Russia needs Russian history

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

In March 2013, Russian President Vladimir Putin approved the idea of creating a textbook on Russian military history. It would seem that dedicated people, people possessing information that differs from the one that we were stuffed with you in schools and universities, we just need to rejoice.

However, this quite natural joy is immediately impeded by the realization that the very creation of such a textbook will again end up in the hands of the retrogrades, who regularly served and continue to serve the clerical versions of our past. The versions of the clergy, who for centuries have destroyed authentic historical documents testifying to the greatness of our past, play into the hands of the West, where hatred of Russians has also been cultivated for centuries.

In Runet, I found an interesting publication by Konstantin Polovnev, who has different views on the history of Russia.

I was bribed by the rigid and consistent reflection of these views, I hope that readers who are not indifferent to the past of Ancient Russia will also not remain indifferent to the notes of this author. This is what he, in particular, writes.

The war against Russia has been going on for a very long time and very successfully. Of course, not on the battlefields, where we have always hit everyone and very painfully, but where the West has always won and continues to win - in information wars. The main goal is to prove to the inhabitants of our country that they are stupid brainless cattle, not even second-rate, but somewhere in the 6-7th category, without a past and future. And he has practically proved that even the authors of many patriotic articles agree with this approach entirely. Examples? You are welcome!

Example 1. We recently celebrated the 1000th anniversary of Russia. And when did it actually appear? The first capital (only the capital of a large country!), The city of Slovensk, was founded in 2409 BC (3099 after the creation of the world); the source of information is the chronicle of the Servant Monastery on the Mologa River, the chronograph of Academician M. N. Tikhomirov, "Notes on Muscovy" by S. Herberstein, "The Legend of Slovenia and Ruse", which has a wide circulation and was recorded by many ethnographers. Since it is believed that Novgorod was built on the site of Slovensk, I pestered the leading archaeologists, how plausible it is. Literally, they answered me like this: “Who the hell knows. We have already dug up to the Paleolithic sites there”.

Example 2. It is generally accepted that somewhere in the 8th century, wild, brainless and worthless Slavs, wandering herds through the forests, summoned the Viking Rurik to themselves and said: “Take over us, oh, the great European superman, otherwise we, idiots, we ourselves can’t do anything.” (Free presentation of a history textbook). In fact, Rurik is the grandson of the Novgorod prince Gostomysl, the son of his daughter Umila and one of the neighboring princes of a lesser rank. He was called together with his brothers, since all four sons of Gostomysl died or perished in the wars. He was accepted by agreement with the elders, and worked hard to earn respect in Russia. Source: Joachim's Chronicle, Russian history according to Tatishchev, "Brockhaus and Efron" and so on.

Example 3. The opinion is widely spread that the Roman Empire, a model of legality and morality, was almost the only civilization of the past. In general, that the gladiatorial battles of Rome, that the modern indulgence of marauders in Iraq - one field of berries. The morale of the Western world has not changed much, and it still causes disgust among the "savages" …

Official history: the great, beautiful and mighty Roman civilization fell under the blows of smelly, shaggy savages. In fact, the geeks who had become sick of everyone (like the Americans are now) were sanitized by more decent neighbors. The bare-assed and bare-footed, poorly armed Roman infantry (open a textbook on the history of the ancient world, and admire the legionnaires) was worn down by cataphraktarii, clad in steel from tops to horse hooves. The main source of information is "Cataphracts and their role in the history of military art", A. M. Khazanov. (I don’t remember the rest, but those who wish can go through the autosearch themselves. There is a lot of material - they just don’t let it into schools. "Harmful").

The most interesting - where did the Huns come from to "cleanse" Rome? Ob, Ugra, Volga region, Ural region, Azov region … Graves with partial armament of cataphracts were also found in Dagestan. Have you, comrade patriots, looked at the map for a long time? So where did the Huns go to Rome from? Why was "wild Russia" in Europe called Gardarik - the Country of Cities? Now it doesn't matter, because we are celebrating 1000 years of Russia with joyful mugs, we consider Rurik to be the master who came from Norway, who founded Russia, and even, it seems, are proud of such a story. Four millennia were sent down the drain … And not a single dog even chuckled. 1: 0 in favor of the West.

In the 8th century, one of the Russian princes nailed a shield to the gates of Constantinople. It is difficult to assert that Russia did not exist even then. Therefore, in the coming centuries, long-term slavery was planned for Russia. The invasion of the Mongol-Tatars and 3 centuries of obedience and humility. What marks this era in reality? We will not deny the Mongol yoke, but … As soon as it became known in Russia about the existence of the Golden Horde, young guys immediately went there to … rob the Mongols who came from rich China to Russia. The Russian forays of the 14th century are best described. In 1360, Novgorod lads fought along the Volga to the Kama mouth, and then took by storm the large Tatar city of Zhukotin (Dzhuketau near the modern city of Chistopol). Having seized untold riches, the ushkuiniks returned and began to "drink zipuns" in the city of Kostroma.

