There have been many invasions in the history of both Russia and Europe, but the Tatar-Mongolian occupies a unique place among them. The problem of Mongol-Tatar influence has always worried Russian society. There are three diametrically opposed answers to this question.

1. Russian people did not suffer from the Horde yoke. (L. N. Gumilyov). As evidence, a chronicle text is given in which Khan Dzhanibek is called a "good" king. The words of the chronicle “this king Chyanibek Azbyakovich is very kind to Christianity” must be evaluated in the context of the era. The chronicler praised the king for moderation: he was not too cruel - so, in the early 40s. 14th century released to Russia the myropolite Theognost, whom he held in custody for 600 rubles. Good tsar: he could have killed the metropolitan for such a thing. But most of all, the statement that “the few Mongols of Batu only passed through Russia and returned to the steppe” is surprising. And not a word - how "passed"?

A few supporters of this point of view believe that the main danger to Russia was not the Mongols, but the West, and therefore the alliance of Alexander Nevsky with the Horde was vital. However, how do such conclusions agree with ideas about the black ages of the Mongol-Tatar yoke? After all, the historical evidence of the chronicles about the invasions of punitive detachments, the Battle of Kulikovo itself can hardly be questioned.

2. The Mongol-Tatar yoke brought ruin, death of people, delayed development, but did not fundamentally affect the further historical fate of Russia.

This position was occupied by S. Solovyov, V. Klyuchevsky, S. Platonov, M. Pokrovsky. According to this point of view, Russia only slowed down its development, lagged behind due to large-scale destruction and human losses.

3. The Mongol-Tatars had a decisive influence on the social and social organization, on the development of statehood, the Muscovite state.

So, let's look at historical realities.

In the 20s. 13th century Russian principalities first encountered hordes of Mongol-Tatars. (By the way, this name does not mean a completely defined people, but an association of dozens of nomadic tribes that arose at the beginning of the 13th century, where the Mongols were a small part). At the request of the Polovtsian neighbors, some princes took part in the battle with the Mongols on the river. Kalka in May 1223. The battle ended in the defeat of the allies, and from 1236 Khan Batu began the conquest of Russia itself. It took four years and ended in December 1240 with the fall of Kyiv. During the last quarter of the thirteenth century at least 15 conquest campaigns of the Mongol-Tatars took place. In the areas of invasion, cities, villages, crafts were destroyed, stone construction was interrupted. Diplomatic relations of Russia became difficult. According to archaeologists in the XI-XIII centuries. There were 74 cities in Russia. 19 were ruined and destroyed. In 14 of them, life did not resume, and 15 cities turned into villages.

The population of Russia has decreased. Thousands of Russian slaves fell into the Horde. This is a lot, if we keep in mind that Ryazan, Rostov had no more than 1000 people, and Kyiv, Chernigov 20-30 thousand inhabitants. First of all, artisans and women were taken into slavery.

But is this the only consequence of the invasion?

In the end, if the matter were limited only to the ruin of Russian cities and villages, then after their restoration, the revival of independence, Russia could repeat, continue the European path of development, even if with a delay of several centuries. This, however, did not happen. Why? Is it only the fact that the Tatar-Mongol invasion for a very long time mechanically delayed the development of Russia, threw it back? Or is it necessary and legitimate to talk about something more in this case?

In our opinion, two points should be noted:

1. The Mongol-Tatar invasion, which lasted two and a half centuries (which corresponds to the change of 8-9 generations of people during this time), served as a natural watershed in the socio-historical paths of the Western European and Russian parts of our continent.

2. In the historical sense, it was the Tatar-Mongolian invasion - its scale, the need to resist it and liberate it from the centuries-old yoke - that became the main factor that predetermined the formation of a unique centralized Russian state.

So, despite the fact that during the period of the Mongol-Tatar invasion, North-Eastern Russia did not become integral part Golden Horde (Russia had its own legal norms, and not the legal code of the Mongols. The Mongol-Tatars did not eliminate the Russian princes, did not create their own dynasty in Russia ... Golden Horde did not insist on a change of faith), it largely influenced the process of formation of the Russian people and the Muscovite state.

How Mongolian yoke influenced socio-political development?

The nature of the socio-political relations of feudal society depended on the nature of the relations within the ruling class. The Mongols turned the Russian princes into their subjects, since 1243 the rights to the great reign were granted to the applicants for them by the khan, who not only humiliated the princes, but often deprived them of their lives. The princes received awards for faithful service - labels for separate lands from the khan. The Russian princes absorbed the unquestioning obedience of their subjects. Could friendship relations develop freely if the princes were servants of the Mongol khans. Under these conditions, druzhina relations could not develop, they were replaced by relations of subjects.

