Almost all peoples, except for the people of God, begin their history with some kind of fairy tale, putting in the head of it the ancestor who gave the people his name.
But Russian history began from a period when Russia was a huge link, a strong people, already inhabiting several hundred thousand square miles; rich in trade and industry and divided into two main states, except for several small ones, of which one - the southern or Kiev - a thunderstorm for Byzantium - became orphaned, having lost its rulers, and the other - the northern, or Novgorod, having outlived the centuries of the republic, was already subjected to its usual consequences, those. to general disunity and perfect discord in the affairs of government, and to save her identity, she threw herself into the arms of the monarchical power, calling on the ruler - the Prince from her tribal people.
There is no longer a mythological person who was placed as the ancestor of the people; there are no fabulous giants with magic weapons; there is no she-wolf-educator, Jupiter or Pluto, or any amphibious monster is not placed in the forefathers. - The thread of Russian history begins with the period when Russia is already a huge political body, which testifies both to its enormity and its discord that it existed for many centuries before this period.
This conclusion is not based on fiction or speculation, but on facts that have been erased, obscured by the idle talk of some Western historians; it is based on inferences from natural laws by which kingdoms and peoples are formed, rise and fall, and on a rigorous critical analysis of the legends of the ancients.
The facts that serve as the basis for the creation of the most ancient Russian history lay hidden for a long time, not analyzed, not considered and not passed through the crucible of sound and impartial criticism, just as Herculanus hid under the ashes for several centuries. Meanwhile, the history of ancient Slavic Russia is so rich in facts that everywhere there are traces of it, woven into the life of all European peoples, with a rigorous analysis of which Russia will move forward by itself and show all the ramifications of this world's greatest tribe.
Although the path to this, in its vastness, is rather difficult, it is already somewhat familiar; Katanchich, Venelin, Shaffarik, Savelyev-Rostislavich and many others have started along it, and - let's say with gratitude - not without success. Some German historians also conscientiously dealt with Russian history, but they rarely find in one person knowledge of all the main Slavic dialects and the changes that have taken place in them over the centuries from the internal development of the word and from neighboring influence, as well as their little acquaintance with character, morals, customs, domestic life and the internal movement of the Slavic world, complicated this matter.
We will not talk a lot about those who made it their duty to humiliate everything that pertains to the Slavs, especially to the Russ; these unscrupulous persons include: Bayer, Müller, Schlözer. Gebgardi, Parrot, Galling, Georgi and a whole phalanx of their followers. They all Russian, they adopted the characteristic of their tribe and even attempted to take away from the Slavs-Russ not only their glory, greatness, power, wealth, industry, trade and all the good qualities of the heart, but even their tribal name - the name of the Russ, known from ancient times as Slavic not only to all the tribes of Asia, but also to the Israelites from the time of their coming to the promised land. And among them the Russ are at the head of not only the Romans, but also the ancient Greeks - as their progenitors.
Promotional video:
However, we will not allow them to appropriate our dear and to be magnified by someone else's strength, glory, power and knowledge! Let us take away from them with arguments the facts that they so forcibly timed to the history of their ancestors, having robbed the history of the Slavs-Russ!
We know that history should not be a panegyric, but we will not allow them to turn Russian history into satire.
Perhaps our Russian Schlözerians, without examining the essence of the matter, one by one passion, will stand up for their idol, of which there is not even any doubt; but in order to cool the heat of this party in advance, which led the huge Russ tribe, occupying half of Europe, from a tiny Scandinavian tribe - let's put it comparatively: they pulled the bass string to extract the tone of the fifth from it - to cool the heat of these partisans, let us remind them that Schlözer - this, in their opinion, the great critic and philologist produced the Slavic word: "maiden" from the Germanic "Tiffe (bitch)": one such production is enough to understand Schlözer without further researching his arguments, to destroy the apotheosis recreated by his blinded admirers!
But in order to prove the crude false teaching of the Schlözerians, that Russia developed its forces from the influence of the Scandinavians on it and that it got its very name from them, we present here materials for Russian history that do not smolder.
