Information collected by baron Tisenghausen convince of the fact that attempts to turn the Kipchaks to the new belief were successful in part: in the Crimea and in some places on Itil (Volga).

No, that was Baty-Khan who stroke the most terrible blow to the Kipchaks, not the Russians! He ordered to annihilate the nobility. The hunt for human heads began in the Horde in 1243 - the Kipchak nation was to be beheaded. By the highest standards the role of aristocracy consists in increase of sacred relics of society. In keeping society's morals. Baty stroke the blow to the inmost things: the nation was to be turned into a crowd.

Even aristocracy that physically survived was dying in a spiritual sense having lost its position in society. This is the regularity of life… It is felt, for instance, in modern Karachai, Dagestan, Tatarstan where communities with ancient and formerly highly respected families remained. But… materialistic conduct is the feature of their modern representatives. They are not ready for an act, for a feat in the name of the nation any more.

Degenerated aristocracy is the same as nothing.

Formerly the Kipchak society was divided into estates. Its highest part had seven levels of estates. Differences were in the conduct above all. By the conduct they judged about nobility, position and rights of a person in society. There were adats which it was deemed a shame to breach. The society exiled the people not respecting the adats and their shame was redeemed with blood. Nobility and khans had a lot of obligations.

When the Mongols annihilated aristocracy of the Kipchak nations, the COSSACKS remained in Desht-I-Kipchak - the free estate. Those were the Cossacks who formed the Mongolian army and acted as its living force. The name "Kazakhstan" appeared those days; it meant "The Cossack Land". It meant that no real Turkic aristocrats remained in the lands conquered by the Mongols. That name keeps a very deep sense… Turkic nobility left for the southern lands beyond the reach of the Mongols - dry steppes of the Middle Asia (modern Uzbekistan), the Northern Caucasus and Europe.

Considerable part of the Turkic nobility disappeared for its nation forever. Genealogical books of the Russian nobility tell about it rather well: "General Armorial of Noble Families of the Russian Empire", or "History of the Families of the Russian Nobility", or "Russian Genealogical Book". Historical novels are nothing as compared with them.

For example Ermolovs, the nobles, the family of Alexei Petrovich Ermolov, the hero of the Caucasian War, begin the story of their genealogy as follows: "The ancestor of that family, Arslan-Murza-Ermola, christened as John, as it is shown in the presented family tree, left for the Great Prince Wasil Ivanovich from the Golden Horde in 1506…"

Russia got rich fantastically at the expense of the Turkic nation; the talents were flowing like water saving themselves from the Mongolian barbarism. Princes Kurakins appeared under Ivan the Terrible in Russia; that is the family of Andrew Kuraka, who was the offspring if the Mongolian Bulgak-Khan, the recognized ancestor of the great Russian princes Kurakins and Golitsins, as well as Bulgakovs noble family.

Dashkovs, the nobles are also the natives of the Horde. As well as Saburovs, Mansurovs, Terbeevs, Godunovs (from Cheta murza who left the Horde in 1330), Glinskiys (from Mamai), Kolokoltsevs, Talyzins (from Kuchuk Tagaldyzin murza)… It is desirable to discuss each family separately for they have done a lot for Russia. Every Russian patriot has heard about Admiral Ushakov while only a few know about his Turkic birth. That is the family of Redeg-Khan from the Horde.

Cherkasskiy princes are from the family of Inal-Khan. "As a sign of nationality, - it is written in their genealogy book, - I sent to the sovereign my son Saltman and my daughter Maria, who was then married with the tsar Ivan Vasilievich, and Saltman was christened as Michael and granted the title of the boyar".

Yushkovs, Suvorovs, Apraksins (from Salakhmir), Davydovs, Yusupovs, Arakcheevs, Golenischev-Kutuzovs, Bibikovs, Chirikovs… Chirikovs, for example, are from the family of Berke-Khan, Baty's brother. Polivanovs, Kochubeis, Kozakovs…

Kopylovs, Aksakovs ("aksak" means "lame"), Musin-Pushkins, Ogarkovs (Leo Ogar was the first who came from the Golden Horde in 1397 - "a tall person and a brave warrior"). Baranovs… It is written in their genealogical book as follows: "Zhdan murza, the ancestor of the Baranov family, also known as Baran ("baran" means "ram" in Russian) and christened as Daniel came from the Crimea in 1430".

