Public opinion polls conducted by VTsIOM in the 1990s showed that during this period, collective ideas about the past occupied an increasingly significant place in the identity of Russians. At the same time, such a component of them as “antiquity, antiquity” was of the greatest importance, firstly, for people under 40 with a high level of education, and secondly, for those who were oriented towards democracy and reforms. This was also consistent with the hypertrophied craving for the "small motherland", which far outstripped in its importance in the self-consciousness of Russians such indicators as "our land" and "the state in which I live."

Obviously, many people were frightened by the bloodthirsty image of Bolshevik Russia, painted for several years by the media. In the national republics, the image of imperial Russia turned out to be even less attractive, which had its own crimes on its account, and they were widely written about in the 1990s, for example, in Tatarstan, Bashkortostan and the republics of the North Caucasus. In such a situation, the desire of many people to distance themselves from all these crimes and injustices looked quite natural. This goal can be achieved in two ways: firstly, by appealing to the more ancient past, which was not perceived so painfully and which could be given a heroic appearance, and secondly, by focusing on the “small motherland”, which made it possible to avoid direct identification with the activities of the Russian state . The first led to the creation of romanticized idealized images of antiquity, and the second to the flourishing of local history.

The idea of ​​the significance of school history education in the process of legitimizing state power now seems trivial. At the same time, without clarifying the peculiarities of the ideological landscape of Ukraine, the place of school textbooks in the structure of the ideological market and the definition of concepts, the theme of the image of Russia in Ukrainian school history textbooks turns into only a set of insults, mutual accusations of falsification, ingratitude, betrayal, separatism, chauvinism, and thus loses all practical significance. However, in order not to get away from the stated problem, we can only indicate some initial positions without discussing them in detail. Are school history textbooks a segment of the ideological market? Is the state a monopoly in this market? How effective is this monopoly, if it exists? What are the goals and objectives of coding the historical consciousness of schoolchildren? What are the similarities and differences between the forms and methods of conquering the ideological market by the ruling circles in the USSR and in independent Ukraine? Is the status quo compatible with the proclaimed democratic values? If we are talking about the image of Russia, then what kind of Russia are we talking about - the Moscow State, the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union, the RSFSR or the current Russian Federation? Is it possible to identify the modern Russian Federation as Russia without Ukraine and outside of Ukraine?

There is an opinion that the history of Russia and Russians was deliberately distorted.

Why was the history of Russia written in the 17th century by the Germans, while the greatest Russian academician and historian Lomonosov was sentenced to death? And who was interested in stealing Mikhail Lomonosov's scientific library and destroying his numerous manuscripts?

Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov fell into disgrace because of his disagreements with the German scientists who formed the backbone of the Academy of Sciences in the 18th century. Under Empress Anna Ioannovna, a stream of foreigners poured into Russia. Starting from 1725, when the Russian Academy was established, and until 1841, the foundation of Russian history was remade by the following “benefactors” of the Russian people who arrived from Europe, who spoke Russian poorly, but quickly became experts in Russian history.

Recently, the “Russian theme”, actively used in the political plane, has become very relevant. The press and television are full of speeches on this subject, as a rule, muddy and contradictory. Who says that the Russian people does not exist at all, who considers only the Orthodox to be Russian, who includes in this concept all those who speak Russian, and so on. Meanwhile, science has already given a very definite answer to this question. The scientific data below is a terrible secret. Formally, these data are not classified, since they were obtained by American scientists outside the field of defense research, and even published in some places, but the conspiracy of silence organized around them is unprecedented. The nuclear project at its initial stage cannot even be compared, then something still leaked into the press, and in this case - nothing at all.

What is this terrible secret, the mention of which is a worldwide taboo?

A number of prominent scientists in Russia and abroad question the generally accepted version of the history of the world.

In this book, you will get acquainted with numerous factual material that reveals a striking picture - it turns out that most of the discoveries in the field of archeology and geology, which indicate that man did not originate from a monkey at all, and has been on Earth for a very long time, were hushed up and hidden from the public. The version about the origin of man from a monkey was based on fabricated evidence, which, despite this, was exhibited in the largest museums in the world for decades.

With a thorough study of the facts and evidence of the use of high technologies in the creation of the pyramids, it becomes obvious that these ancient monuments were not created in the way that history presents. And, most likely, they were created, at least with the participation of other Races - as the Traditions and Legends say. The studied similarities in techniques suggest that in South America, Egypt, the Middle East and India, they were erected by representatives of the same culture. Once, apparently, it was a huge Country - the same Babylon, which is equally mentioned in the Bible and ... the Bonpo tradition!

In the past, presumably during the Renaissance in the West and during the Great Troubles in Russia, the largest forgery in the history of mankind took place. The former history of the world was withdrawn and destroyed and a new, false picture was drawn up, which placed people in the narrow framework of ignorance both in relation to their own nature and in the knowledge of their place in the Universe.

Exactly four hundred and thirty years ago, the greatest battle of Christian civilization took place, which determined the future of the Eurasian continent, if not the entire planet, for many, many centuries to come. Almost 200 thousand people met in a bloody six-day battle, proving the right to exist for many nations at once with their courage and selflessness. More than 100 thousand people paid with their lives for the resolution of this dispute, and only thanks to the victory of our ancestors, we now live in the world that we are used to seeing around. In this battle, not just the fate of Russia and the countries of Europe was decided - it was about the fate of the entire European civilization. But ask any educated person: what does he know about the battle that took place in 1572? And practically no one, except for professional historians, will be able to answer you a word. Why? Because this victory was won by the "wrong" ruler, the "wrong" army and the "wrong" people. Four centuries have already passed since this victory is simply forbidden.

Being engaged in the study of northern languages ​​on my own, I caught one characteristic pattern that eludes anyone who is still at the very beginning of the path of learning northern languages: from edition to edition, words with a Russian root stem are gradually withdrawn from all dictionaries ... and replaced by words with a Latin root stem ... Official linguistics rests on the fact that, they say, the Venets living in Scandinavia, who in ancient times formed with the Slavs a kind of single cultural and linguistic community, are closer in language to the Latins. In part, this may be true, I do not presume to argue with the luminaries of linguistics. But the fact that in the modern newspeak of the Norwegian language (nyno(r)shk), made up of hundreds of local dialects, "Russian" words are carefully removed is a fact ... And if this fails for some reason: there is only one argument - these words have not a "Russian" root basis, but ... "Indo-European". Or - which is completely out of the ordinary - they (the words) were somehow borrowed from Russian by these hundred dialects ... Curious, in what way? With word of mouth? If we take into account the very complex geophysical location of this country and the peculiarities of the landscape, then we can assume that the inhabitants who inhabited it a thousand years ago were indisputable innovators in terms of mass communication and ... put Russian words into circulation ... well, how is it done through the same television , Internet or radio, finally.

The state of modern historical science has become especially clear this year - 2012 was declared by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev the Year of Russian History. As of July 15, 2012 (exactly half a year has passed) no results of this Year have been presented to the society. None of the specialized institutes of the history of the Russian Academy of Sciences has given either the Russian people or the Russian president any work, the results of which in any way shed light on at least some controversial moments in Russian history.

And there are many such moments. Suffice it to say that we "officially" do not know anything from the history of our people, which obviously took place before the 9th - 10th centuries of our era. "Official" historical science to this day forces us to teach our children on historical materials formed back in the 18th - 19th centuries. And this despite the fact that such materials were frankly concocted by persons who in those years took an openly criminal position in relation to Russia. We specifically do not name any historical names here, because this article is intended for historians, who, of course, must independently recognize the characters described in it.

Is history a science? It would seem that the answer is known. The father of history is called Herodotus, who lived in the 5th century BC. Augustine the Blessed is considered the founder of the Christian philosophy of history?

After the "Founding Fathers," thousands and thousands of historians worked diligently for centuries in the fertile historical field. They created both the history and philosophy of history, they founded many historical disciplines, identified and substantiated numerous historical periods. In France, as early as 1701, academic historians were members of the French Academy of Inscriptions and Fine Literature, which had 95 full members, of which 40 were foreign subjects. History, which became a university discipline in the 19th century, as a science was taught and is taught today in many educational institutions around the world by thousands of specialists, teachers, associate professors and professors. All of them make up a large and powerful army of official historical science.
And this mighty army cannot and does not want to agree with statements like those made by Alexei Kungurov in his article. Meanwhile, criticism of official history and chronology dates back many centuries. It began almost when, according to A. Kungurov's exact expression, "... Europeans began to compose their great past ...". It is about this, about the falsification of European history and its chronology, that I would like to tell the reader.

The program canvas by Ilya Glazunov “Eternal Russia”, which crowds of Muscovites and visitors once flocked to see, was originally called “One Hundred Centuries”. The term is counted from the alleged exodus of the ancient Aryans from their ancestral home, which was the beginning of the collapse of the primary ethnolinguistic community and the emergence of independent peoples and languages ​​(before, the language was common). The symbol of the former Motherland - the polar World Mountain, placed in the upper left corner, opens the visual row on Glazunov's composition.

But is it really a hundred centuries? Or is ten thousand years not the end of the long journey and the thorny history of the Slavic-Russian tribes and other peoples of the earth? After all, even Mikhailo Lomonosov called a completely different date, far beyond the borders of the most daring fantasy. Four hundred thousand years (more precisely - 399,000) - this is the result obtained by the Russian genius. And he relied on the calculations of the Babylonian astronomers and the evidence of the Egyptians, recorded by ancient historians. It was then that one of the most severe planetary catastrophes occurred: according to Lomonosov, the earth's axis shifted, the location of the poles changed, and in the end, as described by Plato in the dialogue "Politician", the Sun, which had previously risen in the west (!), began to rise in the east. According to Herodotus, this happened twice.

In the “Tale of Bygone Years”, reconstructed by modern scientists, supposedly belonging to Nestor, a monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery, Chernorites, the first real date is 852 AD. (or in accordance with the old Russian chronology - 6360 years “from the Creation of the world”). That year, a powerful Russian fleet appeared at the walls of Constantinople, which was recorded in the Byzantine chronicles, and from there it got into Russian chronicles. The next, truly significant, date - 862 - is associated with the calling of Rurik and his brothers to reign. It was from that time that it was customary to count Russian history for a long time: in 1862, the so-called 1000th anniversary of Russia was even celebrated, on the occasion of which an impressive monument was erected in Veliky Novgorod, designed by the sculptor Mikhail Mikeshin, which became almost a symbol of Russian statehood and monarchism.

Generations of Russian people have been brought up on textbooks and multi-volume publications on the history of Russia by Shletser, Karamzin, Solovyov, Polyakov, Kostomarov, Ilovaisky, Klyuchevsky, Pokrovsky, Tarle, Likhachev and the like. Since these authors have created entire schools and tens of thousands of people repeat the ideological cliches and characteristics of the characters of History they created, everything that is written by these Interpreters of History and repeated tens of thousands of times is perceived as an immutable Truth. But this is far from true. An analysis of the works of representatives of this cohort of historians allows us to conclude that many facts and assessments that these "interpreters" of Russian History presented as Truth have not been proven. V.L. Yanin:

"Repeatedly repeated in different works, such assessments seem to be justified and not subject to doubt by someone, while a study of the literature on the issue reveals that in reality the evidence never existed" (Yanin, 1990, p. 8).

Almost all of these authors were strongly influenced (if not dictated by) the democratic and Masonic trends that were fashionable in their time, which were inherently hostile to the Russian Idea. There were other reasons for these authors, which we will consider in this chapter, to distort the Patriotic History. As will be shown below, such a "substitution of concepts" and a direct falsification of Russian History has been going on for more than 1000 years.

