These are parts of an article that I prepared for the Vesi magazine 5-6 years ago, but I never finished it (like several others). A month ago, Zodiak, with his question on another forum, provoked me to finish it at least as a draft (here I removed the introductory things about the Tartaries, and the "Pugachev rebellion" as the war of the Romanov Empire and Great Tartary, etc., on this forum it is unlikely to be repeated does it make sense). And simsim, opening his topic about Suvorov-79/80, provoked to publish this draft (which, contrary to my expectations, has not been finalized over the past month).
HIS LADY Count Suvorov-Ural
A. V. Suvorov, Count of Rymnik, Prince of Italy, etc., etc., is undoubtedly the most talented and successful commander in the history of the Russian Empire. He was sung in their odes by the best "piits" of the Catherine age (Derzhavin, Petrov, Kostrov, Khvostov, Dmitriev, it is true, interestingly, only starting from 1791, but this is a topic for a separate study). He was also loved by Soviet politicians, and consequently by historians and writers. He was in demand on the eve and during the Great Patriotic War. So the premiere of the famous film "Suvorov" - the first about Suvorov - with Nikolai Cherkasov in the title role took place on January 23, 1941, in the same year the first Soviet performance about Suvorov and the first performance of the large hall of the Central Theater of the Red Army in Moscow was "Commander Suvorov",and the Order of Suvorov was established by the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR dated July 29, 1942.
But it was not customary to mention one of the successful campaigns of the great commander in Soviet times (as, by the way, in the tsarist era, but for other reasons) - neither in books, nor in films, nor in poetry. Emelyan Pugachev was one of the few “class correct” large-scale personalities in Russian history, so the clash of the two heroes on “opposite sides of the barricades”, so as not to embarrass fellow citizens, was not advertised.
But if you wanted to dig deeper, professional historiography would tell you that it wasn't worth it. Yes, Suvorov was urgently transferred from the Turkish front, the most important for Russia, from the victoriously developing military campaign. But he got to the "Pugachev front" already, as they say, to the "shaposh parsing": as soon as he arrived, Pugachev was already captured, and Alexander Vasilyevich was instructed only to "stage" the prisoner to Simbirsk (in some books, the option goes right up to Moscow).
Here is one of the variants of the official version (which still has to argue with a different "conventional wisdom") as presented by the reserve colonel Nikolai Shakhmagonov (by the way, a graduate of the Suvorov school):
The widespread opinion that Suvorov's genius was needed to defeat Pugachev, there is a clear exaggeration.
On August 19, 1774, Suvorov was sent to the disposal of General-in-Chief P. I. Panin, when the rebellious hordes of Pugachev had already been defeated.
Providence saved Suvorov from beating up the rebels, among whom there were many simply deceived.
Ivan Ivanovich Mikhelson, a participant in the Seven Years and Russian-Turkish Wars, defeated Pugachev.
Arriving on the Volga, Suvorov took Michelson's detachment under his command, but it was not he who was destined to put the last point in the defeat of the rebellion, but Colonel of the Don Army, Alexei Ivanovich Ilovaisky, who commanded the vanguard."
This is according to the official version. But as soon as you start "digging" in the sources, the official version begins to raise great doubts. And the main argument is
THE EGG MYSTERY
From my school years, I perfectly remember my own reaction to the well-known legend: Catherine II renamed the Yaik River into Ural in order to erase even the memory of the Yaik Cossacks - the main force of the “Pugachev revolt”. “What idiocy! - I thought, - Who will forget that the river was called Yaik! So many maps, books, in the end - "people's memory". And today everyone knows very well that p. Ural - "former. Yaik ". Catherine's plan failed. And he had no chance of success!"
As shown by later own "research", this plan was 100% successful, or, as they say in such cases, 200%! Since this plan was … "with a double bottom."
