Tatars and Mongols are one people. Tatars or Mongols? There were no Mongol horses in the Mongol troops

It is no coincidence that the slogan from George Orwell’s famous book “1984” was chosen for this chapter. And before moving on to other chapters, where the period of the Tatar yoke will be considered, we need to understand the technique of “substitution of concepts”, which is constantly used in Russian historiography.

The technique of “substitution of concepts” is not new; it can also be called “fighting at windmills” or “ad absurdum”. The meaning of this technique is that a certain false thesis is introduced, and then it is powerfully exposed.

One of these “theses” was the Tatars or Mongols.

For example, they say and already write “Mongol invasion”. And then they ask in surprise, “Where are the traces of the Mongols?” Well, being in a cornered position, they always try to add: “Tatars are not Tatars” or “Tatars are Bulgars.”

So let’s figure it out: who are the Tatars, where and when did they appear on the territory of the Russian Federation, are Tatars Tatars or not, and of course what was the motive for the extremely interesting transformation: Tatars-> Tatar-Mongols-> Mongol-Tatars- > Mongols. This transformation is a typical technique that can conventionally be called “boil a frog over low heat.” The fact is that if the frog is placed in water, which is heated slowly, the frog will not even notice how it is cooked. The same thing happens with the already mentioned transformation: Tatars-> Tatar-Mongols-> Mongol-Tatars-> Mongols. Indeed, all Slavic chronicles speak exclusively about the Tatars! There is not a word about the Mongols in them! However, already in Soviet time the term “Tatar-Mongols” appears, which in post-perestroika times is slowly being replaced by “Mongol-Tatars”, which in our time is being replaced simply by “Mongols” - there is a complete analogy with boiling a frog over low heat. It would seem that, in accordance with this technique, the next step should be replacing the “Mongols” with “Russians”... and this has actually already been done! Not yet official, so far at the level of “alternative history” of scoundrels and liars like Fomenko, Nosovsky and Zadornov.

As we can see, if the term “Tatars” were immediately replaced by “Mongols”, then this substitution would become too obvious, so the replacement lasted a long time with a gradual transformation:

Tatars -> Tatar-Mongols->Mongol-Tatars-> Mongols.

What do the chronicles say?

Here are a few quotes from the Laurentian Chronicle:

"In the year 6731 (1223). Vsevolod Yuryevich left Novgorod to join his father in Vladimir, and the Novgorodians called Yaroslav Vsevolodovich from Pereyaslavl to reign.

In the same year, peoples came, about whom no one knows exactly who they are, and where they came from, and what their language is, and what tribe they are, and what faith. And they call them Tatars..."

“And we heard that the Tatars captured many peoples: Yasses, Bezes, Kasogs, and beat up many godless Polovtsians, and drove others away.”

“Having learned about this, the Russian princes Mstislav of Kiev, and Mstislav of Toropetsky, and Mstislav of Chernigov, and other princes decided to go against the Tatars, believing that the Tatars would attack them.”

“And the Russian princes set out on a campaign, and fought with the Tatars, and were defeated by them, and only a few escaped death; those who were destined to survive ran away, and the rest were killed.”

"That same year in the winter they came from eastern countries Godless Tatars came to the Ryazan land through the forest, and began to conquer the Ryazan land, and captured it as far as Pronsk, and took the entire Ryazan principality, and burned the city, and killed their prince. And some of the prisoners were crucified, others were shot with arrows, and others had their hands tied from behind. They set many holy churches on fire, burned monasteries and villages, and took considerable booty from everywhere; then the Tatars went to Kolomna. In the same winter, Vsevolod, the son of Yuri, the grandson of Vsevolod, came out against the Tatars. And they met at Kolomna, and there was a great battle. And they killed the governor of Vsevolodov, Eremey Glebovich, and killed many of Vsevolod’s other husbands, and Vsevolod ran to Vladimir with a small retinue. And the Tatars went to Moscow. That same winter, the Tatars took Moscow, and the governor was killed by Philip Nyanka for his devout Christian faith, and Prince Vladimir, the son of Yuri, was taken prisoner. And people were beaten, from old man to infant, and the city and holy churches were set on fire, and all the monasteries and villages were burned...”

So, we see that everywhere we are talking exclusively about the Tatars.

Here you need to understand that foreigners (in in this case- Russians) could only learn the name of this people - Tatars - from the Tatars themselves, i.e. Tatars are a self-name.

Sometimes, a number of falsifiers try to present the case as if the Tatars were those who walked in the front ranks and when they went into battle, they shouted “Tatars”, “Tatars”, and that’s why this name arose.

This version does not stand up to criticism, because... on the one hand, the Tatars were known to the Chinese since the 3rd century AD, and on the Yenisei monuments dating back to the 7th century AD. the Tatars are fixed forever. On the other hand, the Tatars never used the name of their ethnic group as a battle cry; they usually shouted “hurray,” from where this word migrated into the Russian language, and besides, it is generally impossible to hear who and what is shouting in the heat of battle.

On the origin of the ancient Tatars

Getting to know a short history Turkic Khaganate, we will inevitably encounter alliances of ancient Tatar tribes under the names "Otuz-Tatars" and "Tokuz-Tatars", known from the Orkhon-Yenisei runic writings on gravestones of the 7th - 8th centuries. If we talk about them in a little more detail, then the main ethans of the history of the ancient Tatars in their homeland in Central Asia presented this way. The Otuz Tatars, first mentioned at the funeral of the founder of the Turkic Kaganate Bumyn Kagan and one of his successors Istemi Kagan, fought battles against the Tyu-Gyu (Turgesh) under the leadership of Ilteris Kagan a hundred years later - in the second half of the 7th century. All this is written on the monument of the famous commander, Prince Kul-Tegin (died in 731). The son of Ilteris Kagan, Bilge Kagan, brother of Kul-Tegin, waged wars against the Oghuz and Tokuz Tatars in 722 - 723 - this is known from the inscriptions on the gravestone of Bilge Kagan himself, who died in 734.