The connection between the times of the History of modern Russia and the era of the Middle Ages was subjected to an even more fierce "attack" by interpreters of History hostile to us. Enormous resources have been expended to break this link between times. Such "attention" is explained by the special importance of the medieval history of Russia for understanding the current stage of the struggle between Russian and Jewish ideas.

It was in the Middle Ages after a centuries-old break that the Jewish idea found its own state, the Khazar Kaganate, which was not slow to put the Idea into practice, turning the tribes living between the Urals and the Dnieper into powerless slaves. There was no worse yoke in the history of mankind. For the first time, a genocide of the indigenous population was carried out on such a massive scale. Everyone who could even think of resistance (tribal leaders, warriors, priests, fists) was completely destroyed. The Jews, who lived in fortified settlements on the territory of the kaganate under the protection of the mercenary guards and their own national army, were proclaimed the highest race, to which everything is allowed in relation to the Slavs, "subhuman", "second-class people."

Already in the very name of the Ancient era there is a direct allusion to the most important role of the Slavic ethnos in those distant times, because "Antiquity" is difficult to translate otherwise than: "the era of Ants." But the Antes, according to most ancient and modern historians, are the Slavs. Perhaps the name given to the era by the name of the works of ancient art and crafts reflects the fact that in the entire Mediterranean of that time slaves were artisans, and most of the slaves were Slavs (Antes). Unfortunately, this is nothing more than a hint, although regardless of this assumption, Yegor Klassen cites many facts indicating the wide participation of the Slavic ethnos in the formation of ancient culture. In particular, he cited dozens of inscriptions on ancient tombstones and sculptures (6th century BC - 5th century AD) in "unknown" languages ​​for Europeans. It turned out that these are inscriptions made in Old Slavonic in Latin letters. And now we write our return addresses in Russia on letters to Europe in the same way. But modern historiography, written by professional interpreters of history, conceals deaf silence about the ancient history of our ancestors, the genesis of the Russian Idea and the Russian people, which took place precisely at that time. We will talk about the reasons for such silence, and even the direct falsification of our history in this chapter.

The Romanov dynasty had "its own interest" in falsifying History.

Most of the most famous historians of that time, mentioned in the introduction to this chapter (Shletser, Karamzin, Solovyov, Ilovaisky, Kostomarov, Klyuchevskoy) were professionals. their well-being, like that of any professional, directly depended on those in power, who had their own ideas about what the people needed to know and what it was better for them to forget. Let us recall once again that all these historians "created" and edited Russian History during the reign of the Romanov dynasty.

The story, which describes the events of the twentieth century seventy years ago, claims that the Second World War began on September 1, 1939 as a result of the invasion of Poland by Nazi Germany. What was the reason for choosing this date? The main reason for taking this date as a starting point was the fact that it was then, for the first time after the end of the First World War, that hostilities began again in Europe. Another argument was the elementary convenience of calculating the duration of wartime. If we consider the period from the date of entry into Poland to the date of the surrender of Japan, which occurred in early September 1945, then the duration of the Second Imperialist War was limited to six years. Nevertheless, the beginning of the countdown from the resumption of armed conflict in Europe does not look entirely logical. In this case, the Eurocentrism inherent in Soviet historical science comes to the fore.

Aleksey Kungurov from show to show shows how the distortion of real history has a detrimental effect

on the formation of a correct, critical perception of the surrounding world and ongoing processes.

Convincingly proving that we can hardly imagine what happened 200 years ago.

And more ancient history goes, already, into the realm of conjectures ...

Official history is a screen for concealing the truth. But this screen is of poor quality and is torn every year more and more, patches no longer help.

The blinders of matrix perception are pulled over our eyes and do not allow us to see the reality behind the virtual images that have been instilled in us since childhood. We have forgotten how to distinguish the virtual picture shown to us from real life.

This is used by the people who control our world to keep us in bondage, giving the illusion of freedom.

We think that we are being deceived in small things, but in general we are in control.

However, in reality we are deceived on a grand scale and in the main.

We have lost the ability to perceive correctly REALITY.

The films tell about the way of warping our consciousness and our perception.

In short, we have a built-in filter in our minds that does not allow us to properly analyze and understand anything at all.

Scientists, historians and all other researchers are not enemies who blatantly lie and try to lead us all into a dead end, but people crippled in soul (more precisely, mind and mind) (like everyone else) with a deformed consciousness.

Therefore, in any analysis of information, the result is far from reality. Each of us has a unique Matrix.

Myths and reality. How are myths written?

Part 1 - What museum armor can tell.

Part 2 - Greek temples. What is their antiquity?

Part 3 - What is schizophrenia, and what only seems to be it at first acquaintance. To the question of the technological achievements of our ancestors in the 18-19th century.

Part 4 - Alexandrian column. How and when was it done?

Part 5 - St. Isaac's Cathedral.

Part 6 - The Hermitage. We still couldn't build it.

Part 7 - Stone-cutting art. Peter's stone decoration.

Part 8 - Contradictions. Dramatic climate change. The reasons. Steam locomotives - a step back? Examples of 18th century technology.

Part 9 - Capture and distortion of religions.

Part 10 - Impact.

Part 11 - Deception.

There is every reason to believe that the falsification of history began at the time of the earliest civilizations. As soon as humanity began to preserve information about its past in one way or another, there were immediately those who were interested in distorting it. The reasons for this are very different, but basically this is the desire, using the examples of past years, to prove to contemporaries the truth of the ideological and religious teachings that existed at that time.

The main methods of historical falsification

The falsification of history is the same fraud, but on an especially large scale, since entire generations of people often become its victims, and the damage caused to them has to be replenished over a long time. Historical falsifiers, like other professional swindlers, have a rich arsenal of tricks. Passing off their own conjectures as information supposedly taken from real-life documents, they, as a rule, either do not indicate the source at all, or refer to the one they themselves invented. Often, deliberate fakes published before are cited as evidence.

But such primitive tricks are characteristic of amateurs. True masters, for whom the falsification of history has become a subject of art, are engaged in falsification of primary sources. It is they who own the "sensational archaeological discoveries", the discovery of previously "unknown" and "unpublished" chronicle materials, diaries and memoirs.

Their activity, which is reflected in the Criminal Code, certainly includes elements of creativity. The impunity of these false historians is based on the fact that to expose them, a serious scientific examination is needed, which in most cases is not carried out, and sometimes it is also falsified.

Fake Ancient Egypt

It is not difficult to see how long the tradition is based on the falsification of history. Examples from ancient times can be proof of this. The monuments that have survived to our times are a striking evidence. In them, the deeds of the pharaohs are usually depicted in a clearly hypertrophied form.

For example, an ancient author claims that Ramses II, participating in the Battle of Kadesh, personally destroyed a whole horde of enemies, which ensured victory for his army. In fact, other sources of that era testify to the very modest results achieved that day by the Egyptians on the battlefield, and to the dubious merits of the pharaoh.

Falsification of an imperial decree

Another obvious historical forgery, which is appropriate to recall, is the so-called Konstantinov gift. According to this “document”, the Roman who ruled in the 4th century and made Christianity the official religion of the state, transferred the rights of secular power to the head of the church. And later they proved that its production dates back to the VIII-IX centuries, that is, the document was born at least four hundred years after the death of Constantine himself. It was for a long period the basis for papal claims to supreme power.

Fabrication of materials against disgraced boyars

The falsification of the history of Russia, carried out for political reasons, is clearly demonstrated with the help of one document relating to the reign of Ivan the Terrible. By his order, the famous "Facial Code" was compiled, which includes a description of the path traveled by the state from ancient times to the present day. This multi-volume tome ended with the reign of Ivan himself.

The last volume says that the boyars, who fell into the tsar's disgrace, were mercilessly accused of numerous crimes. Since the revolt of the sovereign's associates, which allegedly took place in 1533, is not mentioned in any of the documents of that era, there is reason to believe that it is fiction.

Historical fakes of the Stalinist period

The large-scale falsification of Russian history continued in Stalin's time. Along with the physical reprisals against millions of people, including party leaders, military leaders, as well as representatives of science and art, their names were removed from books, textbooks, encyclopedias and other literature. In parallel with this, the role of Stalin in the events of 1917 was extolled. The thesis about his leading role in the organization of the entire revolutionary movement was steadily introduced into the minds of the broad masses. It was a truly great falsification of history, which left its mark on the development of the country in the coming decades.

One of the main documents that formed a false idea about the history of the USSR among Soviet citizens was the Short Course in the History of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, edited by Stalin. Among the myths included here, which have not lost their force to this day, absolutely false information about the victories of the “young Red Army” on February 23, 1918 near Pskov and Narva stands out. Despite the most convincing evidence of its unreliability, this legend is alive to this day.

Other myths from the history of the CPSU (b)

From this "course" the names of all the figures who played a prominent role during the period of the revolution and the Civil War were deliberately excluded. Their merits were attributed personally to the “leader of the peoples” or to persons from his inner circle, as well as to those who died before the start of mass repressions. The true role of these people was, as a rule, very insignificant.

As the only revolutionary force, the compilers of this dubious document represented exclusively the Bolshevik Party, while denying the role of other political structures of that time. All more or less prominent figures who were not among the Bolshevik leaders were declared traitors and counter-revolutionaries.

It was a direct falsification of history. The examples above are by no means a complete list of deliberate ideological fabrications. It came to the point that the history of Russia of past centuries was rewritten anew. This affected primarily the periods of the reign of Peter I and Ivan the Terrible.

Lies - a tool of Hitler's ideology

The falsification of world history entered the arsenal of propaganda tools of fascist Germany. Here it acquired a truly comprehensive scale. One of its theorists was the ideologist of Nazism Alfred Rosenberg. In his book The Myth of the 20th Century, he argued that the blame for the defeat of Germany in the First World War lies entirely with the betrayal of the Social Democrats, who stabbed their victorious army in the back.

According to him, only this prevented them, who had sufficient reserves, to crush the enemy. In fact, all the materials of those years indicate that by the end of the war, Germany had completely exhausted its potential and was in a critical situation. The accession of America to the Entente inevitably doomed her to defeat.

During the reign of Hitler, the falsification of history reached ridiculous forms. So, for example, on his orders, a group of theologians engaged in the interpretation of the texts of Holy Scripture in order to change the generally accepted idea of ​​​​the role of Jews in biblical history. These, so to speak, theologians agreed to the point that they began to assert in all seriousness that Jesus Christ was not a Jew at all, but arrived in Bethlehem from the Caucasus.

Blasphemous lies about war

An extremely regrettable fact is the falsification of the history of the Great Patriotic War. Unfortunately, it also took place during the period when the past of our country was completely controlled by the Ideological Department and in post-communist times, which laid on the shoulders of the people and their ideologists the entire burden of freedom, the ability to use which was destroyed over many years.

In the context of new historical realities, those who put an equal sign between freedom and permissiveness appeared, especially when it concerned the achievement of certain momentary goals. One of the main methods of political PR of those years was the indiscriminate denunciation of the past, reaching the complete denial of its positive aspects. It is no coincidence that even those components of our history that were previously considered sacred were subjected to fierce attacks by the figures of the new time. First of all, we are talking about such a shameful phenomenon as the falsification of the history of the war.

Reasons for lying

If during the years of the ideological monopoly of the CPSU history was distorted in order to elevate the role of the party in the victory over the enemy and depict the readiness of millions of people to die for the leader Stalin, then in the post-perestroika period there was a tendency to deny the mass heroism of the people in the fight against the Nazis and belittle the significance of the Great Victory. These phenomena are two sides of the same coin.

In both cases, deliberate lies are put at the service of specific political interests. If in the past years the communists took it into service to maintain the authority of their regime, today those who are trying to make use of it are trying to make their political capital. Both are equally unscrupulous in their means.

