Rus Articles Journal

Where residents of Yaroslavl put the Kremlin?

Now I are not a hot admirer Fomenko and Nosovsky any more though I assume that in their theory there are many noteworthy moments. But when I only read their “Empire“ in due time, so like that began to look for confirmation of their ideas everywhere.

I Come on affairs to Yaroslavl. At once decided to go sightseeing. I Ask
- Where you have Kremlin?
in the downtown show Me:
- Yes here it!

Everything is it seems normal: towers, walls etc. But I am able to read. On the plate it is written: “Monastery“ (whether XVI, whether the 17th century, already I will not remember). I come to museum of local lore. The guide shows the model of the ancient Kremlin with stone walls, towers, gate. I ask the guide:

- Where Kremlin?
It to me again, as passersby on the street:
- Wons in the center costs, did not see, perhaps?
Ya to it:
- I am able to Read, there “monastery“ it is written, and not especially ancient. Kremlin where?
- Ah and! It burned down in the time of troubles.

I ask it:
- Walls, towers - stone were?
- Yes.
- So where put?
- Burned down.

I to it:
- As burned down? It is stone!! We have Moscow how many times burned. At Napoleon almost all burned out, and the Kremlin and monasteries cost everything - and nothing.
A she goggled and repeats:
- Burned down. Burned down. Burned down.

All crowd of tourists though does not catch up in what business, but too vividly so is interested - and is valid where supposedly you, residents of Yaroslavl, the Kremlin stone put?

Well, I decided it to finish absolutely and I ask:
- is fine, let it pass, with your Kremlin, and it is possible for you a question just as to the historian? - Give
! - and at most, probably, from heart went away that with the Kremlin lagged behind.
- Why Nizhny Novgorod so is called?
- Well, because below Great.
- As you defined it?
It to me it is malicious:
- you what, the young man, did not see a Russia map?
- Saw, and you saw medieval cards? Where they have a top where a bottom? Where North, where South? Even you in the museum have reproductions of these cards, and on them it is visible that the top and a bottom was defined only by a watercourse.

It in a full stupor. I continue:
- If is Nizhny Novgorod then, above on the Volga Current has to be - Top. Where? Perhaps Fomenko`s rights, and Yaroslavl is and is Top or otherwise how more ancient and in due time larger and significant - Veliky Novgorod, and the Kremlin did not burn down, and was how in any textbook on stories it is written, - is destroyed by Ivan the Terrible?
answered Nothing to me the guide, with it the hysterics began.

Novgorodov in Russia (and not only in Russia) there was much. Nothing prevented to be to Novgorod on Volkhov and Yaroslavl before began to be called Yaroslavl, quite could carry the name of Novgorod. All question only in what of numerous ours Novgorodov was called Great (though such name cannot exclude too that during the different periods of our history it could be the different cities).

That to whom non-standard versions of Fomenko are interesting I can recommend to watch the movie “History: science or fiction? - 6. Mister Veliky Novgorod“. I consider that it is possible to guess and argue what of Novgorodov carried a rank Great. However Novgorod on Volkhov, in any case, cannot be in any way that Novgorod which was destroyed by Ivan the Terrible as anyone, having arrived there, can admire walls and to towers of the Kremlin, according to the school textbooks razed by the Moscow tsar. And here Yaroslavl for this role approaches more - it is nearly only city of the Golden Ring which lost under certain strange circumstances of the Kremlin.

And it occurred when fortresses in Russia still did not lose the defensive value at all. Russia constantly was at war, and in the Volga region is very active, and the large trade city on Volga without strong walls could not feel at that time in safety.

Demolition of the Kremlin was not caused by expansion of the city (as in Moscow demolition of walls China - the cities and that in much later times) as on the place of the demolished walls there is a park, the waste ground and several incidentally remained constructions. Even the downtown after the Time of Troubles was displaced aside, to the place of the monastery built already at Romanov. All this can speak about the terrible tragedy which comprehended Yaroslavl in those days, Ryazan of times of invasion of Batyya, quite comparable with destiny (to it the t was necessary to move to the new place, too. to. on old nobody wanted to lodge), but which we do not see in official history.

In the same Yaroslavl there is a remarkable museum, do not remember precisely the name, something like “The museum of the ancient Russian book“. The museum actually unique - probably, only in the country where all most ancient Russian chronicles and books are collected (well, or that probably is more true, - their copies).

And so, except the birchbark manuscripts found in Novgorod on Volkhov, and still, maybe, any modern finds we have no ancient Russian record now: on all chronicles there are following dates: for example, the chronicle of the 11th century - the copy XVI or XVII, and even later centuries, up to XIX, and, once again I will repeat, any original.

I did not subtract all this at Nosovsky and Fomenko or in any pop literature, and itself personally saw in this museum, and anyone can visit it and itself personally to be convinced of it.

That is at the time of Romanov the active copying of our history accompanied with destruction - well was conducted, or we will tell more correctly - traceless loss of original chronicles after their copying. Though, most likely, information filtration, its censorship began much earlier, with that moment when the Moscow princes began to unite Russia around themselves.

The opinion of that Ryurik dynasty who did not want association with Moscow interested them a little therefore so reached us a little (even in copies) chronicles Kiev, Tver, Novgorod, for which Muscovites, and during earlier period - vladimirsko - the Suzdal princes, were worse than Tatars (or perhaps they for them Tatars also were?) .

If to remember that got up with Kiev Yury Dolgorukiy and Andrey Bogolyubsky, then Baty before them turns pale, and Ivan the Terrible`s punishment of Novgorod is colourfully described in any school textbook. All of us very well know from numerous books, movies and an other agitpropaganda about feats of the young prince Alexander Nevsky. Though that is interesting, no archaeological confirmations of these “grandiose“ battles (The Nevsky fight and Ice slaughter) are found yet and places of those battles are definitely not defined (this is not Fomenko told, it is a historic fact).

And in foreign sources about these fights nothing is written (I mean not only a defeated party for which defeat would be quite logical to become silent, generally, but also the neighboring powers for which loud defeat of uneasy neighbors could suit only).

But about details of further life of the Saint prince at school do not speak to us and very few people are interested in it, and in vain. Further it is very interesting: his friendship and nearly relationship with ordynets (Baty declares Alexander the adopted son), rough handlings over risen against Tatars, persecution even on the brother who dared to oppose the Horde.

But if to look at all this under slightly other corner - can, not as at Fomenko, having directly declared Vladimirsko - the Suzdal Russia “A horde and Tartariya“, and somehow it is rather on - gumilevsk as a certain military alliance of the Vladimir princes and nomads (the Tatars but any not of Mongols!) - that everything will rise on the places.

Vladimir, and later Moscow used Tatars as allies or maybe just as mercenaries, dealing shortly their hands with competitors and uniting Russian lands under the power.