For that Misha Lomonosov was sentenced to the death penalty?

For that Mikhail Lomonosov was sentenced to death?For that Misha Lomonosov was sentenced to the death penalty? And who was interested in the abduction research library Misha University and in hiding, and, most likely, in the winding up of its numerous manuscripts on which he worked during the whole of their lives?

MV Lomonosov fell out of favor because of their own disagreements with the German scientists, who formed the backbone of the XVIII century the Academy. When the Empress Anna Ivanovna in Russia was flooded foreigners.

Since 1725, when it was created by Russian academy and until 1841, the foundation of Russian history altered arrived from Europe badly speaking in Russian, but is rapidly becoming experts in Russian history, the next "benefactors" of the Russian people, flooded the history department of the Russian Academy of:

Peter Kohl (1725), Johann Eberhard Fischer (1732), Adolf Bernhard Kramer (1732), Lotter Johann Georg (1733), Le Roy, Pierre-Louis (1735), George Merling (1736), the burden of Johann Friedrich (1737), Johann Tauber Gaspar (1738), Kruzius Christian Gottfried (1740), Moderator Carl Friedrich (1749), Johann Stritter Gotgilf (1779), Hakman Johann Friedrich (1782), Johann Heinrich Busse (1795), Vovile Jean-Francois (1798), Heinrich Klaproth Julius (1804), Herman Carl Gottlob Melchior (1805), Circle of Johann Philipp (1805), Christian Lerberg August (1807), Carl Ernst Heinrich Köhler (1817), Fran Christian Martin (1818), Christian Friedrich Graefe (1820), Schmidt Isaac, Jacob (1829), Shengren Johann Andreas (1829), Charmoi France-Bernard (1832), Heinrich Leberecht Fleischer (1835), Robert Lentz Hristianovich (1835), Marie-Felicite Brosse (1837), Johann Albrecht Bernhard Dorn (1839) . In brackets the year of entry betrothed stranger to the Russian Academy.

The ideologists of the Vatican sent its own view on Russia. No excessive noise at first XVIII century in St. Petersburg are sent one at a future Russian creators of "history", who later became academics, GF Miller, AL Schletzer, GZ Bayer and many others. In the other form of the Roman "blanks" in the pockets of their lay off: the "Norman theory" and the myth of the feudal "Old Russia" and the appearance of Russian culture not later 988 AD and other rubbish. Virtually foreign scholars for its research work proves that "the Eastern Slavs in the IX-X centuries were suschimi savages rescued from the darkness of ignorance Varangian princes." Specifically Gottlieb Siegfried Bayer has put forward a theory of the formation of Russian Norman country. According to his theory of "who arrived to Russia bunch of Normans in a couple of years turned" dark country "into a powerful state."

Uncompromising struggle against distortions of Russian history led Lomonosov and he was in the thick of the struggle. In 1749 — 1750 years, he spoke out against the historical views of Miller and Bayer also imposed against the Germans, "Norman theory" of becoming RF. He criticized Miller's thesis "On the origin of the name and the Russian people", as the works of Bayer Russian history.

Lomonosov often quarreled with foreign employees working in the Academy. Somewhere cited his phrase: "What kind of nasty dirty tricks do not nakolobrodit in Russian antiquities such admitted in their brute!" Argued that the phrase is addressed Schlozer who "created" Russian "history."

Lomonosov was supported by many Russian scientists. Member of the Academy, a prominent Russian machine A.K.Martov filed a complaint with the Senate on the dominance of foreigners in the Russian academic science. The complaint Martov joined the Russian students, interpreters and clerks, also an astrologer Delisle. It was signed by J. Gorlitskiy, D. Greeks, M. Kovrin Nosov, A. Polyakov, P. Shishkarev.

The meaning and purpose of their complaints quite clear — the reincarnation of Russian Academy not only by name. At the head of the commission, made by the Senate to investigate the allegations, was Prince Yusupov. The Commission saw in the speech A.K.Martova, I.V.Gorlitskogo, D.Grekova, P.Shishkareva, V.Nosova, A.Polyakova, M.Kovrina, Lebedev and other "riot mob" that rose against the bosses' [ 215], p.82.

Russian scientists have complainant wrote to the Senate: "We have substantiated allegations by the first 8-point and prove the remaining 30 if we get access to the affairs" [215], p.82. "But … for" perseverance "and" insulting the commission "had been arrested. A number of them (I.V.Gorlitsky, A.Polyakov, and others) was put in shackles and "planted on the chain." About 2-years they stayed in that position, but they have not been able to force rid of evidence. The commission's decision was truly terrifying: Schumacher and reward Taubert, Gorlitskiy EXECUTE, Grekova, Polyakova, nasal PUNISH mercilessly whipped and exiled to Siberia, Popov, Shishkareva AND OTHER Throw in custody until the decision to make a future president of the Academy.

