This question is far from idle, given that the capabilities of modern instrumental dating methods are not able to provide researchers with accurate data about the time of a particular historical event.

Now the most famous is the radiocarbon method, which works with the radioactive isotope of carbon 14C. This method was developed in 1947 by American Nobel Prize laureate W. F. Libby. The essence of the method is that the carbon isotope 14C is formed in the atmosphere under the influence of cosmic radiation, and together with ordinary carbon 12C it is found in the organic tissues of all living things.

One of the biggest problems archaeologists have is determining the age of finds made from stone and the time when rock paintings were created.

When an organism dies, the exchange of its carbon with the atmosphere stops, the amount of 14C decreases during the decomposition of the organism and is not restored. Determining the 14C/12C ratio in samples at a known rate of decomposition of 14C (5.5 thousand years) makes it possible to determine the age of the object.

It would seem that everything is simple. But practice has made its own adjustments. It turns out that the accuracy of the analysis is affected by radioactivity and contamination of the object with foreign impurities. In addition, the method suffers from more serious flaws. On this occasion, the American archaeologist W. Bray and the English historian D. Trump wrote that, firstly, the obtained dates are never accurate, and the correct date of the age of the object lies in some interval taken on faith, and secondly, the legalized Today, the decay rate of 14C turned out to be too low. No one has decided to cancel this value until a new international norm is adopted, and no one is in a hurry to accept it either. Otherwise, we will have to seriously rewrite not only history textbooks, but also the works of many serious researchers.

Researcher R. W. Wescott criticizes this method even more sharply. He believes that the accuracy of dating a sample could be greatly affected by earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, asteroid impacts or the approach of another planet to Earth. In this case, the radioactive “clock” will work like crazy. They will then count for one hour spent by a sample in a pound a whole year, and for a year - a whole millennium. According to R.W. Wescott, the entire dating until the 6th millennium BC. e. must be perceived as purely relative, without giving it absolute meaning. The mentioned W. Bray and D. Trump believe that radiocarbon dating is trustworthy only for the last 2,000 years. If you agree with this opinion, then the question involuntarily arises: what century or millennium are we living in?

SCIENTIFIC ERRORS AND PARADOXES

Domestic researcher F. Zavelsky believes that the accuracy of determining the age of an object by the method depends on the correctness of the assumptions accepted by agreement (i.e., without serious justification) by the scientific community:
- For tens of thousands of years, the intensity of cosmic radiation falling on the Earth has not changed;
- Cosmic carbon 14C was always diluted with terrestrial carbon in the same way;
- 14C activity does not depend on the longitude and latitude of the area and its height above sea level;
- The content of carbon 14C in living organisms has been constant throughout observable history.

If all or even one of these assumptions later turns out to be inaccurate, then the results of the radiocarbon method will become illusory.

Over time, it became clear that in some places the radiocarbon age of soils is 1.5-2 times less than the age of charcoal obtained from plants in the same layer. In Germany, Israel and Czechoslovakia such combinations of pounds were discovered that the radiocarbon method in them gave different ages that differed from each other by a factor of 2.

Historical researchers G.V. Nosovsky and A.T. Fomenko cite a number of significant errors in determining dates using the radiocarbon method.

When radiocarbon dating the Egyptian collection of J. G. Brasted, it was suddenly discovered that one of the three objects that were analyzed turned out to be modern! No, the object was genuine and ancient, but the radiocarbon method gave an error of four and a half thousand years! And, so as not to confuse public opinion, the ancient sample itself was subsequently declared a forgery.

When dating living mollusks using the radiocarbon method (according to the journal Science, No. 130, 1959), the error was 2,300 years. In other words, the freshly caught common snail was supposedly more than two thousand years old.

Radiocarbon dating of stone structures is possible only if there are organic remains there, and they can be of a much later date.

The journal Nature (No. 225, 1970) reports that a study of the organic mortar of an English castle produced a 10-fold error. According to medieval chronicles, the castle was built 738 years ago, and radiocarbon dating has aged it to 7,370 years old! Thus, the error was almost six and a half thousand years.

When freshly shot seals were dated based on their 14C content, they were found to be 1,300 years old! And the mummified corpses of seals that died only 30 years ago were dated by this method to be 4,600 years old (Antarctic Journal of the United States, No. 6, 1971).

But the living American mollusk turned out to be already at a respectable age - 1,200 years, and another mollusk shell, found in Florida, will appear only after 1,080 years.

A blooming rose from North Africa, according to radiocarbon dating, turned out to be dead for 360 years, and a growing Australian eucalyptus turned out to not yet exist; the method showed that it would appear only in 600 years!

Radiocarbon dating in Heidelberg of a sample from a medieval altar showed that the wood from which it was made had not yet grown!

And there are many dozens of such examples.

BY EYE

In other words, all dating of historical events that occurred before our era is largely arbitrary, since for very old samples carbon atoms have to be counted almost individually. And for such calculations, the accuracy of modern instruments is simply not enough. Therefore, the much-needed accuracy of measurements lies beyond the current capabilities of science.

Archaeologists have even more problems determining the age of finds made from stone and the time of creation of rock paintings. For example, the age of rock carvings of well-known spacesuit-like figures discovered by A. Lot’s expedition in 1956-1957. in the Central Sahara on the Tassilin-Ajjer plateau, has been determined to range from 8,000 to 3,500 BC. e. But can this assessment be trusted?

In this regard, Corresponding Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences D. A. Olderogge points out that there is no generally accepted classification of all rock carvings of the Sahara. Usually the comparative method is used. If, for example, a rock painting depicts a bull, then archaeologists estimate when such animals could have existed in this area. If the stone of interest to historians is located on the bank of the bed of a dried up ancient river, then the approximate time of its drying is established. It is clear that one cannot expect particular accuracy with such determination methods, since the processes of drying up rivers or extinction of bulls can be greatly extended in time over hundreds and thousands of years.