These materials consist of tribal names, scattered throughout the stories and now cleared by criticism from their conversion to Greek, Roman, Mongolian, German and Scandinavian types and brought them to their prototype; no less than that, the names of cities, living tracts, settlements, graves, embankments, treasures, ruins, coins, medals, idols, monuments of various kinds, weapons, way of life, local remains of the Slavic language, customs, customs, beliefs, order of wars, household items, rituals and countless other items.
The consonance of the conclusions drawn from these materials gives us not only a reliable foothold, but also draws a clear image of the ancient Slavic-Russian history.
The Greeks and Romans gave many Slavic tribes their own, arbitrarily composed nicknames, referring them to the locality, then to the appearance, then to the severity in wars, then to the way of their life; but here and there in their legends the real names of those tribes appear. From this, in ancient history, there are more than fifty superfluous names that do not mean anything special, which must be destroyed in advance if we want to clarify this chaos in any way and separate the Slavic tribe from it with a sharp line, which will then become in its place naturally, non-violently, not by the verdict of willfulness and eloquence, but by the monotony and affinity of circumstances.
That we are standing on an unshakable continent regarding the choice of facts belonging to the Slavic-Russ, from the historical conglomerate, launched under the names of Scythians, Sarmatians, Etruscans, Celts, Alans, Normans, Varyags, etc., will be confirmed by living tracts and various other monuments scattered everywhere …
Scythian earrings.
We owe the explanation of these monuments, even the first thought to the way of explaining them, to F. Volansky, who made the first and significant step towards this and is tirelessly working in the course of his research and explanations.
We will not write him well-deserved praise and gratitude, let the acceptance of his works by us in parallel to our conclusions serve as such. We put here hand in hand our critical conclusions with his clarified captions.
Although our conclusions are drawn from the same sources from which the Scandinavian people also drew; but we took everything that they accidentally, and for the most part missed with intent as contrary to their assumption, that they arbitrarily and without evidence rejected and, finally, everything that they misinterpreted, and we have raised again to their former meaning and value.
Etruscan earrings.
It would be both unsuccessful and daring to promise the fullness of the round in this matter, but we undertake to present to the enlightened readers several new phases of ancient Slavic Rus, which could serve as fulcrum for the development of the thread of ancient Russian history and for the complete defeat of the false teachings of the Scandinavian school!
With further analysis of the inscriptions on the Slavic monuments, which, among the darkness, are scattered over the face of the earth, there is, of course, an opportunity to connect the whole of ancient Russia with the new into an unbreakable chain and in a constantly gigantic size.
Of course, such works are moving forward slowly; let us go, too, slowly, unhurriedly, but with a sure foot and we wish: may they be done to the honor and glory of Russia!
To take an active part in the past deeds of their forefathers, to admire their glory and greatness and from their experiences, both brilliant and bitter, to create laws for their own lives has always been a striking feature of the character of every somehow enlightened people who have already crossed the border of political infancy and achieved by experiments and reasoning of inner self-awareness. - These feelings are so close and natural to the human heart that there is no need to prove them. Only a heartless cosmopolitan can be indifferent to his fellow countrymen, because selfishness has already killed in him all the germs of higher feelings and aspirations. - And therefore, whatever a person does, whatever he devotes to the working part of his life, during his rest, the history of the Fatherland will always find access to him and shelter in his heart. The hero, having folded his abusive armor, sage,having closed the book of ideas, and the bitter worker, having finished their day's work, will find joy and consolation in the story of their ancestors.
There is therefore no need to assert that taking up history is pleasant; such a thought has long since become an axiom. But let us raise this object to its source - to a unity that is conditioned not by a nominal personality, but by a common application. - If the history of a person is a coherent story of the Divine ways in which he was to be brought up and improved, then there is nothing more instructive and sublime than a thoughtful engagement in it; regardless of whether we will turn our gaze primarily on the Creator-Educator and at the same time on all the events glorifying his omnipotence and wisdom, justice and love - or will we cast our eyes on a person-pupil who follows the intended path or deviates from that path and freely forging lots and to his descendants; will we look at him as a slave to our passions,or will we occupy ourselves with his struggle with vice and error; whether we stop at the picture of his greatness, or with shame we turn away from the image of his shame; whether his virtues will attract us or his vile vices repel us.
