Which peoples are actually the descendants of the Mongol-Tatars. Which people belong to the Mongolian group? National character and values

Who were the Tatar-Mongols as an ethnic group? Where did the Tatars come from? Was there a Tatar invasion of Rus'? Where did the Tatars go?

M. A. Gaisin

Preface

Adults, sometimes seriously, sometimes jokingly, ask children what they want to be when they grow up. As a child, no one asked me this question, however, around the age of seven, I myself approached my maternal grandfather (Batyev) and said that I wanted to become the most important. He replied that you need to become the Minister of Defense in order to be the most important, although he could say that I am already the most important, only because I am from the Batu family. Why did I remember this episode from my childhood? And I remembered because it turns out that I know the early history of Rus' better than all historians combined. Now I regret that I did not ask my grandfather, but even what I know is enough to say that real story different from the history we are taught in schools and universities.

Who the Tatar-Mongols really were as an ethnic group.

Everyone who went to school more or less knows the generally accepted and at the same time incorrect answer to this question. That is, somewhere in the distant steppes of Mongolia at the beginning of the 13th century, a very strong military horde formed, which captured China and then moved west. The Mongols defeated Khorezm along the way and in 1223 reached the southern borders of Rus'. And on the Kalka River they defeated the Russian army. In the winter of 1237 they invaded Rus' and captured Russian cities. And the Tatar-Mongol yoke began in Rus', which lasted about 250 years.
But modern researchers prove that the Mongols (nomads), due to their small numbers, in principle could not form such a powerful combat-ready horde. Naturally they came to the conclusion that since there was no Tatar-Mongol horde, then there was no Tatar-Mongol invasion to Rus', and accordingly there was no Tatar-Mongol yoke. What happened then? And there was, according to Academician A.T. Fomenko, a Russian horde that controlled the Russian principalities.
That is, there is an obvious contradiction. Chronicles say that there was a Mongol invasion of Rus', but modern researchers say that the Mongols did not have enough people or material resources to invade Rus'.
The author found the key to solving this contradiction in the epic Barsbij, written in 1497.

"Boryn utken zamanda
Bulgarian Belen Saraida,
Zhaek belen Idelde,
Altyn Urda, Ak Urda –
Danly Kipchak Zhirende,
Tatardan Tugan Nugai Ilende
Tuktamysh Digen Khan Buldy"

The author made a translation of this passage of the epic with comments. So, at the beginning, the time of the events described is determined. “Boryn utken zamanda” - that is, in times long past. Then the territory where these events took place is determined. From north to south “Bulgar Belen Sarayda”, that is, from Volga Bulgaria to the capital of the Golden Horde Saray. From east to west “Zhaek Belen Idelde”, that is, between the Ural and Volga rivers. Then the khanates located in this territory are listed. “Altyn Urda, Ak Urda – Danly Kipchak Zhirende” - Golden Horde, White Horde on the glorious land of the Kipchaks. Another khanate is added to the list. “Tatardan Tugan Nugai Ilende” is the Nogai country born from the Tatars. “Tuktamysh Digen Khan Buldy” - there was a khan named Tokhtamysh. The key to understanding the history of Rus' is one line of four words. “Tatardan Tugan Nugai Ilende” is the Nogai country born from the Tatars. To explain why the information in this line is so important, you need to know that modern Tatars for the most part are not descendants of those Tatars who invaded Rus'. And they are descendants of the Kipchaks and Bulgars and were identified as Tatars much later, and then because of their residence in the country of the Tatars - the Golden Horde. Modern researchers conclude from this that there was no Tatar-Mongol invasion of Rus', since the ancestors of modern Tatars did not invade Rus', and there seem to be no other Tatars, then accordingly there was no invasion. But in fact, there were real Tatars, and they themselves identified themselves as Nogai during the collapse of the Golden Horde with the formation of the Nogai Horde. The reader may ask why this information is so important? It is important because the author revealed that the history of the Tatar-Mongols is in fact the history of the Nogais. The name of the Nogai Horde comes from the name of the military leader of the Golden Horde, Nogai. The main population was made up of tribes that were part of Nogai's army. Most of The Nogai warriors were from the Mangyt tribe. Another name for the Nogai Horde is the Mangyt Horde (Mangytsky Yurt). The Nogai language, together with the Kazakh and Karakalpak languages, form the Kipchak-Nogai subgroup in the Kipchak group of Turkic languages. Let's consider the word "mangi", which is translated from Kipchak as "eternal". The rules of word formation from this word in the Western Kipchak language differ from the rules of word formation in the Nogai language. For example: to the question who is he? a Nogai will answer “mangyt”, but plural"mangyttar". To the question who is he (Nogai)? the Kipchak will answer “mangyl”, and in the plural “mangyllar”. The use of the affix “tar” instead of “lar”, the affix “you” instead of “ly” is typical for the Nogais, Kyrgyz and Kazakhs. To invade Rus', the Tatar-Mongols had to pass through the Kipchak steppes. Accordingly, Rus' learned about the invasion of the “Mangyllar Tatars” from the Kipchaks. And in the phonetics of the pronunciation of the Russian language, the phrase “Tatar mangyllar” was transformed into “Tatar-Mongols”. The author came to the surprising conclusion that at that time the word “Mongol” did not mean the Mongolian people, but meant the most combat-ready tribe of the Tatar tribes - “Mangyt”. That is, in fact, only the Tatars invaded Rus'.

Where did the Tatars come from?