In other cases, historians simply compare “by eye” in which layer of soil a specific material residue was found. If the pound has weathered and a sample of, say, ceramics lies on the surface, then even this approximate “eye” method becomes unsuitable.

The imperfection of dating methods is clearly illustrated by the story of the famous crystal skull, which is attributed to the ancient Mayan civilization. It was discovered in 1926 on the Yucatan Peninsula in a tropical rainforest during excavations of an ancient sacred city. But it is impossible to determine the time at which the crystal was given the shape of a sculpture using the available geological methods.

Currently, many researchers consider the generally accepted dates for the creation of the Egyptian pyramids in Giza and the Sphinx, as well as the dates for the construction of some Mayan, Aztec, and Incas cities in the range of 3-5 millennia, to be erroneous.

One of the leading historians A. Oleynikov wrote: “For example, from ancient written sources it is known that the Egyptian pharaoh Ramses II reigned about 3,000 years ago. The buildings that were erected during his time are now buried under a 3-meter layer of sand.

This means that over a millennium, approximately a meter-thick layer of sand deposits was deposited here. At the same time, in some areas of Europe, only 3 centimeters of precipitation accumulates over a thousand years. But in the conditions of the estuaries in southern Ukraine, a 3-meter layer of sand is deposited annually.” This means that the dating method based on the thickness of sediment layers also turns out to be unsuitable. Modern data from climatologists suggests that once the entire territory of Egypt was a blooming garden, and not a desert.

Estimates of the creation of the Egyptian pyramids and the Sphinx in 10-15 thousand years BC are increasingly common. e. However, these estimates were made thanks to modern astronomical calculations of the positions of celestial bodies in ancient times. It seems that this method is now the most accurate and reliable, but is by no means universal, since it first needs to be clearly established that a particular object had an astronomical orientation.

Thus, by the beginning of the 21st century, historical science found itself in a methodological dead end due to imperfect dating methods. In fact, you can make many local finds, excavate several more ancient cities and cultures, but not find a logical chronological connection between them. But history without a clear chronology is nonsense. Therefore, it is possible that many chapters in the history of ancient civilizations will have to be rewritten anew in the future.

Inna finished her studies at the university. Having rented a small private house with neat renovations and got a good job, she began to live for pleasure. The house was light and cozy, but there was one oddity: for some reason, a small gap the size of a couple of bricks was left under the bathtub, as if there weren’t enough materials to seal it. Inna didn’t ask the landlady who was in a hurry to rent out the house - she thought it was because of the humidity.
But even here the strangeness did not end. Every morning, near this gap under the bathroom, Inna discovered either garbage, damp earth, or other small rubbish, sometimes even recently lost things. She wrote off that everything fell to the floor when she took off her clothes and shoes. But one day something made the girl wonder if this was so.
Inna was in a hurry to go to work in the morning. I had to quickly wash my hair; there was about 20 minutes left to do everything. The girl bent down and began to rub the fragrant shampoo into her hair, when she suddenly felt something cold leaning against her toes, something that was moving. The girl straightened her leg, rubbed her soapy eyes, and for a moment something light with a dull bluish tint flashed through the crack. For some reason Inna thought it was a rat. In the evening she bought poison for rats and threw it into the crack. The girl slept poorly all night; it seemed to her that some kind of fuss was going on in the bathroom, as if someone was scraping their nails along the bottom of the bathtub.
The next day, Inna was detained at work; the girl came home late and very tired. When she began to wash off her makeup, she suddenly clearly felt something disgustingly cold and rough grab her ankle. In surprise, Inna opened her soapy eyes and saw with horror how a deathly pale, bony hand with purple-gray, slightly overgrown nails was holding her leg, and sounds began to be heard under the bathroom, as if someone really wanted to get out of there. Inna screamed in horror, her eyes hurt with soap, barefoot, with a smeared face, Inna ran to her neighbor, a lonely old woman who lived a few steps away. After giving the shocked girl some valerian and then some tea, she began asking what had happened. Inna told everything as it happened, holding a cup of tea with shaking hands and swallowing tears and sobs. With every word, the grandmother rolled her eyes more and more and crossed herself, and tomorrow morning she promised to go to the nearest church for advice.
Walking into the room, the priest examined it and looked through the crack. From there there was a slight whiff of mustiness and dampness, mixed with a strange, barely perceptible, sugary smell of decomposition, but not so strong as to be noticeable in the ordinary bustle of life. We began to decide what to do. It couldn't have happened without the police.
3 years have passed since the incident, and Inna still remembers this story with horror. As it turned out, a husband and wife lived in the house. The husband drank a lot and one day his wife could not stand it and, in a fit of quarrel, broke her husband’s skull with a meat ax. Frightened, she and her brother dug a hole under the bathroom and placed the body there, covering everything with boards, placing a bathtub and walling up all the cracks there. Neighbors were told that the husband had left his wife and left. The newly-made widow went to live with her brother and after a year decided to rent out the house, no longer afraid that the smell of decay would become noticeable, and they needed money.
How a gap appeared under the bathtub, what mysticism made the corpse make itself known (many assumed that it was the brownie who did not tolerate disorder that helped), but if not for this hole, the matter would never have come to the surface. An alcoholic husband would be recognized as having run away from his nagging wife, and no one would be looking for him.
Inna is now hysterically afraid of various openings and holes in rooms. Everything that happened to her cannot fit into her head, but she still remembers that chilling feeling when the hand of a dead man clasps the ankle of her leg...
Whether to believe this story or not is up to everyone to decide, but it gave me a terrible impression when they told it to me...

