Was or not the Tatar-Mongol yoke? This is a question that has recently been asked by an increasing number of domestic historians. The first doubts about the existence of this state entity appeared many years ago. Now this topic is discussed quite often. In this article we will try to understand this issue, turning to the opinion of historians.
First doubt
To wonder whether or not the Tatar-Mongol yoke was actively begun in the 20th century. After analyzing historical memos, scientists noticed that a similar term is not used by any of the authoritative historians who lived in previous centuries. For example, neither Karamzin nor Tatishchev have it.
Moreover, the term “Tatar-Mongols” itself is neither the ethnonym of the Mongol peoples, nor their self-name. This is an exclusively cabinet and artificial concept, which was first used in 1823 by the historian Naumov.
Since then, it has "migrated" to scientific articles and textbooks.
Where did the Mongols come from?
Nowadays many modern alternative historians argue in detail on the truth about the Tatar-Mongol yoke. For example, the journalist and writer Yuri Dmitrievich Petukhov, also known as a science fiction writer.
He emphasizes that under the ethnonym "Mongols" one cannot understand the real representatives of the Mongoloid race who live in the territory of the modern state of the same name.
Anthropological Mongoloids - Khalkha. These are poor nomads whose tribes were gathered from several disparate communities. In fact, these were shepherds who were in the XII-XIV centuries at the primitive communal level of development.
Petukhov insists that the existence of Russia under the Tatar-Mongol yoke is a grand provocation organized by the West, led by the Vatican against Russia. At the same time, Yuri Dmitrievich refers to anthropological studies of burial grounds, which prove the complete absence of Mongoloid elements in Russia. There are no Mongoloid signs among the local population.
Gumilyov version
One of the first who began to describe the period of the Tatar-Mongol yoke in a fundamentally different way was the archaeologist and writer Lev Nikolayevich Gumilyov, the son of Anna Akhmatova and Nikolai Gumilyov.
He began to argue that in Russia there were two rulers who were responsible for managing the state. These were the prince and the khan. The prince led in peacetime, and Khan took the reins of government in his own hands during the war. When there was peace, he was responsible for the formation of the army and its maintenance in full combat readiness.
Gumilev, doubting whether or not the Tatar-Mongol yoke existed, writes that Genghis Khan is not a name, but the title of a prince of wartime, whose position corresponded to the modern commander in chief. In total, there were several people in the history who wore a similar title.
He considers Timur the most outstanding. In the surviving documents, Gumilev indicates that this man is described as a warrior with blue eyes and a tall man, who had white skin, red hair and a thick beard, which does not correspond to the image of a classical Mongol.
Opinion of Alexander Prozorov
In detail on the topic, whether or not the Tatar-Mongol yoke existed, a bright representative of modern mass literature, Alexander Prozorov, the author of science fiction novels and short stories, speaks out.
He also sees in the existence of the yoke a conspiracy of Western detractors. Prozorov believes that Russian princes nailed the shield to the gates of Constantinople as early as the 8th century, however, many would not like to admit that already at that time there was Russian statehood.
That is why, he claims, a version appeared about centuries-old slavery under the mythical Mongol-Tatars.
The dates of the beginning and end of the Tatar-Mongol yoke are considered to be the time from 1223, when, as it is believed, innumerable hordes of Asians approached the borders of Russia, until 1480, when the northeastern principalities got rid of it. Moreover, the gradual process of overthrowing the yoke began a century earlier after the victory in the Battle of Kulikovo, which became an important stage in the restoration of the unity of Russia.
"New chronology"
The topic of the Golden Horde and the Tatar-Mongol yoke is discussed in detail by well-known "alternative" historians Anatoly Timofeevich Fomenko and Gleb Vladimirovich Nosovsky.
As evidence of their innocence, they give all kinds of arguments. For example, in their opinion, the name Mongolia itself comes from the Greek word, which can be translated as "great." Moreover, it does not occur in ancient Russian sources, but Great Russia is regularly used. On this basis, Fomenko concludes that Mongolia called Russia foreigners, to whom the Greek language was closer and more understandable.
Examples from the annals
Further, the authors of the "New Chronology" indicate that the very description of the conquest of Russia by the Tatar-Mongols is presented in the annals in such a way that it seems that we are talking about the Russian army led by Russian princes, which are called "Tatars".
As an example, Fomenko and Nosovsky cite the Laurentian Chronicle, which is considered one of the main reliable sources telling about what was happening at that time. It describes the conquests of Genghis Khan and Batu.
In their own interpretation of the information contained in it, the authors of the "New Chronology" conclude that it describes the process of unification of Russia around Rostov, which took place from 1223 to 1238 under Prince George Vsevolodovich. At the same time, only Russian troops and Russian princes participated in it.
Indeed, the Tatars are mentioned, but there is not a word about the Tatar military leaders, and the Rostov princes use the fruits of their victories. Fomenko notes that if you replace the word "Tatar" in the text with "Rostov", you get a natural text about the unification of Russia.
Siege of Moscow
Then the annals describe the war against the Tatars, who besiege Vladimir, take Moscow and Kolomna, conquer Suzdal. After that, they go to the river Sit, where a decisive battle takes place, in which the Tatars win.
During the battle, Prince George dies. After announcing his death, the chronicler stops writing about the Tatar invasion, devoting several pages of text to a detailed description of how the body of the prince with all honors was delivered to Rostov. Paying special attention to the magnificent burial, he praises Prince Vasilka. In the end, he claims that Yaroslav, who was the son of Vsevolod, took the throne in Vladimir, and there was great joy among Christians when the land was freed from the godless Tatars.
Based on this, we can conclude that the result of the victories of the Tatars was the capture of several key Russian cities, after which the Russian army was defeated on the River City. According to the proponents of the classical point of view, this was the beginning of a long yoke. A fragmented country was turned into a conflagration, and bloodthirsty Tatars were in power. Allegedly, on this independent Russia ended its existence.
Where are the Tatars?
Further, Fomenko is surprised that there is no description of how the surviving Russian princes go to the khan to bow. In addition, there is no mention of where his bet was. It is assumed that after the Russian army was defeated, the khan the conqueror will reign in the capital, but this is not a word in the annals again.
It further describes how things were at the Russian court. For example, the burial of a prince who died in the City. His body is being taken to the capital, but not a stranger rules in it, but the heir, the brother of the deceased, Yaroslav Vsevolodovich. Further, it is not clear where the khan himself is, nor why in Rostov they are so happy about this victory.
The only plausible explanation that Fomenko finds is that there have never been any Tatars in Russia. As additional evidence, he even cites the memories of foreign travelers and diplomats. For example, the Italian Franciscan monk Giovanni Plano Carpini, who is considered the first of the Europeans to visit the Mongol empire while traveling through Kiev, does not mention a single Mongol leader. Moreover, most of the important administrative posts are still held by Russians.
The Mongol conquerors, according to the authors of the New Chronology, are turning into some invisible people.
Instead of a conclusion
Concluding, we note that all attempts to refute the existence of the Tatar-Mongol yoke are made by researchers who seek by hook or by crook to prove that the state in Russia has existed since time immemorial. Moreover, it was never subordinate to anyone, it was not under someone’s control, being forced to pay tribute.
Thus, the possible influence of the Tatar-Mongol yoke on Russia is in every possible way reduced.