Karaulovs, Ogarevs, Akhmatovs, Bakaevs, Gogol, Berdyaevs, Turgenevs… "The ancestor of Turgenev family, Leo Turgen, christened as John, left for the great prince Wasil Ioannovich from the Golden Horde…" That family was from the aristocratic community of the Horde as well as Ogarev family (their Russian ancestor - "Kutlamamet murza, also known as Ogar").

Karamzins (from Kara-Murza), Almazovs (from Almaza, christened and Eropheus, he came from the Horde in 1638), Urusovs, Tukhachevskiys (Indris, the native of the Golden Horde, was their ancestor in Russia), Kozhevnikovs (from Kozhai murza, in Russia since 1509), Bykovs, Ievlevs, Kobyakovs, Shubins, Taneevs, Shuklins, Timiryazevs (there was Ibraghim Timiryazev who came to Russia in 1408 from the Horde).

Chaadaves, Tarakanovs… and it will take a long time to continue. Dozens of the so-called Russian families had the Turkic ancestors.

Should one be surprised that the Turki have become the bearers of more than three hundred common Russian names… Breath-taking changes! But that is Russian history where everything is abrupt.

Observations of Yuri Tynyanov in his "Cannibals" are very expressive; he describes the descendants of Radshi-Khan known in Russia as Pushkins. It turns out not only the Tatars were becoming "the Slavs" but also the Western Europeans. For example, the German Gundret-Markt became Markov, Pagencampf became Pogankov, the Czech Garrah became Gorokhov, the Italian Basco became Baskov, the Dane Cos von Dalen became the Russian Kozodavlev. "Hazy great Russian noble state accepted and expelled people, - Tynyanov writes, - dug in the papers, rustled with true and false documents, observed the order of precedence, rummaged in beds. Because they needed a family tree and the easiest thing in a family tree are the first pages, then it becomes harder and harder." First pages - the indisputable ones - were read in Turkic. Some people succeeded in falsification of the "family trees" usually taken from Prussian or other faraway archives which it was impossible to verify.

It is difficult to say who is who in Russia. And it is impossible to understand anything.

What can be said if the family tree of Romanovs, the Russian tsars, begins from the Turki. Broad faces of the tsars with high cheek-bones, eyes color, body proportions convince of their Turkic origin like the documents. As a matter of fact, appearance is the best "document" of a person. And the main thing which makes one believe in the evident Turkic origin of Romanovs is their hatred towards everything Turkic… That is the most reliable evidence.

In XVIII century the rulers of Russia created the modern ethnographic map; they did it at their discretion, as they wished: the whole provinces were registered as the Slavic ones. Thus Russia has become what was called by a Kipchak from Turgen family: "Russia is for thousands of versts around".

At that time, in XVIII century - just about two hundred years ago! - inhabitants of Tambov, Tula, Orel, Ryazan, Bryansk, Voronezh, Saratov and other regions were called "the Tatars"… That was the former population of the Golden Horde! They are the Polovtsians. They are the Kipchaks… Isn't it interesting that ancient cemeteries in Ryazan, Orel or Tula are still called "Tatar" (That arouses a protest of anybody who is inadvertently familiar, for example, with the book "Struggle of Moscow State with the Tatars…" by A.A. Novoselskiy. In that book, openly and between the lines, rather interesting information is provided, which, maybe apart from intention of the author who cites historical documents, allowed us to come to conclusions being in contradiction with the official viewpoint about the history of south of Russia. Works by other Russian authors which are on the list of used sources, strengthened our belief in our own conclusions, or rather in their relevancy. ).

Russian cemeteries appeared there just in XVIII century together with Russian settlements. And "ethnic misunderstandings" followed.

The face of Desht-I-Kipchak was being changed in a keen manner; it wasn't even always perceptible. Say, in XIX century they proceeded to total plowing of the steppe (In the national cookery of the Kipchaks meat and mild dishes prevail and flour and cereal products take the second d place. And that is not a whim. That is the physiology of the nation: to lead a healthy life an organism of the Turki needs meet, sour milk, yoghurt, cheese, mutton broth at first and then porridge. Plowing the pastures, the colonizers made a blow to health of the nation destroying the originality of steppe inhabitants.). The Kipchaks were deprived if the pastures; they disturbed their way of life, the lands which were common became private property of the new Russians who cultivated them in a new "agricultural" manner… Otherwise their states would be taken away. By the way, that situation was described in "Dead Souls" by N.V. Gogol. Chichikov, the small officer, was buying his souls to take them away to the Steppe.