In choosing the political path of development of Russia, the death of the ruling class played a colossal role. The princely squads were the first to enter the battle with the Mongols, that is, the Russian nobility took the first blow. For example, in Ryazan, out of 12 princes, 9 died, in Rostov - out of 3 - two, in Suzdal - out of 9 - five. Together with old nobility the traditions of vassal-retinue relations with the princes were leaving, and the new nobility was formed on the basis of relations of allegiance.

So, by the time Batu came, the paths of Russian feudalism had not been determined by history. It cannot be ruled out that even without the Horde yoke, in the confrontation between vassal-druzhina and princely-subject relations, the latter would have won.

The yoke influenced not only the choice of the type of Russian feudalism, but also the pace of its development. It delayed the feudal fragmentation of the country for 240 years.

It was then that the principle of the Mongolian right to land was established in Russia, according to which all land belonged to the khan. There were no private landowners. It was this principle of land ownership that Muscovite Russia adopted from the Tatars. And when Moscow managed to get out from under the Tatar yoke, its development did not follow the proto-bourgeois path (variants of Novgorod and Galician-Volyn Rus), but the path of the Golden Horde. Taking away from the princes their patrimonies and destinies, Moscow returned them to them, but not as property, but in the form of a salary for service.

The Horde yoke deformed Russian statehood. Fiscal matters became the main ones - the timely collection of all kinds of requisitions. Hence the appearance of monetary units of clearly eastern origin, tanga, altyn, etc. Under the conditions of Horde dependence, a type of statesman was formed, whose public concern was to ensure the timely receipt of money and keep his subjects in check. Russia inherited from the Horde and political instability - the Grand Duke's power did not set itself tasks of national importance. Let's take the construction of roads as an example - if we compare the road in the Russian principality or on the lands of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, then there are two big differences. Or take environmental issues. In 12th-century France, royal ordinances stipulated that new forests should be planted in place of those cut down. We had nothing like this before Peter I.

The Tatar-Mongol invasion is the first, extremely important milestone at which the further historical paths of the western and eastern parts of geographical Europe sharply diverge in the period after the 12th century.

Russia, which was Maksimov Albert Vasilyevich

You never know in Russia ... Dmitriev?

You never know in Russia ... Dmitriev?

The coins minted in those years can also tell a lot about the secrets of Russian history. This topic was covered in some detail and interestingly in the works of Nosovsky and Fomenko. However, I will make some comments. According to these authors, in Russia there never was a Tatar-Mongol yoke, as well as the invasion itself, and the Golden Horde is nothing more than a military structure of the Russian Empire, in which the Tatars also lived on the outskirts.

Nosovsky and Fomenko write: “However, how then to understand the following facts: Edigey (i.e., allegedly a Tatar khan) wrote to Vitovt (supposedly a Lithuanian prince, and according to our reconstruction, he is also Grand Duke Vasily Dmitrievich (This is all according to the reconstruction of Nosovsky and Fomenko - Auth.): "Pay tribute and depict my seal on the Lithuanian money. "Vytautas himself demanded the same from Khan Timur Kutluk."

Let me explain the background of this story. On TV in 1399, a great military clash was being prepared between Lithuania, which had gained strength, and the Horde, which had weakened in civil strife. Vitovt demands from Kutluk that he become “his son and tributary”, and “also wanted the Mongols to depict his sign or seal on their money ... Khan demanded a period of three days.” At this time, Edigei with a strong army comes to the aid of Khan Kutluk. Yedigei tells Vitovt about Kutluk that he “justly could recognize you as a father: you older in years, but younger than me: and so express humility to me, pay tribute and depict my seal on Lithuanian money.

That is, as you can see, everything is clear in this situation, but Nosovsky and Fomenko simply did not fully understand this historical situation.

Now let's compare individual facts and conclusions made by Nosovsky and Fomenko on the monetary topic. At the same time, under A - their conclusion, under B - my conclusion.

1. On the coins of Dmitry Donskoy there is a signature in Arabic: “Sultan Tokhtamysh Khan”.

A. Dmitry Donskoy is Tokhtamysh

B. Coins were printed in the early eighties of the XIV century, when Donskoy was obliged to print the name of the Horde Khan Tokhtamysh. Why must? Read the story of Vytautas and the Horde khans.

2. On Russian coins, there is often a tamga - a Tatar seal in the form of a certain ornament, but a similar image is found in some Moscow cathedrals.

A. The Grand Dukes and the Khans of the Horde are the same persons (but Russians).

B. All the great princes, starting from 1238, are from the Tatars, from the clan of Genghis Khan (Genghis Khan was only Russian on the paternal side, and even then half. ornaments - seals in the paintings of Moscow churches and on coins just confirms the theory proved on the pages of this book.

3. The famous Russian double-headed eagle first began to be minted on Horde coins, and on Russian coins a hundred years later.