Historical falsifications today

The pernicious tendency to reshape history, noted in the documents that have come down to us from ancient times, has successfully migrated into the enlightened XXI century. Despite all the opposition to the falsification of history, attempts to deny such dark pages of the past as the Holocaust, the Armenian genocide and the Holodomor in Ukraine do not stop. The creators of the so-called alternative theories, not being able to generally deny these events, are trying to cast doubt on their reliability, refuting insignificant historical evidence.

The relation of art to historical authenticity

The fight against counterfeiters is a common cause

Among the most effective ways to counteract attempts to falsify the history of our country, one should first of all name the commission created under the President of the Russian Federation, whose task is to combat this harmful phenomenon. Public organizations created locally are also of no small importance in this direction. Only by joint efforts can we put a barrier to this evil.

09/01/2013 05:23

This material was conceived as an attempt to answer the question why our true history is being hidden from us. A small historical digression into the realm of historical truth should enable the reader to understand how far from the truth is what is given to us as the history of the Russian people. In fact, the truth may initially shock the reader, as it was a shock to me, it is so different from the official version, that is, a lie. I came to many conclusions on my own, but then it turned out that, fortunately, there are already works by several modern historians of the last decade who have seriously investigated the issue. Only, unfortunately, they, their works, are not known to the general reader - academicians and the authorities in Russia, well, they really do not like the truth. Fortunately, there are interested ARI readers who need this truth. And today the day has come when we need it in order to answer - Who are we? Who are our ancestors? Where is the Heavenly Iriy, in which we must draw strength? V. Karabanov, ARI

FORBIDDEN HISTORY OF RUSSIA

Vladislav Karabanov

To understand why we need historical truth,

you need to understand why the ruling regimes in Russia-Russia

a historical lie was needed.

History and psychology

Russia is degrading before our eyes. The huge Russian people is the backbone of the state that decides the fate of the world and Europe, under the control of rogues and scoundrels who hate the Russian people. Moreover, the Russian people, who gave the name to the state located on its territory, is not the owner of the state, is not the manager of this state and does not receive any dividends from this, even moral ones. We are a disenfranchised people in our own land.

Russian national self-consciousness is at a loss, the realities of this world are falling on the Russian people, and they cannot even stand upright, group themselves in order to maintain balance. Other peoples are pushing the Russians, and they are convulsively gasping for air and retreating, retreating. Even when there is nowhere to retreat. We are oppressed on our own land, and there is no longer a corner in the country of Russia, a country created by the efforts of the Russian people, in which we can breathe freely. The Russian people are so rapidly losing their inner sense of the right to their land that the question arises of the presence of some kind of distortion in self-consciousness, the presence of some kind of defective code in historical self-knowledge, which does not allow one to rely on it.

Therefore, perhaps, in search of solutions, one must turn to psychology and history.

On the one hand, national self-consciousness is an unconscious involvement in an ethnic group, in its egregore filled with the energy of hundreds of generations, on the other hand, it is a reinforcement of unconscious sensations with information, knowledge of one's history, the origins of one's origin. The people, in order to gain stability in their minds, need information about their roots, about their past. Who are we and where are we from? Every ethnic group should have it. Among peoples in antiquity, information was recorded by folk epos and legends, among modern peoples, who are commonly called civilized, epic information is supplemented by modern data and is offered in the form of scientific works and research. This information layer, which reinforces unconscious sensations, is a necessary and even obligatory part of self-consciousness for a modern person, ensuring its stability and peace of mind.

But what will happen if the people are not told who they are and where they come from, or they tell lies, invent an artificial story for them? Such people endure stress, because their consciousness, based on information received in the real world, does not find confirmation and support in the ancestral memory, in the codes of the unconscious and in the images of the superconscious. The people, like a person, are looking for support for their inner self in the cultural tradition, which is history. And, if he does not find it, it leads to disorganization of consciousness. Consciousness ceases to be integral and breaks up into fragments.

This is the situation in which the Russian people find themselves today. His story, the story of his origin is invented or distorted so much that his consciousness cannot focus, because in his unconscious and superconscious, he does not find confirmation of this story. It is as if a white boy were shown photographs, as if of his ancestors, where only dark-skinned Africans would be depicted. Or vice versa, an Indian brought up in a white family was shown as if the grandfather of a cowboy. He is shown to relatives, none of whom he looks like, whose way of thinking is alien to him - he does not understand their actions, views, thoughts, music. Other people. The human psyche can not stand such things. The same story with the Russian people. On the one hand, the story is absolutely uncontested by anyone, on the other hand, a person feels that this does not fit with his codes. The puzzles don't match. Hence the collapse of consciousness.

Man is a creature that carries complex codes inherited from ancestors, and if he is aware of his origin, then he gets access to his subconscious and thus is in harmony. In the depths of the subconscious, each person has layers associated with the superconsciousness, the soul, which can either be activated when the consciousness that has the correct information helps the person gain integrity, or blocked by false information, and then the person cannot use his inner potential, which depresses him. Hence, the phenomenon of cultural development is so important, or if it is based on a lie, then it is a form of oppression.

Therefore, it makes sense to take a close look at our history. The one that tells about our roots.

It somehow turned out strange that, according to historical science, we more or less know the history of our people since the 15th century. From the 9th century, that is, from Rurik, we have it in a semi-legendary version, supported by some historical evidence and documents . But as for Rurik himself, the legendary Russ that came with him, historical science tells us more conjectures and interpretations than real historical evidence. That this is speculation is evidenced by the heated debate around this issue. What is this Rus, which came and gave the name to the huge people and the state, which became known as Russia? Where did the Russian land come from? Historical science, as it were, is debating. As they began to lead in the early 18th century, they continue. But as a result, they come to the strange conclusion that it does not matter, because those who were called Rus"did not have a significant impact" on the formation of the Russian people. It is in this way that historical science in Russia rounded off the question. So - they gave the name to the people, but who, what and why - does not matter.

Is it really not possible for researchers to find an answer. Are there really no traces of the people, no information in the ecumene, where are the roots of the mysterious Rus that laid the foundation for our people? So Russia appeared out of nowhere, gave a name to our people and disappeared into nowhere? Or bad search?

Before we give our answer and start talking about history, we need to say a few words about historians. In fact, the public has a deep misconception about the essence of historical science and the results of its research. History is usually an order. History in Russia is no exception and was also written by order, and despite the fact that the political regime was always extremely centralized here, it ordered the ideological construct, which is history. And for the sake of ideological considerations, the order was for an extremely monolithic history, without allowing deviations. And the people - Rus spoiled a harmonious and necessary to someone picture. Only in a short period at the end of the 19th, beginning of the 20th century, when some freedoms appeared in tsarist Russia, were there real attempts to sort out the issue. And almost figured it out. But, firstly, then no one really needed the truth, and secondly, the Bolshevik coup broke out. In the Soviet period, there was not even anything to say about objective coverage of history, it could not exist in principle. What do we want from hired workers who write to order under the vigilant supervision of the Party? Moreover, we are talking about forms of cultural oppression, which was the Bolshevik regime. And to a large extent the tsarist regime as well.

Therefore, the heaps of lies that we encounter when looking into the story that was presented to us, and which is not true either by its facts or by its conclusions, are not surprising. In view of the fact that there are too many blockages and lies, and other lies, its branches, were built on this lie and fiction, so as not to tire the reader, the author will focus more on really important facts.

Past out of nowhere

If we read the history of Russia, written in the Romanov era, in the Soviet era and accepted in modern historiography, we will find that the versions of the origin of Russia, the people who gave this name to a huge country and people, are vague and unconvincing. For almost 300 years, when you can count the attempts to deal with history, there are only a few established versions. 1) Rurik, the Norman king, who came to the local tribes with a small retinue, 2) Came out of the Baltic Slavs, either encouraged, or Vagrov 3) Local, Slavic prince 3) The story of Rurik was invented by the chronicler

Versions common among the Russian national intelligentsia also come from the same ideas. But recently, the idea that Rurik is a prince from the West Slavic tribe of Wagrs, who came from Pomerania, has been especially popular.

The main source for constructing all versions is The Tale of Bygone Years (hereinafter PVL). A few stingy lines have given rise to countless interpretations that revolve around several of the above versions. And completely ignored all known historical data.

Interestingly, somehow it turns out that the whole history of Russia begins in 862. From the year indicated in the "PVL" and begins with the calling of Rurik. But what happened before that is practically not considered at all, and as if no one is interested. In this form, history looks only as the emergence of a certain state entity, and we are not interested in the history of administrative structures, but in the history of the people.

But what happened before that? 862 looks almost like the beginning of history. And before that, a failure, almost emptiness, with the exception of a few short legends of two or three phrases.

In general, the history of the Russian people that we are offered is a history that has no beginning. From what we know, one gets the feeling that the semi-mythical narrative began somewhere in the middle and from a half-word.

Ask anyone, even a certified historian-specialist in Ancient Russia, even a layman, what concerns the origin of the Russian people and its history before 862, all this is in the realm of assumptions. The only thing that is offered as an axiom is that the Russian people descended from the Slavs. Some, as it were, nationally minded representatives of the Russian people, in general, ethnically identify themselves as Slavs, although the Slavs are still more a linguistic community than an ethnic one. This is complete nonsense. For example, it would also look ridiculous if people who speak one of the Romance languages ​​- Italian, Spanish, French, Romanian (and its dialect, Moldavian), discard the ethnonym and begin to call themselves "novels". identify themselves as one people. By the way, the gypsies call themselves that - Romans, but they hardly consider themselves and the French to be tribesmen. The peoples of the Romance language group are, after all, different ethnic groups, with different destinies and having different origins. Historically, they speak languages ​​that have absorbed the foundations of Roman Latin, but ethnically, genetically, historically and spiritually, they are different peoples.

The same applies to the community of Slavic peoples. These are peoples who speak similar languages, but the fates of these peoples and their origins are different. We will not detail here, it is enough to point to the history of the Bulgarians in whose ethnogenesis the main role was played not only and maybe not so much by the Slavs, but by the nomadic Bulgarians and local Thracians. Or the Serbs, like the Croats, take their name from the descendants of the Aryan-speaking Sarmatians. (Here and below, I will use the term Aryan-lingual, instead of the term Iranian-speaking, which is used by modern historians, which I consider false. The fact is that the use of the word Iranian- immediately creates a false association with modern Iran, in general , today, quite oriental people. However, historically the word Iran, Iranian, is a distortion of the original designation of the country Arian, Aryan. That is, if we talk about antiquity, we should use the concept not Iranian, but Aryan). The ethnonyms themselves are presumably the essence of the names of the Sarmatian tribes "Sorboi" and "Khoruv", from which the hired leaders and squads of Slavic tribes were born. The Sarmatians, who came from the Caucasus and the Volga region, mixed with the Slavs in the area of ​​the Elbe River and then descended to the Balkans and assimilated the local Illyrians there.

Now with regard to the actual Russian history. This story, as I have already indicated, begins, as it were, from the middle. In fact, from the 9th-10th century AD. And before that, in the established tradition - the dark time. What did our ancestors do and where were they, and how did they call themselves in the era of Ancient Greece and Rome, in the ancient period and during the period of the Huns and the great migration of peoples? That is, what they did, how they were called and where they lived directly in the previous millennium, is somehow inelegantly hushed up.

Where, after all, did they come from? Why does our people occupy the vast expanse of Eastern Europe, by what right? When did you come here? The answer is silence.

Many of our compatriots are somehow used to the fact that nothing is said about this period. In the view that exists among the Russian national intelligentsia of the previous period, as it were, does not exist. Russia follows immediately almost from the Ice Age. The idea of ​​the history of one's own people is vague and vaguely mythological. In the reasoning of many, there is only the "Arctic ancestral home", Hyperborea, and similar matters of the prehistoric or antediluvian period. Then, more or less, the theory of the age of the Vedas is developed, which can be attributed to a period of several millennia BC. But actually to our history, we do not see a transition to real events in these theories. And then, somehow immediately, bypassing a couple of millennia, virtually out of nowhere, Russia arises in 862, the time of Rurik. In no case does the author want to enter into polemics on this issue and even to some extent shares theories on the prehistoric period. But in any case, Hyperborea can be attributed to the era of 7-8 millennia ago, the era of the Vedas can be attributed to the times of the 2nd millennium BC, and maybe even earlier.