Thus, in a letter from the Chinese Li-Deyu, written to the Uyghur Urmuzu in 842, it is reported about such tribes, and in the report of the envoy of Emperor Wang-Yen-ting already at the end of the 10th century, in 981, it speaks of eight Tatar tribes.

The Tatars lived south of the Mongols Eastern Transbaikalia and modern Mongolian steppes. They came into contact with the Mongols, constantly communicated with them and were soon involved in the process of creating the Mongol state under the leadership of Khabul Khan, later his great-grandson Genghis Khan, who united all the scattered Mongol and some neighboring tribes into one centralized state. It included a significant part of the ancient Tatars.

In Chinese, Mongolian and Persian historical sources The history of the Mongols and their southern neighbors the Tatars is described in some detail. At the same time, according to these materials, the Tatars, unlike the Mongols, appear to be tribes of a different ethnic group, namely Turkic. Even despite some inconsistency in the information of individual authors, the history of the Turkic-Tatar tribes differs from the history of the Mongols and other related tribes (Oirots, Merkits and others). In one Chinese Chronicle XIII century, for example, it is specifically stated that the Tatars “come from a special kind of sha-to.” The Sha-to tribes are a confederation of tribes of Western Turks who lived in the 7th century in the area of ​​​​present Fergana in Central Asia. In the 8th - 9th centuries, some of them moved to the territory Northern China. Chinese sources note the White Tatars, calling them Onguts (in Mongolian - Chagan-Tatars), who were Turkic-speaking.

After the war between the Mongols and Tatars in 1198, sources note four large Tatar tribes: Chagan-Tatars, Alchi-Tatars, Dutaut-Tatars, Alukhai-Tatars.

And not in vain later eminent historian Middle Ages Rashid ad-din (XIV century), also the secretary of state of the Iranian ruler Ghazan Khan, who had a huge library of valuable manuscripts, which our Persian author successfully used when creating his classic work “Collection of Chronicles,” listed 14 Turkic tribes, one of the most he called the largest of them Tatar, which at one time consisted of 70 thousand yurts (houses, families). This is what he wrote about the Tatars:

“Because of [their] extreme greatness and honorable position, other Turkic clans, with [all] the differences in their ranks and names, came under their name and were all called Tatars.” This is an authentic and very serious message, and its author's definitions are truly encyclopedic. By the way, the largest Russian orientalist, academician V.V. Bartold wrote that “the work of Rashid ad-din was a huge historical encyclopedia, which no people in Asia or Europe had in the Middle Ages.”

We said that part of the Tatars were assimilated by the Mongols. We can say that assimilation was even mutual. In any case, a noticeable Turkic layer in the then Mongolian language associated specifically with the Tatars. It is known that Genghis Khan himself knew and Tatar language; There is some information that his mother, the beautiful Hoelun, was born from a mixed Tatar-Mongol marriage. By the way, one Genghis Khan, unlike all the Mongols, was “tall and majestic in stature, with a broad forehead and a long beard”; he had two Tatar wives and another Foster-son. The supreme judge of the empire and one of the major military leaders was the Tatar Shiki-Khutuku. In general, as in personal life Genghis Khan, and in his government affairs the Tatars played an important role. In his code of basic laws called "Great Yasa" ("yasa" from the Turkic word "yasak" - tax, tribute) there were many Turkic-Tatar terms and titles. The sayings of Genghis Khan, expressed mainly in poetic form, were called by the Turkic word “bilik” (belek - knowledge). The Khan's seal was of two types, to designate which the Turkic terms “al tamga” (scarlet tamga) and “kok tamga” (blue tamga) were used. By the way, the word “khan” itself is of Turkic origin.

About the language of the Kazan Tatars

Speaking about the ancient Tatars, it is necessary to clarify that their language belonged to the Kipchak subgroup Turkic languages. The language of the Bulgars (Huns) belonged to the Bulgar subgroup of Turkic languages. The language of the modern Kazan Tatars belongs to the intermediate - Bulgar-Kypchak subgroup of the Turkic group of languages, indicating that the language of the Kazan Tatars was formed as a result of the ethnogenesis of two ethnic groups: the Bulgars (Huns) and the ancient Tatars.

Briefly about archeology

Archaeologists excavating the cities of the Golden Horde on the territory of Bulgaria indicate that through the archaeological layers they can observe a consistent change in culture. This indicates that the Bulgars were not exterminated, because in this case, archaeologists would see not a smooth change in culture, but an abrupt end of one culture and an abrupt beginning of another. The smooth change in culture indicates the cohabitation of the Bulgars and Tatars and the fact that these two ethnic groups participated in the ethnogenesis of the modern Volga Tatars.

Speaking about the language of the Tatars and Mongols, it should be noted that the names of all the khans of the Golden Horde were Turkic: Janibek, Uzbek, Tokhtamysh, Mamai, Timur, Tinibek, Nogai, Berdibek, Kaganbek, etc. These names can still be found among Tatar, Kazakh or Uzbek names, and the prefix “bek” or “bai” are typical Turkic words denoting a lord and a rich person. Let's compare the mentioned names with the names of Mongolian writers: Badam-Ochiryn Galaarid, Byambyn Rinchen, Vanchinbalyn Inzhinash, Galdan-taiji, Gun-Aazhavyn Ayurzana, Dashdorzhiin Natsagdorj, Dondogiin Tsebegmid, Donrovyn Namdag, Dorzhiin Garma, Sodnombalzhiryn Buyannemekh, Sormunir Shin Dashdorov, Sengiin Erdene, Tserentulgyn Tumenbayar, Chadraabalyn Lodoydamba, Shagdarzhavyn Natsagdorj

Are Mongolian names similar to the names of the khans of the Golden Horde?

Briefly about the Crimean Tatars

Having mentioned the Kazan Tatars, one cannot ignore the Crimean Tatars, especially since in Russian propaganda the Crimean Tatars are presented as a completely separate ethnic group, supposedly having no connection with the Volga Tatars.