A small digression is required here. When some 10 years ago I had the opportunity to “climb” the Internet with a good speed for those times, the main purpose of my “web surfing”, in addition to materials on my business, was maps. Antique maps of old cartographers from the sites of Russian lovers of antiquity, Western universities, antique auction houses, etc. The motive was the acquaintance with the books of Fomenko-Nosovsky shortly before. The collection of maps multiplied. For several years there were several hundred of them. The legendary "Tartary" was everywhere, one had only to cross a certain time line. Further more. A few of the findings were just crazy! They lined up into a single picture, painting the "mainstream" version of the "new chronologists" with bright colors. I told about them on occasion to friends, acquaintances,for fellow travelers on trains and airplanes, he even conducted several small seminars for those who were interested, began to write several chapters to the book and catalog maps … But everything hung for many years. Where to get free time to bring it all to mind)) …
But now I have only told about one such find.
On most of the maps dated by the "pre -ugachev" time, Yaik, not yet "called" the Ural, has another name - Rymnik (Rymn)! And the South Ural (sometimes the Middle) was called the Rymnik Mountains.
Riminicus (Laurent Frize, 1525, ibid. Rimnia Montes), Rhimnius and Rhymnius (Gerhard Mercator, 1595), Rymnus (Nicholas Fischer, 1680, ibid. Rymnice Mons), Rimnus (Vincenzo Maria Coronelli, 1693/1701), Rhymncus and Rhymni mountains (Kluver, 1697), Rhamnici Montes (Nicholas Witsen, 1705), etc.
Promotional video:
Fischer (Fischer), 1680; Coronelli, 1693/1701, etc.
(I'll insert the rest of the pictures later … if I can reach it)
(For those who believe that “Rymn” and “Rymnik” are “two big differences,” I remind you that according to TI the famous battle took place between the Rymna and Rymnik rivers)
This is also confirmed by the "New and Complete Geographical Dictionary of the Russian State, or Lexicon …" in 1789, published by Novikov:
Who remembers this now? Not a single historian has I found an indication of this old name of Yaik-Ural. (It is strange that the "new chronologists" did not pay attention to this either, except that the portvein once wrote about the "Rum mountains")
Catherine's plan paid off brilliantly. (In general, this character, oddly enough, is greatly underestimated in our country.) Moreover, the purpose of the "information strike" was not the people's memory of the Yaik Cossacks, but something more …
But more on that later. In the meantime, we found out: Ural = Yaik = Rymnik.
KNIGHT OF THE RIMNIK
But after all, in honor of Rymnik, Suvorov received his main title - Count of Rymnik! And after that, can you really continue to believe that the title bears the name of a small stream in Romania ?! Compare with other heroes of the Catherine's century (and later): Rumyantsev-Zadunaisky, Potemkin-Tavrichesky, Dolgorukov-Krymsky, Kutuzov-Smolensky, Dibich-Zabalkansky, Paskevich-Erivansky - all titled in honor of large regions (cities) where fateful campaigns. (I give an argument to my opponents: Orlov-Chesmensky. Or is this just an exception that proves the rule? Or is there somewhere to dig into Chesma's account?)
Those who are in the subject of NH do not need to repeat it twice - this is almost direct proof that it was Suvorov who played a decisive role in the defeat of Pugachev, because the decisive battles took place on Yaik-Rymnik, from here the uprising began, here was the main rate of "Pugachev".
And then, after the defeat of the main regular military forces of Tartaria, apparently, Suvorov within 2 years, as a result of an unprecedented campaign, annexed all the lands of Moscow (Great) Tartary. (more details below).
A SON DOES NOT RESPOND FOR THE FATHER?
In connection with the "newly discovered facts", the tragic fate of the son of our Count Rymniksky, Arkady Alexandrovich, looks completely detective.
“The dramatic nature of Suvorov-Rymniksky's relationship with his son ended in a gloomy finale, stunning in its mystical predestination: in 1811, the army's favorite, General Arkady Suvorov … drowned, crossing the flooded Rymnik, which his father simply called a stream. The glorious path that A. V. Suvorov, turned out to be fatal for his son. (I didn't write down the author, I can't find it now).