But as for the next 3 millennia, times that directly rest on the era of the creation of the historical Russian state, the time of the beginning of a new era and the time preceding the new era, practically nothing is reported about this part of the history of our people, or false information is reported. Meanwhile, this knowledge gives the keys to understanding our history and the history of our origin, respectively, our self-consciousness.

Slavs or Russians?

A common and undisputed place in the Russian historical tradition is the approach that the Russians are a primordially Slavic people. And, in general, almost 100% equal sign is put between Russian and Slavic. It does not imply a modern linguistic community, but, as it were, the historical origin of the Russian people from ancient tribes identified as Slavs. Is it really?

Interestingly, even the ancient chronicles do not give us reason to draw such conclusions - to deduce the origin of the Russian people from the Slavic tribes.

Here are the well-known words of the Russian primary chronicle under the year 862:

"Deciding to ourselves: let's look for a prince, who would have ruled" us and judged by right. , tako and si. Resha Rusi Chyud, Sloveni and Krivichi: "our whole land is great and plentiful," but there is no outfit in it: go and rule over us. And three brothers were chosen from their generations, girding all of Russia in their own way, and came; the oldest Rurik is in Novegrad; and another Sineus on Beleozero, and the third Izborst Truvor. From those the Russian land of Novgorod was nicknamed: these are the people of Novgorod from the Varyazhsk clan, before the besh of Slovenia.

It is difficult to learn something new, but in these annals, in different versions, one important fact can be traced - Rus named as a kind of tribe, people. But no one is looking further. Where then did this Russia disappear? And where did you come from?

The established historical tradition, both pre-revolutionary and Soviet, assumes by default that Slavic tribes lived in the Dnieper region and they are the beginning of the Russian people. However, what do we find here? From historical information and from the same PVL, we know that the Slavs came to these places almost in the 8th-9th centuries, not earlier.

The first completely indistinct legend about the actual founding of Kyiv. According to this legend, it was founded by the mythical Kyi, Shchek and Khoriv, ​​with his sister Lybid. According to the version cited by the author of The Tale of Bygone Years, Kiy, who lived on the Dnieper mountains with his younger brothers Shchek, Khoriv and sister Lybid, built a city on the right high bank of the Dnieper, named Kyiv in honor of his older brother.

Immediately, the chronicler reports, although he considers it implausible, the second legend that Kiy was a carrier on the Dnieper. So!!! Kiy is named the founder of the town of Kievets on the Danube!? Here are those times.

“Some, not knowing, say that Kiy was a carrier; there was then a transfer from Kyiv from the other side of the Dnieper, which is why they said: "For transport to Kyiv." If Kiy had been a carrier, he would not have gone to Constantinople; and this Kiy reigned in his generation, and when he went to the king, they say that he received great honors from the king to whom he came. When he was returning, he came to the Danube, and chose the place, and cut down a small town, and wanted to sit in it with his family, but the people living around did not give him; and until now the inhabitants of the Danube call the ancient settlement that - Kievets. Kiy, returning to his city of Kyiv, died here; and his brothers Shchek and Khoriv and their sister Lybid died immediately. PVL.

Where is this place, Kievets on the Danube?

For example, in the Encyclopedic Dictionary of F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Efron, it is written about the Kievets - “The town, which, according to Nestor’s story, was built by Kiy on the Danube and still existed in his time. I. Liprandi, in his "Discourse on the ancient cities of Keve and Kievets" ("Son of the Fatherland", 1831, vol. XXI), brings K. closer to the fortified city of Keve (Kevee), about which the Hungarian chronicler Anonymous Notary narrates and which was located near Orsov, apparently, at the place where the Serbian city of Kladova is now (among the Bulgarians Gladova, among the Turks Fetislam). The same author draws attention to the fact that, according to Nestor, Kiy built K. on the way to the Danube, therefore, perhaps not on the Danube itself, and points to the villages of Kiovo and Kovilovo, located 30 versts from the mouth of the Timok. »

If you look at where the current Kyiv is located and where the aforementioned Kladov with the nearby Kiovo at the mouth of the Timok, then the distance between them is as much as 1,300 kilometers in a straight line, which is quite far even in our times, especially those. And what, it would seem, is common between these places. This is clearly some kind of insinuation, substitution.

Moreover, the most interesting thing is that there really was a Kievets on the Danube. Most likely, we are dealing with a traditional history, when settlers, moving to a new place, transferred their legends there. In this case, the Slavic settlers brought these legends from the Danube. As you know, they came to the Dnieper region from Pannonia, driven in the 8-9th century by the Avars and the ancestors of the Magyars.

Therefore, the chronicler writes: “When the Slavic people, as we said, lived on the Danube, they came from the Scythians, that is, from the Khazars, the so-called Bulgarians, and sat down along the Danube, and were settlers on the land of the Slavs.” PVL.

In reality, this story with the cue and the meadows reflects ancient attempts not only to tell, but to distort real facts and events.

“After the destruction of the pillar and the division of the peoples, the sons of Shem took the eastern countries, and the sons of Ham - the southern countries, while the Japheths took the west and the northern countries. From the same 70 and 2 the Slavic people also descended, from the tribe of Japheth - the so-called Noriki, who are the Slavs.

After a long time, the Slavs settled along the Danube, where now the land is Hungarian and Bulgarian. From those Slavs, the Slavs dispersed over the earth and were called by their names from the places where they sat down.." PVL

Clearly and not ambiguously, the chronicler says that the Slavs lived in other territories than the lands of Kievan Rus, and are a newcomer people here. And if we consider the historical retrospective of the lands of Russia, it is clear that they were by no means a desert, and life has been in full swing here since ancient times.

And there, in The Tale of Bygone Years, the chronicle brings to the reader information about the resettlement of the Slavs even more clearly. It's about moving from west to east.

After a long time, the Slavs settled along the Danube, where now the land is Hungarian and Bulgarian (more often they point to the provinces of Rezia and Norik). From those Slavs, the Slavs dispersed throughout the earth and were called by their names from the places where they sat down. So some, having come, sat down on the river by the name of Morava and were called Morava, while others were called Czechs. And here are the same Slavs: white Croats, and Serbs, and Horutans. When the Volohs attacked the Danubian Slavs, and settled among them, and oppressed them, these Slavs came and sat on the Vistula and were called Poles, and from those Poles came the Poles, other Poles - Lutich, others - Mazovshan, others - Pomeranians

In the same way, these Slavs came and sat down along the Dnieper and called themselves glades, and others - Drevlyans, because they sat in the forests, while others sat down between Pripyat and Dvina and called themselves Dregovichi, others sat down along the Dvina and were called Polochans, along the river flowing into the Dvina , called Polota, from which the Polotsk people were named. The same Slavs who sat down near Lake Ilmen were called by their name - Slavs, and built a city, and called it Novgorod. And others sat down along the Desna, and along the Seim, and along the Sula, and called themselves northerners. And so the Slavic people dispersed, and after his name the charter was called Slavic. (PVLIpatiev list)

The ancient chronicler, whether it was Nestor or someone else, needed to portray the story, but from this story we only learn that not very long ago the Slavic clans moved to the east and northeast.

However, for some reason, we do not find a word about the details about the people of Russia from the chronicler PVL.

And we are interested in this Rus- the people, which is with a small letter and Russia, the country, which is with a large one. Where did they come from. To be honest, PVL, for the purpose of finding out the true state of affairs, is not very suitable. We meet there only separate references, of which only one thing is clear, that Rus was and it was the people, and not some separate Scandinavian squads.

Here it must be said that neither the Norman version of the origin Russ neither West Slavic is satisfactory. Hence there are so many disputes between supporters of these versions, because choosing between them, there is nothing to choose. Neither one nor the second version allows us to understand the history of the origin of our people. But rather confusing. The question is, is there really no answer? Can't figure it out? I hasten to reassure the reader. There is an answer. In fact, it is already known in general terms, and it is quite possible to form a picture, but history is a political and ideological tool, especially in a country like Russia. Ideology here has always played a decisive role in the life of the country, and history is the basis of ideology. And if the historical truth contradicted the ideological content, then it was not the ideology that was changed, but history was adjusted. That is why the traditional history of Russia-Russia is largely presented as a set of false statements and omissions. This silence and lies have become a tradition in the study of history. And this bad tradition begins with the same PVL.

It seems to the author that there is no need to slowly lead the reader to true conclusions regarding the past Russ-Rus-Russia, consistently exposing the lies of various historical versions. Of course, I would like to build a narrative, creating intrigue, gradually leading the reader to the correct conclusion, but in this case it will not work. The fact is that the departure from historical truth has been the main goal of most historians, and the heaps of untruth are such that hundreds of volumes would have to be written, refuting one nonsense after another. Therefore, I will take a different path here, outlining our actual history, along the way explaining the reasons for the silence and lies that determined the various "traditional versions". It must be understood that, with the exception of a short period at the end of the era of the Romanov Empire and already today, our modernity, historians could not be free from ideological pressure. Much is explained, on the one hand, by a political order, on the other hand, by the willingness to fulfill this order. At some periods it was the fear of reprisals, at some times the desire not to notice the obvious truth in the name of some political hobbies. As we go deeper into the past and reveal the historical truth, I will try to give my explanations

The degree of lies and the tradition of diversion from the truth were such that for many readers the truth about the origin of the ancestors will be a shock. But the evidence is so undeniable and unambiguous that only a stubborn dumbass or a pathological liar would dispute a perfectly clear truth.

As far back as the end of the 19th century, it could be clearly stated that the origin and history of the people of Rus, the state of Rus, that is, the past of the ancestors of the Russian people, is not a mystery, but is generally known. And it is not difficult to build a historical chain of times in order to understand who we are and where we come from. Another question is that it was contrary to political guidelines. Why, I will touch on this below. Therefore, our history has not found its true reflection. But sooner or later the truth must be presented.

Goths

Indeed, Russian history does not begin at all with the year 862, but is a continuation of the history of a strong and powerful people, because a mighty state could not appear on this vast land from nowhere or by the force of small Norman squads from Scandinavia, and even more so from absolutely mythical Baltic encouragers. There was a real basis here, on our historical land, and it was the Germanic Gothic tribes who lived in the territory, which later became known as Russia. Their names are preserved in history, both under the general name of the Goths, and under the tribal names - Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Vandals, Gepids, Burgundians and others. Then these tribes became known in Europe, but they came from here.

When historians shrug their shoulders about the fact that it is not known what was there in Eastern Europe on the territory that later became Kievan Rus, as if assuming that it was a wild sparsely populated land, they are at least cunning or simply lying. From the end of the 2nd century AD, the entire territory from the Baltic to the Black Sea was an integral part of the settlement of the Gothic tribes, and from the 4th century there was a powerful state known as the state of Germanarich. The Gothic tribes and the Gothic state located here were so strong that they could challenge the Roman Empire. There is more than enough evidence for this. In the 3rd century AD for 30 years, the empire was shaken by a war that went down in history as the Scythian, although Roman historians call it the Gothic War. The war was fought from the territory of the Northern Black Sea region, which the Greeks called Scythia, and inhabited by tribes of Gothic origin. That is, the Goths advanced from those territories that we today consider South Russian. The scale of this war can be judged by the numerous testimonies of chroniclers.