A. Since the Golden Horde and Russia are one and the same, then both coins are Russian-Horde.

B. Perfect confirmation of an alternative version of history. The double-headed eagle came to Russia with the great Genghisid princes.

4. On the coins of Ivan III, when the Horde yoke was overthrown, there are Tatar inscriptions.

A. Russian money was issued by the princes for their subjects - the Tatars. (This conclusion of the authors does not fit into any gate at all).

B. Ivan III is another Tatar on the Russian throne.

5. How, then, to interpret a coin with an inscription in the center: “The Just Sultan Dzhanibek”, and on the same side in a circle: “Prince Vasily Dm.”.

Several remarks should be made here.

Firstly, Nosovsky and Fomenko consider Dzhanibek to be John-Bek, that is, Ivan Kalita. And Ivan Kalita, by the way, is the great-grandfather of Vasily Dmitrievich.

Thirdly, Dzhanibek ruled in the Horde in 1339-1359, but died when Donskoy was not yet the Moscow prince, and Vasily Dmitrievich was not yet in sight. So dead end?

No, everything is perfectly consistent with the alternative version of history offered to the reader. Vasily is a basileus, sovereign, so let's read the inscription in a new way: "Grand Duke Sovereign Dm." If Dm. - Dmitry, why should we talk only about the Donskoy, the white light did not converge on it like a wedge. Remember, in the film “Hello, I am your aunt”, when asked about Don Pedro, aunt (Kalyagin) said: “You never know Pedro in Brazil!” So in Russia there were quite a few Dmitrievs. At the time of Dzhanibek was Grand Duke Suzdalsky Dmitry Konstantinovich, who soon became (but after the death of Dzhanibek) the Grand Duke of Vladimir, bypassing the minor Donskoy.

By the way, a curious fact: in 1328, Kalita received a label for a great reign, but Khan Uzbek divided the great reign equally, fearing the strengthening of someone, giving Novgorod and Kostroma Kalita, and Vladimir and the Volga region to Alexander Suzdalsky, uncle Dmitry Konstantinovich.

And one more thing: the name Dmitry was also common among the Tatars. In 1362, Olgerd defeated three Tatar princes: Kutlubug, Hadonibey and Demetrius.

6. For Russian coins of the XIV-XV centuries, "any Tatar coins were taken indiscriminately, often old, with the name of a long-dead khan, as samples for copying."

A. Again: Russia and the Horde are one and the same.

B. Brilliant confirmation of the theory I propose. So, Tatar names are minted on Russian coins, but others, not of those khans who ruled in the Horde in the year of minting the coin. These names are the TATAR NAMES OF THE NEXT RUSSIAN GRAND PRINCES, Tatars by origin. As for the names of the khans, many names are close in sound. For example, in the annals of some Temirs, one can count half a dozen, there were two Tokhtamysh plus another Tokhta, Edigerov - two, Edigeev - also two, and so on. Some prince Tokhtamysh comes to Russia, becomes a grand duke, a coin is minted with his Tatar name. Why is it believed that it could only be the same Khan Tokhtamysh known to us? This is for example.

7. On many coins of Vasily Dmitrievich there is an inscription "Rarai".

A. No one can explain it.

B. The explanation is simple: Rarai is the Tatar name of one of the three great princes, bred in our history under the name of Vasily Dmitrievich. By the way, Rarai is very similar to the name Mamai, that is, a completely Tatar name.

8. Tver coins depict incomprehensible horned and tailed, but bipedal creatures.

A. Conclusion (more precisely, the question): the appearance of the official national coin is too strange.

B. My answer will also be a question: what about, for example, the coins of Poland?

A short summary of the monetary theme. I fully agree with the following words of Nosovsky and Fomenko: “All these coins were not bilingual, but bilingual, that is, the name of one ruler was printed on the coin ... but in two languages ​​- both in Russian and in Tatar.” But I have one significant remark: according to Nosovsky and Fomenko, this ruler was both the khan and the grand prince of one single state of the Horde-Rus, but my opinion is that this ruler is the prince of only Russian lands, but he himself is a Tatar, native of the Horde.

A lot has been written about the Tatar influence on the culture of Russia, the way of life of its inhabitants. However, a number of interesting points should be noted. The Russian nobility dressed in the Tatar way: dressing gowns, bloomers, Tatar headdresses and boots. The Russians fought on low Tatar horses, used Tatar bows and arrows, curved sabers, wore quilted Tatar armor, and hunted with tamed falcons. There is nothing to say about the multitude of Tatar words in Russian, one has only to add that the famous Russian “hurrah” is the Tatar “bey”.