This story is directly related to the life story of Genghis Khan. The clan of Genghis Khan's father is Borjigin-kyat. Where kyat (kiyat) is one of the Kipchak (Mangyt) tribes, and Borjigin is a noble family of this tribe. To begin with, the author will identify the territory of residence of the Kipchaks (Mangyts) before the great campaigns. The author found the simplest way to solve this issue. Genghis Khan's eldest son Jochi (Zhoshi) was buried in his homeland while his father was still alive. The mausoleum of Jochi Khan is located on the left bank of the Kara-Kengir River, which flows into the Sarysu River near the Ulytau Mountains. I don’t think that Genghis Khan, who was also buried in his homeland, was buried far from his son’s grave. On the right bank of the Kara-Kengir River, within direct visibility from the Jochi Mausoleum, there is the Alasha Khan Mausoleum. I think that Alasha Khan (unifier khan) is Genghis Khan himself, who spent his entire life unifying the Tatar tribes. Therefore, during life or after death, he could receive the second name Alasha. It is also necessary to take into account that the greatest Mangyt rulers Edigei and Tokhtamysh are also buried here, although they lived their lives thousands of kilometers from these places. The eldest son of Genghis Khan, Jochi, formed his headquarters here, and from here Batu began his campaign to the west. The Sarysu River flows from the Ulytau Mountains towards the Syrdarya. The Aral Sea region, the lower reaches of the Syr Darya and the valley of the Sarysu River were the place of residence of the Kipchaks (Mangyts) at that time. Now Sarysu does not reach the Syrdarya about 200 kilometers and overflows into a lake. At that time it flowed into the Syr Darya. The Sarysu River valley is the northern boundary of the Betpakdala plateau, an elevated plain 300-350 m above sea level. In the south, the plateau is limited by the Chu River, in the west by the Turan Lowland, and in the east by Lake Balkhash. The entire plateau is crossed by dry desert. This desert was the natural border between the Kipchak (Mangyt) Khanate and the Kara Khitan Khanate. Then, on the territory of the Kara Khitan Khanate, there lived numerous and powerful tribes of the Kara Tatars - Juin (Zhyen), Ayribuir, Jalair, Ungirat (name options: Khungirat, Ongirat, Khonkirat, Kungirat, Kungrat), Naiman, Kerait, Merkit, Oirat, Kangly, etc. .d. The phrase “kara Tatars” literally translates as “black Tatars,” but this is an incorrect translation. Since there were also white Tatars, and accordingly the reader may think that there should be a fundamental difference between black and white Tatars. But in reality this is not the case, since the words “black” and “white” in this context do not mean the color of something, but the direction of light. That is, the correct translation of the phrase “kara Tatars” will be “northern Tatars”, and accordingly “ak Tatars” will be “southern Tatars”. Let me give you an example: the river “Ufa” in the Bashkir language is called “Karaidel”, and this does not mean that the river is black, but only that it flows from the north. And the Belaya River received its name from literal translation from the Bashkir name of the Agidel River, although the correct translation would be “southern”, since it flows from the south. Why is the Black Sea called black, although in fact it is blue. Because this name was borrowed from the Turks, and for the Turks this sea is northern and accordingly is called the word “kara”, and the Mediterranean Sea is called white by the Turks because for them it is southern.
In 1161 Temujin (Genghis Khan) was born. The Borjigin-Kiyat clan had a tradition of taking brides from the Ungirates (Kungrats). Genghis Khan's mother and wives and his sons' wives were Ungirat. There were close family relations between the Kyat and Kungrat tribes. Therefore, the heads of the Kyat, Mangyt, Kungrat, Bayly, Tangut and Yidzhan tribes in 1206 chose Temujin as khan and named him Genghis Khan. Average and central Asia(according to Gumilyov) for 1193 (Fig. 1). The territory of residence of the Kypchaks (Mangyts) on the map in the upper left corner. Throughout his life, Genghis Khan was engaged in uniting the neighboring tribes of the Kara-Khitans (Karakitas) and Naimans. And at this time, Khorezm, located in the southwest of the Mangyts, was turning into a huge empire. Khorezmshah Ala ad-Din Tekesh (1172-1200) captured eastern Persia in 1194. Conducts a successful campaign against the Kara-Khitans (Karakitas) and takes Bukhara from them. And his son Ala ad Din Muhammad the second, takes Samarkand and Otrar from the Kara-Khitans (Karakitas). Extends its power to the Ghazna region in southern Afghanistan, subjugates western Persia and Azerbaijan. By 1218, the Khorezm Empire and the Khanate of Genghis Khan became neighbors. Genghis Khan sends 450 trade representatives to Khorezm. In the Khorezm border city of Otrar, the goods brought were confiscated and the traders were killed.
Genghis Khan sends an ambassador to Khorezm with a demand to explain the reason for the murder of his merchants. Sultan of Khorezm Muhammad kills this ambassador too. Genghis Khan holds a kurultai, where he announces preparations for a military campaign against Khorezm. In 1219, Genghis Khan’s troops, having made a difficult transition through the Betpakdala desert, besieged the city of Otrar (Fig. 2). From there, Genghis Khan sent his commanders to different parts of the Khorezm Empire. He himself captures Bukhara and Samarkand. By April 1221, Urgench was taken (Fig. 2). Next, Genghis Khan and his commanders were busy conquering Transoxiana, Khorosan, Central Persia and Afghanistan. And driven by pursuit, the Khorezmshah Muhammad ibn Tekesh fell ill in 1221 and died on the island of Abeskun in the Caspian Sea. And the tumens of Zev and Subegadei, who pursued the Khorezmshah, were given a new task, to conquer the western part of the Khorezmian empire. After completing this task, they went to Transcaucasia and further to the steppes North Caucasus and the Black Sea region. There they defeated the Alans and defeated the united Russian-Polovtsian army on the Kalka River. And we went further to the Volga steppes. But on the Volga they fell into traps set by the Kipchaks and Bulgars. The Tumens of Zev and Subegadei were forced to turn back. They crossed the Volga and in 1224 returned through the steppes to Central Asia (Fig. 2). In 1235, the kurultai decided to attack to the west. In 1235 and early 1236, the assembled Genghisid army was preparing for an offensive. The campaign began with the conquest of the Bashkir tribes. In the fall of 1236, the Genghisid army was under general management son of Jochi Batu concentrated in the Caspian steppes. Batu's army struck the first blow on Volga Bulgaria. Volga Bulgaria was defeated and by the spring of 1237 it was completely conquered. Then the Polovtsians and Alans were defeated. Then the lands of the Burtus, Moksha and Mordovians were captured. Preparations for the winter campaign against Rus' were carried out in the fall of 1237. And in the winter of 1237 the Tatars attacked Rus'.

Where did the Tatars go?