Another method was also in use. It is seen in Bashkortostan history - agricultural repartition followed the hostilities there. They began in spring, "scorched earth" tactics was implied - they used to burn the villages. They were gradually depriving the free steppe nation of its districts and villages.

A lot of military leaders were notable in that quiet "war": the Kipchaks were driven into the mines and designated to the plants as the slaves. The Bashkirs still remember Alexander Vasilievich Suvorov… Allah reward his deserts; he has deserved it.

A. Donelli, the American professor, issued a sorrowful book "Conquest of Bashkiria by Russia in 1552 - 1740" where terrible facts are provided… Russian historians used to write about how Bashkiria voluntarily joined Russia. And famous rebels in Bashkiria were mentioned in passing.

Plowing the lands of Desht-I-Kipchak, they "plowed" the monuments of ancient steppe culture - barrows, cemeteries, stone statues, remains of settlements. Not at once, of course, not all of a sudden. However, the time has come and they all disappeared without a trace. And there is nothing to witness of originality of the steppe nation.

In Orel, for example, on the place of an ancient Kipchak cemetery which graves were destroyed by a bulldozer, a plant has been built. Who can prove now that a cemetery was there? Rumors are alive but they are not the evidence.

On May 5th, 1997 the president of Russian Federation signed a Decree; that wasn't discussed by the media. It contains the list (of two newspaper pages) "of monuments of history and culture excluded from the list of monuments of history and culture of federal (All-Russian) importance." They were condemned to destruction by the state; and that list contains a great deal of the Turkic monuments! And to make it imperceptible they were placed near flat-museums of revolutionary activists.

… An essay by Ibn Battuta, who was called "Arabian Marco Polo" by the Europeans, shines like a star in the book by V.G. Tisengausen. That attentive Arab, skilful observer of life, and (frankly speaking) a gifted scout, made a traveling to the Golden Horde in 1335 and left "The Gift to the Observers Interested in World Countries and Wonders of Traveling" for the descendants. Excellent travel notes! A real dossier.

While Marco Polo acquainted Europe with the "Book" in which he described the steppe east in 1298, Ibn Battuta did the same for the Arabic countries. They are the two great witnesses of Desht-I-Kipchak. They didn't think about politics, predilections or insincerity: they wrote what they saw. Customs, ceremonies, way of life.

Ibn-Battuta wrote as follows: "That region where we stopped belongs to the steppe known as Desht-I-Kipchak". Noble-minded Arab retained the name of the land which has never existed according to the Russian "histories". He retained the name of the vanished nation.

"Desht-I-Kipchak was the country that stretched for eight months of travel lengthwise and for six months of travel in breadth, - Ibn-Battuta continued, - Allah knows it better!" A traveler could see a lot during those eight months of travel - an entire world. Danube, Dnestr, Dnepr, Don, Itil, Yaik, Irtysh, Ob, Yenisei and Lena flew in the land of the Kipchaks which is unknown in Russia.

Ibn-Battuta and Marco Polo showed there was no Wild Field to the south of Moscow. But there was the country which history was covered with fog. That country was really original.

For example, here is an extract from Ibn-Battuta: "I saw a church, moved to it, found a monk inside and on the wall I saw an image of an Arab man in a turban, belted with a sword and with a spear in his hand. An icon-lamp was burning in front of it. I asked the Monk: "What image is this?" He answered: "That is the image of Ali the prophet", - I was surprised with his answer…" A good illustration of toleration and wisdom of the Kipchaks, those gentle children of the Great Steppe who, as we can see, bore direct relation to Islam.

Regardless of everything, in V, in XII, in XVI centuries they kept on living "according to their rules" in the alien European lands - ancient steppe adats were above all for the nation… Steppe inhabitants kind of didn't see the hostility of the world around, they didn't understand their maladjustment to it. It is astonishing. Their number decreased, their lands were vanishing, but they didn't see it. Life has taught nothing those stubborn adherents of the steppe culture being proud of themselves.