So, until the 30s of the 15th century, the nomadic places of the Tatars extended from the Crimea to the Volga region. So in the Russian chronicles there is a message for 1432, when one of the beklarbeks from the Shirin family, Tegenei Bey, went to the Crimea to spend the winter in the winter, and in the summer he came to the headquarters of Ulu-Muhammad, who at that time lived in the Volga region. Ulu-Muhammad is the Khan of the Great Horde, representing the remnant of the Golden Horde. His headquarters was in the city of Sarai, which still existed at that time. And thus, at that time the Crimean Tatars formed simply one of the branches of the entire Tatar people. There are actually a lot of such contacts. Another example: during the “Great Rebellion” in the Golden Horde, Khan Tokhtamysh appeared, who tried to unite all the territories of the Golden Horde, and Khan Tokhtamysh appeared in Crimea in 1380, when he finally defeated Mamai. Mamai was the ruler of the Crimean peninsula. He belonged to the noble family of Kiyat, from where Genghis Khan himself came. And after Mamai was defeated, the Crimean peninsula went to one of the great princes-beks Tokhtamysh from the Shirin family. Tokhtamysh had a personal guard from personal tribes given under his control by Genghis Khan and these four tribes: Shirin, Baryn, Argyn, Kipchak. And so the Crimean peninsula went to the Shirins. These four tribes are the warriors who formed the backbone of the khan's guard. These groups then remain in Crimea, we then find these groups there in the 15th century, but these same groups existed in the Kazan Khanate and the Kasimov Khanate!

The following example speaks about the movement of the Tatars among the khanates: Chura Narykov visited the Kazakh steppes, Astrakhan, and Kasimov, then comes to Khanate of Kazan. This happens shortly before the fall of the Kazan Khanate. And he was just from the Argyn tribe. The Argyns were in the Kazan Khanate - we know this from sources. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Crimean and Kazan Tatars are supposedly different. The differences lay in the local substratum, for example, in the Volga region there were Bulgars who were assimilated by the Tatars, in the Crimea there were remnants of the Khazars, remnants of the Allans, Kipchaks and they were assimilated by the Tatars. Cultural differences between Kazan and Crimean Tatars appeared much later.

Population of the former USSR

Continuing the conversation about whether it was a Tatar/Turkic conquest or a Mongol one, let's take a look at the map of the former USSR and try to find at least one Mongol village or Mongol republic there. There is none of them. We are not considering Kalmyks, because... they appeared on this territory only in the 17th century. But we see many Tatar villages and even Tatar republics, and this is not to mention the Turkic republics in general. But this is a clear trace, which once again proves that the invasion was Turkic, and not Mongolian.

Thus, we have enough evidence from both historical documents and archaeological sites both documents and linguistic analysis, to state that modern Volga Tatars are descendants of both the Bulgars (Huns) and the ancient Tatars who came with Genghis Khan and then with Batu Khan.

It would seem that the descendants of the ancient Mongol-Tatars should be, first of all, two modern people– Mongols and Tatars - but not everything is so simple in history.

Who are the Mongol-Tatars?

Historians believe that at first it was only about the Mongols. In the 11th-13th centuries they occupied approximately the same territory as present-day Mongolia. The Mongols led a nomadic life and were divided into several tribes. The most numerous of them were the Merkits, Taigits, Naimans and Kerits. At the head of each tribe were bogatyrs (translated into Russian as “heroes”) and noyons (gentlemen).

The Mongols did not have a state until the arrival of Genghis Khan (Temujin), who managed to unite all the numerous nomadic tribes under his rule. Actually, that’s when the word “Mongols” arose. Their state was called Mogul - “big”, “healthy”. One of the main occupations of nomads, which helps them obtain material wealth, has always been robbery. The well-organized army of Genghis Khan began to plunder and seize neighboring lands and succeeded in this. By 1227, Genghis Khan controlled a huge territory - from the Pacific Ocean to the Caspian Sea.

In the second quarter of the 13th century in the Polovtsian, North Caucasian and Crimean lands, and also on the territory of Volga Bulgaria arose the Mongol state of the Golden Horde, which actually existed from 1242 to 1502. It was founded by the grandson of Genghis Khan, Batu Khan. The majority of the Horde's population were representatives of Turkic peoples.

How did the Mongols turn into Tatars?

Over time, Europeans began to call the Mongols Tatars. In fact, at first this was what all the inhabitants of Asia were called - “the land of Tartarus”. Tat Ar was the name given to all the peoples who lived there. Although in our time it is mainly the descendants of the Volga Bulgars who call themselves Tatars. But their lands were also conquered by Genghis Khan.

This is how the Pope's envoy Plano Carpini described them: “The Tatars were short, broad-shouldered, shaved heads with wide, cheekbones, they ate various meats and liquid millet porridge. The favorite drink was kumiss (horse milk). The Tatar men looked after the cattle and were excellent shooters and riders. Household work rested with the women. The Tatars had polygamy, each had as many wives as he could support. They lived in yurt tents, which were easily dismantled.”

In Rus', the Mongols were also called Tatars. During the era of the Golden Horde, Russian princes often married daughters and relatives for political reasons Tatar khans. Their descendants inherited princely power, so that almost all Russian rulers and aristocrats have Tatar roots.

Where to look for the descendants of Genghis Khan?

There is evidence that before the era of Genghis Khan, the majority Mongol nomads had Caucasian features. Even Genghis Khan himself was described as having blond hair, eyes and a beard. But in the process of conquest, the Mongols mixed with the peoples of the lands they conquered, which contributed to the formation of new ethnic groups. First of all, these are the Mongols themselves, then the Crimean, Siberian and Kazan Tatars, Bashkirs, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, partly Uzbeks, Turkmen, Ossetians, Alans, Circassians. Then the Ural Khanty and Mansi, Siberian indigenous peoples - Buryats, Khakass, Yakuts. The genotype of all these peoples contains features that are commonly called Mongoloid. It is also possible that the blood of the Mongol-Tatars flows in modern Japanese, Chinese, and Koreans. However, researchers believe that Tuvinians, Altaians and Khakassians, for example, have a type of appearance closer to Caucasian than eastern peoples. And this can serve as an indirect confirmation of the “Caucasian” ancestors of the Mongol-Tatars. There is also a version that many European nations have Mongolian roots. These are Bulgarians, Hungarians and even Finns.

