There are many blank spots in the history of our country. The lack of a sufficient number of reliable sources gives rise not only to speculation, but also outright falsifications. Some of them proved to be very tenacious.
Older than accepted
According to the official version, statehood came to Russia in 862, when the Finno-Ugric and Slavic tribes called on the Varangian Rurik to rule over them. But the problem is that the theory we have known since school is taken from the Tale of Bygone Years, and modern science is questioning the reliability of the information it contains.
Meanwhile, there are many facts confirming that the state in Russia was before the vocation of the Vikings. Thus, in the Byzantine sources, when describing the life of the Rus, clear signs of their state structure were reflected: developed writing, the hierarchy of the nobility, and the administrative division of lands. Minor princes are also mentioned, over whom the "kings" stood.
The data of numerous excavations presented by the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences indicate that where the Central Russian Plain is now located, life was in full swing even before the new era. The famous Russian archaeologist and anthropologist Tatyana Alekseeva found a sufficient amount of evidence that in the territory of modern central Russia in the period from the 6th to the 2nd millennium BC. e. there was a flourishing of large proto-cities.
Ukraine-Rus
Promotional video:
Ukrainian historian Mikhail Hrushevsky created one of the most famous falsifications on which modern Ukrainian historiography is based. In his writings, he denies the existence of a single ancient Russian ethnos, but speaks of the parallel history of two nationalities: "Ukrainian-Russian" and "Great Russian". According to Hrushevsky's theory, the Kiev state is a state of the "Russian-Ukrainian" nationality, and the Vladimir-Suzdal state is a "Great Russian" state.
Already during the Civil War, Hrushevsky's scientific views were severely criticized by colleagues. One of the most notable critics of his “Ukraine-Rus” concept was the historian and publicist Andrei Storozhenko, who viewed this approach as an attempt to clothe the political tasks of Ukrainian separatism in a historical form.
The influential Kiev public figure and publicist Boris Yuzefovich, having familiarized himself with the works of Hrushevsky, called him a "scholar-liar", hinting that all his writing activity is connected with the desire to take the place of professor at the Department of Russian History at Kiev University.
Veles's book
In 1950, “Veles's Book” was first published in San Francisco by emigrants Yuri Mirolyubov and Alexander Kur. According to Mirolyubov's stories, the text of the "Veles Book" was copied by him from wooden planks lost during the war, created around the 9th century.
However, very soon it was established that the printed document was forged. So, the photographs of the tablets, presented by Mirolyubov and Kur, were actually made from specially prepared paper.
Philologist Natalya Shalygina says: rich factual material convincingly proves that "Veles's Book" is a complete historical fake, both from the point of view of linguistic and philological analysis, and from the point of view of the historical inconsistency of the version of its acquisition.
In particular, it became known that in response to the arguments of scientific criticism, the authors of the forgery made changes and additions to the already published material in order to make it more credible.
Testament of Peter the Great
This tendentious falsification first appeared in French in 1812. According to the authors of the document, it was based on a strategic plan of action for the successors of Peter the Great for many centuries with the aim of establishing Russia's world domination; the goal was "to get as close as possible to Constantinople and the Indies."
Historians have come to the conclusion that the main provisions of the Testament were formulated in October 1797 by a Polish emigrant close to Napoleon, General Sokolnitsky. The abundance of errors and absurdities in the text suggests that the author of the document was not familiar with the foreign policy of Peter I. It was also established that the testament was originally intended not for propaganda purposes, but for internal use.
Waste Alaska
The history textbooks explain the sale by Russia of its overseas territory to the United States simply: it became more and more costly to maintain Alaska, since the costs of providing it far exceeded the income from its economic use. There was another reason for the sale of Alaska - to improve relations with the United States.
Historian Ivan Mironov says that there are a lot of documents that refute the official version. The history associated with the sale of Alaska is very reminiscent of contemporary events in terms of corruption scandals, "kickbacks" and "cutting" of budgetary and public funds by a handful of oligarchs and politicians.
Work on the sale of the American colony began in the reign of Nicholas I. In addition to the sale of Alaska, the government's plans included the intention to get rid of the Aleutian and Kuril Islands, of course, for money. The main lobbyist for the 1867 deal was Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, brother of Emperor Alexander II, among his accomplices were a number of influential persons, including the head of the Foreign Ministry Alexander Gorchakov.
Rasputin's personality
In the memoirs of his contemporaries, Grigory Rasputin was often presented as an odious person. He was accused of a mass of sins - drunkenness, debauchery, sectarianism, espionage for Germany, and interference in domestic politics. However, even the special commissions investigating the Rasputin case did not find anything incriminating.
It is curious that Rasputin's accusers, in particular, Archpriest George Shavelsky, admitted in their memoirs that they themselves did not know the elder or saw him several times, and that all the scandalous stories they described were based solely on the retelling of what had been heard somewhere and once.
Doctor of Philology Tatiana Mironova says that the analysis of the evidence and memories of those days tells about the methods of banal and impudent manipulation of public opinion by means of falsifications and provocations in the media.
And not without substitution, the scientist continues. The atrocities attributed to Grigory Rasputin were often a clown of doubles organized by swindlers for mercenary purposes. So, according to Mironova, it was with the scandalous story that took place in the Moscow restaurant "Yar". The investigation then showed that Rasputin was not in Moscow at that time.
Tragedy in Katyn
The massacre of captured Polish army officers, carried out in the spring of 1940, has long been attributed to Germany. After the liberation of Smolensk by Soviet troops, a special commission was created, which, after conducting its own investigation, concluded that Polish citizens were shot in Katyn by the German occupation forces.
However, as documents published in 1992 testify, the executions of Poles were carried out by the decision of the NKVD of the USSR in accordance with the decision of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks of March 5, 1940. According to the published data, a total of 21,857 people were shot, in addition to the military, there were mobilized Polish doctors, engineers, lawyers, and journalists.
Vladimir Putin, in the status of Prime Minister and President of the Russian Federation, has repeatedly voiced the opinion that the Katyn execution is a crime of the Stalinist regime and was caused, first of all, by Stalin's revenge for the defeat in the Soviet-Polish war of 1920. In 2011, Russian officials announced their readiness to consider the rehabilitation of the victims of the shooting.
New chronology
There are many falsifications in historiography - events, documents, personalities - but one of them clearly stands apart. This is the famous theory of mathematician Anatoly Fomenko, according to which the entire previous history is declared fake. The researcher believes that traditional history is biased, tendentious and designed to serve a particular political system.
Official science, of course, calls Fomenko's views pseudoscientific and, in turn, calls his historical concept falsification. In particular, Fomenko's statement that the entire history of antiquity was falsified during the Renaissance, in their opinion, is devoid of not only scientific, but also common sense.
According to scientists, even with a strong desire, it is impossible to rewrite such a voluminous layer of history. Moreover, the methodology that Fomenko uses in his "New Chronology" is taken from another science - mathematics - and its application for the analysis of history is incorrect. And the obsessive desire of Fomenko to unite all the ancient Russian rulers with the names of the Mongol khans among historians even causes a smile.
What historians agree with is Fomenko's statement that his New Chronology is a powerful ideological weapon. In addition, many believe that the main goal of the false scientist is commercial success. Historian Sergei Bushuev sees a serious danger in such scientific fiction, since its popularity may soon oust the real history of the country from the consciousness of society and our descendants.