The world is full of secrets and mysteries, and a person is too small and inexperienced to actually be able to tear away the heavy veils of darkness from them. From time to time, the general public receives information that is so intriguing that it is simply impossible to believe in its reality. However, we cannot escape the mysticism that permeates our entire existence. Here are 7 completely inexplicable stories that still trouble the best minds of our time.

Nine dead tourists, whose bodies were mutilated in a very strange way. Radiation contamination. A government that is still hiding the truth. Rumors about Yeti. Rumors about UFOs. And finally, the death of another person just a few months ago. The frightening mystery of the Dyatlov Pass opens our list of mysterious incidents, each of which simply has no scientific explanation.

Murders at Hinterkaifeck Farm

This case is reminiscent of a low-budget horror film. A remote farm, where a gloomy family of 6 lived, became the setting for a wild, still unsolved crime. The killer lived on the farm for several days, walking like an invisible shadow among the household, and then destroyed the entire family and disappeared into the shadows again.

Night stalker

The killer, who has not yet been found, terrorized Sacramento County, California, for several months. He liked to call his victims' homes to warn them of an intrusion. 120 corpses, and the FBI suggests that Stalker is still alive today. I just retired.

Maria Celeste

The story of the Mary Celeste is known throughout the world. The ship, whose crew disappeared without a trace, was found off the coast of Portugal. There was perfect order on board, as if all the crew members had just left the table.

DB Cooper

In 1971, a modest man in a black suit and tie boarded a plane bound for Seattle. Immediately after takeoff, this unremarkable man showed the stewards a bomb, demanded $200,000 and four parachutes from the government, and then simply disappeared into the air, jumping somewhere over Mexico City.

The Gibbons Twins

Absolutely normal-looking girls, June and Jennifer Gibbons, refused to make contact with the outside world from childhood. Or rather, the twins simply did not understand the words addressed to them, while they could communicate with each other in their own language. Linguists have never been able to solve it.

Cicada 3301

Every year since 2012, a secret organization has puzzled the entire Internet by sending puzzles to everyone who wants to join its ranks. Incredibly complex, intricate puzzles can only be solved by professional hackers; they are scattered all over the world - and most importantly, there is no information about who the Cicada 3301 group actually serves.

Alexander Prozorov

The war against Russia has been going on for a very long time and is very, very successful. Of course, not on the battlefields, where we always beat 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 6-7 category, without a past and a future. And it has practically proven that even the authors of many patriotic articles agree with this approach entirely.

Examples? Please!

Example 1. We recently celebrated the 1000th anniversary of Rus'. When did she actually appear? The first capital (only the capital of a large country!), the city of Slovensk, was founded in 2409 BC (3099 from the creation of the world); the source of information is the chronicle of the Serf Monastery on the Mologa River, the chronograph of Academician M. N. Tikhomirov, “Notes on Muscovy” by S. Herberstein, “The Tale of Sloven and Rus,” which is widely circulated and recorded by many ethnographers. Since it is believed that Novgorod was built on the site of Slovensk, I pestered the archaeologists leading the excavations about how plausible this was. They answered me verbatim like this: “Who the hell knows. We’ve already got to the bottom of Paleolithic sites there.”

Example 2. It is generally accepted that somewhere in the 8th century, wild, brainless and good-for-nothing Slavs, wandering in herds through the forests, called the Viking Rurik to themselves and said: “Own us, oh great European superman, otherwise we, idiots, are nothing ourselves.” can not". (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 lower rank. He was drafted together with his brothers, since all 4 sons of Gostomysl died or were killed in wars. He was accepted by agreement with the elders, and worked hard to earn respect in Rus'. Source: Joachim Chronicle, Russian history according to Tatishchev, “Brockhaus and Efron”, etc.

Example 3. The opinion is being spread everywhere that almost the only civilization of the past was the Roman Empire, an example of legality and morality. In general, both the gladiatorial fights of Rome and the modern indulgence of looters in Iraq are the same thing. The morality of the Western world has not changed much, and continues to be disgusted by “savages” such as Russians, Chinese and Dagestanis.

Official history: the great, beautiful and powerful Roman civilization fell under the blows of stinking, shaggy savages. In fact, the degenerates, fed up with everyone (like the Americans now), were subjected to sanitization by their more decent neighbors. Naked and bare-legged, poorly armed Roman infantry (open a textbook on the history of the ancient world and admire the legionnaires) were trampled, chained in steel from the tops of their heads to their horse hooves cataphracts. The main source of information is “Cataphractars and their role in the history of military art” by A.M. Khazanov. (I don’t remember the rest, but those who wish can search through the auto search themselves. There is a lot of material - they just don’t let it into schools. “Harmful”).

The most interesting thing is where did the Huns come from to “cleanse” Rome? Ob, Ugra, Volga region, Urals, Azov region... Graves with partial weapons of cataphracts were also found in Dagestan. Have you, fellow patriots, looked at the map for a long time? So where did the Huns attack Rome from? Why was “wild Rus'” in Europe called Gardarik - the Country of Cities? Now it doesn’t matter, because we celebrate the 1000th anniversary of Rus' with joyful faces, we consider Rurik to be the master who came from Norway and founded Russia, and we even seem to be proud of this history.

4 millennia were sent down the drain, impudently thrown away as uninteresting - and not a single dog even blathered.

1:0 in favor of the West.