Lomonosov was not formally submitted a complaint to the middle of Schumacher, but his behavior during the investigation indicates that Miller almost made a mistake when he said: "Mr. associate Lomonosov was one of those who made a complaint against Mr. Schumacher advisor and caused by purpose of the Commission of Inquiry. " Was not far off, perhaps from the truth and Lamanskii stating that Martov's statement was written mostly by Lomonosov. During the period of the commission Lomonosov intensively supported Martov … Specifically, these were caused by his violent collision with the more zealous minions Schumacher — Vintsgeymom, Truskotom, Miller.

The Synod of the Orthodox Christian Church also accused the majestic Russian scientist in the dissemination of the manuscript anticlerical works under Articles 18 and 149 of the Martial Article number of Peter I, the death penalty. The clergy sought burnt University. Such severity appears to be caused by a very great success freethinking, anti-clerical works of Lomonosov, indicating perceptible weakening of the authority of the church to the people. Archimandrite D. section — confessor Empress Elizabeth — has been seriously disturbed by the fall of the faith, the weakening of interest in the church and religion in Russian society. Typically, specifically Archimandrite D. Sechenov own a lampoon of the University, sought the burning of a scientist.

The Commission stated that the Lomonosov "for multiple discourteous, dishonest and unpleasant behavior with respect to both the Academy and to the Commission, and to German soil" BE the death penalty or, in the latter case, flogging and disenfranchisement and conditions. Decree of the Empress Elizabeth Misha Lomonosov was recognized guilty, but released from punishment. He's only half reduced salary, and he had to "for prederzosti committed by them," apologize to the professors.

Gerhard Friedrich Miller with his hands was a mocker "repentance" that Lomonosov had to speak in public and to sign. Mikhail Vasilyevich, to have an opportunity to continue the study, had to abandon their views. But that German doctors were not satisfied. They continued to press for removal of Governors and his followers from the Academy.

Around 1751 Lomonosov began work on "Ancient Russian history." He sought to refute the thesis Bayer and Miller about the "great darkness of ignorance", allegedly prevailed in Old
Russia. Of particular interest in his work is the first part — "On the Russian Federation before Rurik", which set out the doctrine of the ethnogenesis of the peoples of Eastern Europe and the first Slavic Russes. Lomonosov pointed to the constant movement of the Slavs from the east to the west.

German professor of history decided to pursue removal of Lomonosov and his followers from the Academy. This "scientific work" was waged not only in Russia. Lomonosov was a scientist with the global naming. Its perfectly aware abroad. Every effort was made to disgrace University to the world scientific community. With all of this in the course have been started by all means. Did their best to downplay the significance of Lomonosov's work not only on the history, and the natural sciences, where his reputation was very high. Namely, Lomonosov was a member of several foreign academies — the Swedish Academy since 1756, the Bologna Academy in 1764, [215], p.94.

"In Germany, Miller inspired performances against discoveries University and sought his removal from the Academy" [215], p.61. To do so at that time was not possible. But opponents of University managed to reach the destination of the Russian academicians Schlozer STORIES [215], p.64. "… Schletzer called Lomonosov" gross ignoramus who did not know anything, except their own chronicles "" [215], p.64. So, as we litsezreem, Lomonosov was blamed Cognition Russian chronicles.

Quote

"Despite protests University, Catherine II appointed Schlozer academician. With all this he did not just getting in the uncontrolled use of ALL DOCUMENTS ARE IN THE ACADEMY, and the right to seek whatever you think is needed, from the imperial libraries and other institutions. Schletzer received the right to represent their works specifically Catherine … In a preliminary memo written by Lomonosov "Memory" and the case had missed the confiscation pronounced feelings of anger and bitterness caused by this solution: "Keep nechevo. Everything is open Schlozer madcap. In the Russian library to carry more secrets' "[215], p.65.

Miller and his associates had full power not only at the Institute in St. Petersburg, and in high school, ready for future students. High school ruled by Miller, Bayer and Fisher [215], p.77. In the gymnasium, "TEACHERS DO NOT KNOW Russian LANGUAGE STUDENTS … did not know German. ALL were taught only in the Latin language … For 30 years (1726-1755) high school did not prepare any of 1 person for admission to the university, "[215], p.77. From this it has made subsequent output. It was stated that "the only way out is the writing of students from Germany, because of the Russian cook them as if everything is impossible," [215], p.77.

This struggle lasted for a lifetime University. "Thanks to the University in the academy there were some Russian academics and adjuncts" [215], p.90. But "in 1763 after being denounced by Taubert, Miller, Staehelin, Epinussa and others, is another RF Empress Catherine II« It laid off LOMONOSOV EVEN FROM THE ACADEMY "[215], p.94.

But soon a decree on his resignation was canceled. The premise was the popularity University in Russia and the recognition of its foreign academies Awards [215], p.94. Yet, Lomonosov was removed from the control department geographic, and instead of it there was appointed Miller. Was made an attempt to "put at the disposal Schlozer MATERIALS LOMONOSOV language and history" [215], p.94.