The war began with the destruction of Greek cities subject to Rome in the Northern Black Sea region by the Goths. Archaeologists clearly trace the traces of the beginning of the Scythian war. At that time, the Greek colony of Olbia at the mouth of the Southern Bug and the Greek colony of Tire at the mouth of the Dniester, which was the stronghold of the Romans in the region, were destroyed.

Then large-scale hostilities unfolded on the territory of the Roman Black Sea provinces - Moesia and Thrace, as well as Macedonia and Greece.

The Roman chronicler Jordanes, himself a Goth, in his history "On the Origin and Deeds of the Goths" written in the 6th century AD. reports on the number of Goths participating in the campaign against the Roman provinces in 248. The instigators were Roman legionaries dismissed from service and therefore defected to the Goths: “The warriors, seeing that after such labors they were expelled from military service, indignantly resorted to the help of Ostrogoth, the king of the Goths. He received them and, ignited by their speeches, soon brought out - to start a war - three hundred thousand of his armed people, while having the help of numerous Taifals and Astrings; there were also three thousand carps; these are extremely experienced people in the war, who were often hostile to the Romans.

This is how the Roman chronicler Dexippus describes in the retelling of George Sincellus the campaign of the Goths in 251, when they took Philippopolis: “The Scythians, called Goths, having crossed the Ister River under Decius (Decius Trajan or Decius - the Roman emperor in 249-251, ed.), devastated the Roman state in large numbers. Decius, having attacked them, as Dexippus relates, and having exterminated them up to thirty thousand people, was nevertheless so defeated by them that he lost Philippopolis, which was taken by them, and many Thracians were killed. When the Scythians were returning home, this very Decius the God-fighter attacked them together with his son at night at Avrit, the so-called Forum of Femvronius. The Scythians returned with many prisoners of war and huge booty, ... "

The city of Philippopolis, now Bulgarian Plovdiv, was a very large commercial and administrative center. The Goths destroyed there, according to another Roman chronicler Ammianus Marcellinus, referring to his contemporaries, about 100 thousand people.

Then the Goths, in the same campaign of 251, defeated an army led by Emperor Decius near Abritta (now the Bulgarian city of Razgrad) . Emperor Decius drowned in a swamp while fleeing.

As a result, the next Roman emperor, Trebonianus Gallus, entered into an agreement with the Goths on terms that were humiliating for Rome, allowing them to take away the captured captives and promising annual payments to the Goths.

Another time, the Goths carried out an invasion of the Roman provinces in 255 AD, invading Thrace and going as far as the Greek Thessalonica and laying siege to it. Like last time, according to Roman historians, the Goths left with rich booty.

Let me remind you that they made raids from their lands in the Northern Black Sea region and retreated with prey to the same place.

In 258, the Goths, having built a fleet, made a sea expedition along the Western coast of the Black Sea, while the other part moved along the coast. They reached the Bosporus and crossed there to Asia Minor. They captured and devastated a number of large and rich Roman cities of Asia Minor - Chalcedon, Nicaea, Kiy, Apamea and Prus.

The next invasion, which was also crowned with success, was carried out by the Goths in 262 and 264, crossing the Black Sea and penetrating into the interior provinces of Asia Minor. A major sea campaign was ready in 267. The Goths, along the Black Sea, on 500 ships reached Byzantium (the future Constantinople). The ships were small vessels with a capacity of 50-60 people. A battle took place in the Bosporus, in which the Romans managed to push them out. After the battle, the Goths withdrew a little back to the exit from the Bosphorus to the sea, and then, with a fair wind, they headed further to the Sea of ​​Marmara and then sailed on ships to the Aegean Sea. There they attacked the islands of Lemnos and Skyros, and then dispersed throughout Greece. They took Athens, Corinth, Sparta, Argos.

In another extant passage from the chronicler Dexippus, he describes the siege methods used by the Goths during one of their other campaigns in the Roman provinces of Asia Minor: “The Scythians besieged Sida - this is one of the cities of Lycia. Since there was a large supply of all kinds of shells in the walls of the city and many people cheerfully set to work, the besiegers prepared cars and brought them to the wall. But the inhabitants had enough for that too: they dropped from above everything that could only impede the siege. Then the Scythians built wooden towers, the same height as the city walls, and rolled them on wheels to the very walls. From the front, they sheathed their towers either with thin sheet iron, tightly nailed to the beams, or with leather and other incombustible substances.

And in 268, inspired by the victories, the Goths, already on 6 thousand ships (!) that had gathered at the mouth of the Dniester, were undertaking a campaign against the Roman provinces. The Byzantine historian Zosimus writes about this: “In the meantime, part of the Scythians, very pleased with the previous raids of their relatives, together with the Heruli, Pevks and Goths, gathered on the river Tyra, which flows into the Pont Euxinus. There they built six thousand ships, on which they loaded 312,000 men. After that, they sailed down the Pontus and attacked the fortified city of Toma, but were driven back from it. The campaign continued overland to Marcianopolis in Moesia, but even there the attack of the barbarians failed. Therefore, they sailed further by sea under a good wind. But this time, the Goths are failing due to defeat and an epidemic.

Why is all this here, the reader asks? And then, so that you can take a closer look at the events of that era and understand the scope of military operations against the leading world power, which was then Rome. Hundreds of thousands of warriors, thousands of ships year after year send the Goths on their expeditions to the Roman provinces. The Goths make deep raids and invade already deep into the empire. This is not possible if the Goths have serious rears where they come from - from the Black Sea and inland lands along the Dnieper and along the Don. To ensure such a scope, the Gothic state must have a huge internal population in its lands, which supplies hundreds of thousands of warriors, arms them, equips them with everything necessary for long-distance campaigns, and also builds thousands of ships and military vehicles. And it does not matter that the ships are small, for 50 people, in order to create 6 thousand such ships at that time, the efforts of hundreds of thousands of people are needed for several months. Someone must feed these people at this time, feed their families and somehow compensate for their efforts. Such coordination is only possible for the state.

And it is also clear that such a population should be located inland to the north of the Black Sea coast. Up the Dnieper and Don. This means that we have the involvement of vast territories adjacent to the Northern Black Sea coast, and these territories were already inhabited at that time by a large number of people consolidated under a single command, that is, states or proto-states.

The land of this state, according to Jordan, is located in Scythia and is called Oyum. Jordan describes the exodus of the Goths from Scandinavia and the arrival in Scythia: “From this very island of Scandza, as if from a workshop [manufacturing] tribes, or rather, as if from a womb [generating] tribes, according to legend, the Goths once came out with their king named Berig. As soon as they got off the ships and set foot on the ground, they immediately gave the nickname to that place. They say that to this day it is called Gotiskandza.

They soon advanced from there to the places of the Ulmerugs, who then sat along the shores of the ocean; there they encamped, and fighting [the Ulmerugs] drove them out of their own settlements. Then they subjugated their neighbors the Vandals 65, adding them to their victories. When a great multitude of people grew up there, and only the fifth king after Berig, Philimer, the son of Gadarig, ruled, he decreed that the army of the Goths, together with their families, would move from there. In search of the most convenient areas and suitable places [for settlement], he came to the lands of Scythia, which in their language were called Oyum "

The size of the territory that was under the control of the Gothic state, and its approximate contours, we can quite definitely draw not only from the chronicles, but also from the vast archaeological material that modern researchers have accumulated. In addition, there is also data on toponymy and comparative analysis.

First, let's turn to the chronicles and historical evidence. The same 6th-century Gothic historian Jordanes, who served the Romans, gives information about the period of the most prominent Gothic king Germanaric. We are talking about the middle and second half of the 4th century AD: “After the king of the Goths, Geberic, retired from human affairs, after a while Germanaric, the noblest of the Amals, succeeded to the kingdom, who subjugated many very warlike northern tribes and forced them to obey their laws. Many ancient writers compared him in dignity with Alexander the Great. He conquered the tribes: Goltescythians, Tiuds, Inaunks, Vasinabronks, Merens, Mordens, Imniskars, Rogovs, Tadzans, Ataul, Navego, Bubegens, Kolds.

There are different opinions about the peoples listed by the Jordan, conquered by Germanaric. But basically, analyzing the names of these peoples, historians give the following interpretation of the names of the listed peoples, under Goltescythians understood as the peoples of the Urals, under the names horns and tadzance should be understood Roastadjans, which means those who live on the banks of the Volga, under Imniscars beekeepers should be understood as the Meshchera, who were called so in Russia, and under merens and mordens - modern measurements and Mordovians.

In another passage, Jordanes mentions the subjugation of the Veneti tribes by Germanaric, reporting that they are known under the names of Veneti, Antes or Sklavins. We are talking most likely about the lands in the region of Pannonia, where the Slavs then lived.

In the following part of his work, Jordanes, continuing the list of the conquests of Germanaric, writes: “With his mind and valor, he also subjugated the Estonian tribe, who inhabit the most remote coast of the German Ocean. He ruled, thus, over all the tribes of Scythia and Germany, as over property.

Regarding the Estonians, it seems that no special explanations are needed to understand that we are talking about the Baltic coast, inhabited by the ancestors of the Estonians.

And if you now look at the geographical map, then a picture emerges of the huge Gothic state of Germanarich, stretching from the south from the Black Sea coast to the Baltic coast in the north, and from the Urals and the Volga region from the east to the Elbe in the west. One does not have to be seven spans in the forehead to understand that this power was one of the most extensive and strongest states of that era. And again, one does not have to be seven spans in the forehead to pay attention to the fact that these lands are very similar to the territory of already historical Russia, passing into Russia.

This state existed 500 years before the arrival of Rurik. Returning to the picture that bad historians give, describing the lands of Russia as wild, starting in general with the notorious Nestor, we clearly see that this is a complete lie, there was far from a wild desert.

The historical evidence of chroniclers about the space on which the state of the Goths was spread is confirmed by extensive archaeological material and surviving material evidence.

The material culture of that era, which archaeologists call Chernyakhovskaya, and which dominates the same space from the Baltic to the Black Sea and from the Volga region to the Elbe, is defined as the culture belonging to the Goths and their kindred tribes, which have already been mentioned - the Vandals, Gepids, Burgundians and etc.

How developed the state that existed on this territory was can be judged by the monumental Zmiev (Trayanov) ramparts - hundreds of kilometers of earthen fortifications 10-15 meters high and up to 20 wide. The total length of the defensive ramparts located from the Vistula to the Don, to the south Kyiv in the forest-steppe, is about 2 thousand kilometers. In terms of the scope of work, the Zmiev ramparts are quite comparable to the Great Wall of China.

The topic, of course, was under the strictest taboo, and up to a certain point, official historians shrugged their shoulders regarding the time of creation and the creators of the Serpentine Walls. Interesting in this regard are the revelations of the director of the Institute of Archeology of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Academician Boris Alexandrovich Rybakov, whose institute was supposed to answer this question - “Snake ramparts are one of the greatest and most interesting mysteries of the ancient history of our Motherland. Unfortunately, they were completely undeservedly forgotten by archaeologists, and no work has been done on them lately.”(Trud newspaper, 14.08.1969) That's it, a riddle, but no work is being done to solve the riddle.

Apparently, it was strictly forbidden to answer an important question, so the well-known Ukrainian mathematician A.S. Bull.

Examining the ramparts, A.S. Bugai found coal from burnt logs in them, the age of which was determined by radiocarbon dating. Based on the data obtained, A.S. Bugay dates the ramparts to the 2nd century. BC. – 7th century AD . The map of the shafts he published shows the dates of radiocarbon dating at the coal sampling sites. A total of 14 dates have been noted for nine rampart lines within 150 BC. - 550 AD, including two dates - II-I centuries. BC, one each - II and III centuries, six - IV century, two - V century. and two - VI century. If we evaluate the obtained definitions objectively, then the ramparts date back to the 2nd century BC. BC e. - VI century AD(Book by M.P. Kuchera. Serpent Shafts of the Middle Dnieper. Kyiv, Publishing House Naukova Dumka, 1987)

Somehow, official science missed at some point in the study of mathematics. They were confused, however, they preferred not to advertise the results very much, because accompanying questions and corresponding conclusions immediately arose, which categorically did not suit not so much scientists as their owners from the political leadership of the country.