Second goal against the Russian fools. In the 8th century, one of the Russian princes nailed a shield to the gates of Constantinople, and it is difficult to assert that Russia did not exist even then. Therefore, long-term slavery was planned for Rus' in the coming centuries. The invasion of the Mongol-Tatars and 3 centuries of obedience and humility. What marked this era in reality? We will not deny the Mongol yoke out of laziness, but... As soon as the existence of the Golden Horde became known in Rus', young guys immediately went there to... rob the Mongols who came from rich China to Rus'. The Russian raids of the 14th century are best described (in case anyone has forgotten, the period from the 14th to the 15th century is considered the yoke).

In 1360, Novgorod lads fought along the Volga to the Kama mouth, and then stormed the large Tatar city of Zhukotin (Dzhuketau near the modern city of Chistopol). Having captured untold wealth, the ushkuiniki returned and began to “drink their zipuns on drink” in the city of Kostroma. From 1360 to 1375, the Russians made eight large campaigns against the middle Volga, not counting small raids. In 1374, the Novgorodians took the city of Bolgar (near Kazan) for the third time, then went down and took Sarai itself - the capital of the Great Khan.

In 1375, Smolensk guys on 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 Bolgar, taught by bitter experience, paid off with a large tribute, but the khan’s capital Sarai was stormed and plundered. In 1392, the Ushkuiniki again took Zhukotin and Kazan. In 1409, Voivode Anfal led 250 Ushkuis to the Volga and Kama. And in general, beating the Tatars in Rus' was considered not a feat, but a trade.

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

They still can’t forgive us for these visits! And at school they still talk about how Russian gray-legged men cried and gave their girls into slavery - because they were submissive cattle. And you, their descendants, also imbue this thought. Does anyone here doubt 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 Rus':

Trial by jury introduced;

Free primary education (church schools);

Medical quarantine at borders;

Local elected self-government, instead of governor;

For the first time, a regular army appeared (and the first military uniform in the world belonged to the Streltsy);

Tatar raids stopped;

Equality was established between all segments of the population (do you know that serfdom did not exist in Rus' at that time? 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 !).

Slave labor is prohibited (source - Ivan the Terrible's code of law);

The state monopoly on the fur trade, introduced by Grozny, was abolished only 10 ( ten!) years ago.

The territory of the country 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 an allowance of 5 rubles per family. The expense books have been preserved).

The growth in the well-being of the population (and taxes paid) during the reign amounted to several thousand (!) percent.

During the entire reign there was no no one executed without trial, the total number of those “repressed” ranged from three to four thousand. (And times were turbulent - remember St. Bartholomew's Night).

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

3:0 in favor of the West.

By the way, about the stupid Americans as a result of propaganda. Already in the 16th century, many brochures were published in Europe for every brainless layman. It was written there that the Russian Tsar was a drunkard and a libertine, and all his subjects were the same wild monsters. And in instructions to ambassadors it was indicated that the king was a teetotaler, unpleasantly smart, categorically cannot stand drunks, and even banned drinking alcohol in Moscow, as a result of which you can only “get drunk” outside the city, in the so-called “nalivka” (a place where they pour food). Source - study “Ivan the Terrible” by Kazimir Waliszewski, France. Now guess three times - which of the two versions is presented in textbooks?

In general, our textbooks are based on the principle that everything that is said about Russia that is vile is true. Everything that is said that is good or intelligible is a lie.

One example. In 1569, Grozny came to Novgorod, which had approximately 40 000 population. There was an epidemic raging there, and there was also a smell of riot. Based on the results of the sovereign’s stay, the memorial lists fully preserved in the synodics mark 2800 dead. But Jerome Horsey in “Notes on Russia” indicates that the guardsmen massacred in Novgorod 700 000 (seven hundred thousand (?)) people.

Guess which of the two figures is considered historically accurate?

4:0 in favor of the West.

Wild Russians cry and moan. And they are constantly stolen and driven into slavery by the dashing Crimean infidels. And the Russians cry and pay tribute. Almost all historians point their fingers at the stupidity, weakness and cowardice of the Russian rulers, who could not even cope with the puny Crimea. And for some reason they “forget” that there was no Crimean Khanate- was one of the provinces of the Ottoman Empire, in which there were Turkish garrisons and an Ottoman governor. No one wants to reproach 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 the Mediterranean lands, spreading from Iran (Persia) and advancing on Europe, approaching Venice and besieging Vienna. In 1572, the Sultan decided to conquer at the same time the wild, as European brochures assured, Muscovy. moved from Crimea to the north 120 thousand troops, with the support of 20 thousand Janissaries and 200 cannons.

Near the village Juvenile The Ottomans faced a 50,000-strong detachment of the governor Mikhaily Vorotynsky. And the Turkish army was... No, not stopped - completely cut out!!!

From that moment on, the Ottomans' offensive against their neighbors stopped - but try to engage in conquests if your army was almost halved! God forbid you can fight off your neighbors yourself. What do you know about this battle? Nothing? That's it! Wait, in 20 years they will also begin to “forget” about Russian participation in World War II in textbooks. After all, all “progressive humanity” has long and firmly known - The Americans defeated Hitler. And it’s time to correct Russian textbooks that are “wrong” in this area.

Information about the Battle of Molodi can generally be classified as closed. God forbid the Russian cattle learn that they too can be proud of the deeds of their ancestors in the Middle Ages! He will develop incorrect self-awareness, love for the Fatherland, for its deeds. And this is wrong. So, it is difficult to find information about the Battle of Moldody, but it is possible - in specialized reference books. For example, three lines are written in the “Encyclopedia of Arms” of Kosmet.

So, 5:0 in favor of the West.