From 1360 to 1375, the Russians made eight major campaigns on the middle Volga, not counting small raids. In 1374, the Novgorodians took the town of Bolgar (not far from Kazan) for the third time, then went down and took Sarai itself - the capital of the great khan. In 1375, the Smolensk guys in seventy boats under the command of governors Prokop and Smolyanin moved down the Volga. By tradition, they paid a "visit" to the cities of Bolgar and Saray. Moreover, the rulers of the Bolgar, taught by bitter experience, paid off with a large tribute, but the khan's capital Sarai was taken by storm and plundered. In 1392, the ushkuyniks again took Zhukotin and Kazan. In 1409, voivode Anfal led 250 ushkues to the Volga and Kama. And in general, to beat the Tatars, in Russia, was considered not a feat, but a trade.

During the Tatar "yoke" Russians went to the Tatars every 2-3 years, Sarai was fired dozens of times, Tatar women were sold to Europe in hundreds. What did the Tatars do in response? We wrote complaints! To Moscow, to Novgorod. The complaints persisted. The "enslavers" could not do anything else. The source of information on the mentioned campaigns - you will laugh, but this is a monograph by the Tatar historian Alfred Khasanovich Khalikov.

They still cannot forgive us for these visits! And at school they still tell how Russian gray-legged men cried and gave their girls into slavery - because they were submissive cattle. And you, their descendants, also penetrate with this thought. Do we have any doubts about the reality of the yoke?

2: 0 in favor of the West. In the 16th century, Ivan the Terrible came to power. During his reign in Russia. - Introduced a jury trial. - Free primary education (church schools). - Medical quarantine at the borders. - Local elected self-government, instead of the governor. - For the first time there was a regular army (and the world's first military uniform - at the archers). - Tatar raids have been stopped. - Equality has been established between all segments of the population. Do you know that serfdom at that time did not exist in Russia at all? The peasant was obliged to sit on the land until he paid for its rent, and nothing more. And his children were considered free from birth, in any case! - Prohibited slave labor (source - the law of Ivan the Terrible). - The state monopoly on the fur trade, introduced by Grozny, was canceled only 10 (ten!) Years ago.

- The country's territory has been increased 30 times! - the emigration of the population from Europe exceeded 30,000 families (those who settled along the Zasechnaya line were paid a lifting 5 rubles per family. Expense books were preserved). - The growth in the well-being of the population (and in taxes paid) during the reign amounted to several thousand (!) Percent. - During the entire period of the reign there was not a single person executed without trial and investigation, the total number of "repressed" ranged from three to four thousand. (And the times were dashing - remember St. Bartholomew's night in Europe).

Now remember what you were told about Grozny at school? That he was a bloody tyrant and lost the Livonian War, while Russia was shaking in horror?

3: 0 in favor of the West. By the way, about the Americans who are stupid as a result of propaganda. Already in the 16th century, many brochures were published in Europe for every brainless man in the street. There it was written that the Russian tsar was a drunkard and a lecher, and all his subjects were the same wild freaks. And in the instructions to the ambassadors it was indicated that the tsar is a teetotaler, unpleasantly clever, categorically cannot stand drunken people, and even forbade drinking alcohol in Moscow, as a result of which one can only get drunk outside the city, in the so-called "liqueurs" (the place where they are poured) …

In general, our textbooks proceed from the principle that everything that is said about the Russia of the abominable is true. Anything that is said good or intelligible is a lie. One example. In 1569 Grozny came to Novgorod, which had approximately 40,000 inhabitants. There was an epidemic raging there, and it smelled of riot as well. According to the results of the sovereign's stay, the memorial lists fully preserved in the synodiks mark 2800 dead. But Jerome Horsey in "Notes on Russia" indicates that the guardsmen massacred 700,000 (seven hundred thousand people!

Guess which of the two numbers is considered historically accurate?

4: 0 in favor of the West.

Wild Russians cry and moan. And they are constantly hijacked and driven into slavery by the dashing Crimean basurmans. And the Russians cry and pay tribute. Almost all historians point a finger at the dullness, weakness and cowardice of the Russian rulers, who could not cope even with the spattered Crimea. And for some reason they “forget” that no Crimean Khanate existed - there was one of the provinces of the Ottoman Empire, in which there were Turkish garrisons and an Ottoman governor. Who has no desire to reproach Fidel Castro for not being able to capture a tiny American base on his island?