If we summarize the results of dating, then the main time of construction of the Serpentine Ramparts is the 2-6th century AD. That is, the time when the Gothic state existed here. The volume of earthworks, according to experts, is about 160-200 million cubic meters of soil. All shafts had wooden log cabins at the base, which served as the base of the shaft. Indeed, such work can be carried out only if there is a serious state center and a centralized plan.

Now a few words about archeological data. It is clear that Soviet managers from science, such as Academician Rybakov, had a clear instruction not to categorically recall any such ready, which they did, in general, with obvious success. The “success” is evidenced by the fact that no one in the country heard about any Goths or Germans in Ancient Russia. All the finds, all their systematization was based on the fact that the data of the chronicles and archeology were attributed to anyone, but not to the Goths or Germans. However, objective data inexorably accumulated. And already in our time, a book by the St. Petersburg archaeologist M.B. Shchukin, which is called “The Gothic Way”, in which the author summarized archeological data regarding the presence of the Gothic material culture in the territory from the Baltic to the Black Sea (see Shchukin M. B. The Gothic Way (Goths, Rome and Chernyakhov culture). - St. Petersburg .: Faculty of Philology, St. Petersburg State University, 2005.)

Drawing conclusions from the results of archaeological data regarding the 4th-5th centuries AD, Shchukin writes: “It was by this time that a vast territory, from Eastern Transylvania to the upper reaches of the Pela and Seim rivers in the Kursk region of Russia, on an area slightly inferior to all of Western and Central Europe, turned out to be covered with a dense network of settlements and burial grounds, surprisingly uniform in their cultural appearance.”(Shchukin M. B. The Gothic Way p. 164 ) . We are talking about the monuments of the so-called Chernyakhov culture, known to archaeologists, which dominates the area from the Baltic to the Black Sea. This culture, as Shchukin convincingly proves, quite obviously corresponds to the settlements of the Goths (although they try to attribute it to anyone, even the Slavs, who came 500 years later, only to cross out the Goths). A significant amount of data on this culture has been accumulated, which allows us to build a clear picture of the settlement of the Goths, their trade and cultural contacts.

Regarding the density of the monuments of the Chernyakhov culture, Shchukin reports: “Traces of the Chernyakhovsky settlements sometimes stretch for several kilometers. It seems that we are dealing with a certain, very large population, and the population density in the 4th century. slightly inferior to modern. ( there)

Regarding the quality of objects of the Chernyakhov culture, Shchukin, summarizing the opinion of archaeologists, gives the following assessment: “These are, of course, the products of highly qualified craftsmen, sometimes reaching perfection, the creation of masterpieces of applied art by them is, of course, a manifestation of the “high technologies” of that time. We will not find a similar set of forms for this period either among the master potters of antiquity, or in the Barbaricums of Europe.”(ibid.)

Summarizing the data of archeology, we can safely say that on the territory from the Baltic to the Black Sea, on the territory that we now perceive as the historical territory of Russia, there was a serious center of civilization that had signs of political, cultural and economic unity.

The Scandinavians preserved epic works about this time. Here it must be recalled that the Goths are an East German people, close to the Scandinavian branch of the Germans - the Swedes, Danes, Icelanders. The Swedes themselves also come from Germanic, Gothic tribes. In the "Saga of Hervör" recorded in the 13th century, it is said about the country of Gardarik and Reidgotland, and the capital Archheimar on the banks of the Dnieper. It also tells about the battle with the Huns. All this corresponds to historical data, because it was there on the territory of the Gothic state, the future Russia, that the Goths encountered the nomadic Huns, against whom they built the Serpentine Walls.

Interestingly, in the Russian folk tradition, memories of the power of Germanarich have been preserved, which gives us another reason to link this story with the Russian one.

All of the above about the country is ready, stretched between the Baltic and the Black Sea, only a small fraction of the existing materials and data on this topic, and I will turn to them in more detail in subsequent chapters.

From ready to rus

Now, perhaps, we should move on to the main question, and what does the state have to do with the people? Rus, to historical Russia, to Russia and to the current Russian people. The most direct. And here, in fact, there are no more mysteries for a long time. True, from the side of the so-called historical science, official, it is believed that there is ambiguity, however, in fact, these are not riddles, but only silence or a direct lie. Probably, as a lot of things happen to us, in this case we have the largest falsification in history.

Indeed, the information reported by eastern and western chroniclers, merchants, travelers of that time about the people "Rus", with official dating, according to which they called Rus with Rurik only in 862 to Novgorod, either from Denmark, or from the lands of the Baltic Wagris. Let's start with the fact that Novgorod itself, as already proven, was founded at least 50 years later. Large-scale campaigns that he undertakes Rus, territories that Rus occupies, trading operations and embassies, which Rus organizes, could not do a handful of aliens. Moreover, a lot of cases, again according to officialdom, they had to complete earlier than they came according to the official dating. And at the same time it is clear that Rus these are not Slavs, as official historians try to portray.

Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus, who ruled from 945 to 959, in his essay “On the Management of the Empire” in the chapter “On the Dews Departing with Monoxyls from Russia to Constantinople” reports the names of the Dnieper rapids in Russian and in Slavonic, calling the Slavs pactiotes of the Rus “Slavs, their pactiotes, namely: Kriviteins, Lendzanins and other Slavinians ...”. What is not clear here, what are the difficulties? Paktioty means subordinate allies, and judging by the names of the tribes, we are talking about the tribes of the Krivichi and Luzhitians, who then lived in the upper reaches of the Dnieper. The Byzantines could perfectly distinguish the Rus from the Slavs. Well, the names of the rapids themselves in Russian - “Ess (o) upi”, (O) ulvorsi, “Gelandri”, “Aifor”, “Varuforos”, “Leandi”, “Strukun”, as all researchers admit, have obvious Germanic roots.

In fact, the most probable, and most likely the only true version of the origin of the ethnonym Rus put forward in the 19th century by the dean of the Faculty of History of the University of Warsaw, Professor A. S. Budilovich. At the 8th congress of archaeologists in 1890, he read a report where he explained the origin of the ethnonym. The epic nickname of the Goths is known as Hreidhgotar, for which the older form Hrôthigutans ("glorious Goths") has been restored. He both historically and ethnologically connected Russia with the Goths, and her name - with the Gothic stem hrôth, "glory". If you translate the transcription, it sounded like hrös with a German umlaut, where the sound ö is something between the Russian ё and o, and in Russian it sounded like ryus with a soft “s” at the end and the first aspirated sound x, which is in the Slavic language missing and therefore lost. Actually we have an exact match rus or grew up, which in the Slavic sound was reproduced with a soft "s" like Rus or ros. Rus, grew up, is a self-name coming directly from Gothic. And it is absolutely logical, - Rus continues the history of the ancient Gothic state, the people of the Gothic root, but in the next historical period.

The modern historian Egorov in his work “Rus and Rus Again” writes: “So, not the legendary, but the historical state of Reidgotaland was created in the 3rd century AD. Black Sea Goths, who called themselves and are known to us in a foreign language transmission as: hros / hrus, grew / Rus, give birth, ‛ρω̃ς. On East Slavic soil, the aspiration [h], which was absent in the Old Russian language, should inevitably disappear, and [θ] should go similarly to the Greek language in [s]: → → grew / Russian. Therefore, it can be argued with good reason that linguistically transformation in the Old Russian language ethnonym Greutungs in ros / rus it is quite natural. ”(V. Egorov "Rus and Rus again")

This is how the mystery unfolded. And everything falls into place, because the history of Kievan Rus naturally follows from the previous history of the Goths, which in turn follows from the ancient history of Scythia. It is immediately clear where the people Ros, Rus, Eros come from in the early medieval chronicles of Byzantine and Arab authors of the 6th and 7th centuries. And another question is resolved, which baffled even the Normanists, the question of where so many Varangians came from in Russia, that they gave it a name, a name for the people, made up the ruling layer of the ancient Russian state and filled its considerable army, which went on formidable campaigns. So many people could not migrate from Scandinavia overnight. Indeed, it couldn't. Everything is very simple, the Varangians-Rus lived here from time immemorial, and the state has been here from time immemorial. And then, the people of Rus became the basis of Kievan Rus, its state-forming people, and Kievan Rus itself was the heir to the state of the ancient Goths.

Just as the Goths subsequently took other names and entered history under them - Burgundians, Ostrogoths, Vandals, Gepids, and so on, so here in Eastern Europe, they adopted a new ethnonym, which became known to us as Rus.

The fact that the Slavs and Russia are different peoples, and about the secondary role of the Slavs, Nestor tells in the PVL when describing the campaign of the Prophetic Oleg against Tsargrad in 907, when Oleg orders to distribute the sails: “And Oleg said:“ sew pre (sails) of pavolochiti (dense embroidered silk) of Russia, and Word of crop (cheap silk) “...”.

Indeed, the people Rus already present in the chronicles from the 6th-7th century. The Syrian chronicler known as Zechariah of Mytilene has a passage about the Eros people. Russ are mentioned by the Arab historian of the 10th century, At-Tabari, in the History of the Prophets and Kings, when describing the events of 644. The ruler of Derbent, Shahriyar, writes to the ruler of the Arabs: “I am between two enemies: one is the Khazars, and the other is the Rus, who are the enemies of the whole world, especially the Arabs, and no one knows how to fight them, except for the people here. Instead of paying tribute, we will fight the Russians ourselves and with our own weapons and we will hold them back so that they do not leave their country.

In the 9th-10th centuries, Eastern chroniclers report that the Rus organized a number of campaigns to the Caspian. In 884, according to the information of the 13th century historian Ibn Isfandiyar, in the History of Tabaristan it is said that during the reign of the emir of Tabaristan Alid al-Hasan, the Rus attacked the city of Abaskun in the Astrabad Bay (the southern part of the Caspian, now modern Iran). In 909 and 910 the Russian fleet of 16 ships again raided Abaskun. In 913, 500 ships entered the Kerch Strait and, having ascended the Don, with the permission of the Khazars, they further crossed to the Volga and, descending along it, entered the Caspian. There they attacked the Iranian cities of the South Caspian - Gilan, Deylem, Abaskun. Then the Rus moved to the western coast and organized attacks on the territory of Shirvan (modern Azerbaijan). Then we went up the Volga to Itil to return. The Khazars, having received part of the booty, decided to destroy the weakened army of the Rus. The pretext was revenge for the destroyed Muslim co-religionists. The Khazar cavalry attacked on the portage from the Volga to the Don. According to information, about 30 thousand Rus were destroyed. Five thousand managed to get away. The next campaign took place in 943/944. The forces of the 3,000th detachment, led by Helgu, took the city of Berdaa.

And again we see the same ships and the same tactics as during the Scythian wars against the Roman Empire.

In general, historians have always noticed that among the ancient authors, the people rus perceived as autochthonous, although it was known that the Slavs came to the Dnieper in the 7th-9th century. In the 19th century, Ilovaisky wrote " already in the second half of the 9th and in the first of the 10th centuries, the Arabs knew Russiahowa numerous, strong people who had neighbors Bulgars, Khazars and Pechenegs, who traded on the Volga and in Byzantium. Nowhere is there even the slightest hint that they consider Russia not a native, but an alien people. This news is in perfect agreement with the campaigns of Russovto the Caspian Sea in the first half of the 10th century, with campaigns that were undertaken by several tens of thousands of soldiers." (Ilovaisky D. I. The Beginning of Russia (“Investigations about the beginning of Russia. Instead of an introduction to Russian history”) It was, in general, clear that there could not be any autochthonous Slavs in the Crimea and the Black Sea region.

