but not in the royal or the patriarchal library, there was not a history book (Bocharov LI etc. Conspiracy against Russian history. M ., 1998.).

Unfortunately, historians have paid very little attention to the issue of distortion of the source base XVII century. Scientists are of course found in the books obvious forgery XVII century. For instance, Karamzin discovered in Khrushchev list Book of Degrees retelling speech of Ivan the Terrible on Calvary in 1550. Renowned historian and archivist VN Autocrat proved that false speech Grozny was fabricated in the XVII century (Autocrat VN speech of Ivan the Terrible in 1550 as a political pamphlet late XVII century / / Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian literature. Moscow, Leningrad, 1955.). Aznamenitaya correspondence with Prince Kurbsky Grozny, according to some scholars, is a literary work written in C. Shakhovskoi XVII century. But, unfortunately, there were only isolated incidents of detection of distortions in the sources on the history of Russia.

Distortion of the facts of the source base of historical science clearly traced in the XVIII century, when the activity begins the process of creating a new (distorted) the history of Russia.

"Suffice it — write the authors of the book" Conspiracy against Russian history "- that even Peter I during his reign has repeatedly issued edicts which commanded from across the country bring their capital in the ancient chronicles. Why? Ostensibly to write the true story of Russia. That's just what we mean by the word "true"? Then, as they say, how many people, so many opinions. "

Even more strange things happened in the reign of his older brother Peter I — Theodore Alekseevich. Once, for example, he ordered to collect all the bit of the book and burn them in the front hall royal chamber. This book is a history of the ancient Russian families where there were merits of each type of the Fatherland. The result has been destroyed not only the genealogy of the Russian nobility, but also the memory of the deeds of our ancestors.

As a result of this "cleansing", as noted by the famous historian Robert G.Skrynnikov, "to preserve the Russian archives and depositories XVI century — the worst in Europe."

The distortion of the source base is in the future.

Under Empress Anna Ivanovna in Russia flooded foreigners. Germans are the founders of the modern version of Russian history. A start was made by Bayer (Gottlieb — Siegfried Beyer was born in 1649 in Königsberg. Graduated from the University. Since 1725 took the chair of oriental antiquities and languages of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences.), Miller (Gerard Friedrich Miller. In Russia since 1725. In Siberia has been collecting documents, which became known as the "Portfolios Miller.") Schlozer (August Ludwig Schletzer — German historian, was in Russian service from 1761 to 1800.) in the middle of the XVIII century.

The task of the German scientists was to prove that the Eastern Slavs in IX — X centuries were savages bring into being rescued from the darkness of ignorance Varangian princes. To do this, Gottlieb — Siegfried Bayer advanced Norman theory of formation of the Russian state. According to his theory, which arrived to Russia Normans handful a few years turned "dark country" into a powerful state.

Catherine II appointed Schlozer academician. In doing so he not only got to the uncontrolled use of all the documents in the Academy, but also the right to claim all that was considered necessary from the Imperial Library, and other institutions.

Struggle against distortions of Russian history led MV Lomonosov. In 1749 — 1750 years he spoke out against the historical views of Miller and Bayer. He criticized Miller's thesis "On the origin of the name and the Russian people," gave scathing criticism Bayer works on Russian history. University was supported by many prominent Russian scientists.

Member of the Academy AK Martov filed a complaint with the Senate on the dominance of foreigners in the Russian Academy. It was signed by J. Gorlitskiy, Grekov, P. Shishkarev Nosov, A. Polyakov, M. Kovrin etc.

The Senate set up a commission to investigate, led by Prince Yusupov. The Commission considered performance of Russian scientists' revolt mob "against the authorities. The commission's decision was terrible: I. Gorlitskiy executed, Grekov, Polyakov and V. Nosov exiled to Siberia, P. Shishkareva and others remain under arrest until the case next president of the Academy.

The Commission stated that the Lomonosov "for repeated discourteous, dishonest and nasty behavior with respect to both the Academy and to the Commission, and the German state to be sentenced to death, or, in extreme cases, flogging and exclusions and conditions." Nearly seven months Lomonosov spent under arrest pending the approval of the sentence order of Elizabeth … he was convicted, but the sentence of "liberated." He halved the pay, and he had "committed against them for prederzosti" apologize to the professor … Miller was humiliating "repentance" that Lomonosov was obliged to publicly speak and sign … It was the first and last time the Lomonosov was forced to abandon its views (See: Beliavsky MT MV Lomonosov Moscow State University and the foundation (1755 — 1955). M, 1955.).

German professors sought removal of Governors and his supporters from the Academy. In 1763, after being denounced by Taubert, Miller, Staehelin, and other Epinussa Catherine University dismissed from the Academy, but soon a decree on his resignation was canceled.

After the death of University, the next day, the library and all the papers were Lomonosov sealed by order of Catherine Count Orlov, transported to his palace and disappeared without a trace.

GF Miller in 1765 at the request of Prince Golitsyn was appointed head of the Moscow Archive of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As noted by VO Klyuchevsky "from now revived this archive, so important to Russian history. Stored here is not one of the Moscow government diplomatic correspondence from the late XV century Ambassadorial order charge and the other branches of administration, and all documents on these parts of government is also preserved in its archives, and in a remarkable fullness. Miller felt at home in this atmosphere. He began a systematic description of the archive, continued by his successors. In addition, he began to process the material is located there, and he wanted to write a new Russian history from the time of impostors "(VO Klyuchevskii Works. T. 8. M., 1957.).