The Ottoman Empire, by this time, was actively expanding in all directions, conquering all Mediterranean lands, stretching from Iran (Persia) and advancing on Europe, approaching Venice and laying siege to Vienna. In 1572, the Sultan decided to conquer at the same time the wild, as European brochures assured, Muscovy. 120 thousand troops moved from Crimea to the north, supported by 20 thousand janissaries and 200 cannons. Near the village of Molodi, the Ottomans encountered a 50,000-strong detachment of Voivode Mikhaila Vorotynsky. And the Turkish army was … No, it was not stopped - it was completely cut out!

From that moment on, the Ottoman offensive on the neighbors stopped - but try to engage in conquests if your army was almost halved! God forbid you to fight off the neighbors yourself. What do you know about this battle? Nothing? That's it! Wait, in 20 years the participation of Russians in the Second World War will also be “forgotten” in textbooks. After all, all "progressive humanity" has long and firmly known - Hitler was defeated by the Americans. And it’s time to correct the Russian textbooks “wrong” in this area. Information about the Battle of Molodi can generally be classified as closed. God forbid, the Russian cattle will learn that they can be proud of the deeds of their ancestors in the Middle Ages! He will develop a wrong self-awareness, love for the Fatherland, for her deeds.

And this is wrong. So, it is difficult to find data about the Battle of Molodi, but it is possible - in specialized reference books. For example, in the "Encyclopedia of Armaments" of the KiM three lines are written. So, 5: 0 in favor of the West. Stupid Russian bums. Remembering the Mongol invasion, I am always amazed - where did they manage to collect so many sabers? After all, sabers were forged only since the 14th century, and only in Moscow and Dagestan, in Kubachi. Such is the strange fork - forever we and the Dagestanis are unexpectedly the same. Although in all textbooks between us there are always a couple of hostile states. Nowhere else in the world has they learned to forge - this is a much more complex art than it might seem.

But progress was coming, the 17th century. The saber gave way to other weapons. Before the birth of Peter, there was very little left. What was Russia like? If you believe the textbooks, approximately the same as in Tolstoy's novel "Peter the First" - patriarchal, ignorant, wild, drunk, inert …

Did you know that it was Russia who armed all of Europe with advanced weapons? Every year Russian monasteries and foundries sold hundreds of cannons, thousands of muskets, and edged weapons there. Source - here's a quote from the "Encyclopedia of Arms": "It is interesting that the manufacturers of artillery guns in the 16th-17th centuries were not only the sovereign's cannons, but also monasteries. For example, a fairly large production of cannons was carried out in the Solovetsky Monastery and in the Kirillovo-Belozersky Monastery. Owned guns and very successfully used the Don and Zaporozhye Cossacks. The first mention of the use of guns by the Zaporozhye Cossacks dates back to 1516. In the XIX-XX centuries, in Russia and abroad, the opinion was formed that the pre-Petrine artillery was technically backward. But here are the facts: in 1646 the Tula-Kamensk factories supplied the Netherlands with more than 600 guns, and in 1647 360 guns of 4, 6 and 8 pounds. In 1675, the Tula-Kamensk factories shipped abroad 116 cast-iron cannons, 43892 cannon balls, 2934 grenades, 2356 musket barrels, 2700 swords and 9687 pounds of iron."

So much for the wild, backward Russia, which they talk about at school. 6: 0 in favor of the West. From time to time I meet Russophobes who argue that all of the above cannot be, since even highly progressive and developed England and France learned to cast iron only in the 19th century. In such cases, I argue for a bottle of cognac and take a person to the Artillery Museum in St. Petersburg. One of the cast-iron cannons, cast in 1600, lies cheekily there on a stand for all to see. I have already accumulated 3 bottles of cognac in my bar, but they still don’t believe me. People do not believe that Russia, throughout its history and in all respects, has overtaken Europe by about two centuries. But …

Loser's findings. Starting from school years, we are told that our whole history is like a huge cesspool, in which there is not a single bright spot, not a single decent ruler. There were either no military victories at all, or they led to something bad (the victory over the Ottomans is hidden like nuclear launch codes, and the victory over Napoleon is duplicated by the slogan: Alexander is the gendarme of Europe). Everything that was invented by the ancestors is either "brought to us from Europe" or just a baseless myth. The Russian people did not make any discoveries, they did not release anyone, and if someone turned to us for help, it was turning into slavery. And now everyone around has the historical right of Russians to kill, rob, and rape. To kill a Russian person is not banditry, but a desire for freedom. And the lot of all Russians is to repent, repent and repent. A little more than a hundred years of information warfare - and a sense of our own inferiority has already been sown in all of us. We are more, like our ancestors, not sure of our own righteousness. Look what is happening with our politicians: they are constantly making excuses …

Why should Russia make excuses? After all, she is always right! Nobody else dares to say this. You think - it's just that the current politicians are so indecisive, but instead of them, just about, others will come. But this will never happen. Because the feeling of inferiority does not come from the post of foreign minister. It begins to be systematically brought up from childhood, when the child is told: our grandfathers were very stupid, stupid people, incapable of making the most elementary decisions. But a kind and clever uncle Rurik came to them from Europe, began to own and teach them. He created a state for them, in which we live.