After all, were they able to know a friend from an enemy? Black from white? That question is not unnecessary in the history of the Kipchaks… Especially when their relations with Moscow were in question. Everything was in mist! Just through the prism of the centuries it is evident how Moscow was skillfully demoralizing the Steppe by example of the West - it always got away with it. Steppe inhabitants didn't see anything.

It is possible that the fact that Moscow policy was led by the migrants from the Great Steppe who have become the Russians is important. Maybe, there is another reason… But in 1570 Ivan the Terrible incited Saryk-Azman (ataman of a little yurt from Don) to rob Polish and Nogai caravans. And the ataman started to do it for money. Don was in great trouble those days… Thus the Cossacks were enticed by an unjust deed. They started to tame them leading the policy of threats and bribery. "Bribery" was delivered through Saryk-Aman, and "threats" - through Nogai khans.

Moscow lured the Don Kipchaks with generous charities the same as the Greeks dealt with Attila's warriors (the Turkic federates) in their time. The history repeated again. Everything was annoyingly simple and cheap but the policy was led with distant aims in view: again the Kipchaks were needed as "cannon-fodder".

Ivan the Terrible, having conquered Kazan and Astrakhan, moved to the Caucasus: Moscow had serious plans at that time. Military successes turned its head and, no doubt, that was noticed in Europe. Rome was worried by impossibility to control Ivan the Terrible who was ready to act independently.

Anxiety became stronger when Russian army turned to the Caucasus which was called a Caspian province (!) of the Roman Catholic Church at that time. It became evident: in the campaigns against the Caucasus Moscow had aims beyond the bounds of the Great Steppe.

From 1560 to 1600 the Russian organized ten campaigns. But they were defeated ten times and failed to reach the mountains. After that Moscow, which pride was hurt, made a genius move in its foreign policy. In order to crush the minor enemy - as it regarded the Caucasian Kipchaks - it persuaded the Big Nogai Horde from Kazakhstan to come from Asia to Europe for money since the climate was softer and the lands were better there, remembering the main rule of diplomacy: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Later, under Peter, in 1708, according to the advice of count P.M. Apraksin, the Russians brought the Kalmyks to Europe from Mongolia.

Don and Caucasian Kipchaks quickly sensed the newcomers: bloody wars for survival started in the Steppe. Don and Terek were separated from each other; the newcomers cut their lands from Volga to the Crimea… Everybody waged a war at that time except for the Moscow Prince who took the position of "happy third" waiting for the enemies to become weak.

Trustful Nogai and Kalmyk leaders didn't even understand how they've become fully dependant from Moscow. Choosing their khan the Nogai would ask for permission of the Russian tsar. And choosing Ishterek-Khan the following instruction came from Moscow: "And later for the Nogai Horde to appoint the prince in Astrakhan before the boyars and the voevodes, according to their law, and not in their yurts, in order to make them act in compliance with the monarch's will and keep them in slavery forever (bold provided. - M. A.)".

Moscow waged a war with Don, Terek, the Crimea using the Nogai and the Kalmyks; it divided the Kipchaks, it dismembered the steppe nation. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend", indeed. But… it waged a war remaining the ally of Don and the Caucasus. Its double "divide and rule" policy was mentioned perhaps only in the Crimea.

It is not surprising that in the beginning of XVII century building of the Russian fortresses commenced in the Upper Don as though for protection against the Crimean army. And the Kipchaks were promised evident advantages due to those fortresses - at first they used to buy the surplus of the harvest from the Cossacks. That was suitable for them. The distant defence system was being constructed since 1613: Sokolsk, Dobry, Belokolodsk and other Russian towns appeared in the Steppe. And Moscow markets were crammed with "steppe" goods - carcasses, for example, were sold not by weight but by eye.

By its every action Moscow attracted the Steppe to it enticing it into the range of its interests and immersing it into the bog of its policy.

In January, 1646 its first "quiet" invasion to Don began. It seemed they went there with peace having released 3205 free men to settle among the Cossacks but near the new Russian towns. But the Russians weren't accepted on Don - their flight from there commenced promptly. The following year they sent another 2367 persons to settle there, but they ran away even faster (This statistics is provided in the book "Attempts of Moscow Government to Increase the number of the Cossacks on Don in the Middle of XVII Century" by V.G. Druzhinin. It is shown with figures there that the Russians would run not to Don but from it.).