At first glance, nothing unusual in the activities of GF Miller is not, in fact, I think he does good work: the archive when it come to life, he began a systematic description of the archive, we find there began to process the material. That's it, process it. No wonder the VO Klyuchevskii here writes: "Lomonosov did not take his eyes off of Miller … he's very afraid of Miller's work, in each of his works, he saw zanozlivost and reprehensible speech, said that Miller sees only spots on the clothing of the Russian body, not noticing her jewelry."

Miller organized an expedition to Siberia and brings out a lot of the collected documents that have come down to us as the "Portfolios Miller." Why he went to Siberia, where he selected the documents, we do not know, but we can assume (since MV Lomonosov very afraid of Miller's work), there are not only collected, but also destroyed documents.

Miller not only organized the expedition of archival documents. In 1828, the idea known Archeograf PM Stroev archeographic organized an expedition to explore all those in Russia drevnehranilischa, mostly church, monastery. Six years of PM Tunings and his assistant YI Berednikov studied the documents of Northern, Eastern and Central Russia, examined the government and the monastic library, choosing from these acts and literature in our history.

But not only archeografic expedition and P. Miller Stroyev influenced the state of the source base on the history of Russia. Spent on re-started and the documents in the state archives. At this in more detail.

The fact that it is always kept in the archival documents of the order in which they were deposited in the office work. State apparatus, created during the formation of the centralized state, overgrown with a powerful system of public institutions. The most important organ of the State, who shared with the king the supreme power, was the Boyar Duma. More than 90 central institutions — the orders of different values, functions and values were formed by the XVIII century. During practice the orders came, as you know, extensive paper records management. Powerful bureaucracy mandative system demanded photographic reflection of its activities, and save documents in the order in which they were formed in the proceedings.

But since the mid XVII century there is a change in the means of storage archives. The document begins regroup. That is, instead of storing the documents in the order in which they were formed in the proceedings, they began to sort and store thematically. Instead archives institutions were established collection of documents by topic. For example, the documents were removed from the foreign policy of all the funds of institutions, and build collections on the history of foreign policy. So sprayed case and formed thematic collections. Subsequently, scientists have searched for an explanation for this phenomenon.

The essence of these rearrangements document explains, usually the best ways to store them, which would provide a quick search of the necessary documents. And no one has ever raised the issue that the regrouping of documents held on the contrary — to difficult search for documents enabling their destruction with impunity. For this it was necessary first of all to bring the archives in a state to them, no one could understand.

Artificially changed not only the source base of Russian history, distorted source base throughout world history.

You can define a certain limit (early XVII century), separating more or less accurately dated sources XVII — XIX centuries of unreliable, which should include all the documents allegedly earlier (before the XVII century). Of course, some of them may find ancient scripts, but there was very little. And those that are today the most referenced reason very well "reaffirm" the traditional chronology (Scaliger chronology — Petavius). And therefore they are primarily falls suspicion if not fake, at least in the later processing and deliberate distortion of the ancient original. In other words, almost all sources, dating from today until the beginning of XVII century, in fact, there are today only in the wording of XVII — XVIII centuries.

I would like to draw the reader's attention and to another, from our point of view, a very important conclusion. If medieval history before XV century distorted mainly by natural unintentional errors, since the end XV before the XVII century was carried out apparently deliberate falsification of the history of this era as well as the earlier period. As a result, today we are considering all medieval history before the beginning of the XVII century through the prism of fraud XVI — XVII centuries. This distorts the prism XVI — XVII centuries, should always be borne in mind if we want to finally understand the events before XVII century. The objectives of the political situation dictated fraud era XVI — XVII centuries, that is a violent era of struggle and split during the Reformation swept the whole of Western Europe.

Many documents and books were destroyed just as in Western Europe and in Russia, the Romanov era. The destruction was one of the main goals of the famous "Index of Forbidden Books." Index is the Catholic Church in Italy, the Vatican, since 1559, that is, from the middle of the XVI century. Books, get in the index systematically unichtoSut these rearrangements document explains, usually the best ways to store them, which would provide a quick search of the necessary documents. And no one has ever raised the issue that the regrouping of documents held on the contrary — to difficult search for documents enabling their destruction with impunity. For this it was necessary first of all to bring the archives in a state to them, no one could understand.

Artificially changed not only the source base of Russian history, distorted source base throughout world history.

You can define a certain limit (early XVII century), separating more or less accurately dated sources XVII — XIX centuries of unreliable, which should include all the documents allegedly earlier (before the XVII century). Of course, some of them may find ancient scripts, but there was very little. And those that are today the most referenced reason very well "reaffirm" the traditional chronology (Scaliger chronology — Petavius). And therefore they are primarily falls suspicion if not fake, at least in the later processing and deliberate distortion of the ancient original. In other words, almost all sources, dating from today until the beginning of XVII century, in fact, there are today only in the wording of XVII — XVIII centuries.

I would like to draw the reader's attention and to another, from our point of view, a very important conclusion. If medieval history before XV century distorted mainly by natural unintentional errors, since the end XV before the XVII century was carried out apparently deliberate falsification of the history of this era as well as the earlier period. As a result, today we are considering all medieval history before the beginning of the XVII century through the prism of fraud XVI — XVII centuries. This distorts the prism XVI — XVII centuries, should always be borne in mind if we want to finally understand the events before XVII century. The objectives of the political situation dictated fraud era XVI — XVII centuries, that is a violent era of struggle and split during the Reformation swept the whole of Western Europe.