In the same place, Ilovaisky writes: “Bishop Liutprand of Cremona was twice ambassador to Constantinople, in the second half of the 10th century, and mentions the Russ twice. In one case, he says: "In the north of Constantinople live the Ugrians, Pechenegs, Khazars, Russes, whom we otherwise call the Nordmans, and the Bulgars, the closest neighbors." In another place, he recalls the story of his stepfather about the attack of Igor's Russia on Constantinople and adds: "These are the northern people, which the Greeks call the Russ by their outward quality, and we, by the position of their country, the Nordmans."

It can be safely assumed that the Bishop of Cremona knew the subject he was talking about well.

For clarity, we can cite several excerpts from numerous annals, notes and chronicles that baffled the followers of the official versions.

“In former times, the Gothic tribes were many and many of them now, but the largest and most significant of them were the Goths, Vandals, Visigoths and Gepids, formerly called Sarmatians, and Melanchlens. Some authors called them getae. All these peoples, as has been said, differ from each other only in names, but in all other respects they are similar. They are all white in body, have blond hair, tall and good-looking…..” Procopius, “War against the Vandals”, v. 1, 2.2

The modern historian V. Yegorov, who has already been mentioned here, gave an accurate assessment of the PVL (“The Tale of Bygone Years”) as a source of misconceptions and insinuations: “Centuries passed, but neither obvious inconsistencies in its own chronology, nor obvious discrepancies with "Foreign" sources, neither contradictions to the objective data of archeology, nor outright fantasy, which was shamefully omitted and hushed up even by the original historians who canonized it. This status for PVL is still preserved, although sometimes it seems that the vast majority of our contemporaries involved in history treat it, to put it mildly, with distrust. But due to the inertia of traditions and corporate unity of interests, historians have not dared to say directly that our queen is naked. Only the most daring of them allowed themselves to hint at the indecent appearance of this high-ranking person, sometimes even very expressively, as, for example, the historian D. Shcheglov did in the century before last: “ Our chronicle, or, more precisely, our saga about the beginning of the Russian state, included in the subsequent chronicle, knows what was not, and does not know what was. ».

From Odin to Kievan Rus

Thus, we can try to build a sequence of historical events.

At the beginning of the 2nd century AD, the tribes of the Goths, or rather a significant part of them, and their relatives - the Vandals, Gepids, Burgundians, etc., took action to return to their historical homeland - the Black Sea steppes, from which they were taken away 200 years ago leader Odin (Odin's exodus to the north, presumably in the 1st century BC, this is another episode of the history of the Goths, which was substantiated by Thor Heyerdahl . - « The source on which Thor Heyerdahl was based was the Ingling Saga, created by the Icelandic chronicler Snorri Strulson - here is the testimony of the scientist himself: “The Yngling Saga tells in some detail about the land of the Ases, located in the lower reaches of the Tanais, as they called it in ancient times the river Don. The leader of the aces in ancient times was a certain Odin, a great and wise leader who owned witchcraft arts. Under him, wars with the tribes of the neighboring people of the Vans took place with varying success: the aces either won or were defeated. For me, this proves that Odin was not a god, but a man, because the gods cannot lose. In the end, the war with the Vans ended in peace, but the Romans came to the lower reaches of the Tanais, and the Ases, weakened by long wars, were forced to retreat north.

I carefully read the sagas and calculated that thirty-one generations had passed from Odin to the historical figure - Harald the Fair-Haired (X century). Everything converges: the Romans conquered the northern Black Sea region in the 1st century BC. In addition, I was simply amazed when I found out that the tribes of Ases and Vanir were real peoples who inhabited these places before our era! And when I looked at the map of the lower reaches of the Don and saw the word “Azov”, I simply could not read it otherwise than “As Hov”, because the Old Norse word “hov” means a temple or a sacred place! ”(Quoted by A. Gaisinsky The Unknown History of Russia: Three Components).

Therefore, returning to their ancient homeland, having landed in the Baltic Pomorie at the beginning of the 2nd century, the Goths, by the end of the 2nd century AD. reached the Northern Black Sea region and settled there. Along the way, the Goths settled and asserted their control over the territories from the Baltic to the Black Sea. Most likely, their fellow tribesmen still remained in the Black Sea region, who had not once gone north with Odin.

By the beginning of the 3rd century, the Goths already had a semblance of a center and came into contact with the outposts of the Roman Empire. By the middle of the 3rd century, the Scythian (Gothic) wars with Rome broke out, which lasted 30 years and as a result of which both sides suffered heavy losses. By the 4th century, the Gothic power had regained its potential. The area of ​​control included Sarmatian, Ugric and Slavic tribes. By the time of Germanaric, by the end of the 4th century, the power of the Goths - Reidgotland, had reached the peak of its power. The population of the country, it can be conditionally called Gothic Russia, is numerous and numbers in the millions. A small part of the Goths accepts Arianism.

And during this period, at the end of the 4th century, from the steppe, from the East, a new terrible enemy appeared - the Huns. Germanaric, who is 110 years old, at this time has a conflict with the Roxalani tribe, because of a young wife from this tribe. ( On the basis of the name of the Roxalany tribe, some built a whole version about the tribe of the Rus Slavs, etc. Unfortunately, there could not be any Slavs there, Rox-Alans, can mean an Alanian tribe, and if in another surviving version - Rosso-Mons, then by the root of Mona or Mana - that is, people in a Gothic way, then this is more likely a Gothic tribe . The plot was reflected in the sagas, the girl's name was Sunilda, and her brothers, who wounded Germanaric, were called Sar and Ammius, which is clearly not like the Slavic names). Perhaps the Gothic state collapsed due to the enmity that arose. Meanwhile, the Huns inflicted a series of defeats on the Goths split into hostile camps. The country is devastated and defenseless. After the death of Germanaric, part of the Goths went to the West. Later, they carried out the complete defeat of the Western Roman Empire and laid down a number of states in Europe, giving rise to a new era in the West. Another part of the Goths submitted to the leader of the Huns, Attila.

Then, over the course of 2 centuries, the Goths who remained on the territory of Reidgotland restored their potential. During this time, some of them adopted another ethnonym ros/rus possibly named after a tribe. Most likely, the descendants of the Sarmatians and Alans living in this area were integrated with the Goths. At this time, the integration of the Finno-Ugric peoples into the area of ​​the Goths continued. In the 8th-9th century, the integration of the Slavs began, who moved from the Danube to the Dnieper, from the oppression of aggressive nomads - Avars, Magyars. Slavs, immigrants from the West, apparently make up 20-25% of the population of the Goth-influenced area. Part of the territory of Gothic Rus began to be controlled by the Khazars. By the 8th-9th century Rus accumulated capacity for assembly. Integrated Slavs who moved to the area Russ, under their protection, became involved in the economic and military activities of the Russian princes, and later, by the end of the 10th century, they adopted the ethnonym Rus. In the 10th century, the Slavic language began to be widely used for communication due to increased trade.

However, the military-political elite was Rus. It is worth recalling the list of names in the text of the treaty of 911, with the Byzantine emperor given in the PVL: “We are from the Russian family - Karls, Inegeld, Farlaf, Veremud, Rulav, Guda, Ruald, Karn, Frelav, Ruar, Aktevu, Truan, Lidul, Fost, Stemid - sent from Oleg, the Grand Duke of Russia ....". As you can see, these are all Germanic names.

At the end of the 10th century, in 988, as a result of an agreement between the Kyiv prince and Byzantium, Kievan Rus officially adopted Byzantine Christianity. Priests from Bulgaria poured into rich Russia, who carried books, written and linguistic culture based on the Church Slavonic language, that is, in the Bulgarian language. Intellectual activity, which is concentrated in monasteries, correspondence, everything is conducted in Bulgarian. As a result, Church Slavonic, in fact Bulgarian, becomes the administrative language. Without participation in church ceremonies, that is, without knowledge of the Bulgarian language, access to positions is excluded. The Slavic language is already used by a third of the population of Kievan Rus - Slavs by origin, and was already partly the language of communication. Under such administrative conditions, there is a rapid exit from the use of the Gothic language. Russ(Moreover, due to fears of conversion to Arianism, the Gothic alphabet and language is prohibited by the Byzantine Church). By the end of the 11th century, the population completely switched to a language with a Slavic base. Then, in the 13th century, during the invasion of the Mongol-Tatars, a significant part of the elite, which kept the memory of its past, was destroyed. Ancient centers of the most compact habitation destroyed Russ- Azov-Black Sea Russia - Korsun, Tmutarakan Principality, etc. The rest flee north. Under the control of the Orthodox Church, which received privileges, there is a complete erasure of historical memory and the trampling of the remnants of the Gothic past of Russia, since, according to Orthodox ideologists, this can contribute to the tendency to convert to Catholicism. The Church considered the fight against Catholicism the most important thing. In the 15-16 centuries, family books and records preserved in princely houses were consistently destroyed, which can preserve the memory of the non-Slavic past of Russia. By the 16th century, the process of erasing memory seems to have been completed. But, still, the roots remained. Both in the soul and in life.

To understand why we need historical truth, we need to understand why the ruling regimes in Russia-Russia needed historical lies. After all, as is clear, by the end of the 19th century there was already a certain clarity.

In fact, despite the fact that the truth has been eradicated for a millennium, this past, even if you leave archeology, is present with us. And in what we use every day and in what makes its way to us from the depths of the subconscious.

You can cite a lot of words that have been preserved in the Russian language from the Gothic base.

think goth. domjan "judge"

debt - goth. dulgs "debt"

sword - gothic mekeis

bread - gothic hlaifs

barn - gothic hlaiw

banner - hrungō

boiler - katils

dish / dishes, - gothic. biuÞs "dish"

buy - kaurōn "to trade

kusiti (hence Russian to tempt) - Gothic. kausjan "to try";

interest (interest, growth) - gothic. leiƕa "loan, loan", leiƕаn "to lend"

flattery flattery "cunning, deceit" - Gothic. lists "cunning"

cattle - gothic skatts "state"

salt - goth. salt "(!LANG:salt"!}

glass - gothic stikls "cup"

vineyard - gothic weinagards "vine"

Also from the Gothic passed to us the most important words associated with military affairs helmet, armor,knight, regiment, with social relations prince, hetman, chieftain, the guest, with the house hut,gates, hut, with church affairs church, fast, with tillage plow and many more words included in the basic conceptual apparatus associated with home, food and war. Just words bread, salt mean that these almost the main concepts in the daily life of a person came to us from this past. Despite the fact that the Bulgarian language was rigidly implanted, the most important words of the modern Russian language remained to us from Russ. Although some of the words also found their way into other Slavic languages, apparently during the reign of Germanarich. Now hundreds of such words are known, the origin of which is easily determined, but there are still a lot of words whose etymology is confusing and among which there is probably a huge layer inherited from Russia.

The loss of a language, the transition to another language base due to administrative influence or some historical events, is not something out of the ordinary. The German-speaking Franks began to speak the language of the conquered Gauls, who had previously switched to corrupted Latin, now it is French. The Celts of Ireland switched to English, and the Slavs of Pannonia, of which 95% were completely switched to the language of 5% of the Magyars, Hungarians. It happens in history.

However, let's continue with the roots. There are other interesting moments reflecting the preserved elements of historical memory.

