Ancient History - is this true?

 

[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]

With all due respect, I think Fomenko's work is a load of hogwash.

For example:

I read, Fomenko's "History of Russia" and found it interesting. His conclusions, that there was no Tatar-Mongol rule, simple because, no document in any Turk language was found in Russia and that 300 years Tatar-Mongol's yoke was a propaganda hoax, sound convincing.

...despite the fact that all political entities around the Blue Horde recognized its existence; that travelers from europe went to Russia and conversed with the Mongol Khan; fact that Byzantine records even trace involvement with the Golden Horde's royal family; that muslim travelers left descriptions of the Golden Horde in Russia.

But, some things look really strange for me. Why christianity came in West and East Europe not at the same time, but with difference about a thousand years?

That's actually quite fast. Many religions don't even make it out of the original hometown. How long did it take for egyptian religion to reach eastern europe?


Edited by Imperator Invictus - 11-Jun-2006 at 16:30

They were both Christianized during Roman times. Or do you mean Central Northern...
No even that was only 600 years later maximum

What are you talking about?
[/QUOTE]

Babtizing of Russia started in Kiev in 988.

Yes, and western Europe wasn't Christian till 400 AD ish.
The only christians in the first centuary were the Palestinians and they're neighbours

Originally posted by Imperator Invictus They visited Russians and spoke to them, but gave them different names.Similar: Allemand, Deutsch, Germans, Nemcy - mean the same. Sometimes, people here claim that Mongols are Turkic (no offense), but this is the first time I've heard that Mongols were Russian, or that Russians were Mongols. P.S. Actually christianity came to both eastern europe and western europe at about the same time because the Roman empire spanned both areas. I have no idea where he got that idea of "1000 years separation."

Originally posted by Onkel_Wowa "...despite the fact that all political entities around the Blue Horde recognized its existence; that travelers from europe went to Russia and conversed with the Mongol Khan; fact that Byzantine records even trace involvement with the Golden Horde's royal family; that muslim travelers left descriptions of the Golden Horde in Russia."   They visited Russians and spoke to them, but gave them different names. Similar: Allemand, Deutsch, Germans, Nemcy - mean the same. " ..That's actually quite fast. Many religions don't even make it out of the original hometown. How long did it take for egyptian religion to reach eastern europe?"   But, the egiptian religion did not reach West Europe as well. Equal result.

Actually, a religion which had an Egyptian origin, the Isian cult, not only reached Western Europe but was very important in the 2nd to the 4th centuries.

As far as the Russians are concerned, the accounts of the Western Europeans, the Arabs and the Byzantines are all quite clear in drawing a difference between Slavic and Turkic people. 

The Christianization of Eastern Europe is well documented. From its early beginnings in Greece and the rest of the Balkans in the 2nd to the 4th centuries, the gradual conversion of the local hellenized population in the 4th to the 6th centuries, the christianization of the Southern Slavs (Bulgarians, Serbs and Croats) in the 8th and 9th centuries (that is 2 to 3 centuries after their initial invasion), to the conversion of the Russians in the 10th century. It is all a gradual and logical progression. There's also examples of christianization occuring quite late in Western Europe as well. Friesland for instance was pagan until the 9th century. Scandinavia, Wales, Scotland, Cornwall, Moravia... They were all christanized quite late, contemporary in many cases with areas in Eastern Europe.

 

Fomenko attempts to make these extraordinary claims, but usually has little to back it up except scorn and denial for all the methods that historians use. HE uses flawed data consisting of incomplete or inaccurate ruler lists to show how certain empires are apparently one and the same. He refuses to accept all methods of dating, ranging from C14-dating, to dendrology, to earth layer dating, etc. as inaccurate, but doesn't offer any other tool as an option, except for speculation. He ignores the great mass of documents as fiction, even when they come from drastically different times and places... It's a wonder anyone takes him seriously.

Originally posted by Decebal Originally posted by Onkel_Wowa   If Mongols were Turks they would write Turk as well. But only document in official church-slavic are found in Russia.  The cristianity came at the same time to West and East Europe. That is what Fomenko tryed to prove.   Turks and Mongols were not Christian during the middle ages, so I see no reason why they would ever write in Old Church Slavonic. Also, much like other steppe Empires, Mongols and Turks had very little literary tradition when they lived in steppe areas, such as Russia. It is usually when they conquered civilized areas such as China, Persia or the Fertile Crescent that they developed a literary tradition of their own. [/QUOTE   Do You think, it was possible to control Russia for 300 years without any paperwork? Anyway, Fomenko's point of view looks more plausible. Tatar-Mongols were invented in 17th century when Romanovs came to power and an excuse was needed. Afterwards they were widely used in Russia for "patriotic education".

Sorry, never heard that any court in Russia ever used Arabic language.

Sorry, only minority of Russians have the "asian eyes". Tartars themself are about 4% of all popullation of Russia. Word "yoke" used widely for propaganda purposes. There was no yoke in Russia in the Middle ages, and there is no yoke now. Russia is multinational. For thousand years people learned how to live in peace  there. Never heard about any problems in relatioship between Tartars and other nations living in Kazan area or somewhere else in Russia.