There is a people on the territory of Russia whose representatives consider themselves direct descendants of Genghis Khan - these are the Kalmyks. They claim that their ancestors were Genghisids - the elite at the court of Genghis Khan. Some Kalmyk families allegedly descend from Genghis Khan himself or his closest relatives. Although, according to another version, the Kalmyk cavalry simply served the Genghisids. But who can say for sure now?

Thus, the descendants of the Mongol-Tatars can be scattered not only throughout Asia, but also in Europe. Nationality is generally a rather arbitrary concept.

In the second half of the 12th - early 13th centuries, numerous Turkic tribes, including Mongols and Tatars, lived in vast areas from the Great Wall of China to Lake Baikal. The Mongols gave the name to this entire tribal union, and then to the state. In Rus' they began to be called Tatars, and the name Mongol-Tatars was fixed in history. These tribes were divided and constantly fought against each other. The Mongols were lagging behind in their development compared to Russia. In Mongolian society there arose feudal relations. The measure of wealth, power and influence here were livestock and pastures. The Mongols led a nomadic economy and did not build cities; even after the capture of the cities, the army remained living in yurts. All this gave Mongolian society the features of a backward civilization. From the very beginning, Mongolian statehood was militarized. The Mongols practiced horse riding, wrestling and archery. The Great Khans encouraged military exercises, as they saw them as a way to train the army and identify best warriors. Many tournaments were held, and success in them contributed to promotion. These classes developed coherence of action, and it was this that constituted the strength of the Mongol army. The khans took full advantage of the military dexterity of the Mongols, their ability for fast and long-distance movements in the saddle and in wagons. The spirit of druzhina prowess captured Mongolian society at that time. Wars began between tribes, the rise of some khans and the fall of others, their desperate fights for power, for pastures, for livestock and herds of horses. Mongol leaders dreamed of long campaigns and conquests. “There is not a single people in the world that is distinguished by such obedience and respect for their leaders as the Tatars. They rarely quarrel with each other and never fight; they have no thieves, and therefore their yurts and tents are not locked; they are sociable with each other , help in need; abstemious and patient: there may be a day or two without eating - nothing; they sing and play as if they had a hearty lunch, they also easily endure cold and heat." Soloviev S.M. "History of Russia since ancient times" Eksmo. M., 2010 page 101

Temuchin succeeded in uniting the tribes into a single whole, who was proclaimed Genghis Khan at the general congress of Mongolian leaders - kurultai. There, the Mongols declared that their goal was to conquer the world. Genghis Khan promised that the next generations of Mongols would live in luxury. He began the path of a conqueror by forming a maneuverable and disciplined army. His hordes terrified the enemy, the warriors killed everyone who did not surrender or go over to their side. His army once marched at a breakneck speed of 440 kilometers in just three days. Over the course of two centuries, the Mongols, led by Genghis Khan, conquered Siberia, part of Northern China, Far East, Korea. Mongol troops under the leadership of Subedei and Jebe passed through Northern Iran, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia, reached North Caucasus. Thus, the path to the Polovtsian steppes and southern Russian lands was open to the Mongols.

The first battle with the Tatar-Mongols by the Russian squad, whose allies were the Polovtsians, took place in 1223 on the Kalka River. The Mongols defeated the Russian troops due to their numerical and tactical superiority and returned to their steppes. "It would seem that the Russian princes should have from this first clash with Tatar army learn a lesson for the future, but they did not and could not do this, because under the given conditions they could not overcome feudal disunity, the contradictory interests of the feudal rulers, which made endless senseless wars inevitable, which did not stop even when external enemy was in the country. Public elements, which could put an end to this state of affairs, were still too weak. "Danilevsky I.N. "Russian lands through the eyes of contemporaries and descendants (XII - XIV centuries)" Aspect Press, M., 2001. Page 105 Thus, despite the fact that the ancient Russian princes knew about the aggressiveness, mercilessness, and cruelty of the Tatars -Mongols, followed with concern the military successes of the Genghis in Eastern Europe, but did nothing to strengthen Rus', continued strife and did not prepare for the second enemy invasion.

The Battle of Kalka indicates that the Russian princes thought little about the fate of Rus', they were more interested in their own interests, there was no single commander, each prince fought on his own and any of them could leave the battlefield. As a result of the internecine enmity of the princes and the cowardice of the Polovtsians, the Russian troops failed to win. The forces of the Mongol-Tatars were undermined by the battle of Kalka; on the way back they suffered serious defeats from the Volga Bulgars and returned to Mongolia through the steppes of present-day Kazakhstan. They dared to go on a campaign against Rus' only a year after they conquered Volga Bulgaria.

We are accustomed to calling the troops of the legendary conqueror Genghis Khan and his descendants Mongol-Tatars. Although in fact the relations between the two peoples were not allied. At the very beginning of the 13th century, the Mongols tried to completely exterminate the Tatars, which they practically succeeded.

This was one of the historically confirmed cases of genocide. How did it happen that the name of an almost completely destroyed people spread to their persecutors?

The tribes were at war

Now Tatars are the name given to representatives of several disparate Turkic-speaking ethnic groups living in the Volga region, Crimea, Siberia, Kazakhstan and Central Asia. All of them were once conquered by the Mongol invaders. But initially the ethnonym “Tatars” referred to only one tribe that lived in the Khalkhin Gol River basin near Lake Buyr-Nur. This is the northeast of modern Mongolia.

All Tatars were divided into several clans: Alukhai, Alcha, Dutaut, Nerait, Khoin and Chigin. Like the Merkits, Kereits, Oirats, Barguts and Naimans, they were part of the community of the so-called Darlekin Mongols, opposing themselves to the Nirun Mongols. All these tribes were constantly at war, often committing predatory raids on each other. Civil strife prevented people from establishing a peaceful life, trade, and developing the economy and various crafts.

Despite this, by the middleXIIcenturies, the Tatars became a very influential and numerous tribe, their ethnonym began to be used in in a broad sense, when talking about the Mongol tribes in general.