Based on the legends of the Bashkir people and handwritten documents on the history of the Ufa province of the 15th and early 16th centuries, the Russian historian Pyotr Rychkov wrote that on the territory of the city of Ufa there was a large city stretching along the high bank of the Belaya River from the mouth of the Ufa River at a distance of ten miles, in which there was Tura Khan's headquarters. On the Belaya River, where the Dema River flows into, there was a Kungurat fortress on the mountain, and the mountain itself was called Tura-tau. At the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries, a significant number of the population left the territory of Bashkortostan. This phenomenon was associated with two waves of the Shibanid conquest of Central Asia in 1500-1510. It is believed that Uzbek tribes, the so-called nomadic Uzbeks, left the territory of Bashkortostan. It must be said right away that in those days the ethnic definition of “Uzbek” did not apply to the numerous Turkic and Turkified tribes of Central Asia. This happened only later, when the nomadic Uzbeks joined this population, at the same time passing on to them their ethnonym “Uzbek”. This understanding is very important, since this is where many historians begin to get confused. Since these tribes, no matter how Bashkir, the question arose as to who they were then. And they were Tatars. In the work “Mongols and Rus',” the scientist G.V. Vernadsky wrote: “according to Paul Pelio, the name Uzbek (uzbeg) means “master of himself,” that is, “ free man" Neither in European, nor in Russian, nor in Arabic sources is the ethnonym Uzbek mentioned in relation to the people of the Golden Horde in the 13th-14th centuries, and the population of the Golden Horde was considered Tatar. Only in Central Asian chronicles is the population of the Golden Horde designated as Uzbek. Example: Khan Haji-Muhammad in all sources is considered a Tatar khan, except for the Central Asian chronicles, where he is an Uzbek sovereign. Conclusion: the ethnonyms Tatars and Uzbeks are the external names of the peoples of the Golden Horde.
The reader may have questions. Firstly, why is this a large number of the Tatars ended up on the territory of Bashkortostan. Secondly, for what reason did they go to Central Asia?
So, while cities were being built in the Golden Horde in the 14th century, the great conqueror Tamerlane (Timur) was born in Central Asia in 1336, who in 1370 founded the Timurid Empire with its capital in Samarkand (Fig. 3). Genghis Khan divided his power between his heirs into uluses. Over time, the uluses became more and more isolated from each other. Timur set the task of reuniting the lands conquered by Genghis Khan. To achieve this goal, he created an army from almost the same tribes as Genghis Khan - Naimans, Kipchaks, Kiyats, Jalairs and so on. Under him, the descendant of Genghis Khan Suyurgatmysh (1370 - 1388) and his son Mahmud (1388 - 1402) were considered khans, and he himself was content with the title of great emir (leader). Tamerlane believed that it was very honorable to have family relations with the house of Genghisids. Therefore, having become related to the house of the Genghisids, by marrying the daughter of the Genghisid Kazan Khan, Tamerlane added the title gurgan (son-in-law) to his name. At that time, the nomads of the steppe were convinced that power came from God, and accordingly, according to their concepts, it was impossible to become a khan, they could only be born. Therefore, the commanders Nogai, Edigei and Tamerlane, having full power, did not declare themselves khans.
Khan of the Golden Horde Tokhtamysh pursued a hostile policy towards Emir Timur. And Emir Timur made three campaigns against the Khan of the Golden Horde, finally defeating him in 1395. IN last trip The cities of the Golden Horde were subjected to total destruction. The population was partially destroyed, partially driven out to the periphery of the Golden Horde, including the territory of modern Bashkortostan. This time is recorded as the time of a powerful influx of Kipchaks to the west of Bashkortostan. Throughout the 15th century, internecine wars raged between the Genghisids in the territories of the Great Steppe. At the end of the 15th century, discontent began to brew among the nomadic nobility of the steppe that power in the lands of Genghis Khan in Central Asia illegally belonged to the Timurids. Sheybani Khan expressed this dissatisfaction in his letter to the Kazakh Sultan Kasym. In this letter, Sheybani Khan asks for an army to help, so that the descendants of Genghis Khan can return the lands of Turkestan, which now belong to the descendants of Emir Timur, and thereby return the former glory to the Genghisids. Sheibani Khan's army consisted of almost the same tribes that Genghis Khan had - Mangyts, Kiyats, Kungrats, Naimans, Uighurs, Tanguts and so on. As a result, the Shibanid conquests of Central Asia occurred in 1500-1510. The Timurids, for the most part, were physically destroyed, and power again passed to the Genghisids.
The next exodus of the Nogai (Tatars) from the lands of Bashkortostan is recorded in the shezher (history) of the Yurmaty tribe. For three years (1543-1545) there were very harsh winters. There were no horses and sheep, the grain did not sprout at all. Many people found themselves hungry and naked. The Nogai gathered and held a council: “Our ancestors came here from the Kuban for land and water, but it turned out that the winter cold was worse than the midday heat.” And the council decided to return to Kuban. And an innumerable horde of Nogais migrated to Kuban. After some time, the last remaining three hundred Nogais with their clans also migrated to Kuban. The remaining people called themselves Ishtyaks and enjoyed life on the empty lands left by the Nogais.

Conclusion. Firstly, the Tatar-Mongol invasion of Rus' was actually a Tatar-Mangyt invasion. Secondly, the Mangyts (Mangyls) were not Mongols, but Kipchaks. Thirdly, the events that resulted in the invasion of Rus' took place not in Mongolia, but in the central part of Kazakhstan and Central Asia.

Literature

Wikipedia. Free encyclopedia. Internet.

Chinese chroniclers, describing the tribes that lived north of China in the Mongolian steppe, called them “Tatars.” However, the Tatars were not a single steppe people, but were divided into 3 branches. These were “white”, “black” and “wild” Tatars.

The "White" Tatars or Onguts lived in the southern steppe regions and were subordinate to the Manchu Kinh Empire in the 12th century. Their task was to protect the country's borders. For this they received high fee and lived prosperously: they wore silk clothes, acquired porcelain dishes and other foreign utensils.

The "Black" Tatars lived in the open steppe north of the Gobi Desert. These people obeyed their khans and deeply despised the “white” Tatars, who exchanged their independence and freedom for silk rags and porcelain dishes. The “black” Tatars herded cattle, and the latter fed them and dressed them in clothes made from tanned skins.

The “wild” Tatars lived north of the “blacks” and also despised the latter. The “savages” lacked even the rudiments of statehood. They obeyed the elders in the family, and if such submission became a burden to the young and energetic steppe inhabitants, they could secede. These people were engaged in hunting, fishing and valued freedom most of all.