But as we consider the fate of one person, this separate link in a vast chain of people, so we can also consider the fate of an entire people in relation to itself or to its inner life and in relation to other peoples around it, or in relation to its external life. - There we will see the struggle between the forces of moral and physical in the entire volume of the national outcome, we will see the revival of some, often from a small but pure source, and the immersion of others with their entire gigantic mass in impersonal chaos. - There we will see why strong Babylon and enlightened Egypt fell, from which the Hellenes separated their power, what overthrew the famous Ilion, how luxury and debauchery imposed chains on colossal Rome, how the strife of the Slavs subjugated them to alien dominion. There we will study the reason for the transience of the huge states compiled by Alexander the Great,Attila, Charlemagne, Napoleon and other heroes of the past.
So, history in this respect has the same two sides: pleasant and useful. In the first respect, it serves us as a memorable book about the events of the past, and in this case it tells us the birth of a people, the development of its forces, internal and external, its own movement in the mass of the entire population of the globe, and at the same time tells us about our affairs ancestors, who can comfort us in disasters with their bitter experiences, and inspire and cause us to imitate with their glorious ones.
The useful side of history lies in the teachings that we can draw from events, revealing the causes of all phenomena, whether accidental or prepared for centuries, and deducing the natural consequences of those phenomena. In this respect, history becomes pragmatic and must read to us the teachings both over monuments and over the ruins of ancient grandeur, testifying to the once great events. This side of history is the most difficult and requires the highest caution. For, developing the facts into their causes and consequences, we must remove any preliminary prejudice in favor of this or that people, any visibility that is contemporary to us into its character. The latter is important because the present and the past of the same people rarely go steadily along the same track, and so the present can in no way serve as the basis and measure of the past.
Therefore, the basis for pragmatic development should only be the facts of certainty. Any unaccountable assumption, any hypothesis, introduced into the limits of history and then serving as a fulcrum for a philosophical view of all periods, then subsequent ones, brings a false light into science, distorting the spirit, character of the people, its inner strength, its peculiarity, and often its worthy greatness.
It is useless and even ridiculous to unconditionally accept any kind of fairy tales into the realm of history, but one cannot reject the fact that they sometimes do not contain any historical thread. All folk tales or legends in general are divided into mythical and heroic. The first originated from people's beliefs in supernatural beings with earthly natural life and passions and contain fictions, very often merged with reality. This happened when a person, gifted with special abilities against his contemporaries, surprised and fascinated them with his actions and for this was ranked among supernatural or mythical creatures. Heroic legends are recollections of actual events in which the hero's personal virtues are exposed.
Both kinds of these writings belong to the field of poetry and by no means to history. But, having decomposed such a legend into its constituent parts, having separated the fiction from it by strict criticism, one can always find in it a personality and historical actions.
For as a historical legend takes its subject from the circle of reality, sometimes removing only the laws of time and space, transfers these events to the realm of the miraculous and transforms brave people into heroes, heroes into demigods and gods, and, finally, at the highest degree of its development, it is lost in the realm of purely mythical; just as legends about deities descend into the real world, dress the creatures invented by them with the names and properties of living people and peoples. The perfect fusion of one and the other kind of legends in one creation forms an epic. - But there is no epic in which there would be no characteristic feature from history.
Take the Icelandic sagas for example. We find in them the names Valland (Gaul), Danmork (Denmark), Gotthiod (Gotland), Rin (Rhine), Attli (Attila), Holmgardr (Kholmogory), Vana (Veneda). These are all names that undoubtedly belong to history. Many of their words will also be explained, in which they add the letter r at the end, like aesir, diar, iatnar or iotar, thursar or thussar, vanir, vanaheimr, Skalogrimr, etc. Subtract the final letter r, it will be: aesi, dia, iatna or iota, thursa or thussa, vani, vanaheim, skalogrim (basics or demigods, spirits or gods, Jutes or Getae, Furses or priests, Vans or Venets, Venetia or the land of the Venets, Skalogrom is a Slav who moved from the Baltic Sea to Norway under King Harald of Norway, and from there he passed with his neighbors to Iceland and made up its first population). These names are all taken from real life. The most ancient writers, such as Ethelward, Albericus, Snorro, Torfei, Saxon Grammaticus, also argue that all the names found in ancient Scandinavian legends were taken from historical persons and peoples, but transferred to deities and supernatural beings.