The Iranian scientist Rashidaddin Fazlallah Hamadani (1247-1318), in his work “Jami at-tawarikh”, the title of which is translated as “Collection of Stories”, writes that the total number of Tatar clans at the beginningXIIIcentury there were about 70 thousand houses (families), and many people considered it an honor to count themselves among the representatives of this tribe.

This fact is confirmed by another source - “The Secret History of the Mongols,” written by an unknown author in 1240. Historical document tells about the formation and life path of the legendary founder of a huge empire. “The Secret History of the Mongols” calls the Tatar tribe one of the most powerful and dangerous enemies Genghis Khan.

Since the family of the great conqueror, who was called “Kiyat,” as well as his father Yesugei-Baghatur and other close people were often subjected to predatory raids by the Tatars, Genghis Khan had personal scores to settle with them.

The unification of the Mongol tribes into a single force, concentrated in the hands of the legendary commander, took place in a difficult struggle. The bloody civil strife that tore the people apart from within ceased only after no less brutal measures to centralize power. The fate of the Tatars, despite their strength and power, was decided.

Victory of Genghis Khan

The battle took place in the spring of 1202 in the lower reaches of the Khalkhin Gol River, where it flows into Lake Buyr Nur. This means that the aggressor side was the troops of Genghis Khan, who attacked the lands of the Tatars.

Before the campaign, the legendary conqueror took a number of measures aimed at strengthening military discipline. So, he announced to his comrades that they would face inevitable execution if they escaped from the battlefield. Any retreat and heads will fly off your shoulders.

Another innovation was the ban on looting the property of enemies before reaching complete victory above them. The fact is that mongol tribes often attacked each other with one goal - to take possession of other people's property. The ancestors and relatives of Genghis Khan themselves suffered from such raids. Often, right during the battle, instead of pursuing the fleeing enemy, warriors rushed to grab everything that was lying around: clothes, household utensils, dishes. This gave the enemies the opportunity to regroup and attack again.

Genghis Khan understood the depravity of this practice. He told his comrades that now the division of the loot would be made after the end of the battle, and each warrior would receive his share. And the property due to those killed in battle will go to their widows and children. This law was enthusiastically received by the army; the idea of ​​a fair distribution of military spoils did not suit only the representatives of the nobility, who had previously taken advantage of their privileged position by appropriating most looted goods.

That is, Genghis Khan set out to create a professional army from a crowd of warlike nomads seeking robbery. And he succeeded. Strengthening discipline and uplifting morale in the army brought victory to the legendary conqueror. Using the famous tactics of encircling the enemy, Genghis Khan achieved victory without any major losses.

And the property of the Tatars, who were the richest among the nomads, was honestly divided among themselves by the invaders.

Extermination of the people

Relatives and closest associates of Genghis Khan determined the fate of the conquered Tatars at a specially organized council. Since the losers of the battle repeatedly raided representatives of the victorious tribe, a decision unprecedented in its cruelty was made - to completely exterminate all the Tatars.

An exception was made only for children whose height did not exceed the height of a cart wheel. Some young and beautiful women The Mongols also regretted taking her as a concubine. The rest of the prisoners were completely killed, only a small handful of people managed to escape. The extermination was organized methodically and prudently. People trying to escape were pursued by troops.

By the way, Genghis Khan himself took two Tatar sisters, whose names were Yesukat and Yesulan, as concubines. And the wife of his grandson Batu Khan, Borakchin Khatun, also belonged to this people.

According to one of the legends, which was orally transmitted to each other by representatives of the Karagash people living in the south modern Russia, they are direct descendants of those Tatars who managed to escape from the army of Genghis Khan, hiding among the thickets of trees. Actually, the phrase “kara agash” is translated as “ ebony" This is how these people began to call themselves in gratitude to the forces of nature for saving them from imminent death.

The surviving people were forced to swear allegiance to Genghis Khan and join his army. And a few years later, the grown-up Tatar children, who remained to live with the invaders, also joined the common ethnic group united by the Great Khan. Since the numerous and influential Tatar tribe was widely known in different countries, the conquering troops were often called Mongol-Tatars.

According to legend, Genghis Khan’s wife, Borte Khatun, adopted a Tatar boy. She named him Shiki-Kutuku. They say that Ogedei, one of the heirs of the great conqueror, treated him like his elder brother.

Subsequently, many representatives of the Tatar tribe became influential emirs, military leaders and officials in the states founded by the descendants of Genghis Khan.

Several centuries have passed since the events of the “Mongol-Tatar yoke,” but the passion for studying this issue does not subside. And until the whole truth comes out, until the last masks are removed from the “Mongol-Tatars,” researchers will continue to delve into this most interesting topic.

Unfortunately, the copyists of history have done a lot to ensure that the true events that took place during the time of the “Mongol-Tatars”, and in other times, were forgotten and erased from our memory. The destruction of genuine evidence, its falsification, the silencing of remaining traces - these are the few tools that are used by the enemies of humanity to control society and enslave the consciousness of an individual. But it’s not always possible to hide and destroy all artifacts. So it is with the topic of “Mongol-Tatars”: so much data has accumulated that contradicts official version stories that few people have any doubts that the “Mongol-Tatars”, like the “yoke,” never existed. And also the fact that the “Mongol-Tatars” are not Mongoloids at all, as they imposed on the whole world, but Europeans!

Where did the term “Mongol-Tatars” come from?

In 1817 Christian Kruse published an Atlas on European history(“Atlas and tables for reviewing the history of all European lands and states from their first population to our times”), where he first introduced the term “Mongol-Tatar yoke” into scientific circulation (this work was translated into Russian in 1845).

In Russia, the term “Mongol-Tatars” was coined famous historian P. N. Naumov in 1823 And only from that time, from the 19th century, did it appear in textbooks and scientific articles. In all surviving sources, be it maps, chronicles, dictionaries, of course there are no “Mongol-Tatars”. Studying the etymology of the word “Mongol-Tatars”, we see that this term was artificially invented and introduced into use much later than the events of the “Mongol-Tatar yoke”. And now more details.