From this it can be seen that the tribes of the Mongolian steppe had different behavioral stereotypes. But in addition to the Tatars, Mongols also lived in the steppe regions. They lived in Eastern Transbaikalia. In the 11th-12th centuries, there were several Mongolian clans in the forest-steppe tracts north of the Onon River.

Tribes inhabiting the Mongolian steppe in the 11th-12th centuries

Keraits roamed along the Selenga and Tole rivers in the central regions of Mongolia. They had elected khans who received their high positions at the will of their fellow tribesmen. The Keraits lived in kurens - this is when many yurts were placed together, surrounded by carts and guarded by warriors. This people, unlike its neighbors, adopted Nestorian Christianity in 1009 and became extremely devout.

In the foothills of Altai, to the west of the Keraits, the Naiman lived. There were 8 clans in this tribe. The Keraits were descendants of the Khitans, whom the Manchus forced out of their former camps. The Merkits lived near the southern shores of Lake Baikal. And in Sayano-Altai lived the Oirat tribes.

All the tribes of the Mongolian steppe were at enmity with each other. But the conflicts were local in nature and represented border skirmishes. In general, the life of the steppe inhabitants was quite prosperous and satisfying. She walked among the wild nature in daily labors and clashes with neighbors. The Mongols and Jurchens (Manchus) were considered the most warlike among these peoples. They have traditionally been at odds with each other.

The Manchus conquered the Khitan kingdom in Northern China and created their own empire. And then one day a fortuneteller came to the Manchu Emperor Bogd Khan and predicted the death of the Manchus from the nomadic Mongols. The emperor decided to resist the strengthening of the Mongols and began annually sending military detachments to their camps. They killed the men, and brought the women and children to China and sold them into slavery. The Chinese willingly bought captives to work on plantations.

To protect themselves from Manchu raids, the Mongol tribes united and elected a khan. The first such khan was Khabul Khan. He ruled in the 30-40s of the 12th century. Under him, the Manchu troops suffered a crushing defeat. But Khabul Khan died in 1149, and the Mongol tribal union fell apart.

At the same time, the Manchu Empire strengthened. In their fight against the steppe people, the Jurchens showed pathological cruelty. They nailed captured soldiers to wooden boards and in this form they were exposed to the southern sun. People died in terrible agony.

During those same years, serious disagreements began among the Kerait tribe. The rightful heir Toghrul was handed over to the Merkit by his father's enemies. The father freed his son, but he was captured by the Tatars. He escaped from the Tatars and took the power that belonged to him. However, the opposition in the Kerait horde was extremely strong, and Toghrul had to flee the country every now and then. At the same time, the Naiman, who lived in the western regions of Mongolia, entered into an alliance with the Kerait opposition and the Manchus.

It might seem that the tribes of the Mongolian steppe would never be able to unite their forces to defend against their enemies. However, the future showed that this was not the case. At the beginning of the 13th century, Genghis Khan united all the steppe peoples under his rule and began great campaigns of conquest.

Alexey Starikov

There is evidence that before the era of Genghis Khan, most Mongolian nomads had Caucasian features. Even Genghis Khan himself was described as having blond hair, eyes and a beard. But in the process of conquest, the Mongols mixed with the peoples of the lands they conquered, which contributed to the formation of new ethnic groups. First of all, these are the Mongols themselves, then the Crimean, Siberian and Kazan Tatars, Bashkirs, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, partly Uzbeks, Turkmen, Ossetians, Alans, Circassians. Then the Ural Khanty and Mansi, Siberian indigenous peoples - Buryats, Khakass, Yakuts. The genotype of all these peoples contains features that are commonly called Mongoloid. It is also possible that the blood of the Mongol-Tatars flows in modern Japanese, Chinese, and Koreans. However, researchers believe that Tuvinians, Altaians and Khakassians, for example, have a type of appearance closer to Caucasian than that of eastern peoples. And this can serve as an indirect confirmation of the “Caucasian” ancestors of the Mongol-Tatars. There is also a version that many European nations have Mongolian roots. These are Bulgarians, Hungarians and even Finns.

There is a people on the territory of Russia whose representatives consider themselves direct descendants of Genghis Khan - these are the Kalmyks. They claim that their ancestors were Genghisids - the elite at the court of Genghis Khan. Some Kalmyk families allegedly descend from Genghis Khan himself or his closest relatives. Although, according to another version, the Kalmyk cavalry simply served the Genghisids. But who can say for sure now?

Thus, the descendants of the Mongol-Tatars can be scattered not only throughout Asia, but also in Europe. Nationality is generally a rather arbitrary concept.

Mongols. Who are they and where did they come from?

Let's begin to carefully understand what textbooks and historians write to us about the Tatar-Mongol invasion.

Karamzin wrote "Moguls".

The Russians first encounter the Mongols if you look at the PVL, on the Kalka River. How did this happen?

The Novgorod chronicler writes: “Because of our sin, the nations came into being unknown, but no one knows who they are, and when they came out, and their language, and what tribe they are, and what their faith is. And they are called Tatars, and others say: Taurmeni (Turkmen, Tauromen?) and others Pechenesi... God alone knows who they are, and how they came out” (Polevoy, T. 2, p. 502. with reference to New Years, l. 98).

This news was reported to the Russians by the Polovtsians. Nobody knows their language?! But the Mongols are negotiating with the Russian princes. Through a translator? In V. Yan’s novel “Batu” an interpreter appears, but in the chronicles there is not a word about translators. This means that the Mongol language is still known! Most likely, we are not dealing with the total knowledge about the Mongols who appeared in the lands of the Polovtsians, but with the knowledge about them (it would be better to say the absence of such) of a particular Novgorod chronicler or his entourage. “The chronicler here conveys only rumors and rumors. He absolutely cannot say anything for sure, modestly excluding himself from the circle of “wise men” who understand books, and assigning himself the role of a simple recorder of the calamity (? - A.G.) events" (Grekov, Yakubovsky, 1950. P. 201).