The poison, drop by drop, pours into the soul, and when a person leaves school, he gets used to looking at the West as a kind master, smarter and more developed. And at the words "democracy" begins to reflexively stand on its hind legs. What the Western world is best at is waging an information war. The blow was struck in the place that no one had thought to defend - according to the educational program. And the West won. It remains to show a little patience - and our children themselves will crawl on their knees in that direction and ask the lowest permission to lick the owners' shoes. They are already crawling - I managed to see a piece of the program "Why does Russia need its own currency?" Right. Then there will be: "Why do we need an army?" Then: "Why is statehood needed?" The West won. The consignment.

What to do? If you do not want children to be made slaves, you need not shout that we will fight when the hour comes, but save them right now. The hour has already come, the war is almost over for the overwhelming advantage of the enemy. There is an urgent need to break the course of teaching history, changing the emphasis of teaching to a positive one. And even better - to file a lawsuit against the Ministry of Education regarding the dissemination of deliberately false information … The second way to at least slightly strengthen the position on the fronts of the information war is to demand from the procurators the initiation of a criminal case on the fact of inciting ethnic hatred by teaching false historical information. There are a lot of examples. Let's remember the Tatar yoke. We are told that the Tatars oppressed the Russians, but they do not say that the Russians robbed the Tatars no less famously. As a result, Russians have a resentment towards fellow citizens on the basis of race. Moreover, the insult is wrong. We are all good and behaved exactly the same.

Kazan celebrated (or tried to celebrate) the day of remembrance of the Tatars who defended the city from Russian troops. There is a clear confrontation on the basis of ethnicity. Although, in fact, the city was taken not by the Russians, but by the Russian-Tatar (!) Troops. Shig-Alei's cavalry provided cover for the streltsy detachments - and if he is a German, then I am ready to recognize myself as Pope. The Russian-Tatar troops took Kazan, eliminating the influence of Istanbul on the Volga and protecting civilians from predatory raids, and freed tens of thousands of slaves. It is enough to recognize the participation of the Tatars in this noble cause - and the national question loses its acuteness. But I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t know how to roll out a statement in such a way that it’s not brushed off and sent to hell.

The entire course of history is replete with pearls about how the Tatars attacked, how the Russians attacked the Tatars, etc. But nowhere is it indicated that the Tatars are our symbiote, our companion people. Tatar units have always been part of the Russian troops, participated in all Russian wars - both internecine and in battles with an external enemy. We can say that the Tatars are just Russian light cavalry. Or the Russians are Tatar forged men. The Tatars fought against Mamai on the Kulikovo field together with the Moscow army, the Tatars were the first to attack the enemy in the Swedish and Livonian wars; in 1410, near Grunwald, the combined Polish-Russian-Tatar army utterly defeated the crusaders, breaking the back of the Teutonic Order - moreover, it was the Tatars who took the first blow.

Sometimes I am asked why I do not mention the Lithuanians. So I mention - Russians. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania was a Russian state, with a Russian population that spoke Russian, and even the office work was conducted in Russian. Did you think that a small racist country on the Baltic coast was once a great state? 7: 0 in favor of the West …

… As you have seen, the notes are polemical, but quite sound. The author is right: we do not need to get discouraged, but keep a course for the positive.

Today is a critical moment: the motley "historical" society is eager to participate in the writing of the textbook. As you know, historians are a clan formation. Therefore, each of them will work out the clan ideology. If the team includes a historian with an Orthodox indulgence, then the history of Russia will be fatly anointed with church fat. If a pan-Europeanist enters the collective, then only monuments to the knackers Napoleon and Hitler, cast in the Russian word, will remain from the history of Russia. If the "liberals" - the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of bloody revolutionaries like N. Svanidze - come, then the history of Russia will never see its true side anymore.

Therefore, there is no need to rush to finish writing a history textbook in just one year. Let's remember that in one year we could not even agree on daylight saving time. It is necessary to write a textbook in chapters and introduce one chapter into education. Discussing these chapters not in a human rights committee funded by the State Department, and not in a synagogue funded from the Russian budget.

People. It is the Russian people who must, each with their own unique voice, approve every line of this textbook. And these peculiar elections for Russia are much more important than the presidential elections.

Andrey Tyunyaev