It's a well-known fact, only now … If the legend of the Romanian battle of 1789 is part of the "cover operation" (the battle, perhaps, was, but what was the name of that stream earlier? I could not find it on the old "Dosuvorov" maps), then somehow everything looks almost like a sacrifice to tie this stream "forever and ever" to the name of Suvorov …
HE PASSED BOTH CRIMEA AND RIM
The figure of Suvorov himself (as well as several other persons involved in those rebellious times) has been tragic for me for some time now.
It is clear that his official "autobiography" was written much later. Perhaps more interesting are the “anecdotes” about Suvorov that remained among the people, characterizing his “restless soul”.
Against the background of solid "Germans" - one of the few Russians … Is it Russian? The official version indistinctly repeats about Swedish roots. How strong are these roots (if any)? "I am Russian, - what a delight!", "Powder is not gunpowder, boucle is not a cannon, a scythe is not a cleaver, and I am not a German, but a natural hare!" etc. He probably considered himself a truly "natural hare" (if, again, this is not part of a later legend about him). But then the war with the legitimate dynasty, probable punitive expeditions to Yaik, in Siberia and the Crimea on the side of the "interventionists" (colleagues are entirely foreigners) could not but affect the psyche of a patriot and a renegade at the same time. "Cognitive (or rather, mental) dissonance," you know.
Then I understand his "madness" in retirement, seclusion in the countryside, and so on.
By the way, I mentioned the Crimea. This is the next "mission" of Rymniksky. In 1776, Suvorov was first appointed commander of the St. Petersburg division, and then sent to Crimea as the commander of the Moscow division in the troops of Lieutenant-General A. A. Prozorovsky.
I will not dwell on the Crimean campaign of Suvorov (1776 - 1778), somewhere on the forums they already wrote about the punitive aspects of this campaign, primarily in relation to the Christian population. This is how the remnants of Little Tartary disappeared.
By the way. For a long time, according to various sources, he was looking for the chronology of Suvorov's actions from the "transfer" of "Pugachev" (1774) to his appointment to the Crimea (November 1776). It turned out to be not so easy. But here is an indirect confirmation of the "Great Eastern Campaign". Under the year 1775, in rare biographies (most of them - a lacuna) it is written: "Suvorov is engaged in the elimination of rebel detachments and the pacification of the inhabitants who found themselves in the zone of influence of the uprising." And then what? From the end of 1775 to November 1776 A. V. allegedly receives a year's leave associated with the death of his father. Yeah, at a certain moment when, in fact, the map of Eurasia is being redrawn))).
So, what are the most important victories of Suvorov? Focsani, Romanian Rymnik, Italian hike? But the Ottoman Empire and others remained on the map, but the Small and Great (Moscow) Tartaria disappeared from the maps forever. This means that the most fateful ones are Rymnik and Crimea, the defeat, in fact, of compatriots and fellow believers.
Here's to you, "and Crimea and Rym." How many nonsense I had to read about the etymology of this saying! For me it was tightly linked with the events of 1774-1778 right away, when at the turn of the century “I found“Rymnik”.
And what do the experts write?
Gramota. Ru: “As for the word“eye”, it is not Rome distorted for rhyme, but, as evidenced by the dictionaries of marine terminology:“a metal ring for securing cables, blocks, stoppers, mooring lines, etc. The rings are installed on the deck and on the bulwarks of ships, in the bow and stern ends of boats, as well as on quays and quays."
Chains of galley convicts were also pulled through the eyelets. Thus, the eye is a kind of symbol of bondage.
As for the Crimea, it was there in the Cafe (modern Feodosia), roughly from the 12th century to 1675, that was the largest slave market in the Black Sea region, and later in Europe. So most likely the expression "To pass Crimea and the eye" can literally mean - to go through slavery and hard labor.