Many documents and books were destroyed just as in Western Europe and in Russia, the Romanov era. The destruction was one of the main goals of the famous "Index of Forbidden Books." Index is the Catholic Church in Italy, the Vatican, since 1559, that is, from the middle of the XVI century. Books, get in the index systematically destroyed throughout Europe. And in Russia, many of the books were destroyed in the XVII century, after coming to power of the Romanovs.

Fortunately, some of these books still have survived. For example, the book Mavro Orbini (Orbini) (Or as it says in the book — Mavrourbina: "The book historians to chat name, fame, and the expansion of the Slavic people and their kings and lords of the under many imyanami with many kingdoms, the kingdom, and the province. Compiled from many historical books, through the Lord Mavrourbina Archimandrite Raguzhskogo. ").

Book Orbini (Orbini was Archimandrite Raguzhskim (Raguzskim), that is a big church held a post in Ragusa. Town of that name still is in Italy (Sicily)) is written in Italian and published in 1601. Translated into Russian in 1722. We will focus on the book in detail because of its importance for understanding the history of the world in the light of the new chronology (In 1722, its distance, apparently only on the direct orders of Peter I, overwhelmed by the idea to move the capital of the Russian Empire closer to Scandinavia — to the place where the alleged Slavs took to the conquest of Europe. Thus was St. Petersburg.).

The main result of their historical research Orbini formulated at the beginning of the book. "Slavic people embittered his weapons almost all nations in the universe, I pass ruined; Azieyu owned and Africa, and fought with the Egyptians and the great Alexander, to subdue Greece, Macedonia, IL-lyrical earth possessed Moravia, Silesia earth, Czech, Polish and the shores of the Baltic Sea, was held in Italy, where much time fighting against the Romans.

Sometimes been defeated, sometimes biyuchisya in battle, great smertopobitiem otmscheval Romans, and sometimes the same biyuchisya in battle, was wounded. Finally, having won for themselves derzhavstvo Rome, seized many of their provinces, ravaged Rome, committed tributaries Cesar Roman, which in the whole world a people not chinival.

Possession of France, Britain and fixed in derzhavstvo Ishpa-tion, seized the best provinces in Europe, and from this are always nice people in times past, there were a strong people, that is, the Slavs, Vandals, burgontiony (ie burgundy particles in modern France) Goths, Ostrogoths, dents or Rasi, Visigoths, Gepids, getyalany (ie Goths — Alans) uverly or gruly, Avars, scirrhus, Ghirri, Meland, bashtarny, peuki, Dacians, Swedes, Normans, tenny or Finns, harboring, or unkrany (Ukrainians), Marcomanni, quads, tuxedos (or tracks if "Fitou" read "t"), were at the Aller Wends, or genetic, that settled the coast of the Baltic Sea, and is divided into many beginning-ly, that is, pomeranyany (oranges, ie Pomerania) uviltsy, rugyany, uvarnavy, obotrity, Labe region, uvagiry, lingony, Tholen particles, REDATAM or riaduty, tsirtsipanny, Kizin: eruly or Al-eldy, levbuzy, uviliny, storedany and britsany (British, that is British! or Breton), with many other who were all very Slavic people (that is, all of which were in very Slavic nation). "

Leaves, dear reader, that our ancestors mastered the whole of Europe and not just her. In his book Orbini writes that Slavic people owned Asia, Africa and Europe. In particular, France, England, Spain, Italy, Greece, the Balkans — Macedonia and Illiricheskoy land, the coast of the Baltic Sea and in general the best European provinces. In addition, from the Slavs took many European nations, which are considered today have nothing to do with the Slavs. Among these peoples Burgundians, ie residents of Burgundy — a country attached to France in the XV century, Swedes, Finns, the Goths, the East — West Goths — Goths (sighting — Goths in Orbini), Goths — Alans, Dacians, Normans, coats or trucks, that is simply Turks Wends, oranges (Pomeranian, ie Germany and Poland), the British or the Bretons (britsany Orbini have), and accidents.

Almost all of these statements Orbini confirmed by other independent sources, particularly the Norse geographical treatises.

In the XIX century there were serious scientists who pointed to the same historical facts as Orbini. These include, for example, the famous historian AD Chertkov and renowned philosopher and scholar Khomiakov.

In terms of traditional history book Orbini bizarre, but new chronology allows for — a fresh look at his work. He is not so strange. Moreover, the natural (In fact, if the "Mongol" — a great achievement was largely Slavic, it is not surprising that many Western European nations are part of Slavic blood. What, in fact, claims Orbini.).

Orbini begins his book with a deep and very true thought: "Some fought, and others have written a story."

Reading today, the historical records, we inevitably find ourselves under the influence of the national — chronicler subjective view on what is happening. Every chronicler, of course, tried to show his people in the most favorable light. Battle, even minor, which defeated his people, he described the particularly bright. Other battles, far more important and decisive, but where his people lost, the chronicler expounded sparingly or even could modestly silent about them.

It is natural. But perhaps not all realize that this must be kept in mind when reading the old chronicles.

Orbini observes that the existence of the state of the historical school, whose writings have come down to us, and the military victories of the State — as a rule, the two things together are not related. It so happens that the most successful in the military empire covered his victories more than modest. Conversely, weak states sometimes for that shortcoming by writing historical works which exaggerate their military power and historical significance. Could not win on the battlefield — had to win on paper.