The Ipatiev Chronicle only says about the Tatars that they are atheists: “In the summer of 6732, an unheard-of army came, the atheists of Moab, recommended to Tatarva, came to the land of Polovtsian. Konchak, who became a Polovtsian of Yurgia, was more powerful than all the Polovtsians, but he could not resist and ran against him, and suffered many beatings, but to the Dnieper River the Tatars returned to his vezha, but the Polovtsians who fled to the Rous land, who hunted them down by the Rus prince, even If it doesn’t hurt us, we will be cut off now, but in the morning you will be cut off...” (Ipatiev Chronicle, 1998. pp. 740–741). That's all. But in Rus' at that time there were plenty of pagans.

The Kiev chronicler, unlike the Novgorod one, clearly knows who the Tatars are, since he immediately reminds the reader that “these are the Tatars” (it’s easy for the reader to forget, because there are a lot of different people and tribes around). This chronicler's awareness is understandable; events are happening literally right next door. In hundreds of years, Tatars will be understood as completely different people, or rather a very specific people.

Let us note that the chronicler about the Tatars says this: “recommendations to Tatar.” How is the word “recommendations” translated? The Old Slavonic “reku” (instead of “u” the letter “us” is written) means “to say”: therefore, “sayable or called Tatars.” Modern Polish “rzekomy” is translated as “apparent, imaginary”, and “rzekomo” is “supposedly”. Maybe they actually mean “river Tatars”, from the words “rzeka = river”? The assumption is not so fantastic, since among the Tatars there were wanderers - living along the banks of the Don (the wanderers became allies of the Mongols when they appeared on the Don (Gumilev, 1992b. p. 339)).

Question: why are we so sure that the chronicler uses the word “Tatars” to name the people, and not in any other sense? For example, the Tatars are just cavalry. Whose? Godless Moabites. At that time they knew who we were talking about. Just as in the white newspapers during the Civil War, they were fully aware of who the “godless Bolsheviks” were.

Well, finally, let’s ask - who are the “Moabites”? These are the inhabitants of the country located to the east of the Dead Lake. The title is about Moab, “the son of Lot by his eldest daughter. Moab was the ancestor of the Moabites… The Moabites were severely punished for mistreating the Israelites…. They were given over to idolatry, which is why some of the prophets turned to them with their denunciations and prophecies...” ( Bible Encyclopedia, 1991. p. 479).

So, the chronicler (and this is most likely a monk, that is, a person knowledgeable in Christian teaching) could not just call the Tatars Moabites. It had a deep meaning for him. Which one?

The Moabites were severely cursed - until the tenth generation they would not enter the society of the Lord “forever” (Bible. Deut. XXIII, 3–6); Moreover, “the Lord has delivered the enemies of the Moabites into your (Israelite) hands. A.G.)… And at that time they beat the Moabites about ten thousand people... and no one escaped” (Bible. Judges. III, 12-30). “And he struck the Moabites, and measured them with a rope, laying them on the ground... And the Moabites became David's slaves, paying tribute” (Bible. II Sam. XIII, 2). Could the chronicler monk simply call the unknown warriors who came from the Far East (as historians say) Moabites, a people with such a “glorious” past? And they beat them by the thousands, and they were slaves paying tribute...

But it is even more interesting to find out what the prophets were talking about when addressing the Moabites. The very essence of Isaiah’s prophecy: “in three years, counting the years of mercenaries, the greatness of Moab will be destroyed with all its great multitude, and the remnant will very small and insignificant” (Bible. Isaiah. XV, XVI). “Give wings to Moab so that he can fly away; its cities will be desolate, because there will be no one to live in them” (Bible. Jeremiah, XLVTII, 9).

This means that the Tatars only attacked and beat the Russians (i.e., the Kyiv, Volyn, etc. princes), but the chronicler already knows that their death is not far off. It was possible to write like this only three hundred years later, after the “end of the Tatar-Mongol yoke.” The Ipatiev Chronicle ends in 1292, therefore, we have before us a text edited no earlier than the 16th century. Let us note that in the Novgorod Chronicle the Tatars are called godless Hagaryans. But, again, the Hagarites are allies of the Moabites in wars with the Israelites, which were unsuccessful, i.e. the chronicler knows the result of the wars with the Tatars.

True, the option remains that the Tatars are well-known “sinners”, and another fight is described between the southern princes, not only the Rurikovichs, but also others who turned out to be uninteresting for the authors of numerous traditional textbooks on Russian history. In this case, the application of the label “Moabites” to old and familiar opponents is understandable. They beat God’s chosen people, that is, “us,” and God will punish them...

Greater Tartaria according to Lyzlov

Historical events associated with the era of the “Tatar-Mongol invasion” and which attracted our attention unfold in the vast of Eastern Europe. We imagine these spaces as we learned about them in geography lessons. But an eyewitness who lived and described them in the 13th century imagined something completely different. Let us turn, for example, to the description of the “place of events” by the ancient Russian historian A.I. Lyzlov, who lived quite recently, three hundred years ago. Whatever the witness, he is still closer to the times of Batu than we are.

In the 17th century, in “Scythian History,” A.I. Lyzlov presents the Tatars as part of the Scythian people, which also includes the Slavs.

“Scythia is named after Scythian, the son of Hercules, and there are two things: one (the first. - A.G.) European, where we live, that is, Moscow, Russians (Ukrainians and Belarusians. - A.G.), Lithuania, Volokhi and Tatar European. The second is Asian, in which all the Scythian peoples live, sitting east from midnight. These Asian Scythians multiplied greatly and were nicknamed by various names. Unite the Tauros, like those at Mount Taurus (Mount Ararat! As can be seen from Lyzlov’s words on the next page. - A.G.) live, ini Agatyrsi, also esedoni...and Maasgeti, Arismani, Sakevi or Saga.

All these Scythian peoples are hidden and unknown to the Greeks and Latins. The Scythian borders are west of the Don River [and Boter, the describer of the whole world, believes from the Volga, which is more appropriate to be]. To the east of the sun to the borders of the Khiy, like India. From noon from the sea of ​​Meotskago, that is, Azovskago, and Caspian Sea, that is, Khvalisskago. At midnight even to the ocean of the Scythian Iceland.

It is divided into four parts. One has everything within the Horde. The second Zagatai and all the peoples like them under Usson and the Lopskaya desert. The third will control China, and the hedgehog is found in the mentioned desert, and the Khin state. The fourth contains countries little known to us, such as Belgi-an, Argon, Arsater, Ania.