Stupid Russian slackers. Remembering the Mongol invasion, I am always surprised - how did they manage to collect so many sabers? After all sabers were forged only starting from the 14th century, and only in Moscow and Dagestan, in Kubachi. Such a strange fork - the Dagestanis and I always end up unexpectedly being the same. Although, in all textbooks there are always a couple of hostile states between us. Nowhere else in the world have they learned how to forge sabers- this is a much more complex art than it might seem.

But progress came, the 17th century. The saber gave way to other weapons. There was very little time left before the birth of Peter 1. What was Russia like? If you believe the textbooks, it’s approximately the same as in Tolstoy’s novel “Peter the Great” - patriarchal, ignorant, wild, drunk, inert...

Did you know that it was Russia that armed all of Europe advanced weapons? Every year, Russian monasteries and foundries sold there hundreds of cannons, thousands of muskets, and edged weapons. Source - here's a quote from the "Encyclopedia of Arms":

“It is interesting that the producers of artillery pieces in the 16th-17th centuries were not only the sovereign’s Pushkar courts, but also monasteries. For example, quite a large-scale production of cannons was carried out in the Solovetsky Monastery and in the Kirillovo-Belozersky Monastery. The Don and Zaporozhye Cossacks owned cannons and used them very successfully. The first mention of the use of cannons by the Zaporozhye Cossacks dates back to 1516. In the 19th-20th centuries, in Russia and abroad, there was an opinion that pre-Petrine artillery was technically backward. But here are the facts: in 1646, the Tula-Kamensk factories supplied Holland with more than 600 guns, and in 1647, 360 guns of 4.6 and 8 pound caliber. In 1675, the Tula-Kamensk factories shipped abroad 116 cast iron cannons, 43,892 cannonballs, 2,934 grenades, 2,356 musket barrels, 2,700 swords and 9,687 pounds of iron.”.

So much for the wild, backward Rus' they talk about in school.

6:0 in favor of the West.

By the way, from time to time, I come across Russophobes who claim that all of the above cannot happen, since even highly progressive and developed England and France learned to cast iron only in the 19th century. In such cases, I bet on a bottle of cognac and take the person to the Artillery Museum in St. Petersburg. One of the cast iron cannons cast in 1600, there lying cheekily on a stand for all to see. I already have 3 bottles of cognac in my bar, but they still don’t believe me. People do not believe that Rus', throughout its history and in all respects, was ahead of Europe by about two centuries. But...

Loser's Conclusions. Since our school years, we have been told that our entire 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 - the gendarme of Europe). Everything that was invented by our ancestors was either brought to us from Europe or simply a baseless myth. The Russian people did not make any discoveries, did not free anyone, and if someone turned to us for help, it was slavery.

And now everyone around has the historical right of Russians to kill, rob, and rape. If you kill a Russian person, this is not banditry, but a desire for freedom. And the destiny of all Russians is to repent, repent and repent.

A little more than a hundred years of information war - and a feeling of our own inferiority has already been sown in all of us. We are no longer, like our ancestors, confident in our own rightness. Look what's happening with our politicians: they constantly make excuses. No one is demanding that Lord Jad be put on trial for promoting terrorism and collaborating with bandits - he is being persuaded that he is not entirely right.

We threaten Georgia - and we do not carry out the threats. Denmark spits in our faces - and they don’t even impose sanctions against it. The Baltic countries have established an apartheid regime - politicians turn away in shame. People demand to allow the sale of weapons for self-defense - they are openly called worthless cretins who, out of stupidity, will immediately kill each other.

Why should Russia make excuses? After all, she is always right! No one else dares to say this.

You think that current politicians are simply so indecisive, but others are about to come instead. But this won't happen NEVER. Because the feeling of inferiority does not originate in 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 basic decisions. But the kind and smart uncle Rurik came to them from Europe, began to own them and teach them. He created for them the state of Russia, in which we live.

The poison, drop by drop, pours into the soul, and when a person leaves school, he already gets used to looking at the West as a kind master, smarter and more developed. And at the words “democracy” it begins to reflexively stand on its hind legs.

What the Western world knows best is to wage an information war. The blow was struck in a place that no one thought to protect - the educational program. And the West won. All we have to do is show a little patience - and our children themselves will crawl on their knees in that direction and humbly ask permission to lick their owners’ shoes. They are already crawling - a couple of days ago I managed to see a part of the program “Why does Russia need its own currency?” Right. Then it will be: “Why do we need an army?” Then: “Why is statehood needed?”

The West won. The consignment.

What to do?

If you don’t want children to be made slaves, you should 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 due to the overwhelming advantage of the enemy. There is an urgent need to break the course of history teaching, changing the emphasis of teaching to the positive. My girls are still 4 and 5 years old, but when they go to school, I foresee difficult days. Lawsuits for poor quality teaching are guaranteed. If a historian does not teach children who such an important person in history as Rurik was or does not know about the Battle of Molodin, then he must pay fines from his own pocket.

And even better - file a claim to the Ministry of Education regarding dissemination of deliberately false information. Hire a good lawyer and kick them painfully, painfully - let them itch. But I just don’t have the money for “good” ones. To chip in feebly in the name of saving the honorable name of our ancestors?

The second way to at least slightly strengthen positions on the fronts of the information war is to demand that the prosecutors initiate a criminal case for inciting ethnic hatred by teaching false historical information. There are plenty of examples. Let us remember the Tatar yoke. They tell us that the Tatars oppressed the Russians, but they do not tell us that the Russians robbed the Tatars no less famously. As a result, Russians develop resentment towards their fellow citizens based on race. Moreover, the offense is wrong. We are all good and behaved exactly the same.