In Slavic countries in which major historical schools in the past have not been, or her writings have not survived. In European countries, and especially in Italy, such historical schools existed. Today we learn a history that is largely based on the views of these schools. This explains that for all the "antiquity" Italian Rome supposedly reigned supreme over all the then world, but it turns out only on paper. And his paper iron legions severely crushed paper barbarians — the Germans, Slavs and others.

These "paper theory" are not harmless. Some gullible fans "mighty drevneitalyanskoy stories" tried already in this century to revive the spirit of the former Roman Empire, ostensibly Italian. A striking example — Mussolini. Beautiful, but the paper myth encountered rough reality. What happened next — well known (Of course, Italy's contribution to world civilization is known to all and undeniable: the Italian architecture, painting, opera, literature. Italy has had a huge cultural impact on the other countries of Europe. But why all this add more and great glory allegedly conquerors of the world, subdued — like trying to convince us Scaliger history — Germany, Gaul, Britain, Spain, Persia, Egypt, the Balkans, the Caucasus?).

Interesting psychological observations that make AT Fomenko and GV Nosovskii on this issue. And what prevented Russian adequately reflected in the annals of his remarkable military success? Here, for example, the Italians even supposedly non-existent painted their military achievements. What explains this "Russian modesty"?

Primarily, not modesty, but in the actual defeat of Russia in the political arena in the XVII century as a result of the Great Troubles. Ascended to the Russian throne Romanovs — the actual puppets of Western diplomacy. Although after a while Russia "digest" is a Western invasion, trace it in Russian culture has been very profound. And this, apparently there is some psychological explanation.

History is often seen as an ideological weapon state. The effectiveness of such weapons has been understood in the West, much earlier than in Russia. Home to the historical — political influence who was probably a medieval Italy XV-XVII centuries. We have to admit that they have created history and generated its ideology and diplomatic brought Western Europe in its dispute with Russia and Turkey, the success that the West could not achieve by military means.

Russia's lag behind in understanding the impact of the historical literature on the people is evident even today. West is actively used and is exaltation of their historical victories, often greatly exaggerating them. Russia, because of their historical and cultural traditions to praise themselves so not used to it.

It must be borne in mind that this situation poses a great challenge to the perception of the new chronology. In Russia, perhaps, easier would agree that in addition to the Mongol yoke we suffered another two or three other horrible foreign dr. This would be in the jet of education, we are used to from the time of the Romanovs. But the opposite is often thought in Russia for some awkward feeling of embarrassment. Awkward that our forefathers, even long ago, won the enlightened Europe. Again begin to speak of Russian barbarism.

On the one hand, these emotions, of course, follow from the education received from the hands of the Romanov historians. On the other hand, low self-evaluation is due, apparently, the Russian national character.

After the reconstruction of the history of AT Fomenko and GV Nosovskaya becomes clear that it describes the actual events of the Middle Ages. One should not think that the West Slavs conquered almost every century and for almost two thousand years — as described by Orbini. The fact that Orbini was already confused artificially extended chronological version, created in XVI century. At this time, the correct chronology was already well forgotten. Returning events described Orbini on their true chronological place, all these many Slavic conquest will be the reflection of one relatively short historical period, when really — the Great Russian Empire, being mostly Russian, that is really Slavic, established its supremacy in Europe, Asia and Africa.

Despite the fact that the Great Russian Empire collapsed after a while, the memory of this great historic event, multiplied many times in the chronicles. And this was reflected in Orbini as alleged numerous conquests throughout Europe Slavs allegedly centuries.

According to the concept of Fomenko and Nosovsky, the book is a description of the many Orbini duplicates Russian "Mongol" — the great conquests of the XIV century BC. e., scattered throughout the historical scale, starting from the beginning of BC

AT Fomenko and GV Nosovsky give many interesting examples of unmistakable traces of Slavic presence in Western Europe, but we will not dwell on them, but refer the reader to their book "Empire."

Along with the official "pro-Western" historiography in Russia there was "Slavophile historiography." Here the important point that if the "pro-Western" official history has always given the "green light", the dissent at best suppressed. An important stage in the development of historical science is presented Labor S. Medvedev, S. Remezov, A. Lyzlov, which were, in fact, the first monographic studies.

Of great interest, in our view, represents the works of Lyzlova "Scythian history."

The basis of the work of AI Lyzlova put Russian chronicles. In particular, it is widely used not have survived record (eg, "Chronicler inundating Zasekin"). He used the documents Russian, Polish and Lithuanian archives. They are extensively involved in the work of foreign researchers (Belsky, Ba roniya, Gvanini, Stryjkovsky etc.).

AI work Lyzlova of interest in the sense that it largely is a fresh look at the issue of "Mongol-Tatar yoke."

At the turn of the century XVIII out seven books AI Mankiev "core of Russian History", which connects the Russian history of the events of world importance. He often runs counter to the prevailing concept of history. He denies the origin of the name of the Slavs from the Latin word "slave", which was typical for the time. Slavic people, in his opinion, "the beginning of his takes on the order of a continuous Mosoha — man." Slavic name Mankiev produces after "synopsis" of the concept of "glory" ("Slavs" — "nice").

Under Peter I the interest in historical works. February 16, 1722, Peter I issued an order to all the dioceses and monasteries of sending to Moscow, to the Synod, they are "Chronicles" and "chronograph" on parchment and on paper to make copies. Forbidden to conceal anything. Promised to return the documents. As the promise was made — is unknown.