Looking at the maps and illustrations of the atlases that have come down to us, we will see the words MOGOL, MOGUL! Please note, without the letter "N".

The word "Mogul" is of Greek origin and means "Great". This is exactly what the Great Ones called us, the Slavs, the Rus, by some Europeans, Arabs, Chinese, and Japanese on their maps, on engravings and other surviving artifacts. And those whom historians call Mongols call themselves Khalkhas or Khalkhas, Oirats, etc. But not the Mongols. And historians began to call them Mongols only in the 20th century.

And now regarding the word “Tatars”.

That is, not Tatars, but Tartars. Yes, yes, exactly TARTARS. And these people lived on the territory of Great Tartary, that’s why they called them that!

Here is what Nikolai Levashov writes:

“...The name Tartary has nothing to do with the name of the Turkic tribes. When foreigners asked the inhabitants of this country about who they were, the answer was: “We are the children of Tarkh and Tara” - brother and sister, who, according to the ideas of the ancient Slavs, were the guardians of the Russian land (Goddess Tara - the patroness of Nature and her older brother Tarkh – May God grant you the keeper of the ancient Great Wisdom)". The word Tartaria comes from the merger of the words Tarkh and Tara. And the fact that later the letter “R” from the words TaTtaria and tartars was removed from the spelling and pronunciation of the word suggests that someone needed it. To erase from the consciousness of the people themselves the memory of both the country, which was truly called Great Tartary, and about the people themselves - the Tartars. And over several centuries, the copyists of history almost succeeded. Almost.

So it turns out that in one case the Slavs were called Mughals, in another Tartars. But never - “Mongol-Tatars”! And the words “Mongols” and “Tatars” are already modern translation unfortunate historians from science. And if you take the original surviving artifact and the translation, you can see for yourself how “Tartars” turn into “Tatars” and “Mughals” into “Mongols.”

What did the “Mongol-Tatars” known to us all look like?

According to the official version of history, the “Mongol-Tatars” are representatives Mongoloid race, which have a different eye structure than other races, and above all, these are slanted eyes with a highly developed fold upper eyelid, black hair, dark eyes, with a yellowish skin color, with strongly protruding cheekbones, a flattened face and poorly developed hair.

And, of course, in all films the “Mongol-Tatars” appear exactly as described above. In history lessons, teachers repeat the same thing; teachers at universities hammer the information into students’ heads that the “Mongol-Tatars” are Mongoloids, and nothing else. With the rare exception of teachers who are not afraid to go against the educational system.

In general, there are no affirmative sources that would unequivocally say that the “Mongol-Tatars” were Mongoloids. Rather, on the contrary, there are a very large number of artifacts indicating the opposite. Or rather, they say that all famous personalities of the times of the “Mongol-Tatars” were Europeans! And not just Europeans, but representatives of the white race - that would be more correct. But this information is carefully hushed up, because we will have to rewrite the entire history that was imposed on us in the 18th century.

Let's look at some of them in more detail.

Genghis Khan.

Let me start with the fact that history knows many Genghis Khans. But we will look at the one who became famous throughout the world. The one who is called the founder and first khan of the Mo(n) Gol Empire.
In fact, Genghis Khan, as many people think, is not a name, it is a title. And khans were the name given to military princes in Rus'. What is the real name of the famous Genghis Khan? Real name is Timur. Or, as was customary in those ancient times, Timur Chin (or Temujin, or Temujin in distorted pronunciation, as Genghis Khan was often called). The name of Genghis Khan has been sorted out. Now let's see what kind of “Mongol-Tatar” he was.

Of all the surviving portraits of Genghis Khan, historians have declared only one to be authentic. And this portrait of Emperor Taizu (Genghis Khan) is kept in national museum Taipei Palace, Taiwan:

The Mongolian doctor of sciences D. Bayar reports the following about the only portrait of Genghis Khan: “The image of Genghis Khan was preserved in the walls of the palaces of the rulers of the Yuan times. When Manchu rule was overthrown in 1912, the historical and cultural assets were transferred to the Middle State. These historical treasures included more than 500 paintings depicting rulers and their wives, sages and thinkers. There were also portraits of eight Mongol khans and seven khanshas. These portraits were published in Beijing in 1924, 1925 and 1926. In this series of Mongol rulers, Genghis Khan is depicted wearing a light-colored Mongolian fur hat with a slanted edge, wide forehead, with a face radiating light, an intense gaze, bearded, braided behind the ears, and very old age. Regarding reliability of this image A detailed study was carried out on Genghis Khan and it turned out that this portrait on fabric woven 59 cm long and 47 cm wide was starched and bordered in 1748.” Those. this portrait dates back to the 18th century!!! But it was precisely in this century that a global process of falsification of history took place all over the world, including in Russia and China. So this portrait is another invention and falsification of historians.

Among the reproductions of Genghis Khan, there is another “medieval” Chinese drawing, which was made even later than the “official” portrait:

The drawing is made in ink on silk and depicts Genghis Khan in full growth in a Mongolian cap with a Mongolian bow in right hand, a quiver with arrows behind his back, left hand clasps the hilt of a saber in a sheath.

Rashid ad Din, a famous Persian figure, in his “Collection of Chronicles” also provides several miniatures where Genghis Khan appears in his imagination as a Mongoloid.

So what did the real Genghis Khan look like? And are there other sources indicating that he was not a Mongoloid?!

Historian Gumilyov in his book “ Ancient Rus' and the Great Steppe" describes it as follows: "The ancient Mongols were, according to the testimony of chroniclers and the finds of frescoes in Manchuria, a tall, bearded, fair-haired and blue-eyed people... Temujin was tall and majestic in stature, with a broad forehead and a long beard. The personality is militant and strong. This is what makes him different from others."

The Borjigins have “blue-green ...” or “dark blue, where the pupil is surrounded by a brown rim” “Histoire de Mogols el des Tatares par Aboul Ghazi Bahadour Khan, publiee, traduite el annotee par Baron Demaison. SPb., 1874. T. 11. P. 72, Cahun L. Introduclion a l "histoire de l" Asie. Paris, 1896. P. 201 "".