Or, for example, last year in Kazan they celebrated (or tried to celebrate) the day of remembrance of the Tatars who defended the city from Russian troops. There is a clear confrontation along ethnic lines. Although, in fact, it was not the Russians who took the city, but Russian-Tatar (!) troops. Cover for the rifle detachments was provided by the Shig-Aley cavalry - and if he is German, then I am ready to recognize myself as the Pope. Russian-Tatar troops took Kazan, eliminating the influence of Istanbul on the Volga, and protecting civilians from predatory raids, freeing tens of thousands of slaves. It is enough to acknowledge the participation of the Tatars in this noble cause - and the national question loses its urgency.

But I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t know how to write up an application in such a way that it won’t be brushed aside and sent to hell.

By the way, Dallas’ plan to incite national hatred has been mentioned more than once. And no one paid attention to how it was implemented. Also at school. Good teachers diligently sow discord between the largest national groups - Russians and Tatars. The entire history course is full of 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 partner people. Tatar units Always were part of the Russian troops, participated in all Russian wars - both internecine and in battles with external enemies. It can be said that Tatars are just Russian light cavalry. Or the Russians are the Tatar forged army. 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 united Polish-Russian-Tatar army completely defeated the crusaders, breaking the back of the Teutonic Order - and it was the Tatars who took the first blow.

Sometimes people ask me why I don’t mention Lithuanians. So I mention - Russians. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania was a Russian state, with a Russian population that spoke Russian, and even 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.

We lived with the Tatars side by side for four thousand years. They fought, they became friends, they became related. They smashed the Romans, the Crusaders, the Ottomans, the Poles, the French, the Germans... And now, our children open the textbook, and it drips from every page: enemies, enemies, enemies... Legally this is called inciting national hatred. And in fact - ordinary information war.

The war continues...

Original taken from geogen_mir in THE FORBIDDEN HISTORY OF Rus'. Why is the history of Russia the biggest secret on Earth?

This material was intended as an attempt to answer the question of why our true history is hidden from us. A short historical excursion into the area of ​​historical truth should enable the reader to understand how far from the truth is what is presented to us as the history of the Russian people. In fact, the truth may shock the reader at first, as it shocked 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 of several modern historians of the last decade who have seriously studied the issue. Only, unfortunately, they, their works, are not known to the general reader - academicians and the authorities in Russia, well, they really don’t like the truth. Fortunately, there are interested ARI readers who need this truth. And today is the day when we need her in order to answer -
Who are we?
Who are our ancestors?
Where is the Heavenly Iriy, from which we must draw strength?

V. Karabanov, ARI. 09/01/2013 05:23

FORBIDDEN HISTORY OF Rus'

Vladislav Karabanov

To understand why we need historical truth,

we need to understand why the ruling regimes in Rus'-Russia

a historical lie was needed.

History and psychology

Russia is deteriorating before our eyes. The huge Russian people are the backbone of the state, which decided the destinies of the world and Europe, under the control of crooks and scoundrels who hate the Russian people. Moreover, the Russian people, who gave the name to the state located on its territory, are not the owner of the state, are not the administrator of this state and do not receive any dividends from this, even moral ones. We are a people deprived of our rights in our own land.

Russian national identity is at a loss, the realities of this world are falling upon the Russian people, and they cannot even stand up, group themselves in order to maintain balance. Other nations are pushing back the Russians, and they are convulsively gasping for air and retreating, retreating. Even when there is nowhere to retreat. We are squeezed 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 right to their land that the question arises about the presence of some kind of distortion in self-awareness, the presence of some kind of defective code in historical self-knowledge that does not allow relying on it.

Therefore, perhaps, in search of solutions, we need to turn to psychology and history.

National self-awareness is, on the one hand, an unconscious involvement in an ethnic group, in its egregor filled with the energy of hundreds of generations, on the other hand, it is the reinforcement of unconscious feelings with information, knowledge of one’s history, the origins of one’s origin. In order to gain stability in their consciousness, people need information about their roots, about their past. Who are we and where are we from?
Every ethnic group should have it. Among ancient peoples, information was recorded by folk epics and legends; among modern peoples, who are usually 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-awareness for a modern person, ensuring his stability and mental balance.

But what will happen if people are not told who they are and where they are from, or if they tell them lies and 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 images of the superconscious. The people, like people, seek support for their inner self in the cultural tradition, which is history. And, if he does not find it, this leads to disorganization of consciousness. Consciousness ceases to be whole and falls into fragments.

This is precisely the situation in which the Russian people find themselves today. His story, the story of his origin, is fictitious or distorted so much that his consciousness cannot focus, because in his unconscious and superconscious, it does not find confirmation of this story. It’s as if a white boy were shown photographs of his ancestors, where only dark-skinned Africans were depicted.
Or, on the contrary, an Indian raised in a white family was shown to be the grandfather of a cowboy. He is shown relatives, none of whom he resembles, whose way of thinking is alien to him - he does not understand their actions, views, thoughts, music. Other people. The human psyche cannot stand such things. The same story is with the Russian people. On the one hand, the story is absolutely not disputed by anyone, on the other hand, the 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 his ancestors and, if he is aware of his origin, then he gains access to his subconscious and thereby remains in harmony. In the depths of the subconscious, every person has layers associated with the superconscious, the soul, which can either be activated when consciousness possessing correct information helps a person gain integrity, or blocked by false information, and then the person cannot use his inner potential, which depresses him. This is why the phenomenon of cultural development is so important, or if it is based on lies, then it is a form of oppression.

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

Somehow it turned out strangely that, according to historical science, we more or less know the history of our people starting from the 15th century. Since 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 Rus', which came with him, historical science tells us more conjectures and interpretations than real historical evidence. The fact that this is speculation is evidenced by the heated debate surrounding this issue.

What is this Rus, which came and gave its name to a huge people and state, which became known as Russia? Where did the Russian land come from? Historical science, as it were, leads discussions. As they began to communicate at the beginning of the 18th century, they continue to do so. But as a result, they come to the strange conclusion that this does not matter, because those who were called Russia“did not have a significant impact” on the formation of the Russian people. This is exactly how historical science in Russia rounded off the question. That's it - they gave a name to the people, but who, what and why does not matter.

Is it really impossible for researchers to find an answer? Are there really no traces of the people, no information in the ecumene, where there are the roots of the mysterious Rus' that laid the foundation for our people? So Rus' appeared out of nowhere, gave its name to our people and disappeared into nowhere? Or were you looking poorly?

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 to order, and given that the political regime here was always extremely centralized, it ordered the ideological construct that history is. And for the sake of ideological considerations, the order was for an extremely monolithic story, not allowing deviations.

And the people - Rus spoiled a harmonious and necessary picture for someone. Only in a short period at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century, when some freedoms appeared in Tsarist Russia, were there real attempts to understand the issue. And we almost figured it out. But, firstly, no one really needed the truth then, and secondly, the Bolshevik coup broke out. In the Soviet period, there is nothing even to be said about objective coverage of history; it could not exist in principle. What do we want from hired workers who write to order under the watchful supervision of the party? Moreover, we are talking about forms of cultural oppression, such as the Bolshevik regime. And to a large extent the tsarist regime too.

Therefore, it is not surprising the heaps of lies that we encounter when looking into the story that was presented to us, and which, neither in its facts nor in its conclusions, is true. Due to the fact that there are too many rubble and lies, and other lies and their branches were built on these lies and fabrications, in order not to tire the reader, the author will focus more on the really important facts.

Past out of nowhere

If we read the history of Rus', written in the Romanov era, in the Soviet era and accepted in modern historiography, we will find that the versions of the origin of Rus', the people who gave this name to a huge country and people, are vague and unconvincing. For almost 300 years, when attempts to understand history can be counted, there are only a few established versions. 1) Rurik, a Norman king, who came to the local tribes with a small retinue, 2) Came from the Baltic Slavs, either the Obodrites, or the Vagrs 3) A 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 Western Slavic tribe of the Vagr, who came from Pomerania, has become especially popular.

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

What’s interesting is that somehow it turns out that the entire history of Rus' begins in 862. From the year that is indicated in the “PVL” and begins with the calling of Rurik. But what happened before is practically not considered at all, and as if no one is interested. In this form, history looks only like 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? The year 862 almost looks like the beginning of history. And before that there was 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 is offered to us is a history that has no beginning. From what we know, we get the feeling that the semi-mythical narrative began somewhere in the middle and halfway through.

Ask anyone, even a certified historian-specialist in Ancient Rus', or even an ordinary person, as for the origin of the Russian people and their 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, seemingly nationally minded representatives of the Russian people, generally identify themselves ethnically as Slavs, although the Slavs are still more of a linguistic community than an ethnic one. This is complete nonsense.

It would also look ridiculous, for example, 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 “Romanes”. Identify yourself as one people. By the way, the gypsies call themselves that - Romals, but they hardly consider themselves and the French to be fellow tribesmen. The peoples of the Romance language group are 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, these 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 differ. We will not go into detail here, it is enough to point out the history of the Bulgarians in whose ethnogenesis the main role was played not only and perhaps 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 further, I will use the term Aryan-speaking, instead of the term Iranian-speaking used by modern historians, which I consider false. The fact is that the use of the word Iranian-speaking immediately creates a false association with modern Iran, in general , today, quite an eastern people. However, historically the word Iran itself, 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 “Sorboy” and “Khoruv”, from which the hired leaders and squads of the Slavic tribes came. 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 there they assimilated the local Illyrians.

Now as for Russian history itself. 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 established tradition, there was a dark time. What did our ancestors do and where were they, and what 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, what they were called and where they lived directly in the previous millennium is somehow inelegantly kept silent.

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

Many of our compatriots have somehow become accustomed to the fact that nothing is said about this period. In the minds of the Russian national intelligentsia of the previous period, it seems to not exist. Rus' follows almost immediately 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, a theory was developed about the Vedic era, which can be attributed to a period several thousand years BC. But in these theories we do not see a transition to our history itself, a transition to real events. And then, somehow immediately, passing a couple of millennia, virtually out of nowhere, Rus' appears in 862, the time of Rurik. The author in no way wants to enter into controversy on this issue and even in some ways divides the theories according to the prehistoric period. But in any case, Hyperborea can be attributed to the era of 7-8 thousand years 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, the times directly adjacent to 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 provides the keys to understanding our history and the history of our origin, respectively, our self-awareness.

Slavs or Russians?

A common and undisputed place in the Russian historical tradition is the approach that Russians are an original Slavic people. And, in general, almost 100% there is an equal sign between Russian and Slavic. What is meant is not a modern linguistic community, but a kind of historical origin of the Russian people from ancient tribes identified as Slavs. Is it really?

What’s interesting is that even ancient chronicles do not give us grounds to draw such conclusions - to deduce the origin of the Russian people from Slavic tribes.

Let us cite the well-known words of the Russian initial chronicle for the year 862:

“We decided to ourselves: let’s look for a prince who would rule over us and judge by right.” I went across the sea to the Varangians to Rus'; for all I know, I called the Varangians Rus, as all my friends are called Ours, my friends are Urman, Anglyans, friends of Gate , tako and si. Decided by Rus' Chud, Slovenia and Krivichi: “all our land is great and abundant, “but there is no outfit in it: let you go and reign over us.” And the three brothers were chosen from their generations, girding all of Rus', and they came; the oldest Rurik sede in Novegrad; and the other is Sineus on Beleozero, and the third is Izborst Truvor. From those the Russian land was nicknamed Novugorodtsy: they are the people of Novugorodtsi from the family of Varangian, before Slovenia."