The latter fact is very mnogoznachitelen. Even if during the life of University samples were made to get to his archive on Russian history, what can we talk about the fate of this unique archive after the death of University. As to be expected, ARCHIVE LOMONOSOV WAS immediately confiscate Immediately after his death and without any trace of the missing person. We quote: "FOREVER LOST ARCHIVES confiscate Catherine II University. THE NEXT day after his death LIBRARY AND ALL PAPERS WERE LOMONOSOV on the orders CATHERINE SEALED GR.ORLOVYM, transported to his palace and disappeared without a trace "[215], p.20. Taubert A letter to Miller. In this letter, "do not hide their own joy Taubert reports on the death of Governors, and adds:" The next day after his death Count Orlov commanded to make printing to his office. No doubt it must be paper that does not want to release into the wrong hands "" [215], p.20.

Bane Misha Lomonosov was also unexpected and mysterious, and walked the rumors of his deliberate poisoning. Of course, what could be done in public, his countless enemies, did the rest secretly and in secret.

So Makarov, "the creators of Russian history" — Miller and Schletzer — got to the University Archives. Thereafter, these files naturally lost. But, after seven years WIRES was eventually released — and quite clear that under the full control of Miller and Schlozer — University work on Russian history. And it is only the first volume. Most likely, rewritten Miller in an appropriate manner. And other volumes simply "disappeared." And so it was that the available now at our disposal, "University on the history of labor" weird and unusual manner consistent with Miller's point of view on the story. Even clear — why then Lomonosov so angry and so many years of arguing with Miller? Why vinyl Miller of fraud in Russian history, [215], p.62, when he himself, in his own hosted "History" so obedient AGREES with Miller on all fr? Obsequiously assents to it in every line of his own.

Quote

Miller published on the "Lomonosov drafts" history of, it can be said, is written as a blueprint, and in fact no different from the Russian version of milerovsogo stories. This applies to both Russian historian — Tatishcheva again did Miller published only after the death of Tatishcheva! Karamzin same, almost literally rewrote Miller, although texts Karamzin after his death more than once been amended and recast. One of the latest of these alterations occurred after 1917, when out of his texts were cleaned all the information about the Varangian yoke. Of course, this Makar, brand new political power, tried to smooth the discontent of the people, by the dominance of foreigners in the Bolshevik government.

As can be seen, under the name of LOMONOSOV been written completely not what LOMONOSOV essentially written. Need to consider Miller to delight rewrite the first part of the work of Lomonosov after his death. So to say, "carefully prepared for the press." The rest is destroyed. Almost certainly there was a lot of fun and principled disk imaging on an old past of our people. Such, whatever Miller, nor Schletzer or other "Russian historians" could not be released in print.

Norman theory up to now adhere to Western scholars. And if we remember that for the criticism of Miller, Lomonosov was sentenced to the death penalty through poveshivanie and spent a year in the slammer awaiting trial, until it was the royal pardon, it is clear that in the falsification of Russian history were interested Russian control of the country. Russian history written by foreigners, specifically for the purpose prescribed by Tsar Peter I of Europe. And in the time of Elizabeth, the most basic "chronicler" became Miller, made famous by the fact that under the guise of imperial diploma, went on Russian monasteries and destroyed all the surviving ancient historical documents.

German historian Miller — creator of "masterpiece" of Russian history, we know what he was Ivan IV of the Rurik dynasty. Having made such a nezamudrenuyu operation, Miller was already difficult to cut short the kind of Rurik with their non-ex
istent history prizhivit to stories of. More precisely strike out the history of Russian kingdom and change her story principality of Kiev, that later make a statement that Kiev — mother of Russian cities (although Kiev under the laws of the Russian language had to be a dad.) Rurik never were kings in Russia, such as the royal family has never been. Rurik was rootless conqueror, who tried to sit on the throne, but was killed Sviatopolk Yaropolkovichem. Forgery of Russian history is on the mind immediately upon reading the "Russian" "Chronicles." It affects the wealth of names of princes who ruled in various places of, that we are given for the center of. If, for example, or any prince of Chernigov, Novgorod, found himself on the Russian throne, it was supposed to be some kind of continuity of the dynasty. And this is not, that is, we are dealing with either a hoax or a conqueror, he began to reign on the Russian throne.

Our mutilated and distorted history RF, even through the thickness of the Miller repeated hoaxes, yelling about the dominance of foreigners. History of the Russian Federation, as well as history Earth's population is made up by the above-listed "expert historians." They were not the only special on the falsification of history, they were also spices, fabrication and falsification of chronicles.

How to see your comments in one of our member societies Lyudmila Shikanova: More and more there is evidence that history RF has been deliberately distorted. Find a lot of evidence of the highest culture and literacy of our Protz in the old days. Found the letter written on birch bark Glagolitic (our own alphabet, not the Cyrillic alphabet imposed on us), and letters written by ordinary peasants. But for some reason it is hidden. We know the detailed history of our country only from the reign of Rurik, and that was before we know almost nothing is clear. Why is it being done, and to whom it is profitable, that is the question.

And at this point in our schools and institutions of higher education students and students studying the history of the Russian Federation from textbooks in almost everything written on the funds overseas philanthropist George Soros. As you know, "who pays for dinner, calls the tune!"

Like this post? Please share to your friends: