History is a political science. Anyone who still remembers Soviet times and was then connected with historical science knows that an ordinary Russian guy or girl could not even dream of the history departments of universities.
Places of future scientists of Russian and world history were inherited within the dynasties of bloody revolutionaries. The rest of the seats went to the most "savvy" in Marxism-Leninism, members of the "equal" Soviet society. And only grains of truly honest people, by the power of their talent, nevertheless made their way through the political palisades of the initiated archons. But the "weather" in Russian history was made by the first. They preached: just as before the revolution, the life of the Russian people was miserable, so before the baptism of Russia, allegedly, there was none at all.
Now, in a democracy, the picture has become even tougher: "domestic" historians have built around national history such an insurmountable wall of mutual responsibility, mixed on a nationally corrupt basis, that they outdid their brothers in origin and "skill" - the builders of the concrete wall in Israel, directed against Palestinians. Not only our own state-forming Russian people, but also all scientists of the rest of the world, were fenced off from Russian Russian history. By the grace of “our” historians-“patriots”, the West fell into such ignorance of Russian history that when I told one of the American scientists about many hundreds of Upper Paleolithic monuments discovered in Russia, this scientist replied: “Well, then consider yourself aliens!”
Now, in the 21st century, the Russian people know almost nothing about their ancestors of the 50th, 30th, 20th, 5th millennia BC, although state museums, I emphasize, are state ones! - have been functioning at most archaeological sites for several decades: "Sungir" - in Vladimir, "Kostenki" - near Voronezh and others. The Russian state funds these important monuments of Russian history. And the Russian state maintains an army of parasites-historians who do not even “itch” in order to convey knowledge about these monuments to the Russian people. But these same historians obsessively and tirelessly tell us the "stories" of a completely fictional Jerusalem, created by the mythological aliens of Sumer, who does not know the letters and spoons of China, the dwarf Byzantine "empire" and even the "great" Indian civilization,and did not master the invention of the wheel and the development of iron.
And this obsession of "real" historians in the context of knowledge of history works against the Russian people better than a nuclear bomb. Just as after the explosion of one such bomb in Japanese Hiroshima, only ashy shadows on the walls of houses remained of people, so after the “real”, “academic” history of the Russian people, only vague shadows of completely false images remain in the heads of the Russian people.
It turned out to be easier for the Russian people to conquer space than to extort from “their own” historians at least something about their origin.
A vivid illustration of what has been said is the shameful epic associated with the dates of the emergence of ancient Russian cities - for some reason atheistic historians stand to death for their chronicle religious dating. With the filing of such atheist believers, Moscow is not even 900 years old. But is it really so? Or is it that people with tortured scientific degrees are simply deliberately and openly castrating our history with the rusty knife of monastic speculations?
By the way, the same speculations allow the same historians in those places of the planet where many of them have a second citizenship, to behave in a completely different way. For example, in June this year, at a conference of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society, a representative of one foreign delegation told those present that scientists had established a new age for Jericho - on 10.10.10, this city would allegedly turn 10 thousand years old. Why exactly on this date - it is not difficult to guess for ourselves, and the speaker confirmed: a convenient date. Not a single historian, and there were several dozen of them in the hall, stood up and opposed such a "scientific" dating.
Promotional video:
All comers this October will be able to celebrate the anniversary of the biblical Jericho. And no one will be confused that the countdown of the Bible itself goes from a later date - only from 3238 BC. That is, scientists have forgotten to make the Bible itself ancient … Constructing the history of Russia according to the chronicles of Byzantine Christians is the same as doing the same according to the reports of Hitler's fascist army: both came to our land late and described in their summaries only the events of the initial period of the conquests …
But let us turn to the positive foreign experience of archaeological correction of the founding dates of the chronicle cities. So, at the very beginning of March 2010, a message eloquently titled "Archaeologists won the dispute over the ancient chronicles about the earlier date of the foundation of Polotsk" went through the news feeds. In 2009, an archaeological expedition of the Institute of History of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Belarus under the leadership of M. Klimov found evidence that Polotsk already existed in the first half of the 9th century, that is, before the year 862, the first mention of this city in the legendary "Tale bygone years ". The basis for this conclusion was the fact that on the territory of the ancient settlement, the original center of Polotsk, four fragments were found, allegedly, "Arab" silver coins - dirhams ", minted in 800 - 825 years.
Another example. At the very beginning of June 1999, at the International Conference "Medieval Kazan: Emergence, Development", the mayor of Kazan K. Iskhakov asked the scientists to give an opinion on the age of the city, noting that by now scientists, archaeologists, bibliographers have accumulated extensive evidence, and that, in his opinion, Kazan has a much more ancient age. In such an important matter, K. Iskhakov was supported by the former Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation, who also suggested in his speech that “current research on the age of Kazan will allow future generations of Tatarstan to discover new, even more ancient layers of the history of Kazan”.
“Surprisingly,” the “objective” and “uninterested” minister did not say a word that future generations of Russians, too, might want to discover more ancient layers of Moscow's history. As part of the request, among other things archaeological material, ancient coins found during the excavation of the Kazan Kremlin were examined, and obedient independent participants in the conference “came to the conclusion that a comprehensive analysis of the accumulated materials allows us to formulate a conclusion about the emergence of Kazan at the end of 10th - early 11th century and consider it appropriate to celebrate the 1000th anniversary of Kazan at the beginning of the third millennium."
Now let's go back to the date when Moscow was founded. 1147 is the year of the first mention of Moscow in Christian annals. And it was this year that atheist scientists persistently entered into the "birth certificate" of Moscow. But not all scientists who are forced to live with historical "wolves" slip into imitation and begin to "howl like a wolf" in this all-occupying pack. There are honest researchers as well. At the end of April 2007, a message appeared in the news feeds: "Archaeologists believe that Moscow appeared 200 years earlier than 1147." This is the conclusion reached by the head of the Moscow archeology sector of the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Professor Leonid Belyaev, who conducted research on the territory of the St. Daniel Monastery.
In his opinion, as a result of "the study of the cultural layer and the application of the latest methods of analysis of previously found ceramic objects, we can conclude that there was a large Slavic settlement in the 10th, and even, I dare to admit, in the 9th century." This is evidenced by the spectrographic and typological analysis of the ceramics found here. In addition, Leonid Belyaev suggests the possibility of the existence of settlements on the modern territory of Moscow, already starting from the 5th century BC.
Alexander Veksler, former chief archaeologist of Moscow, and now advisor to the mayor of Moscow, author of more than three hundred scientific publications on archeology, architecture, culture and life of Moscow, holder of the distinction "For services to Moscow" in his recent work "New archaeological data on the outskirts of the Moscow Kremlin »In 1999 published new data on the antiquity of Moscow. Our capital is an extensive archaeological complex that includes more than a hundred medieval monuments in the historical part of the city. The planning structure of Moscow since ancient times was made up of the city (later the Kremlin) and its suburb - the posad, directly adjacent to the original fortress.
Archaeological research in the 1990s has significantly expanded the understanding of the development of the territory of Moscow in the dynamics of historical growth. The archaeologists obtained especially important information from the study of the suburb surrounding the Moscow Kremlin. During the excavation of a number of objects in Zaneglimenye (Old Vagankovo, Volkhonka, Manezhnaya and Arbat squares), ancient Russian jewelry and household items were discovered. Vyatka jewelry was found in Vsekhsvyatsky passage near the Cathedral of Christ the Savior. And at the same place, a treasure of "Arab" dirhams of the 9th century was found earlier, which, according to A. Veksler, "emphasizes the non-ordinary character of the early settlement."
Excavations at the Old Gostiny Dvor have discovered ancient Russian jewelry dating back to the pre-painting time. Excavations along Ilyinka, from the beginning of the street to the fortress wall of Kitay-Gorod, have uncovered an ancient pavement in 23 tiers. From the earliest times, it was regularly renovated and new log pavements were built. On the site near Red Square, below the pavement, horizons of the primary development of the territory were discovered, which indicate the existence of estate buildings here, interspersed with the arable and vegetable garden horizon. The study of sixteen charcoal samples using the radiocarbon method gave several dates for the beginning of plowing and building, the earliest of them - 890 and 895, the later - 1041, 1048, 1058, 1072.
That is, in the area of Red Square, Moscow was plowed up and built up 257 years before the first mention in the chronicle. Therefore, A. G. Veksler concludes that "archaeological materials testify to the early age of the nearest settlements near the city", "early Moscow had broader limits than it seemed until recently", and that these data open up "ample opportunities for correcting the dating of the cultural layer of the early feudal city" …
Unique finds of Vyatka jewelry were made in the Moscow Kremlin more than 130 years ago. Vyatichi women were buried in a wedding dress, with all the decorations. But the Kremlin finds did not interest Moscow historians, who at that time were drowning in near-Masonic intrigues. Only several decades later, speaking at an archaeological congress, I. E. Zabelin drew attention to the fact that they both "deserve metal, and in their size and massiveness come out of a number of all the same objects that were hitherto discovered in the burial mounds of the Moscow region, which may indicate the special wealth and nobility of the ancient inhabitants of the Kremlin coastal mountain. ".
Another find confirms that high-ranking Kievites managed to visit Moscow with an official mission even before its “chronicle” birth. Archaeologist N. S. Shelyapina found in a pit near the walls of the Armory Chamber a lead "hanging", i.e. attached to the letter, the seal. Archaeologist Academician of the RAS V. L. Yanin attributed it to the time of the reign of Svyatopolk Izyaslavovich in Kiev - to 1093 - 1096 years. That is, the fortress of 1156 was built in an already established settlement. But this fortress was not the first.