The similarity of names in legends with historical names and although the lightest hints of the ancients about events similar to those described in those legends, and at the same time the similarity of the areas that gave rise to such legends, with historical areas, and the similarity of circumstances make it possible to draw historical conclusions, and only the gods are exposed in ordinary people.
Of course, if the names of Indian or African heroes were contained in the Scandinavian legends, then it would be difficult to assume the relationship of these names with history, then this would be attributed to a random consonance of words.
But it is not at all when it comes to two neighboring peoples, about their mutual strife and battles, and when the events themselves are arranged in such an order that they approach our chronology, and especially when the conclusion is made about the peoples described in the legend by the enemies and opponents; for the ancient writers always tried to humiliate opponents, and therefore extracting the real life from this side does not pose a danger that we will extract a panegyric, but, without any doubt, we will receive conclusions about the past.
Actions attributed by legends to any person are, as usual, always exaggerated; but we don't care about that; if we meet the name of Yaroslav in the Scandinavian saga, then, not paying attention to all the actions attributed to him, we can safely conclude about any relations between the Russ and the Scandinavians that existed in his time, or about the memorableness of his actions, which preserved his name in the legends of foreigners. - If the saga talks about the battles of the Scandinavians with the Russ, we do not believe the details of these battles, but we dare not reject either the existence of the Russ at that time, or their wars with the Scandinavians. And if the localities are mentioned in the legend, then we also know where the Russ were then settled.
But if, for example, in the Scandinavian legend Attila is described as a truthful and wise man, and in the history of the Romans as a villain, then we will believe the legend, and not the history that was written by the haters of Attila, and at a time when it was considered not only an ordinary thing, but even it is necessary to humiliate one's enemy to the point that an epigram or satire was made of history.
The Iliad is also a legend; it also has a lot of fiction, but at the same time it clearly reveals and better than in history, the last struggle of Troy and its fall. The story of King Lazarus is similar. - Even the tales of Bove the prince and Tsar Dodon contain a historical relationship; the first is included in the history of the third Odin (historical) and the Russian princess Rynda, and the second is a libel of the Slavs against Prince Bodriti (Obodriti) Dodon, who united with Charlemagne against the Pomorians and Polabs and died, probably at the hands of a bribed killer.
The folk songs themselves help a lot in explaining Slavic history; in them, the terrain of the event is almost always sharply defined, for example, by the blue sea, Khvalynsky, Danube, Don, various cities, etc.; from them we extract the mythology of the people, their bravery, battles, weapons, clothing, customs, addiction to navigation and many other features of public and private life.
There is no doubt that the continuous and unaccountable belief in all such legends is a gross error. Rigorous criticism should examine such and similar sources before borrowing anything from them to add to history; However, it should be noted that sometimes even one such conclusion can serve as a link of a broken historical thread and the phenomena that seemed like fragments or episodes in history, are tied to their source. In a word, for a historian who follows events that are dark, exaggerated or still neutral, by undetermining their relationship to a particular period, tribe or people, there is a special tact that makes you believe or not believe the legend; it is a tact of clarity, a diversion of historical attempts, an accidental collision of two investigators on the same path.
But the rejection of certain facts on the basis of prejudice or bias alone and their reckoning among fairy tales is already a shameful and shameless thing! Such a writer puts himself in the line of a liar and a slanderer, and is not worthy of the title of historian! - There are, of course, cases when facts elude, so to speak, from the review of the descriptive, because events are sometimes scattered in an extremely ramified manner and therefore it is very difficult under such circumstances to concentrate them in one focus. In such a case, the writer is innocent of the omission; he can miss many facts from one oversight, especially if the people are so huge that they occupied a good half of the whole part of the world, and are so diverse that they appear under a hundred different names, in different, distant from each other ends,at different degrees of development of civic consciousness and in contact with completely different peoples among themselves - what was and is the Slavic tribe.
But the skepticism of some Western writers reached the point that they, with some wild charm, wanted to destroy not only the legends concerning the Slavic Russian people, but also in their very annals they tried to suspect those passages that clearly tell us about the identity of the Russian or express any his graceful feature, which goes beyond the limits of ordinary life. - But a strange thing: this skepticism seeks to overshadow everything beautiful and original in Russian history, while in Western history it rejects only everything bad. - So, for example, he rejects in our chronicles a high trait of the character of the people, who realized his weakness from the discord of many of his powers and, in order to bring everything back to its previous order, calling to himself an autocratic ruler; and in the French chronicles that speak of the burning of Joan of Arc,performed in front of many thousands of witnesses and in the great city of France, he rejects the burning. Here's an example of Western skepticism!
So, there are not fruitless classes devoted to the search and examination of long-past events, which have already been examined repeatedly. Where all sources are considered exhausted, all considerations are inaccessible, it is often possible to find many more facts omitted by chance or with intent; for it can easily be that one investigator chose for himself the wrong point of view from which the other looks, and therefore could have missed many facts, among which there may be one that alone is sufficient to completely destroy several positions that have already been received in history predicate of undoubted truth.
The mines of ancient history are still so rich that many facts can be extracted from them, explaining events that have remained neutral in history until now, without looking for evidence of their connection with one or another people. They will bind homogeneous, but disconnected parts into one whole, and heterogeneous adhesives will be cut off with an anatomical knife, like growths.
But there are also cases where the historian, starting his research, already in advance made himself a topic, or, better to say, a fixed idea (idee fixe), which he tried to surround with facts, while neutral, false conclusions and, if necessary, hypotheses, and therefore from self-preservation had to remove suspicions and objections, or silently skip everything that clearly contradicted him in the development of his pre-created labor idea, from which he did not want and because of his bias could no longer evade.
If we collect all the facts that eluded an impartial investigator, and logically justify those that are unjustly branded with the seal of rejection of the historian's one-sided addiction or involvement in sin, then, of course, there will be an opportunity to depict ancient Russia in more fresh colors, to give a more accurate essay to its characteristics. closer to the original.
There are also cases in which a fact relating to the people we are following is revealed not before, as through a detailed analysis of some legend about a neighboring people. But there are also cases where we, following languages, names, nicknames, lifestyle, beliefs, beliefs, proverbs, clothes, food, weapons, etc. everyday relations, we deduce in a synthetic order the name of the people impersonally or under the pseudonym of the described; and through this a new fact is created for history.
Sometimes a happily noticed one character trait of a person or a people reveals to us more than a hundred pages of cold descriptions of the political actions of that people, not involved in its inner life, the side of its heart.
All the deeds of a person or a whole nation constitute one unbreakable thread and are characterized by some kind of unity, if sometimes incomplete, but always clear. In ancient history, we often hear responses that seem to be in tune with the subject we are tracking. It would be a mistake to directly use them as an insertion into the history we are composing; you need to follow, peer, listen to these responses, analyze them and put them in parallel with others. But, having once found a part of such a thread or its original end, it is already much easier to separate the entire thread, even if in other places it was entangled into a huge knot of oncoming events. - Here we are already convinced by the setting of objects, their character, color, ebb, softness or roughness, recklessness or slowness, warmth or cold, in a word: that consonance that clearly expresses the affinity of objects.
This is how fellow countrymen recognize each other, being thrown by fate along different paths into a foreign land. Something familiar, something familiar brings them together from the very first meeting. Customs, habits, inclinations instinctively bring them together before they can be explained in words.
Funeral of a noble Rus in Bulgar. Henryk Siemiradzki (1833).
The philosophical view, cast on a whole series of facts of the life of the people, brings them into harmonious phalanges, connects them into one whole and gives the being of history. Everything that does not belong here, by itself, moves out of the ranks and separates as alien, outside. - This review is called historical criticism. But some writers dared to call the autocratic rules of historical criticism, according to which it is possible to take away from the people all their best assets: their honor, glory, homeland and love for their homeland with impunity, simply saying: I suspect a later insertion or something like that. You never know false suspicions in life! - every suspicion must be supported by some arguments, without which it has no force. Moreover, suspicions can arise from various reasons, sometimes simply unfounded, and sometimes even sinful,born not with the pure intent to justify the truth and brand falsehood, but to humiliate one people and exalt another. Such was also the criticism of Schlözer, who, moreover, allowed himself expressions that were clearly biased and often not at all scientific. And despite the fact, Schlözer is revered by many more as a leading figure in Russian history.