Great historian of the century called VN Tatishchev wrote work "The History of Russia from the very earliest times." The original text of the manuscript was submitted Tatishchev in 1739 to the Academy of Sciences. This work met with approval MV Lomonosov, but the first four volumes were published only after his death Tatishchev, in the years 1768 -1784, and later found the fifth volume — in 1848.

About 1751 to work on "Ancient Russian History" started MV Lomonosov. He rejects the German historians Bayer and Miller about the "great darkness of ignorance," supposedly prevailed in ancient Russia. Of special interest in the "Ancient Russian History" is the first part, "On Russia before Rurik." Here he gave in completely the doctrine of the ethnogenesis of the peoples of Eastern Europe, and above all the Slavs — Rus. He emphasized the constant movement of the Slavs from the east to the west.

Yet it should be noted that the development of historical thought in Russia was under the influence of the work of European thinkers whose works are widely penetrated into Russia. Few historians have tried to oppose their vision of the West.

The most prominent representative of the noble direction in the historical science of the second half of the XVIII century was Prince Mikhail Shcherbatov. Shcherbatov accuses Peter I in the humiliation of the past values of the hereditary nobility, violation of moral purity of patriarchal relations of rural life. MM Shcherbatov in the "History of Russia from Ancient Times" tells of Scythian-Sarmatian-Slavs with the "ancient" Roman Empire. In this case it is based on the sources and the works of ancient authors. Consequently, by MM Shcherbatov, ancient Rome and the Slavs existed at one time and even waged war with each other. With traditional ideas about the chronology of the story, of course, can not be, but from the standpoint of the new chronology is quite natural.

In addition to MV Duke University and the MM Shcherbatov Western historiography opposed and Russian historians such as F. Volansky, AD Chertkov, AS Hamsters, and others whose names are now undeservedly forgotten.

Let us recall the AS Khomiakov. Alex Stepanovich Khomyakov — scholar and lexicographer, a Russian nobleman, who knew all the European languages have always admired friends, endowed as he wrote Herzen, "an amazing gift logic of fascination." "What an extraordinary mind, what vitality, plenty of thought … how much information, a variety of … What he did not know?" — Admired Khomiakov known historian Mikhail Pogodin. But he had a lot of enemies. There are always a lot of great talent detractors. Recognized authorities historian Soloviev, for example, the brilliant erudition Khomyakov tried to blacken, calling its surface and shallow. Trying to discredit Khomyakov, he called it "self-taught" and "amateur".

But object Khomyakov essentially Solovyov could not, and in this case, when there are no arguments, the opponents and the conversation to another plane — the plane of direct insults. Dissatisfaction SM Solovyov was caused by the fact that Khomiakov wrote vivid historical works, contrary to the concepts of Soloviev. According to Solovyov, Khomyakov interest in history was caused by a "known controversy of the 1820s about the" History of the Russian state "NM Karamzin. The controversy this covered almost all the circles of intellectuals in Russia, and one of the main issues she raised was the question of the admissibility of … "artistic" … approach to history. "

It is clear that the case was not in the "artistry." The publication of books Karamzin made publicly known that false version of Russian history, which not long before had just created Schletzer, Bayer, Miller and several other pro-Western "scientists". For many, this westernized version was a complete surprise, and the surprise is in the psychological sense. In Russia, many still remember some of my old family stories authentic. These include and hamsters. These old family tradition did not agree with the version Schlozer, Miller Karamzin.

Hence there was known in Russian history dispute between Westerners, That is, in fact, followers Schlozer-Miller, and Slavophiles.

On the side of the Westerners was hidden, unofficial support of the ruling dynasty of the Romanovs. She called, in particular, that of the Slavophiles, in fact, were not allowed in formal academic study of history, which, of course, existed on the public money, and so she was not free. In addition, the Slavophiles was restricted access to academic, that is, the state, the archives.

Weakness of attitude Slavophiles was that it was basically a "purely negative." They could not offer a complete picture of their return correct history. They only mentioned the numerous contradictions. Their distrust shletse-ro — Miller constantly fueled versions of their ancestral traditions.

Among the Slavophiles was and Khomiakov. "The material has to search for his World History. Hamsters to understand the complexity of the problem … He had in mind hundreds of historical, philosophical and theological works … Hamsters declares mainstream history is unable to determine the real causes of … history. "

Alex Stepanovich wrote a lot about the history of Western distortion of Russian authors. He stressed: "There is no distant tribe, there is no unimportant fact which would not have made … the subject of study of many German scientists … Only one human family is a little … It is worth their attention … — Slavic family. How soon it comes to the Slavs, the German critics errors so visible, so ridiculous blunders, blindness is so great that you do not know what to attribute this strange phenomenon …

Among the people, as in humans, there is passion, and passion is not entirely noble. Perhaps, in the instincts of German hidden enmity, not recognized by them, hatred based on fear of the future or on the memories of the past, for the wrongs done or preterplennyh in old immemorial years. Whatever it was, 'continued Hamsters — almost impossible to explain the stubborn silence of the West everything that bears the stamp of the Slavs. " He notes that "the arbitrarily ranked as the German roots of the peoples" the scientists wrote and wrote countless volumes, and Wendy (Slavs on the hypothesis ATFomenko.) As if there were not. Venda is inhabited by Herodotus beautiful Adriatic coast … Venda soon after the Greeks had already met in the cold Baltic coast … Wendy (genetic) took the scenic slopes of the Ligurian Alps.