During archaeological observations at the Grand Kremlin Palace, near the place where the Vyatichi jewelry was found, at the steepness of the Borovitsky Cape, an ancient moat 16-18 m wide, 5 m deep and shaped like an elongated triangle tipped over with its top was recorded. This moat protected the most ancient city. To it from the north along the Neglinnaya River and from the east along the Moscow River were adjacent settlements with handicraft and trade population. Since ancient times, Moscow has been a local center supplying the surrounding population with its products. Based on the materials of the excavations, one can judge about the gradual folding of the market, i.e. about how the city economically united the district.
The famous numismatist A. I. At the end of the 19th century, Cherepnin wrote that "hoards with Kufic coins in most cases quite definitely indicate the places of the most ancient settlements and, by their number, partly indicate the comparative density of ancient settlements that existed in different regions of ancient Russia during the era of trade relations with the Arabs." Another numismatist, A. Bychkov, in his works describes 15 ancient treasures of Moscow, dating back to 860 years and consisting entirely of "Arab" dirhams. And in the 11th century, Western European coins already poured here, the discovered treasures of which were described in his works by Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences V. L. Yanin.
A group of archaeologists - L. A. Belyaev, N. A. Krenke, S. G. Shulyaev - their article in the authoritative journal "Russian archeology" (1 for 2010) was titled: "Pre-Kremlin Moscow: new data on the topography and ceramics of Danilov settlements 9/11 - 14 centuries." Note that the earliest date is again the 9th century. This is 3 centuries earlier than the chronicle date! The authors provide new data on the size, relief and ceramic chronology of the ancient Russian settlement on the territory of modern Moscow - Danilovsky. This settlement was discovered in the 1980s, 6 km south of the medieval center of Moscow on the territory of the Danilov Monastery (known since the end of the 13th century).
The works of the 2000s established a significant area of the settlement (about 500 m along the Moskva River) and the date of its origin - not at the end of the 10th - 11th centuries, as previously assumed, but 50 - 100 years earlier. It was also established that the center of the ancient Russian settlement was a riverside cape, on which there was a settlement of the Early Iron Age (the second half of the 1st millennium BC - the turn of the 1st millennium AD), that is, again, the 5th 1st century BC
Based on these new data, archaeologists make a logical conclusion: "This information is important for solving the question of the existence, dating and location of settlements that should have preceded the construction of the prince's fortress in the 1150s on the Kremlin Hill." Yes, Moscow is not one hill, even if it later became the Kremlin one. Moscow, like any other city, is a settlement of people that existed in the same geographical location. It is no coincidence that the authors focus not even on the 9th century, which already makes Moscow age 300 years old, but on the early Iron Age, that is, the time "before the new era." The beginning of this period is roughly considered to be the 5th century BC. This archaeological starting point makes Moscow age 2,500 years.
But can this date be considered the date of the foundation of Moscow? Not. The settlements of the Dyakovo culture of the early Iron Age were discovered near the village of Dyakovo near Kolomenskoye, on the territory of the Kremlin, on the Lenin Hills, on the Setun River, in the Kuntsevsky forest park and in many other places in Moscow. Groups of Vyatichi mounds were found near the Yauza station, in Tsaritsyn, Chertanovo, Konkov, Derevlyov, Zyuzin, Cheryomushki, Matveyevsky, Fily, Tushin and in other places. There is a famous Fatyanovo burial ground of the Bronze Age near the village of Davydkovo, the Shchukinskaya Neolithic site on the Moscow River, and so on and so forth. On the territory of the capital, more than 200 archaeological sites have been recorded, rooted in Paleolithic settlements such as Zaraisk, 20 thousand years old.
How advanced were our ancestors? Answer this question yourself. We will suggest the following. In the 4th millennium BC. A lapis lazuli route ran from Moscow to Badakhshan. In the 3rd - 2nd millennium BC. from Moscow to the same Badakhshan and to Baikal a jade route ran. In the 1st millennium BC. The Silk Road ran from Moscow to Europe and Asia, and China joined it at the beginning of the new era. Meanwhile, the Mediterranean countries knew nothing of their powerful northern neighbors. From their ignorance, historians conclude that nothing happened in Russia. But this is not the case. Archaeologists, like detectives of history, literally pull all the evidence out of the ground and bring historians, as they say, to clean water.
… Having made Jericho more ancient until the very beginning of the 8th millennium BC, the Israeli "scientists" overlooked a small detail - at that time there was no modern man on that earth, and even the remnants of the Neanderthals no longer existed. There was simply no one to build Jericho …
With Moscow, everything is much better: in this region a modern-type man was formed, so Moscow could be built at any time, starting from the 20th millennium BC. You can, as colleagues from other countries do, choose any, the most ancient settlement on the site of Moscow. To establish its exact date by physical methods. And this will be the most accurate date for the start of city construction. Precisely Moscow, because Moscow is named after the ancient Russian goddess Mokosha, the emergence of the cult of which academician B. A. Rybakov dated back to the 50th millennium BC.
Andrey Tyunyaev