He brought a false light into our national history at the very beginning. He argued, but only without evidence, that the Varangians-Russ were Scandinavians, while the Scandinavians themselves did not have the slightest trace of the Varangians, and they themselves did not dare to call the Russ tribesmen for a long time. Only the Teutons claimed this; but at the present time it has come to the point that it is assumed that Russia consisted of Scandinavian colonies [1 - notes are made on page 163. - Ed.]; not enough of this - they write that in the eleventh century all the Slavic-Russians spoke the Scandinavian language [2]. This trick is necessary to support the opinions of Schlözer, which have already swayed on a shaky basis. - And despite the fact, many of our Russian historians took the side of Schlözer and developed his idea even more; they even saidas if from the advent of the Varangians-Russ the character and spirit of the Scandinavian were instilled in the northern Slavic people. And this does not mean that all the development of the innate, internal forces and abilities of the Slavic-Russian people was taken away from them and assigned to the Scandinavians, who hardly more than the Chinese participated in this matter? - But what remains now to say about our chronicles of the eleventh century? According to Munhu, the Russ spoke in this century the Scandinavian language, therefore, our chronicles are written in the Scandinavian language? Let's see how the Germans will read the Slavic letter, mistaking it for the Scandinavian runes!hardly more than the Chinese who participated in this case? - But what remains now to say about our chronicles of the eleventh century? According to Munhu, the Russ spoke in this century the Scandinavian language, therefore, our chronicles are written in the Scandinavian language? Let's see how the Germans will read the Slavic letter, mistaking it for the Scandinavian runes!hardly more than the Chinese who participated in this case? - But what remains now to say about our chronicles of the eleventh century? According to Munhu, the Russ spoke in this century the Scandinavian language, therefore, our chronicles are written in the Scandinavian language? Let's see how the Germans will read the Slavic letter, mistaking it for the Scandinavian runes!
The Germans of the last century considered the Russ and in general all the Slavs to be a barbaric people, uneducated and incapable of education; they called them shepherds, nomads, slaves [3] and characterized the people as ignorance and atrocities that required constant motivation [4]. And as they then believed that the light illuminating the whole of Europe poured out from the depths of their self-luminosity, then Schlözer, intoxicated by popular prejudice, suggested that the Russians should be obliged to the Germans for their enlightenment, their citizenship, their system and identity. But as the relations of the Germans with the Russ do not represent any historical material from which it could be deduced that the Russ borrowed all their civic consciousness from them, Bayer and Schletzer hid their thought under the auspices of the Scandinavians, reckoning to them as their fellow tribesmen and the Varangians-Russ …By this they thought to revive their motionless idea, gravitating into the darkness of arbitrariness, pre-created by research and the collection of the Russian chronicles [5].
If Schlözer really did not understand the Russian chronicles, then he is a blind man, bombarded with Germanic distrust of the originality of the Russian states during the Doryurik times; but if he penetrated the essence of the legends and rejected them solely in order to be true to his plan, then he is an evil slanderer!
But let us now turn to our historians. Unfortunately, I must say that some of them looked into the fist of the Germans and from that, without shame, said that great Russia was the hereditary property of the Scandinavians and that Rurik took it as his fatherland, and not as called to the throne by the people themselves; as if until the time of Vladimir there were few nomads who were called slaves, adolescents, slaves, and as if the Russian chroniclers mutilated these words into Slovaks, Slavs and attributed them to a people that never existed. After reading such an opinion, you involuntarily exclaim with the singer of "Glory Daughter":
("Shadows of Lavret! Svyatopolk! Can you rise from your graves? You would know the grief of the people and the shame of your grandchildren. A stranger's thirst drinks our blood, and sons, not knowing the glory of their fathers, are dignified by calling themselves the descendants of slaves!")