But from five hundred years and Bolyn, when the Scythian people, having left the country called Mongal in their language, its inhabitants were called Mongails or Mongaili, having settled some states..., changing their name, calling themselves Tartar, from the Tartar River or from their many peoples, they themselves accept or hear more kindly” (Lyzlov, 1990, pp. 8–9).

So, Scythia includes almost the entire territory of the USSR. The Caucasian peoples "Tauros" are also Scythians. It is important to note that for A.I. Lyzlov all Scythians have the same genetic roots. They all have the same ancestor - Scythian, son of Hercules. Moreover, the Tatars are on a par with other Scythians: Moscow, Lithuanian and Russian.

However, A.I. Lyzlov cannot say about the Mongols Nothing, except that these are Scythians who changed their name. In any case, they accept the name “Tatars”, and they know that they are called that.

Historian E.V. Chistyakova condescendingly writes in the appendix to Lyzlov’s book: “The author could not, of course, at that time resolve such questions as the origin of the Tatar-Mongols and the reasons for their expansion. But he thought about them, studied the various opinions of Western European chroniclers and Polish historians...” (Lyzlov, 1990. P. 362). Another historian, Yu. A. Mytsyk, however, makes the following note to the above words about the “Mongails”: “The question of the origin of the Mongol-Tatars is very complex and has not been fully clarified by modern science. In Chinese sources, the Mongols and Tatars are called “da-da”. There are versions that the Mongols are one of the Tatar tribes and, conversely, the tribal name Tatars was given by the Mongols to the conquered Turkic peoples, etc.” (Lyzlov, 1990. P. 448). Thus, who the Mongols and Tatars are is a mystery to modern science, despite three hundred years of research! Maybe they were looking in the wrong place. But since students have to memorize something, the textbooks showed them a grandiose picture of the global empire of Genghis Khan.

Maybe from the further text by A.I. Lyzlov, something can be found out about the Mongols? Maybe you didn't read it carefully? After all, A.I. Lyzlov used a lot of Russian and foreign sources, some of which have been lost. Well, let's quote further.

“And the smaller half of Scythia, even above the Sea of ​​Assia, is called Great Tartary. The great Tartary is separated from Scythia by Imaus by a great and famous mountain: the hedgehog from one country is Tartaria, and the hedgehog from this country is Scythia. There is a stone mountain called Kaukaz, near the Khvalissky sea. On the other side, from noon and the east, they are separated by the great mountain, Bykova river, in Latin - Mons Taurus, on which Noah’s ark first stood after the flood” (Lyzlov, 1990, p. 9).

The historian Yu. A. Mytsyk, trying to connect the textbook and A. I. Lyzlova, explains the name of Mount Imaus as follows: “This apparently means the Urals.” Famously! It seems to be a hypothesis - “apparently” - but the school discipline and psychology absorbed with blood drives into the consciousness - “of course, the Ural Mountains, why bother there!” And immediately the Mongols become attached to their “ historical homeland" - modern Mongolia, since further A. I. Lyzlov writes:

“About these Tatars mongaileh, like the living in a smaller part of Scythia, which from them was called Tartaria, many famous historical deeds were written, as if I were glorified throughout the world” (Lyzlov, 1990. P. 9). By the way, the Russians called the Ural Mountains the Stone Belt.

Since the smaller part of Scythia, Great Tartary, lies beyond the Ural Mountains, then the Mongols find themselves in modern Mongolia. Is not it? Let's return to Lyzlov's words. Two more mountains are mentioned that outline the locations of Greater Tartary: Taurus and Caucasus. The first, since Noah is mentioned, is Ararat. The second is Kazbek, because “close to the Khvalynsk Sea,” i.e. the Caspian. Looks like Imaus is Elbrus! It marks the border of Great Tartary in the north, and in the south (noon) - Ararat.

Thus, the homeland of the Mongols is in the Caucasus. Rave!? To check, let's look for Minor Tataria. Since there is a “big” one, there must also be a “small” one. Little Tataria really existed on maps, even in the 18th century. On the Western European map of 1755 it was found by G.V. Nosovsky and A.T. Fomenko (Nosovsky, Fomenko. Empire, p. 128). It was located in the south of modern Ukraine. The map is in French, so Little Tartaria is indicated on it as Petite Tartaria (petit ( fr.) - small). So Small and Big Tataria were nearby, which is quite natural. How can Caucasians be Tatar-Mongols! Well, first of all, Scythians, we will adhere to the terminology of A.I. Lyzlov, and secondly, remember that the Tauros who lived near Ararat are Asian Scythians for him.

It’s confusing that Mount Kaukas is Kazbek. But then A.I. Lyzlov mentions the country of Seruanu, or Servana, “near the Caspian Sea,” which has the city of Derbent, “which stands above the gates of Mount Kaukazu at a single close path between two mountains” (Lyzlov, 1990, p. 35). Enough?

Finally, let us remember that the “Tatars Mongailei” received the name “Tatars” after the Tartar River. Let's look in the Caucasus. You won’t have to search for long, since a modern river with the name Terter flows through the territory of Azerbaijan! Tributary of the Kura.

The Caucasus, as the place of residence in ancient times of the Rus, i.e. Scythians, is also indicated in the book (Ayvazyan, 1997). Moreover: “The Rus live along the Kira River, which flows into the Gurgan Sea.” Gurgan is the Caspian Sea; the river flowing into it could be the Kura” (Pervukhin, p. 33). What is it like!? This is from the Book of Josippon, a 10th-century Jewish chronograph.

Let us remember the place where we interrupted the quotation of the “Scythian History”. We were talking about the famous affairs of the Mongols, then called the Tatars. About the “famous” deeds of the Mongails, if we mean the exploits of Genghis Khan from textbooks, this historian does not write anything further in his “Scythian History”. The great Genghis empire did not deserve it, i.e. Scythian in the understanding of A.I. Lyzlov, the right to get on the pages of his book. More than strange. However, Tatar-Mongol yoke nor was due respect given. But it is better not to interrupt the quotation. So:

Rice. 4. Khazaria

“About these Tatars Mongailekh, who lived in the smaller part of Scythia, which from them was called Tartaria, many famous deeds were written by historians, as if they were becoming famous throughout the world. These are nothing special except wives, and children, and weapons in name, and they began nothing, even if it were in vain for them. There was no money, they knew less than gold and silver, they only fulfilled their needs in barter. For, I say, where there is gold in honor, there is desire, and where there is desire, there is love of money in honor, and where there is love of money, there is deception, and such<людей>It’s convenient to overcome with silver.