It is difficult to learn something new, but in these chronicles, in different versions, one important fact can be traced - Rus named as a certain tribe, people. But no one considers anything further. Where did this Rus' then disappear to? 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 incomprehensible legend about the actual foundation of Kyiv. According to this legend, it was founded by the mythical Kiy, Shchek and Khoriv, ​​with their sister Lybid. According to the version given by the author of The Tale of Bygone Years, Kiy, who lived on the Dnieper mountains together with his younger brothers Shchek, Khoriv and sister Lybid, built a city on the right high bank of the Dnieper, named Kiev in honor of his older brother.

The chronicler immediately reports, although he considers it implausible, a second legend that Kiy was a carrier on the Dnieper. So what is next!!! Cue is named the founder of the town of Kievets on the Danube!? These are the times.

“Some, not knowing, say that Kiy was a carrier; At that time, Kyiv had transportation from the other side of the Dnieper, which is why they said: “For transportation to Kyiv.” If Kiy had been a ferryman, he would not have gone to Constantinople; and this Kiy reigned in his family, 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 took a fancy to the place, and cut down a small town, and wanted to sit in it with his family, but those living around did not let him; This is how the Danube residents still call the settlement - Kievets. Kiy, returning to his city of Kyiv, died here; and his brothers Shchek and Horiv 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 Kievets - “a 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 Kevee (Kevee), which is described by the Hungarian chronicler Anonymous Notary and which was located near Orsov, apparently in 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 about 30 versts from the mouth of Timok. »

If you look at where present-day Kyiv is located and where the above-mentioned Kladov is with nearby Kiovo at the mouth of Timok, then the distance between them is as much as 1 thousand 300 kilometers in a straight line, which is quite far even by our times, especially by those times. And what, it would seem, is common between these places. We are clearly talking about some kind of insinuation, substitution.

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

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

In reality, this story with Kiy and the glades reflects ancient attempts not so much to tell as 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 took the southern countries, and the Japhethites took the west and the northern countries. From these same 70 and 2 languages ​​came the Slavic people, from the tribe of Japheth - the so-called Noriks, who are the Slavs.

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

The chronicler clearly and unambiguously says that the Slavs lived in territories other than the lands of Kievan Rus, and are alien people here. And if we look at the historical retrospective of the lands of Rus', 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 conveys to the reader information about the settlement of the Slavs even more clearly. We are talking about movement from west to east.

After a long time, the Slavs settled along the Danube, where the land is now Hungarian and Bulgarian (more often they point to the provinces of Rezia and Norik). From those Slavs the Slavs spread throughout the land and were called by their names from the places where they sat. So some, having come, sat down on the river in the name of Morava and were called Moravians, while others called themselves Czechs. And here are the same Slavs: white Croats, and Serbs, and Horutans. When the Volochs attacked the Danube 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 - Lutichs, others - Mazovshans, others - Pomeranians

Likewise, these Slavs came and settled along the Dnieper and were called Polyans, and others - Drevlyans, because they sat in the forests, and others sat between Pripyat and Dvina and were called Dregovichs, others sat along the Dvina and were called Polochans, after the river flowing into the Dvina , called Polota, from which the Polotsk people took their name. The same Slavs who settled near Lake Ilmen were called by their own name - Slavs, and built a city and called it Novgorod. And others sat along the Desna, and the Seim, and the Sula, and called themselves northerners. And so the Slavic people dispersed, and after his name the letter was called Slavic.” (PVLIpatiev list)

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

However, for some reason we don’t find a word about the Russian people from the chronicler PVL.

And we are interested in this Rus- the people, which is with a small letter, and Rus', the country, which is with a capital letter. Where did they come from? To be honest, PVL is not very suitable for the purpose of finding out the true state of things. We find only isolated references there, of which only one thing is clear: Rus there was and it was the people, and not some individual Scandinavian squads.

Here it must be said that neither the Norman version of origin Rus' neither Western Slavic is satisfactory. Hence there are so many disputes between supporters of these versions, because when choosing between them, there is nothing to choose. Neither nor the second version allows us to understand the history of the origin of our people. But rather confusing. The question arises, is there really no answer? Can't we 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 they did not change the ideology, they adjusted the history. That is why the traditional history of Rus'-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 Rus'-Russia-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 avoiding historical truth has been the main goal of most historians, and the piles of untruth are such that hundreds of volumes would have to be written, refuting one nonsense after another.

Therefore, here I will take a different path, 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 our present day, historians could not be free from ideological pressure. Much is explained, on the one hand, by a political order, and on the other, by the readiness to fulfill this order. In some periods it was fear of repression, in others it was a desire not to notice the obvious truth in the name of some political hobbies. As we delve deeper into the past and reveal the historical truth, I will try to give my explanations

The degree of lies and the tradition of diverting from the truth were such that for many readers the truth about the origin of their ancestors would be a shock. But the evidence is so indisputable and unambiguous that only a stubborn idiot or a pathological liar would dispute a completely clear truth.

Even at the end of the 19th century, it was clearly possible to state that the origin and history of the Rus people, the Rus state, that is, the past of the ancestors of the Russian people, is not a mystery, but is generally known. And it’s not difficult to build a historical chain of times to understand who we are and where we come from. Another question is that this contradicted political guidelines. Why, I will touch on this below. Therefore, our history never found its true reflection. But sooner or later the truth must be presented.