Here is a description by foreigners of Russian warriors in the 16th century: “Their horses are small, not shod, saddles are adapted so that riders can easily turn in all directions and draw a bow ... Their common weapons are bows, arrows, an ax and a flail ... Some of nobles wear armor, skillfully made chain mail, in the form of scales ... others wear dresses lined with cotton ... Everything they do, whether they attack the enemy, or pursue him, or run away from him, they do suddenly and quickly. According to the description, as you can see, ordinary Tatars. However, many were Tatars in the second or third generations.

In this regard, it is interesting to cite an excerpt from Ilovaisky about Alexander Nevsky: “Alexander was very angry with his son Vasily and sent him to the Niz, that is, to the Suzdal land; and he severely punished some of his warriors for their rebellious advice: whom he ordered to be blinded, to whom his nose was cut off. The barbarian yoke was already making itself felt in these punishments. For traditional history, it was still too early for the Slav Nevsky to adopt the barbaric Tatar customs: the yoke had just begun. And according to AV, Nevsky, being a Tatar, acted like a Tatar.

In the late 40s of the XIII century, Daniel of Galicia traveled to Pressburg to meet with the Hungarian king. Here is what the Ipatiev Chronicle writes about this: “The Germans are marveling at the Tatar weapons.” Where did Daniil get Tatar equipment and weapons, he only became a tributary of the Khan for three years?

In Russia, Muslim customs began to take root. We are proud of our original churches with onion domes, which are not found in any other Orthodox country. Take a look at the same Cathedral of the Intercession on Red Square: it is similar at the same time to Orthodox church and a Muslim mosque. Indeed, these domes are very reminiscent of Muslim temples.

In Russia, unlike Poland and Lithuania, there was no drunkenness: it was allowed to drink only a few times a year, and they drank honey and beer. And the nobility locked women in towers, not allowing them to go out into the light, true, there were no burqas, but there were still those headscarves on their heads.

Ilovaisky refers to the unpublished work of the archaeologist Filimonov, in which it was proved that “the so-called. The Monomakh's hat was made by Muslim-Egyptian masters of the 13th century and was sent as a gift by the Egyptian Sultan Kalaun to the Khan of the Golden Horde Uzbek, and from the latter passed to Ivan Kalita. Isn't it interesting?

In the book of Murad Aji "Wormwood of the Polovtsian Field" one can read: "The Turks are always arguing among themselves: who is better, whose family is ancient, and therefore more important." In the same way, the boyars argued in local disputes: whose family is better, who should sit over whom. And here is what Leontovich wrote back in the 19th century: “In the Mongolian administration, even under the first Chinggisids, all those local customs were developed, with which researchers of local life in the Muscovite state are currently acquainting us.” And he also has about the Moscow and Mongolian local institutions: “The affinity of the institutions could in no way be accidental; it, on the contrary, points to the genetic connection of our parochialism with the Horde”.

We know from history that on the outskirts Russian Empire the emperor was called the white king. But it was not the color of the skin. The Golden Horde was also called the White Horde, and the Horde Khan was called that: the white king. And on European maps, Moscow lands were called Great Tataria.

In 1409-1411 the Teutonic Order waged war against Poland and Lithuania. It was during this war that the famous Battle of Grunwald took place, which put an end to the advance of the Germans to the east. At school, we were told that it was thanks to the courage of the Russian regiments, who withstood the powerful blow of the Germans, that the allied forces won. But one cannot read in any textbook that during this war a third of all allied troops were Tatars.

Look how ordinary Russian chronicles write about the Horde. It would seem how much interesting things can be written about the unusual way of life, appearance, beliefs of the Tatar-Mongols, their strange customs. But this is not in the annals, we do not even know where exactly the Russian princes went to the Horde, where the khan's capital was located. Instead, the chronicles tell about the everyday life of the country: who was born, who got married, about the weather, the construction of churches, fires. And why? Just because the Tatar-Mongols were not a novelty for the inhabitants of Russia, these are the descendants of their old acquaintances: Polovtsy, Torks, Bulgars, Berendeys. And princes were often born and raised in the Horde, and with the next prince, the ruling elite was replenished with new Tatars, who quickly assimilated.

The descendants of these noble Tatars in Russia became more and more, and, finally, their quantitative accumulation turned into a qualitative one: they became a real force in the struggle for power. If earlier the grand dukes were appointed from the Horde Genghisids, then after 1425 we can talk about the presence of conditions for the seizure of power by local, partially Russified Genghisids. The tradition began to include the transfer of the throne by inheritance from father to son, from brother to brother, that is, within the same family. But even here, power was often not transferred peacefully, brothers and nephews clashed with each other in a deadly battle. The role of the Horde in determining the contenders for the reign fell, and the number of contenders themselves increased. 1425 - the year of the onset of the Time of Troubles in Russia, ending with the accession of the first Romanov to the Russian throne ...