If Schlözer considered himself the creator of the highest historical criticism, if he dreamed that he had ascended in this branch of scholarship to a height unattainable for others, from which he could crush them, turn them into a fairy tale with his sentence, or arbitrarily assign to one or another people; if his followers think that the lamp lit by him illuminated the whole Russian history with the rays of the sun, therefore they can boldly develop, strengthen and reinforce his Scandinavianism, have the right to deprive the Russian youth of that noblest feeling that is born from high respect for their ancestors - the ancestors then the time will come when they will be shown that they are chained to the nadir and therefore do not see the zenith; that the beacon raised by Schlözer over Russian history has long since burned out and darkened and represents a single smut that stains the sacred sheets of history!
But thanks to the diligent searches of some domestic workers in the field of history, a lot of the ancient glory of Slavic Rus has already been discovered, and there is hope that pre-Christian Russia will soon shine in the glory of the Troyans, the Getae-Russians (erroneously named Etruscans) and Macedonians - in the glory of the mentor of the ancient Greeks and Romans and will cease to be regarded as the stepfather of the legacy of the Scandinavians!
The time will come when the rotten pillars set for the Slavic-Russian history in the Scandinavian swamp will shake at the base, and will indicate their place on the vast continent from the Aral Sea to the Adriatic, from the Caspian Sea to the Baltic coast and from the Black Sea to Murmansk! There is the cradle of this great prehistoric people, called, as if in mockery, a Scandinavian tribe! - There we will put our stone to the common foundation of the history of the ancient Slavs-Russ!
An indication of some Slavic names, with their transposition into Greek, Latin, Germanic and Scandinavian types, as a guide for bringing other distorted Slavic names to their prototype:
Yaroslav - Iarysleif.
Svyatoslav - Sfendoslaf.
Igor - Ingor.
Vsevolod - Wesewolok.
Svyatopolk - Swantopluk, Zwentibold, Zwantipluk.
Volodar - Baldur.
Ratibor- Radbiart.
Svyatobor - Suantibor, Suitibor.
Lyashko - Lessek.
Rogvolod - Ragnwald.
Godunov - Gudenow.
Ermak Timofeev - Iermak Timofega.
Sagach - Sagiz.
Samara - Samora.
Msta - Mstva.
Donets - Domez.
Syzran - Sauseran.
Murom - Murow.
Rybinsk - Kibinska.
Ustyuzhna - Ustezna.
Kizlyar - Kitzlar.
Kozlov - Kolzlof.
Ryazhsk - Rask.
Yelets - Ieles.
Moscow - Moscau.
Malorussia - Malorossinskaya.
Morshansky - Mursianus [6].
Maiden Mountain (on the Volga) Diwizagora.
Tmutarakan - Tautorokan.
Smolyan - Smolinzer.
Ax - Sagari.
Uglich - Aulisch.
Caspian Mountains - Aspisii montes.
Svyatovid - Swenthowit, Swantewid.
Mouth above Labe - Aussig nad Laben, Austi nad Laben.
Ochakov - Axiake.
Ochakovtsy - Axiaka.
Bobruisk - Bobrisk.
Croats - Chrobati.
Bel-god - Biabog.
Voivods - Boebodi.
Money is Denger's.
Guests (merchants) - Gosi.
Settlement - Gredischti, Gradissin, Gradisten.
Akhtyrka - Agathyrska.
Therefore, Akhtyrtsy are Agathyrsi (and knowing who they are
Akhyrsi, we know who and Alanorsi; those. if Akhtyrtsy Russ, then Alanorsi Te is Russ).
Vesyegonsk - Wisigot.
Ostrogozhsky district - Ostrogotsche Kreis [7].
Novgorod - Nowago, Nemogarda.
Smolensk - Milinisk.
Lubech - Teliutzi.
Vyshgorod - Wusegarda.
Kiev - Kujaba.
Slavs - Stavani, Suoveni, Sklavi, Seklab.
So wrote historians, quite distant from the Slavs; but here is an example of how Boleslav the brave describes a German priest of his day, who lived in Poland; Boleslaus primus, qui dictus est Sraba ie mirabilis vel bilulus, qui dicitur sic Tragbir. - So take the "Brave" out of this!