Venda fight Caesar on the stormy waves of the Atlantic — and this strange fact is not drawn to anyone's attention … And it is not scattered tribes, with no connection and communication with each other, and the chain unbroken, covers half of Europe.

Between Pomerania Baltic Wends Illyrian and Wendy — Wendy Great … Then vudiny Russian, then Venda Austrian (Vindobona) ».

Hamsters lists dozens of examples of traces of Slavic Wends tribe still scattered across Western Europe. He says a lot of traces of Slavic conquest of Western Europe. He leads his own interesting observations of the nations of Western Europe. They are valuable as personal observations scholar and lexicographer, Russian aristocrat, who knew all the European languages, interested in the history of nations and therefore able to see that slipping away from the sight of many. For us his opinion there is some historical evidence that reflects a certain view of the Russian aristocratic class, it is now gone in the past.

Hamsters, speaking of Russia, writes: "Slavery (very recently introduced state power) is not inspired owners of contempt for their slave-tillers … toady peasant equated not only by law, but by custom, holy to popular belief, the descendants of the founder of the state. In the same land (in Russia) slaves — not farmers, and servants — instill a sense otherwise. This difference is not in the law … but they are there for a faithful observer. Farmer (in Russia), a native landowner family, blood brother, and the ancestor of the servants — a prisoner of war. Because the farmer called peasant, a servant — a slave. In this state (ie in Russia) there is no trace of conquest ".

Contrasting Russia to Western Europe, Hamsters continues: "In another country, to fifty years, proud franc still calls enslaved vilian, roturier etc. There was no case, no virtue, no merit, which would have equated to curry favor with the plebeian aristocracy. There was slavery, there was not even a legal oppression. But in the customs, opinions, the feelings were deep and lasting hatred contempt. Next conquest was plain text and hot … It's subtleties, as this is just not found in grammar or in the lexicon or in the statistics. "

Thus, Hamsters directly that, according to his own observations, in Russia in the XIX century was not forgotten about the kinship of Russian aristocracy and the Russian peasantry. And the serfs in Russia, that is, the servants, according to Khomyakov constituted a separate class that did not have anything to do with the peasants. And attitudes in Russia was very different — as the descendants of prisoners of war as slaves. But in Western Europe, according to the example of France Hamsters, between the aristocracy and the rest of the local population there was an unbridgeable chasm. According to his observations, the French aristocrats treat all others as the French once the subjugation of the local population. And, through the French aristocracy of the time, the gap between the aristocracy and the "natives" did not disappear, even if a simple Frenchman, that is not an aristocrat, proved the will of fate equalized with an aristocrat on the social ladder. Hamsters explains this by the fact that the Western European aristocracy — the descendants of the conquerors who came to Europe from the outside (That is, by hypothesis, Fomenko, Slavic invaders XIV century BC. Oe.), While in Russia the Russian aristocracy stood out from the very Russian society, that is, from the Russian peasantry. This fundamental difference of Russian society at the time of Western Europe.

It should be noted excellent compliance monitoring Khomyakov with reconstruction stories AT Fomenko and GV Nosovsky. Back in the misty past XIV century BC Russia — Horde won many parts of Western Europe. Shlynuv, the wave of conquest left behind the descendants of Slavic and Turkic invaders. They — probably, and became the ancestors of the West European aristocracy.

Between the conquerors and the conquered remained long gap. Over time, the conquerors were mixed with the local population, but the gap persisted until the XIX century. And in Russia there was a gap, because Russia no one won. The estate of a Russian serfs suggests Hamsters was isolated caste children taken from the conquered countries servants — prisoners of war.

Today, it is the opinion of Khomyakov probably seem unusual, but he was not alone in these views.

Another representative of the noble direction in history — Ivan Nikitich Boltin. He rejects the false belief French Leclerc of savagery and ignorance of ancient Slavs.

Based on the data, it chronicles refutes the validity of the Leclerc distorting the full barbarity of Kievan Rus.

Gaining strength and bourgeois trend in historical scholarship. This work SE Desnitskova, MD Chulkov, VV Cross-nina, I. Golikov, etc.

Prominent representative of the historical science of the late XVIII — first half of the XIX century was NM Karamzin. As the official historian, he has devoted most of his life creating the "History of the Russian state." In his last years there has been a shift from Karamzin Westerners to nationalism. Karamzin in "Note" On Ancient and Modern Russia "accused Peter that he" destroyed the Russians in their own heart "," wanted to make Russia the Netherlands, "and that as a result of activities of the Russian people" have become citizens of the world, but no longer, In some cases, citizens of Russia. "

In the "News of Europe" NM Karamzin published an article "The historical memories and observations on the way to the Trinity", which complains: "We do not have a decent story, glorious and great deeds of ancestors we are not well known."

In 1802 in the same journal, NM Karamzin published another historical article — "On cases and characters in Russian history, which may be the subject of Art." It is explicitly stated that Russia should be eloquent historians who could celebrate our famous ancestors. "It should teach the Russians to respect for property," — the author calls.