They have nothing better than glory, and nature has given them much to their rough nature. First, out of sheer surprise, Justin writes about them, as if they were rude without sciences, they did not know evil, so the Greeks, from great sciences, were full of intemperance. If only the Christian people had such measuredness in themselves as they, not just the earth, but also the sky would love them.

They were never defeated, but they were victorious everywhere. King Darius was expelled from Scythia; and killed the glorious autocrat Cyrus, Alexander the Great, hetman, in the name of Zopirin, defeated with his army...” (Lyzlov, 1990. pp. 9–10).

As we see, A.I. Lyzlov’s Mongols shunned gold. But whether we are talking about the victories of the “ancient Scythians” over Darius and other “ancients”, or whether these are the famous deeds of the Mongols, is difficult to judge.

From the “Mongail Tatars” came the Crimean, Perekop, Belgorod, Ochakov Tatars and all the peoples living near the Sea of ​​​​Azov. In other words, the peoples of Little Tatary, i.e., the south of Ukraine and the Azov region, have roots in Great Tatary in the Caucasus. But further it is written that “the historians of these Tatars imagine that they were a Jewish tribe, as Boter famously writes about this in his books” (Lyzlov, 1990, p. 13).

Commentary by historian Yu. A. Mytsyk: “D. Boter’s opinion about the origin of the Tatars from Jews taken captive by the Assyrians is without foundation” (Lyzlov, 1990, p. 449). Said as cut off. And why? For some reason, German Jews were going to provide military assistance to Batu’s Tatars (see lecture 7).

Jews in ancient times were people who professed Judaism. And these are not ethnic Jews at all. For example, the Khazars, the inhabitants of the south of Eastern Europe (Volga, Don, Kuban - see Fig. 4, i.e. the inhabitants of Great Tatary according to A.I. Lyzlov) were Jews, i.e. Jews for A.I. Lyzlov. The Jews in ancient Kyiv were most likely Slavs, Russians, who chose the Jewish faith (Bushkov, 1997, pp. 60–66). Tolerant Horde Rus' also had Jewish troops, composed of descendants of the Khazars and also of Jewish Slavs. So it is quite possible to detect a Jewish trace in the history with the Mongols. The descendants of the Khazars are wanderers; so they were in the first ranks of the Tatar army, driving the proud Rurikovichs across the steppes. But we'll talk about this a little later.

How did the Jews appear in the Caucasus? “...at the age of one and a half hundred, as Esdra writes, the scourge of the Jews, having gone beyond the mountains of Persia and Med, came to the country of Arsater. Wherever this country of Arsater is located, writers speculate differently about it. Netsy is confirmed. like it was a country Colchian, now called Mingrelia(Mingrelia is a country near the Khvalis Sea, close to Persia. - approx. A.I. Lyzlov) ... the majority of writers say: for Arsater, the country of the region is Belgiana, but by no means the Jews, under the name Tatar, died in the year 1200 from the incarnation of God, during the great Kingis , who established the kingdom of China..." (Lyzlov, 1990, p. 13).

And the fact that the Jews-Mongols-Tatars during the time of Genghis Khan, according to A.I. Lyzlov, founded the kingdom of China is simply wonderful evidence in favor of non-traditional versions of the Horde-Rus. China, as A. T. Fomenko discovered, is by no means modern China. The latter is called China by almost all European peoples. For the Russian people, China was located - not long before A. I. Lyzlov began writing his book - in the south of Russia (A. T. Fomenko even identifies China with Russia). Most likely this is ancient name The Golden Horde or, more precisely, the Trans-Volga Horde.

How did it happen that the Mongols-Tatars (or “Mongailians”) went to Europe (Great Tataria for A.I. Lyzlov is the Asian part of Scythia)?

These people were imposed with tribute by a certain Unkam, but then multiplied (which worried Unkam) and began to look for a place in the sun. “After a number of years, they chose King Hingis from among themselves, and with blessings of victory and courage they gave him the name Great. For that one, having left his country from the incarnation of the Word of God 1162 with a cruel army, conquered new regions under him, with great strength, with great glory” (Lyzlov, 1990, p. 14).

(N.A. Morozov derived the word “Mongol” from the Greek “megalion” = great. - Genghis Khan bore the nickname Great; naturally, his warriors could be called great, i.e. Mongols).

“After the death of this Hiigis, his heirs in a short time were so terrible to all the eastern countries, not even at midnight, with the destruction of countless peoples, as if all of Europe trembled from them.”

As we see, the Mongols were feared in the east, north, and west. China, i.e. China, somehow falls out, although the textbooks talk about the conquest of China (China) by Genghis Khan. In the south, the Tatars are fighting in Persia and going on a campaign against India (this country does not have to be modern India). Where did they come from? “With a countless multitude of his people from Tataria, from those stone mountains of Caucasia, and from the great Imaus mountain, and from the Eutean fields, and came to India, where the king of India, serving him, killed and regions like him, such and others with the Euphrates River and the Sea of ​​Perekata are found captive and devastated....” (Lyzlov, 1990. P. 15). As we see, they moved south from the Caucasus, from their native places; and India is more like Persia - first they beat the “king of India”, who had servants (maybe during the time of Unkam), and then they got carried away and moved even further south, to wash their boots in the Persian Gulf. In general, even in the time of A.I. Lyzlov, India often meant a country distant from Rus'. For example, at the end of the book, by India, A.I. Lyzlov means a place with the port city of Aden (Lyzlov, 1990. P. 243). And this seems to be Arabia!

Sources about the Tatar-Mongols

If the reader wants to gain “real, authentic knowledge” about the bloody Mongol conquerors, then he needs to turn only to the sources listed below and read only them and nothing more. Everything else is literary processing, rewriting and retelling.