There is another version of the origin of this expression.
In the era of the slave trade, captured young men and women, after a thorough check and "quarantine" exposure, were transported from the Crimea across the Black Sea to another live labor exchange - the Asia Minor slave market in Rum …
It is impossible to prove either of these versions, but both, perhaps, have the right to exist (Belotserkovskaya Marina)
And this "eyelet for attaching the cables" walks through all etymological dictionaries and encyclopedias of proverbs and sayings.
True, not so long ago I discovered the opinions of people who, without presenting the general picture, are on the right etymological path.
Here E. A. Shirokoborodov, a researcher at the Starominsky District Museum (Kuban), in February 2009, in an article about the Cossacks, attributed the origin of the proverb to the time after the Crimean campaign of 1854-1857. Those. error only with time.
But I. L. Gorodetskaya, T. A. Fomenko, the Institute of Linguistic Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences, in general, in my opinion, the only ones who correlated the "ring" from the saying and p. Rymnik, “at which A. V. Suvorov defeated the army of the Turks; in the minds of the Russians, it was replaced by the similar-sounding word Rome. The original image has been erased, the heroic element has been lost, but the “seasonality” of the face has remained, so the new unit retained the meaning of the old one”.
We will talk about Rome-Rim later, back to the meaning of the saying. In my opinion, no “heroic element” was lost, and the meaning was always the same as it is now. It is felt by any Russian (and Little Russian) language. This "rubbish" is more often with a negative connotation. I checked my feelings on literary sources: basically (not always), criminals are characterized by a saying. Sometimes a proverb is marked as "jail slang". If we are talking about a woman … You yourself know what shade. I came across, for example, a modernized version of "And Crimea, and Rym, and Leningradka …"
This is probably how the people treated the Russian renegades and mercenaries who passed in 1774-1778 "both Crimea and Rum" …
(I also encountered a variant, probably an old one: "And Crimea, and Rym, and Turetsky Val …" - I think it confirms my version).
ABOUT RIM AND ROME
And the last thing. Is the consonance between Rome and Rome accidental? Without getting carried away with completely revolutionary versions, it is logical to ask the question: "Maybe some individual facts of history took place not in Rome, in the Rim?" Moreover (portvein will confirm) some read Rymn as Rummus (and Rome in the whole East was called Rum, Rum, Urum).
By the way, there is also food for thought: Kazakh. Urim (Türkic Urim, Ürim) - Asia Minor (in the collection of versions of "Rome on Pontus"?). From the Kazakh proverb-malignant "Ulıng Urım'ğa, Qızıng Qırım'ğa ketsin" - "Let your son go to Asia Minor and your daughter to Crimea" Murat-Khadzhi Iliouf (Candidate of Philology, Semey, Kazakhstan) deduces the Russian proverb “Both Crimea and Rym” (Kairat Saki, an orientalist and employee of the Kazakhstani Foreign Ministry, for example, considers the latter to be a derivative of an ancient Turkic proverb).
PS IS THE TRUTH GROWING? NAME RETURN
This can be considered a historical joke. Or?..
Above, we said that the Southern Urals were called the Rymnik Mountains. This name was almost completely eradicated in the last quarter of the 18th century. But in the 40s of the next century, it returned as … the name of a new village. Then, by decree of Nicholas I, Cossack fortresses-settlements began to be created on the Trans-Ural plateau. In honor of the great victories they were named Chesma, Paris, Leipzig, Kulikovsky, Borodinovka, etc. Including Rymniksky in the Troitsky district of the Chelyabinsk province (now in the Bredinsky district of the Chelyabinsk region). Naturally - in honor of the victory on the river. Rymnik is the one in Romania. And 68 km from the former river. Rymnik is the one that is Ural.
PPS
Wow! An entry appeared on Wikipedia in an article about r. Ural: "On old maps the Ural is called Rhymnus fluvius." Earlier, it seems, was not.