The Borjigins are a Mongolian family to which Timur-Genghis Khan belonged. Borjigin translates as "blue-eyed".

By the way, Rashid ad Din in his “Collection of Chronicles” also writes that Genghis Khan belonged to the Borjigin family and had light eyes. And here we can trace the inconsistency between the text, where Genghis Khan appears tall and light-eyed, and the illustrations, in which Great commander clearly a Mongoloid, short in stature, with dark eyes and hair color. But this is a topic for another conversation.

A Chinese drawing from the 13th-14th centuries has also been preserved, depicting Genghis Khan during a falconry:

As you can see, in this picture Genghis Khan is not a Mongoloid at all! A typical Slav, with a thick beard and signs of a clearly white race.

And Marco Polo sees Genghis Khan as a European, and in his miniatures he paints him as a 100% Slav. In miniature “The Crowning of Genghis Khan”:

Marco Polo dresses both Genghis Khan and his retinue in European clothes, crowning the Great Commander with a crown with trefoils, which has always been an attribute of European rulers. And the sword that Genghis Khan holds in his hands has a shape that was characteristic of Russian swords!

So, it turns out that Genghis Khan was a blond guy with blue eyes!!! Here are the Mongols!

So, in addition to the “official” evidence recognized by science, there are others according to which Timur-Genghis Khan is more like a Slav than a Mongoloid, who are not tall, have clearly black hair and dark eyes. However, it is not customary to talk about this.

But before we draw any conclusions, let's see what other Great commanders and figures of the Mo(n) Gol era looked like, whose names have come down to us through the centuries.

Khan Batu.

Batu Khan, or rather Batu Khan, was the grandson of Timur-Genghis Khan. This fact is recognized by modern historians, and it is written about in chronicles and other documents.

Well, as usual, historians see him as a Mongoloid. Here is a portrait of him, which they recognize as authentic:

This is a Chinese manuscript “The History of the First Four Khans of the Clan of Genghis.”

But let's think logically. Batu also belongs to the Borjigin family and must at least resemble his grandfather, i.e. Genghis Khan, and have either blond hair, or blue eyes, or be at least 170 cm tall, or have other characteristics of the white race.

A bust of Batu Khan, located in Turkey, has survived to this day:

Of course, looking at the bust, it is difficult to draw conclusions about what color his eyes and hair were. But something else is visible. Before our eyes appears a typical European with a thick beard, in whose features there is absolutely no sign of a Mongoloid!

And here is another source - “Batu’s capture of Suzdal in 1238. Miniature from the “Life of Euphrosyne of Suzdal” of the 16th century. List of the 18th century":

This miniature depicts Khan Batu in a crown, on a white horse, who, accompanied by his squad, enters the city. His face is purely European, in no way Turkic. And it’s some kind of Slavic army, don’t you think?!

In another chronicle illustration, Batu Khan appears in the image of a Russian Tsar with his Russian warriors:

So the grandson of Genghis Khan, Batu Khan, was not far from his grandfather in appearance.

Kublai.

Kublai Khan, or Kubla Khan, like Batu Khan, was the grandson of Genghis Khan, and, like his grandfather, became seriously famous. Let's take a look at this mo(n)goal.

According to the official version of history, Kublai conquered almost the entire world, capturing China and practically conquering Japan (and if not for the tornado, he would have succeeded). Of course, men OFFICIAL HISTORY They see him as a Mongoloid:

To me, less so, Marco Polo portrays Kublai Kublai as a European. There is an illustration in the “Book of the Diversity of the World” depicting the arrival of Marco Polo at Kublai’s headquarters:

Here again Kublai is not a mo(n)goal, but a European!!! Facial features, beard - everything indicates that this is a man of European appearance.

And 4 wives of Kublai:

As you can see, they are not representatives of the Mongoloid race at all, and look like typical ladies medieval Europe. And in crowns with trefoils, and the trefoil is a military symbol of the Slavic-Aryans!!!

And here is another illustration from the “Book about the Diversity of the World”:

On it, Kublai hands the Polo brothers a “golden shirt” and sends them as ambassadors to the Pope. Again, the appearance, attire, attributes - everything is European!

Separately, I would like to draw your attention to the “golden treasure”. This is the so-called golden paiza. Paiza is a credential tag, issued as a symbol of delegation of power, vesting with special powers. No matter how surprising it may be, all the paizi belonging to the Mo(n)gol khans were found on the territory of Russia. Not a single paizi has been found in the spaces of modern Mongolia! This is another confirmation of the tale of the “Mongol-Tatar” yoke.

But let's return to Kublai.

A 13th-century Japanese scroll depicts Kublai's campaign against Japan:

On the right on the scroll is a wounded man Japanese warrior, on the left are medieval mo(n)goals. In the picture, Khubilai's mo(n)gol army traditionally wears Russian clothes and boots. Noteworthy is the foot formation, characteristic of the tactics of the ancient Russians, as well as traditional Russian weapons: straight swords and complex bows. And pay attention also to the fiery-colored oseledets crest protruding from the top of the head of each of the three warrior-mo(n) heads - a detail of external appearance inherent exclusively to the Slavs. But the most convincing thing is the faces that leave no doubt about their ethnicity.

In the miniature from the “Scroll of the Mongol Invasion” you can see one of Kublai’s ships:

The ship of the Mo(n) Gol flotilla, mainly with Russian warriors! The same as in the previous picture.

Those whom the Japanese call medieval mo(n)goals are one hundred percent Slavs!

The same story can be traced here as with Genghis Khan. Tamerlan is not a name, it’s more of a nickname. And his name is Timur.

According to Ibn Arabshah's description, Timur was tall, broad-shouldered, had a large head and thick eyebrows, had long legs and long dry arms, and wore a large beard. Timur had a limp on his right leg. His eyes were like candles, but without sparkle. He had a loud voice, was distinguished by powerful strength and great courage, was not afraid of death, retained a clear memory until the end of his life, did not like jokes and lies, on the contrary, he liked the truth, even if it put him in a difficult position.

