The strangeness of the official historical version of the Battle of Kulikovo, regarding the place of its holding, has been noted by more than one generation of independent researchers who are inclined to check the myths of official history from the standpoint of elementary logic. It is then that the far-fetchedness of these myths begins to show its essence more and more clearly.
For example, what the researcher of alternative history A. Kungurov writes on this topic in his book "Kievan Rus was not":
So, many independent researchers have already expressed their opinion that official history is not a science and that it is written by the winners. So is it worth to blindly believe in illogical and hardly believable myths from history textbooks? Well, the "Kulikovskoye Pole" indicated by scientists has not yet been found any material evidence that there once was a major battle or battle. This means that the version of Academician Fomenko, despite the heart-rending cries of paid servants of parasites and the screaming of them by people who are completely devoid of independent thinking and the foundations of elementary logic, is more plausible and factually and logically grounded.
michael101063 ©