If you pay attention to the history of the Cossacks, then they firmly understood their connection with the history of the Goths and Sarmatians. Even in the 16th century, among the Cossacks, the memory of the Gothic past reflected in the names was preserved. Here is what the famous Cossack historian of the early 20th century, Evgraf Savelyev, writes: “In the 5th century, Priscus mentions Aspar among the Alanian leaders, one of whose sons was called Erminarik, which name is identified with the name of the Gothic leader of the same time Ermanarik. Consequently, the name Ermi, Christian Ermiy 46), Erminarik, or Ermanarik, was not alien to the ancient Royal Scythians, i.e. Black Bulgarians, or Alano-Goths. The ancient original form of this name is German, or Geriman (German-man), i.e. a man from the ancient sacred Gerros (Ger-ros); hence the diminutive variants of this name: Germanicus, Germinarik, or Erminarik, Ermanarik, Ermik, and the magnifying in the popular pronunciation of the Alano-Goths, i.e. Azov Cossacks, Yermak .... "

As you know, Yermak was from the so-called Azov Cossacks. Here is another “mystery”, around which all sorts of academics went, as it turned out, it has an answer for a long time. Evgraf Savelyev further directly calls Yermak a Goth.

We must also remember the Novgorod ushkuiniks who remembered the origin from rus. They also retained ancient Germanic names, such as Aifal Nikitin, the famous Novgorod boyar of the 15th century, the ataman of the freemen of the Ushkuis.

Well, it would not be out of place to recall the history of the Cossack campaigns against Istanbul and the shores of Asia Minor. They repeat the tactics and routes of the Gothic sea campaigns of the times of the Scythian wars. The prefect of Kafa, Emiddio Dortelli d "Ascoli, in 1634, characterized the Cossack plows (gulls, oaks) in battle: “If the Black Sea has always been angry since ancient times, now it is undoubtedly blacker and more terrible because of the numerous gulls that devastate the sea and land all summer long. These gulls are long, like frigates, they can accommodate 50 people, they go on oars and under sail.

Seagulls are the same monoxyls on which the Goths went to the Byzantine cities - monoxyls also accommodated 50 soldiers. Here are just a few episodes of Cossack campaigns - In 1651, 900 Donets on 12 large plows entered the Black Sea and attacked the Turkish city of Stone Bazaar near Sinop. They took 600 captives and many slaves. On the way back, they captured three large merchant ships carrying wheat to Istanbul and sank them.

The following year, a thousand Donets on 15 plows, led by Ataman Ivan the Rich, again broke into the Black Sea, devastated the shores of Rumelia and visited Istanbul, taking rich booty. On the way back, the Turkish squadron of 10 galleys caught up with the Cossacks, but the Cossacks overcame it.

In May 1656, chieftains Ivan Bogaty and Budan Voloshanin, on 19 plows with 1300 Cossacks, plundered the Crimean coast from Sudak to Baliklei (Balaklava), then crossed the Black Sea and tried to storm Trabzon in Turkey. The attack was repulsed, and then the atamans plundered a smaller city - Tripol. On August 18, the Cossacks, after a 3-month campaign, returned to the Don with rich booty, from where, three days later, a new batch of people wishing to annoy the Tatars and Turks came out on the same plows. One part of them attacked Azov, while the other immediately went to the Crimean coast, where Temryuk, Taman, Kafa and Balakleya were devastated.

So it was not only the names that reflected the past.

Not only among the Cossacks, but also in the people's memory, images of Ancient Russia were preserved. The great Russian poet and writer Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin drew his amazing stories from his nanny, Arina Rodionovna. This has always aroused interest in its origin. Woe, literary critics puzzled over where the Russian peasant woman got such images from, and invented that she was allegedly a “Chukhonka”, that is, a Karelian or Izhorka. Recent studies of parish registers prove that her ancestors were Russian. That is, Arina Rodionovna was the bearer of the Russian folk oral tradition, which reflects Gothic Russia, its plots and images. Therefore, we meet there what the Slavs could not have. These are the plots Russ who lived on the shores of the Russian Sea, what is now called the Black Sea. “An old man lived with his old woman. At the very blue seas" - thus begins The Tale of the Old Man and the Goldfish. Anyone who has been to the Baltic understands that, with all the desire, this sea cannot be called blue, at the same time, as the song says, “the bluest in the world is my Black Sea.” And if you carefully look at the plots, the names of the heroes - Chernomor and 33 heroes emerging from the sea, Tsar Saltan, Gvidon, Ruslan, Rogdai, Farlaf, then images of the Varangians, sea warriors, who reflect a special world, arise. This world is not like the landscapes of the forests near Moscow, there is not even a hint of Slavicism in it. And this world fits surprisingly well into our consciousness as a national epic. Pushkin, a great artist, could read the ancient images of Gothic Russia and embody it in his works.

Another famous story about Kashchei the Immortal is preserved in Russian fairy tales, and which no nation has. As the researchers figured out, the plot is based on the history of Germanarich. For people of that era, when life expectancy was not great, a king who was 110 years old was perceived as immortal. Indeed, what could a 70-year-old old man say to his grandchildren, when he already remembered the old Germanaric as a young man. In the real past, Germanaric also married a young girl. This is how, in the folk tradition, we find a connection with our past.

Now readers will probably have a question about who we should consider ourselves to be - Germanic Goths, Slavs, Sarmatians or Finno-Ugric peoples. Actually, the question is not well-posed, therefore, none of the answers are acceptable. We are Russians, the descendants of all these peoples who are intertwined in the historical fate. But if we put the question differently, whose heirs are the Russian people, whose land, whose history, whose glory we inherit - the answer is unequivocal, we are the heirs of RUSSIA, and through them, the heirs of the GLORIOUS GOTHS. And we have no other options, when we realize, then we wake up.

Another question arises, what was the interest of the ruling classes of Russia to hide the true history of the Russian people. On this issue, one can and should probably write more than one monograph, but I will try to answer briefly. The fact is that the designation of the Goths and the Germans as historical ancestors, the presence of Gothic Russia made our people and its elite equal with the free peoples of Europe, many of whom were descended from the Goths. In such a situation, it was not possible to build an eastern despotism. This is an important and even key point. It is not possible to force a person to put up with his slave position if he knows that he is a descendant of free people. Therefore, the Cossacks in tsarist historiography stubbornly declared the descendants of runaway serfs.

Before unfinished chapters

This work, of course, is a review, so far only a small one, and in my opinion it needs to be continued. Much has been left behind the scenes to build our history more fully. And the name of the mother of Prince Vladimir, whom Nestor called Malferd - that is, Malfrida. And about the beautiful Gothic maidens from the Tale of the Polk. And the history of the Azov-Black Sea Rus. Relationship with other Gothic families. And the epic of the Nibelungs. And the history of Russian princes. And the participation of the Sarmatians. And consider DNA genealogy.

But the main thing that is needed is to sort out issues related to the faith of our ancestors, with the pantheon of Gods. Perun, Veles, Semargl, what heavenly powers we have inherited……

But due to the importance of the topic, I decided not to wait until the end of the work and in general terms give information in this material.

The work will continue. Maybe I'll try to make a movie.

In this situation, you, the reader, can take part and at the same time express your opinion by doing it at your own discretion. Write about your donation at [email protected] and we will include you in the mailing list. If funds are sufficient, a book will be published and sent to you.

P.S. On the evening of Wednesday, January 9, there will be a discussion of this material on the air of ARI Radio and it will be possible to discuss the topic and answer your questions.

In contact with

Classmates

On the issue of falsification of history and crippled consciousness

My research on the correspondence to the truth of the official version of TORIA began with small observations and information received in personal communication. The essence of the information was reduced to the assertion that until recently there was a nuclear war all over the world and after that we were occupied and history was rewritten(including our consciousness was broken by this action).

This information itself turned out to be so shocking, unusual and completely contradictory. everyone our beliefs and views, which was not immediately seriously considered by me. Many of us have read many books in our lives, including those on history, about Borodino, about brave knights, about Robin Hood, about Denis Davydov, etc. Many have watched quite a lot of popular science films on similar topics (and feature films glorifying the exploits of heroes). Some have visited museums displaying mammoth bones, primitive man's tools, and, the most important – evidence that era- copper cannons, uniforms of Russian soldiers and commanders, weapons of those times.

Doubts about authenticity The official version of the story did not appear to me immediately, but after the discovery of a number of objects, the so-called. artifacts, the existence of which historians have not even tried to somehow clearly explain. These artifacts can be safely attributed marble sarcophagusexhibited in the Historical Museum, located on Red Square in Moscow. This sarcophagus is similar to the sarcophagus of the Altai Princess, described in the article "Tisulskaya find".

The most interesting thing is that although it was allegedly found in a different place, it seems to be only two and a half thousand years old, but it was made with a quality that is difficult for us to achieve even now. Later, while examining other extraordinary objects, such as the Atlantes of the Hermitage and their level of manufacture, I was able to assume that the sarcophagus and the Atlantes were made of geopolymer concrete. It turns out that both 2500 years ago and 200 years ago our ancestors knew the secret of geopolymer concrete, and we, with our level of development, were able to rediscover this material only at the end of the 20th century. And if only 200 years ago it was the most common material, then, what happened such that so sharply shortened our memory and impoverished our knowledge?

All studies, the results of which were published in official sources, did not provide answers to the questions asked that arose in the analysis of this amazing information. Therefore, based on the "technological method of reconstruction", successfully applied Alexey Artemyev and described by him in the article, a method was proposed for studying the authenticity of history, based on the reconstruction of the technological level of the development of society, which is necessary for the manufacture of artifacts and (or) the construction of mega-buildings. After all, knowing the tool, we can assume that it can be made, and, seeing the manufactured object, we can determine the tool. For example: if we find a modern T-80 tank in the tomb of Tutankhamun, then we can assume that at the time of its manufacture there were lathes, rolling mills, a developed electronic industry commensurate with our modern one.

The objects of my research megaliths and incredible (in importance and beauty) buildings became. As a result of these studies, described in the article, it was found that many buildings and structures built 200-300 years ago, for example, such as the Hermitage, St. Isaac's and Kazan Cathedrals, the Alexandria Column, were made using technologies whose level far exceeded the level of society of the time described by official history. Moreover, it turned out that 200 or more years ago, many buildings built in different parts of the world were built using the same technologies and in the same cultural tradition. For example, such buildings as: the British Museum, the White House in Washington, the Capitol, the lesser-known church on top of the pyramid in Mexico and the mosque near Baalbek).

Construction with the massive use of huge columns of monolithic rocks everywhere and immediately stopped approximately at the turn 1812-1815. About megaliths, such as the Egyptian Pyramids, Baalbek and the like, modern science generally cannot or does not want to report anything reliable. All this is very reminiscent of bedtime stories (technologies of the "Egyptian slaves"). But the technique of making megaliths required a level of technological development, at least commensurate with ours. All theories about the origin of these objects are built on the assumption that they were built by “someone else”: Gods, Aliens, Atlantes, etc., since people at that moment were allegedly wild (undeveloped) and could not (definitely could not ) to build such objects.

Of course, all these facts separately- loss of technology, climate shift, destroyed forests and a large number of craters (presumably from nuclear explosions) - cannot explain what exactly happened at the turn of 1812-1815. But taken together, they fit into our understanding of nuclear war, about small nuclear winter and its consequences.

For most people, these facts in themselves do not say anything, and even more so, they are not evidence. But for smart people, they are a very important and interesting basis for thinking. After all, if the truth is established and proven the fact of high-tech warfare at that time, then our entire subsequent history can be presented in a completely different way!

For example, many, if not all, wars and revolutions may turn out to be stages of our ancestors’ constant struggle for independence: both what is presented to us as peasant uprisings in the 19th century, and the revolutions of 1905 and 1917, and the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945.

For example, it is well known and allegedly documented that in Leningrad before the war, the power of electricity consumed was 1400 MW, and during the war years (taking into account electricity from the Volkhovskaya HPP) - only 58 MW. And we are also officially told and even written that with such a catastrophic shortage of energy, the entire industry worked, and even trams ran! Moreover, we are told that encircled Leningrad a huge amount of freshly made weapons and ammunition was regularly sent to the front!