The main source for the history of Karamzin served Chronicle. He tried critically to the "Tale of Bygone Years" and concluded: "Nestor allowed himself to guess — in history, places, took from fairy tales, but did not make up." Analyzing operations Schlozer on "Chronicle" Karamzin noted that Schletzer knew some important chronicle lists that he was very hurt bias towards the Slavic peoples — a vice so typical German scientists. "

Speaking of Russia, in the preface to his work Karamzin wrote: "Look at this space a single power, thought numb, never Rome in its greatness can not be with her …" He continued, "There ought to be a Russian, one must only think to curious to read stories of people who boldness and courage gained dominance over the ninth part of the world, opening the country, no one hitherto unknown, by listing them in the general system of geography, history, and the divine enlightened by faith, without violence, without fraud, the use of other adherents of Christianity Europe and America, but the only example of the best. "

At the beginning of XVIII century, an active process of collecting and publishing sources both in the West and in Russia. As Professor O. Medushevsky, "led by historians, archivists, most of medieval studies, research centers, archives become a historical science. So, Fr. Bonaine reformed the archives of Tuscany and store the state archives of Florence, Pisa, Siena, Lucca, Belgian historian and archivist, LP Gashar (1800 — 1885) — Archives of Belgium, the British historian and archivist Palgraf F. (1788 — 1861) — British archives. "

Thus continued the process of reforming the archives, and therefore the adjustment of historical knowledge, the rewriting of history.

But among Western historians are honest, principled scientists. This was the Italian scientist Orbini.

At the beginning of XIX century in Russia are beginning to appear as historical documents. Back in 1811 at the Moscow archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs established a commission printing state charters and treaties. Stepped up its activities with the support of Count NP Rumyantsev (1754 — 1826). Fundamental "Meeting state charters and treaties, which were kept in the State of Ministry of Foreign Affairs' included public acts 1229 — 1696 period. With the 1834 edition of the historical documents became involved Archaeographical commission established under the Ministry of Education. It was from 1837 to publish "The Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles."

To date, we have a base of Russian chronicles and chronicles. Selection and publication of documents in both Germany and Russia were strictly regulated and, of course, aim to rewrite history, its reconsideration within the then ruling pro-Western ideology.

The real battle-western direction to the science of history gave Slavophiles. Stands out among the Slavophiles KS Aksakov, the author of several articles on Russian history, primarily directed against the views of SM Solovyov.

SM Solovyov, who has learned to work more than one generation of Russian historians, in the words of the Soviet academician LV Tcherepnin, "European man — a typical liberal middle of XIX century." Sam S. Solovyov wrote that he was "an adherent of Orleans dynasty and Guizot ministry." Judge for yourself, what angle of view of Russian history can serve people who immediately after graduation went to Europe, and there is "increased education". During the 1842 — 1844's, he traveled to Germany, Belgium, France, the Czech Republic. In Berlin he attended lectures Ritter, Schelling Raumera and Ranke, fixed focus on describing the details of the political history, the supply, of course, in the western world. In Heidelberg Solovyov learning in lectures Schlosser, author of the multi-volume "History of the World", in Paris — in lectures Michelet. There, he becomes a "fan" of works of Guizot.

KS Aksakov on the "History of Russia", said: "The author has noticed one thing: the Russian people."

LN Tolstoy said about the works of SM Solovyov: "Reading about how robbed, ruled, fought, ruined (only about this speech in history), unwittingly come to the question: what is plundered and pillaged? And from this question to another: who made that ruined. "

Ivan Vasilyevich Kireyevsk an article "On the Nature of Education in Europe and its relation to education Russia," published in 1852 in the fourth volume of "Moscow collection."

Slavophiles based on the solidarity of the Russian and Slavic nations with contrasting Slavic and Western world. In the West — conquest, feudalism and chivalry locks, coups, in Russian society — calling, unity and community, inner conviction. In the East — the rule of mysticism to — contemplative start, based on a sense, in the West — rationality, criticism, struggle of contradictions.

I would like to mention two other interesting historical — F. Volanskogo and EI class.

Klassen Yegor Ivanovich (1795 — 1862) — German-born, Russian citizen since 1836, a Russian nobleman. In 1831 he became a trustee of the Moscow Academy of commercial practice. In 1826, was a member of the Commission for the coronation of Nicholas I. Doctor of Philosophy and Master of Fine Sciences, State Councillor. He translated and published historical work Fadey Volanskogo "Description of monuments, explaining the Slavic-Russian history," providing it deployed a foreword and commentary and sharply expressed the view Slavic roots in Western Europe.

All of these materials class gathered in a book, "New materials for the ancient history of the Slavs in general and slavyanorussov doryurikovskogo time especially with a slight sketch of the history of the Rus before Christmas." The book was printed by the printing house of Moscow University in 1854. Klassen says roughly the same as Orbini but Klassen argument is completely different. Give an example, some of his statements:

"The facts are the basis for sozizhdeniya ancient Russian history, a long lay hidden for unsorted … However, the history of ancient Slavic Russia is so rich in facts that are traces everywhere, vpletshiesya into the life of all the peoples of Europe." Klassen, being a German by birth, said that some German historians have engaged in good faith in Russian history, but they were ill-prepared for this, because not known Slavic languages. At the same time, speaking of recognized today as in his time, the founders of Russian history — the Germans who worked in Russia in the XVII century, speaks of them very negative.