In 1653 the owner of Romanov settlement (and not only him) complained the ataman that the dragoons from Sokolsk caused violence: "They break and steal, beat and rob on the roads, travel having gathered together, take hay away from mowing, seizure the lands by force". They Kipchaks put the impudent guests in their place. But not for a long time. Everything repeated the following year.

Those settlements are also interesting for another reason: they started to invite the Turki to Russian army there - at first to unit transport, and then as the soldiers. New and new Cossacks left their nation becoming the serving Russian people. In 1671 they were allowed even to swear to the Russian tsar and get generous tsar's wages. Although they remained the nationals of their country… According to the steppe adat one could swear only once during the life and keep the faith to the swear until the end. And that was taken into consideration in Moscow while creating "the fifth column" in the Great Steppe!

And together with the tsar's wages they obtained the name - a Cossack, which meant not the steppe estate as it has formerly been but a "participant of the Cossack army". And they started to write the word "Cossack" in Russian with the character "a" instead of "o".

After that everything was predictable… During the Azov campaigns Peter I finally conquered the Don Cossacks with their own hands and introduced appointment of the atamans on Don in 1723. That meant that an ataman was not to be elected as it has always been but appointed by Moscow. That was it. The end of the Cossack freedom - there was no place for bribery any longer; they had only threats… They appointed only Russian atamans to be in command of the Cossacks.

At first the appointed atamans obliged the Cossacks to learn the Russian language, otherwise nobody could be accepted in the army. And how could a Cossack do without military service? He was deprived of all the advantages and privileges which military service provided. That's why the Cossacks would stick to service.

In XVIII - XIX centuries there were kind of two Dons on Don - men were obliged to speak Russian (the language of the service) and women still spoke their native Turkic language. It is interesting that the Cossacks still haven't forgotten their native language on Don, Ural; it is called their "home" language but it is hidden now like something improper.

On September 9th, 1769 an order was issued, which caused the substitution of the Cossack national clothes for Russian uniform. So that they don't look like their ancestors. As though their skin was torn off… History retained the information about how certain Cossacks would fall down naked, wallow beaten on the Earth, freeze in the snow but would never put the Russian uniform on.

On August 18th, 1801 another order was issued, which obliged the Cossacks to wear Russian uniform both at home and during the service. Later all other Cossack troops were obliged to do the same.

Was it really like that?.. Russian historiography archly keeps silent on this point inventing the histories of the Cossacks one after another.

But there are some things which cannot be ignored or concealed, - the archives. National archives where official acts are maintained. Not everyone has access there. And there it is evident that Ivan the Terrible and other Russian tsars (before Peter I) dealt with the Cossacks only through the Embassy Department since Desht-I-Kipchak was a foreign state! And the Cossacks weren't the nationals of Russia!

In XVII century appeared a version according to which the Cossacks were fugitive Russian peasants. Who has invented that absurdity? There were no enough serf peasants in Russia to settle Don, Volga, Yaik, lower Dnepr, the Caucasus.

In the course of the years a "scientific theory" concerning the eastern Slavs, whose culture was the copy of the Turkic one, was formed… They were making the Slavs of the Kipchaks in different ways. Some were ascribed to the Cossacks and sent to suppress their brothers with weapons. Disobedient settlements were sent to Siberia and taught to be not just the Russians but obedient Russians under surveillance of the appointed atamans. Thousands of Zaporozhye and Don Cossacks were taken to the morasses of Petersburg and sent to the Caucasus… "Slavic" Mother Russia was rising on bones of the steppe nation.

The steppe nation was disappearing in other countries in surprisingly the same way. In Georgia, for example, though there was less blood there… The theme of Georgia is very interesting in general: in XI century, under David the Builder, about one hundred and forty thousand of Kipchak families moved there. They formed the core of David's army and united separate principalities of Iberia into a single strong Georgian state… "Gyurdzhi" was the Turkic name of that country of the bleu-eyed Georgians who radiated strength and warmth of the Great Steppe.