T.N. Granovsky in " Full meeting works" writes that Timur was born with white hair, like an old man's, and through the female line he belonged to the offspring of Genghis Khan (who, as sources tell us, were fair-haired and blue-eyed). Although other historians claim that Timur did not belong to the Genghisid family. But we have a different task, for us the most important thing is whether he was a goal and what he looked like.

In the city of Sogyut, along with the bust of Batu Khan, there is also a bust of Timur:

As we see, Timur-Tamerlane here is a European, a typical Cossack. And in the minds of the Italians, Dutch, and French, Timur-Tamerlane is also a representative of the white race, and not the Mongoloid one:

In an Iranian miniature of the 15th-16th centuries, Timur is depicted with a white thick beard and external signs of the white race:

Another Iranian miniature of the 15th century by an unknown author:

Here Timur looks European.

But, surprisingly, some modern artists of Timur-Tamerlane in their works reproduce his appearance not as a Mongol, but as a European! Despite the fact that in films he appears as 100% Asian. So, on the stamp block Tamerlan is quite a Russian man, only with a black beard (apparently so that the censor will let him through for publication):

As for the appearance and appearance of Timur-Tamerlane, there are no problems with this at all. Everything fell into place after excavations were carried out in the Gur-Emir mausoleum, the tomb of the Timurid dynasty, in May-June 1941. The expedition uncovered five burials: Timur-Tamerlane, his sons Shahrukh and Miranshah, his grandsons Ulugbek and Muhammad-Sultan.

MM. Gerasimov, a famous anthropologist and sculpture, the author of a method for restoring a person’s external appearance on the basis of skeletal remains, was entrusted with such an important task as the appearance of the real Tamerlane to the whole world. He restores his sculptural portrait and is surprised to see that he turned out to be a man of the European type. This is a natural European! Convex, not flat face:

Also Gerasimov in his book “Basics of facial reconstruction from the skull” reports the following: “The discovered skeleton belongs to to a strong man, relatively tall for a Mongolian (about 170 cm).”

And the shape of Tamerlane’s eyes turns out to be not Mongoloid at all: “However, the significant protrusion of the root of the nose and the relief of the upper part of the eyebrow indicate that the Mongolian fold of the eyelid itself is relatively weakly expressed.” Further: “Contrary to the accepted custom of shaving his head, at the time of his death Timur had relatively long hair.” If Timur is a Mongol, then his hair should be black. But what do we actually see? And here Gerasimov cannot hide the truth: Timur had European hair. Indeed: “Timur’s hair is thick, straight, gray-red in color, with a predominance of dark chestnut or red. The hair of the eyebrows is less well preserved, but still, from these remains it is not difficult to imagine and reproduce the general shape of the eyebrow. Individual hairs are well preserved... Their color is dark chestnut... It turns out that Timur wore long mustache, and not trimmed above the lip, as was customary by the faithful followers of Sharia... Timur’s small thick beard was wedge-shaped. Her hair is coarse, almost straight, thick, bright brown (red) color, with significant graying... Even a preliminary study of beard hair under a binocular convinces that this reddish color is her natural color, and not dyed with henna, as historians described.” .
This fact alone completely destroys all previous traditionally historical attempts to evade the obvious. Here are the conclusions: Tamerlane, like his predecessors - the “Mongol-Tatars” discussed above - turned out to be a fair-haired man of the Caucasian type!!!

ULUGBEK.

Ulugbek - Great Uzbek astronomer and patron of sciences, grandson of Tamerlane, ruler of Transoxiana, and after the death of his father Shahrukh was the ruler of Tamerlane's entire empire.
Unlike his great ancestors-commanders, Ulugbek chose a different life path, which glorified him no less than his grandfather, the Great Tamerlane. He was a Great Astronomer!
Near Samarkand, Ulugbek built a unique for those times astronomical observatory. The result of her activities was the “New Guragan Tables”. In them, with unprecedented accuracy for that time, they determined annual movements planets (with an accuracy of a few seconds of arc), and the Sun (inclination of the ecliptic to the equator, constant precession). There was also a catalog of 1018 stars, geographical coordinates 683 cities in Europe and Asia. Ulugbek built higher schools- madrasah and taught a course in astronomy there. His works were used in the East and West until the 18th – 20th centuries.

Ulugbek's scientific activities ran counter to the ideas and plans of Islamic clergy. He was declared a heretic, and later they staged his murder by cutting off his head.
Ulugbek, like his grandfather, Tamerlane, was of European appearance.

Here is what Gerasimov writes about the restoration of Ulugbek’s skull: “Ulugbek’s skull is well preserved and, except for the loss of almost all teeth (during his lifetime) and cut off corners lower jaw(at the moment of murder), it should be considered as complete... In its form (in horizontal projection) the skull is close to an ovoid shape. Its cross section is round, vaulted, the back of the head does not protrude. The poorly developed glabella is somewhat enhanced by small swellings of short eyebrows, the face is ovoid, the orbits are round and high; with a barely overhanging upper edge, which is not thick, but roundly blunt. The long nasal bones at the top and in the middle part are very narrow, below they form a wide bell, the edges of the pear-shaped opening are thin, sharp, and its shape is shortened, heart-shaped. The strongly developed subnasal spine is barely noticeably inclined downwards. The lower edge of the orbits protrudes strongly forward, which, along with the significant flattening of the zygomatic bones, gives the skull a significant Mongoloid appearance, although at its core the skull undoubtedly has more elements of the Caucasoid Pamir-Fergana round-headed type, inherited from its father, Shahrukh. There are, however, small features in the details of the structure of the skull, undoubtedly reminiscent of his great grandfather Timur":

In other words, Ulugbek’s appearance, although it has some significant signs of Mongoloidity, nevertheless belongs to the Caucasian type.

Thus, we figured out that there were no “Mongol-Tatars” in principle, and those who were called “Mughals” and “Tartars” were people of the white race, Europeans. And famous “Mongol-Tatar” personalities, such as Genghis Khan, Batu, Kublai, Tamerlane, Ulugbek, were Europeans. It is a fact! A fact that must be recognized not only by Russian historians, but also by the whole world.