So, the sources are as follows (Ilovaisky. Formation of Rus', 1996. P. 712):

Chinese chroniclers;

Persian chronicler Rashid Eddin (= Rashid ad-Din, lived in the 14th century);

Buddhist-Mongol Chronicle Altan Tobchi (golden abbreviation);

Armenian sources (“History of the Mongols of the monk Magakia. XIII century”, 1871);

Western travelers of the 13th century: Plateau Carpini, Aspelin, Rubrukvis, Marco Polo;

Byzantine historians: Nikephoros Gregor, Akropolita, Pahi-mer;

Western chroniclers, for example, Matvey of Paris.

I admit, I haven’t seen everything, I haven’t read everything. But I will introduce the reader to the pearls from Rashid ad-Din and Matvey of Paris later. About Plateau Carpini, Rubruk and Marco Polo - just below. Well, about the fact that the “ancient Chinese people” do not have written documents written earlier than the 16th century. (!), historians prefer not to think (Bushkov, 1997, p. 191).

What did Genghis Khan look like?

Answer: “He... was distinguished by his very tall stature, large forehead and long beard” (Ilovaisky. Formation of Rus', 1996. P. 499).

“Portrait” of Genghis Khan, shown in Fig. 5 and taken from the book (Erenzhen Khara-Davan, “Genghis Khan as a commander and his legacy” - http://kulichki.rambler.ru/~gumilev/HD/index.html), probably agrees with this description of the great conqueror. It depicts the "classical Mongol" from the textbooks. Looking at him, no one would think that Genghis Khan was not an Asian from the Mongolian steppes.

Rice. 5. Temuji (1167–1227), who received the title of Genghis Khan at the kurultai in 1201. Reproduction from a painting in the residence of Prince Ke La Shen, a descendant of Genghis Khan

But who said that this is a genuine portrait of the legendary conqueror? Why ask stupid questions: since there is a sign at the bottom “Genghis Khan”, it means “Genghis Khan”. From you, dear reader, all that is required is believe, that somewhere out there in their offices, wise professionals have absolutely definitely established this. I would like to conduct a survey among certified historians: who and when established what is in Fig. 5 depicts Genghis Khan?

I'm afraid that few people will say anything intelligible.

Appearance of the Mongols

Textbooks, historical novels and especially films have assigned the Montolo-Tatars the image of a narrow-eyed, black-haired, wild and evil nomad. Is this true?

“According to the testimony of contemporaries, the Mongols, unlike the Tatars, were a tall, bearded, fair-haired and blue-eyed people” (Gumilyov, 1992, p. 74). No, these Tatars should look like “clumsy people, with short legs, far apart eyes, without upper eyelashes, with sparse hair on their beard and mustache” (Ilovaisky. Formation of Rus', 1996. P. 499). D.I. Ilovaisky is one of those who wrote textbooks, so in his description you recognize the Tatar-Mongols who attacked Rus', familiar from hundreds of films? Alas, in films we are shown modern Mongols.

Why are modern Mongols different from their “ancestors”? Gumilev explains: “Their descendants acquired their modern appearance through mixed marriages with the neighboring numerous short, black-haired and black-eyed tribes” (Gumilev, 1992, p. 74). But where did such strange “blond-haired” and “bearded” people come from in the east? L.N. Gumilyov is silent. But still, the historical appearance of the short-legged and beardless Tatars, recreated, apparently in scientific torment, dominates him too. He writes: “However, even the most ancient Mongols had nothing in common with the blondes who inhabited Europe. European travelers of the 13th century. they did not find any similarities between the Mongols and themselves” (Gumilyov, 1992, p. 74).

Who does he mean? Marco Polo? Was he there? There are a lot of facts suggesting that he had never been to China, the trip to which made him so famous (Nosovsky, Fomenko, 1996). Then, probably, these are the famous travelers Plateau Carpini and Rubruk. But V.N. Tatishchev notes: “The traveling preachers, Karpein, Rubrik, etc., although they tell of their journeys far and farther to the borders of the Chinese, but clearly see, one can hardly believe that they were far from Kiev or the Don, but wrote according to stories, for the crossing of the Volga, Yaik, Aral Sea and the cities through which they needed to travel were necessary. like Bolgor, Turekstan, Tashkent, etc., are not mentioned” (Tatishchev, T. 1, pp. 233–234). By the way, A. Bushkov’s book contains a lot of funny “testimonies” of the “great” travelers Marco Polo, Carpini and Rubruk. Read it, it's good to clear your head.

So, the ancestors of today's Mongols are tall, bearded, fair-haired and blue-eyed. I’m tempted to say “white people.” Let’s make a short digression and cite the legend of the white king, so popular among the “descendants of Genghis Khan.”

Legend of the White Tsar

(From Badmaev’s note to Alexander III on the tasks of Russian policy in the Asian East, see. http://smtp.redline.ru/~arctogai/badmaev.htm#8).

“Now I will try to present, as clearly as possible, the significance of the white tsar for the entire East, based on legendary and historical data, and, I hope, it will be clear to every Russian person why the white tsar is so popular in the East, and how easy it will be for him to use the results the centuries-old policy of their ancestors.

One Buryat ancestor, named Sheldu Zangi, fled from China. 20,000 families after the conclusion of the treaty, but was caught and executed by the Manchu authorities, on the basis of Article X, around 1730, on the border. Before his execution, he gave a speech in which he said that if his severed head flew towards Russia (which happened), then all of Mongolia would come into the possession of the white king.

The Mongols insist that under the eighth khutukt of Urga they will become subjects of the white king. The present khutukta is considered the eighth. The Urga Khutukta is considered a saint by the Mongols, like the Dalai Lama, and has enormous influence on all of Mongolia.

They also expect the appearance of a white banner from Russia in Mongolia in the seventh century after the death of Genghis Khan, who died in 1227.

Buddhists consider the white king to be the reincarnation of one of their goddesses, Dara-ehe, the patroness of the Buddhist faith. She is reborn as a white king in order to soften the morals of the inhabitants of the northern countries.

Legendary tales are much more important in these countries than actual phenomena.

Oppressed by the bureaucratic world of the Manchu dynasty, the Mongols naturally cling tightly to the traditions that promise them a better future, and look forward to its arrival.”

What are the roots of this strange legend that connects the future of the Buryat-Mongols with the white king who will come from Russia? Didn't the fair-haired and blue-eyed Mongols of Genghis Khan come to Mongolia from the west at one time?