There is no doubt that some facts from relations between the Georgians and the Kipchaks have been forgotten, others have been distorted. But there are untouched original facts. For example, judging by their family tree, Dadishlikiani princes are the descendants of the Kipchaks. And it is evident they are not the only ones. Contacts of the Steppe and the Caucasus really have a very long history. In IX - XIII centuries the Kipchaks sent women, children and the aged to the mountains from the separated Steppe. Gzak-Khan, for example, was hiding his son there - little Konchak. That Konchak who took the Russian tsar Igor prisoner and set Chernigov Principality on fire…

Did the Kipchaks disappear as a separate nation of Georgia? Of course they did. In the course of the centuries they joined the Georgian culture, became intimate with it; they are called the Georgians or the Svans. Although the roots have been forgotten, the History hasn't, which allows to establish the relations between, say, Azerbaijan and Georgia, in another way - since these are sister nations.

The same historical foundation, though covered with Baltic sand, can be seen in Lithuania and Poland where a great deal of Polish and Lithuanian princes also have "steppe" family trees. And they are the Turkic Kipchaks wearing alien masks at a masquerade of life… Emblems and seals are of a great interest for an historian in this connection: Almost every second of them contains a tamga or another symbol pointing to the eastern origin of the family - time has no power over the traditions of armory.

A tamga gives the key to solution of the family trees of, say, Dzyaduleviches, Tugan-Baranovskiys and other families which are evidently non-Turkic. Attention should be paid… For example, Tugurkan-Khan descendants are called Polovtsian-Rozhinskiys today; they've been living in Lithuania since XIII century.

The Kipchaks gave "birth" to more than one nation, indeed.

For instance - to the Caucasian Albania - the mysterious country about which not much is known. Unfortunately, that subject hasn't been seriously investigated. But sooner or later some of the young scientists would wonder why the symbol of the Caucasian Albania copies the tamga of the Turkic Alban family? That family moved to the Caucasus from Altai during the Great Nations Migration. Part of it still remains in Kazakhstan (According to the genealogical book of Alban family, they moved to the steppes of Kazakhstan 150 years before Common Era; they came from the Chuya Valley. It seems they are most ancient and respected family; it relates to the elder group of tribes. Respected (families, apparently?) kyzyl boric, konyr boric, aytbozim, segyz sary, kurman, alzhan, kystyk were among the Albans.)… And how did the Lezghins manage to know about Tengri? (Their Church worshipped Tengri until 1836 following the eastern tradition).

The Udins (descendants of the Albans living in Azerbaijan) retained the spiritual culture of the Caucasian Albania. They also have another attitude towards Christ as compared with Rome or Moscow. They Church has always been standing on the same positions with the Armenian one… And are the numerous Turkic adoptions in the Lezghin language casual? Why can ancient dialect of the Turkic language be heard in certain Lezghin words and phrases? (A thesis on this subject has been written.) So who are they, those mysterious Lezghins? No doubt, they are a separate nation. And at the same time they are a mysterious nation having answers to many questions of the "Kipchak" history.

The Turki move in mysterious ways on our planet… For example, certain Kipchak yurts in the Northern Caucasus have became Ossetian by the order of Moscow, and their inhabitants have become the Ossetins although they don't even look like them. A great deal of the Turki has been ascribed to the Chechens, Ingushes, Kabardinians, Circassians… The Kipchaks were assimilated with other nations. And they were assimilating, having been deprived of the Great Steppe.

Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin is right: history should be the sacred book for nations, the mirror of their life and deeds, the percept of the ancestors to the descendants. Let this book be the beginning of such history for the Turkic (Kipchak) nation which has lost itself having presented a great culture to the world.

And marquise de Quistine was also right when he wrote after the trip to Russia: "Seeing them and thinking what was existence for those poor things, I asked myself what has man done to God, for what were those people condemned to living in Russia?".

For not being faith to God! For edification of others…

Appendix

Near St. George Spring

"Gyurdzhi's Day"

Saint George… The most famous saint of the Great Steppe. His actual deeds are hidden in the fog of the Church policy… We have no memory and we have forgotten the truth about that outstanding peace-maker and enlightener. We remember him only as a killing rider… Ruthless image of a murderer - how can it be connected with a saint? Was George, the guardian of the Kipchaks, like that? Not at all. In fact, what do we know about him?