But in order to have an idea of how the Germans still interpret the meaning of some Russian words and how they are familiar with Russian history, geography, mythology and folk life, we will also cite several examples that are quite convincing in this matter and, moreover, are not at all subject to doubt:
Muschiks mean serfs [8].
Naczelnik is the head of insurection [9].
Kosma Minin is a Russian rebel [10].
Robot - corvee [11].
Pulk - branch of Kozakov [12].
Jaga - baba - the goddess of war among the Russ [13].
Also, not further, as at the very end of the last century, namely in the 90s, we come across works that are memorable for the fidelity of the description of Russia and her life. As, for example, in Leclerk “il ya (en Russie) une espece de vinaigre qu'on appelle Kwasse, ou imen-imen”, or “in Russia there are three breeds of horses: horse, horse and nag”; or: in Russia, in winter, the air is heated by the decomposition of fire on the streets. We find another example in Christiani, in his Unterricht fur die zu Kaufleuten bestimmten Junginge. 2 Band. Commerz-Geographic, where Russia is divided into eastern and western; where the western one consists of provinces: Dvina, where Arkhangelsk, Kargopol, Pskov, White Tsora, Rostov, Suzdali, Reshov, Belsk, Severia, where Novgorod, Chermgova, Vorotina, etc. are the provinces of eastern Russia, according to his description, are: Field, Mordva, Ustyug, Vyadski Peyorski, Obdorski, etc. He also claims that Derbent lies in the land of the Samoyeds, that St. Petersburg is located at the rivers: Don, Ob, Dvina, Volga, Dnieper and Neva. And this was written by the notorious Schlözer's contemporaries! But do not think that Christiani's work was taken for a dozen; no, it reached the second edition and was highly praised in contemporary German literary newspapers.
After that, we can understand how Bayer, Müller and Schlözer judged Russian history, who did not know thoroughly either the language of the Russian people, or rituals and customs, or its character in the very core of the population.
But let us return again to the Greekized Slavic words, scattered in different stories. Some are so disfigured that they look more like Chinese than Slavic; others are invented by the Greeks themselves and many are composed of two names: generic and specific, such as Alan - orsi, Sebbi - rozzi, Rox - alani.
It would be superfluous to add here that in order to erect some of the Slavic tribal names that have not yet been solved to their prototype, it seems necessary to consult the regional dictionaries of the Russians. The Slavs have a habit of calling some bastards, others makhlans or zipunniks, and still others Alanniks.
But we will give here several such names and put them in parallel with the tribal names of the Slavs in the Greek and Roman histories.
Alan is a low-lying place, convenient for pasture and mowing, a word derived from that:
Alaniki-Alane (cattle breeding) Alani.
Zipunniki - Zipani, Sipani.
Kakatz (from kakata - birch bark shoes) Zaccati.
Kisyne (from kitty - reindeer boots) Kissini.
Kurpinniki (from kurpin - bast shoes) - Carpiani.
Kurpas (wearing shoes with buckles) Carpi.
Luntani (wearing deerskin boots) Lantani.
Malakhainiki - Malachita.
Makhlanniki (wearing winter hats with ears) Melanchlani.
Nyarynyans (from nyara - felt boots) Neuri, Nerinani.
Ranshina (seagoing vessel) Rani.
Chipped (troublesome) Scoloti (so named by Herodotus Scythians).
Chicks (wearing shoes with ears) Sturni, Strusi.
Harpayniki (wearing raw caftans) Carpagi.
Chepani (wearing Cossacks) Cepini.
Shabera (wearing thick canvas robes) Sabiri.
It seems that of the mentioned clothes and shoes, each belongs to us in a special area in Russia. Maybe someone will engage in a detailed study of this subject and, having determined the locality of the tribes mentioned by the Greeks and Romans, will find that it coincides with the locality of the Russian names given here, and thus turn our guess into historical facts. It should be noted that the main mistake of most of the prospectors of the Slavic areas was that they concentrated all their searches mainly near the Danube, while attention should be paid to the far north, for between the Gulf of Finland and the White Sea there were also Unnes and Russ, and Alana, for which we will give detailed proofs later.
Excerpt from the book: Klassen Yegor Ivanovich "New materials for the ancient history of the Slavs"