Klassen directly writes: "These unscrupulous individuals include: Bayer, Mueller, Schletzer, Gebgard, Parrot, Galling, Georgi and the whole phalanx of followers. They are all Russian, characteristic learned his tribe, and even attempted to rob Slavic — Russ not only their glory, majesty, power, wealth, industry, trade, and all the good qualities of the heart, and even their tribal name — the name of Russ, known since ancient times as a Slavic not only all the families aziyskim but Israelis since the advent of the Promised Land. And they are at the head Russa not only the Romans, but the ancient Greeks — their grandparents … We know that the story should not be a eulogy, but are they allowed to pay Russian history into satire. "

He continued, "Unfortunately, I must say that some of the Slavic writers as Karamzin, Dobrovsky and others — knows or knows — but not completely alien to this sin. But, perhaps, these scientists were afraid to go against the then imaginary authority. Not talking about some of the latest Russian historians, that they — in all honesty, tell yourself, why try to develop a system and brand Schlozer ancient Slavs … But, fortunately, we have two kinds of sources to reconstruct the ancient Slavic world: it records and monuments, who speak totally against them. These sources must first be destroyed, in order to give an opportunity to proclaim a bold lie … Slavyanorussy as a people before the Romans and Greeks, educated, left on its own in all parts of the Old World many monuments testifying to stay there and the ancient literature, the arts and education. Monuments abide forever conclusive proofs, they tell us about the actions of our ancestors in the language, we own, constitute the prototype of all Slavic tongues. "

We are talking about the numerous archaeological sites, which are sometimes found in Europe and Africa during the excavation and the inscriptions on which Western scientists are unable to read. We do not give all the statements classes on these issues. It would take too much space. But the following statements is enough to understand why some orthodox historians do not like the class.

Another important area of historical science is skeptical school MT Kachenovsky (Kachenovsky MT — historian, author of "On Niebuhr's Roman History", "The sources of Russian history."). His basic scientific principle: "In science, there is nothing more fitting as skepticism." In the first article he questioned the contracts Oleg and Igor with the Greeks. He was one of the first criticized the "History of the Russian state" NM Karamzin. MT Kachenovsky came to deny the authenticity of the history of Kievan Rus', referring to a later time (to the XII — XIII centuries) and the origin of the "Russian Truth", and chronicles, and concrete evidence of these sources. He questioned the authenticity of the many reports of ancient chronicles, believing that these news were written later, that is in the XVI century.

Supporters were skeptical school OI Senkovsky, MN Katkov, II Davydov, NI Nadezhdin, KS Aksakov and others. Aksakov, for example, actively argued falseness "Lay." Somewhat later version developed by the French word fake Slavic Louis A hedgehog and A. Mason. The latter, in particular, said: "This whole motley no unity, except age and environment. Age — it's the end of the XVIII century in the triumphant Russian Catherine II, Wednesday — some educated people, grouped in a circle around Count Musin-Pushkin, librarians and lay people inspired by historical readings, flatterers, not less, than the Patriots, drew its inspiration from the service his nationalism and politics of the Empress. "

With a skeptical school, of course, with all the fury fought orthodox science.

It should again be emphasized that all national history historical knowledge permeated struggle representatives of "official history" by supporters of the "Slavophile direction", although these representatives and could act under the banner of various historical schools.

Note the "inverted image of history" and the proponents of Eurasianism. Formally, the date of birth of Eurasianism is 1921, when Sofia left the collection of articles "Exodus to the East." The creators of this movement were the Russian scientists, driven revolution in Russia and settled in exile — in Sofia, Prague, Belgrade, Berlin. They were the brightest scientists, and they occupied the best faculty in these cities. Eurasian founders considered the deepest national expert on the problems of Russia, a world-renowned scholar and historian Prince NS Troubetzkoy (1890 — 1938), the leading geographer and geopolitics PN Savitsky (1895 — 1968), son of the great Russian scientist and naturalist historian G. Vernadsky, the author of numerous books and articles on the history of ancient Russia, the relationship of Russia and the Mongols. These include, and LN Gumilev.

Naturally, not only Eurasians have contributed to the restoration of the true history of the event.

To study the history of Russia is interesting to see how looking at our country overseas. In this regard the recently published book "Ancient Russia in light of foreign sources."

Important introduction to scholarly papers on the history of Russia held in foreign archives.

In the aspect of the new chronology of great interest to the works of foreign authors on the history of Russia.

It should first distinguish the book Mavro Orbini. The basic idea Orbini — the power of ancient weapons, which led almost the entire world to unite around ancient.

Great interest in the study and publication of literature on the history of the Eastern Slavs and ancient. For example, the Austrian diplomat and orientalist J. Hammer — Purgshtall commissioned Rumyantsev published in French in Saint — Petersburg collection of fragments of Arabic, Persian and Turkish sources relating to the early history of Russia.

In 1869, the St. Petersburg University professor DAChvolson published in St. Petersburg translation East news website early X century, and a year later, Russian orientalist A. J. Harkavy published a set of data on the eastern Slavs and rusah by X age inclusive.

In 1884, the Russian orientalist V. Tiesenhausen published collection of materials on the history of the Arab Golden Horde, which included excerpts from the works of authors XIII — XV centuries.

Rusah writes at the beginning of X century Ibn Rust, who lived in the Iranian city of Isfahan. He reports that Russ live on an island surrounded by a lake. Russ ruler bears the title of Hakan and serves as a judge (Ancient Russia in light of foreign sources. M., 1989.).

Comparison of data from foreign sources on Russia with the data of our official history reveals many conflicting facts. Different concepts of Russian history, which gave the orthodox historians and their opponents, also indicate that the house was the official historical science was wrong.

Khodakovsky Nicholas

SQL - 19 | 0,441 сек. | 7.54 МБ