Lovers as experts

Sometimes the disputes that have grown in the workshop science are reflected in near -scientific discussions, in a student audience or in lovers' societies. They are usually reflected in a simplified and pointed form, issuing the main lines of the discussions of professionals. At the same time, amateurs become militant amateurs, taking on the functions of experts and judges. This is sharply manifested in disputes on history that attracts sharp disagreements in society, in particular in a dispute about the Varangians.

1. Conversation With Wild

When discussing a number of my articles on the Internet, a certain Mr. Wild appears (I don’t know, this is a surname or “nickname”). No matter what topic I write on, he is here with his comments in which he reproaches me, that I do not answer his objections against my conclusions about the Varangians-Normans. He believes antinormanists, and I consider antinormanism not by a scientific theory, but a purely ideological platform built to turn the country into an empire into a military camp. He stigmatizes me as a Normanist, and I consider Normanism a beuple, invented by the anti -Normanists to justify his desperate struggle and give her meaning.

Take a look at his comment on the Blog of Trinity Option of June 13, 2012, to my article on a completely different topic - “The lovely letter of Rusnauki ” (I reprint with the spelling of the wild):

"Here You All Fight CO Lzhenau Koy , pseudo -conferences , false academician Miimi . A So Lee strongly You from Are you different ? A Here to me It seems that Very Not strongly . You And The authors of "Velesova Books " And others “Holy - Aryan Vedas " Just Two side of one Medals . How They lengthen the Russian History to times TRILLOO BITS , so And You Russophone Drive the bottom Russians people to level Dika Rei , who Good Civilizers for tails With trees Strengthened . For one You Water mud real Russians historians Lomonosov , Rybakova , Kuzmina And Fomina . Pot Mu What They V Difference from Goodbye weighty Historians . You even on my criticism ( undivided Love the liner stories ) are incapable Normal BUT answer . On Pressation , meeting readers or seminar You are me Not Call . But Nothing I I find out when​ You You will conduct And at the DU And I'll take it Journalists . Let Everyone knows which u NASA Doctors Source sciences " .

Contrary to my custom not to answer such letters, I will answer, because the letter is typical and my answer can help others with equally reckless critics to refrain from stupid and funny attacks.

Mr. Wild .

Argue With You I really not going to . By two reasons : first - on​​ this level to me To argue not Interesting And Once , a Secondly , you​​ After all And dispute lead Not For Find out Truth , a from excitement - show it scientists , what Here We at all Not scientists , but We understand better their . At the same time You Initially believed V Those flattering bikes O the past with which You Feed Record Antinor Manists , and Go from them How From the saint Truth . You obviously Relate To his own opponents How To the enemies And liars who are necessary Raway . They Attack on then , with how You Cleled .

At this You Not Fucking Once brave accusations . You Seeing that I I dousize mud “On the standing Russians scientists Lomonosov , Rybakova , Kuzmina And Fomina " . Where is it I their Puffed mud ? Quote , please . AND With which por Criti ka called dousing mud ? Directly Let 's say scientists This Multimly staff . Lomonosov great You are a barrier , but Very A weak historian . Rybakov was Very Talent by virtue historian , but Not Could Cooked to give CO his own imagination , many of it Buildings destroyed ( by the way , it is precisely to me belongs The most Under the timid biography Acad . Rybakova , written With maximum I eat sympathy ) . Kuzmin was Human knowledgeable , but one -sided , his student Fomin is zealous And Fanatical . This my to me ( and Not only mine ), but This Not About Ling mud .

You Declare that​ I Russophone and I get down Russian people to level Dee Karey . Let me You Ask where​ You are u me Found ? Quote , perhaps one hundred . But I To you I will help . What ancestors all peoples - And Russians , and Germans , and Jews and T . D.​ - were savages , c this u I'm not doubts . U You There is ? What land, later Famous How East Slavic , in bronze century Leave Vali from more Western - This A fact , you Not Famous , but those Not less not ceasing from this be Fon . Central And Western Euro PA littered bronze swords and vessels , their many Hundreds V Archaeolo of the gytical Museums . On Russian territory only Small jewelry from copper , and on south , c steppes ( populated Indoi Ranks nationalities ) - bronze knives And Shiles , more than more - knives from flint . Unfortunately , our​ country And later often lagging behind From the Western neighbors . I I think that If would many u us They did not try This hide , smear And redrawn , then we Not lagged behind would By many gim indicators Now . About Shu Not confuse me With Dr. Din Gundyaev , who assured V interview TV channel "Russia" on September 21 , 2010 , that Slavs Already after Christmas There were Christ Not only barbarians , but “People second varieties " and "almost beasts . " Is it behind - Yes . But Here the same And Japan lagged behind , but Japanese This is go Not hid , a Now They are in number advanced .

You Threaten come with Journalists on My "Meetings With readers , press - conferences or Se minara " - obviously to arrange​ scandal And publicly Divate me . TO Unfortunately , you Openi years 20. me​ Already 85, me Giving but Not I speak publicly , really that with reports V scientific meetings . And this Very Narrow Audience , and unlikely Lee she will To you sympathize . But me I am writing Articles And Books , them Print and Translated , and This the only thing Field , on which You You can myself Show in All shine . Not Internet And newspapers where​ Can print What Most ( or almost What Most ), a Scientific Lithuania . Write suitable To Printing a book . Maybe be if​ You Try those , then You will understand that shouts and impudence few what Reach that​ here Required Very Street stacks Knowledge , a lot work , many exactingness To yourself And , about Stiet , talent . Maybe be your​​ arrogance will be reduced and Your surname Stop be like that speaker ( or "Nick" So successful chosen ).

2. Who Financing Normanists ?

On the Internet, I stumbled upon a large selection of materials on the ancient history of Russia and the Norman question ( http://my.mail.ru/community/varyagi_i_rus/728b161eb9bb787.html ). This selection was created by Kyiv amateur Alexander Oleinichenko.

The matter is certainly commendable. However, he immediately divides all the authors whom he read and immediately divides into two categories: those who found in the history of Rus' only flattering and pleasant facts, and those who were looking for the truth and revealed any facts - whether they would like readers like Oleinichenko or not. The first are allies, the latter are enemies. I got into the second category.

Therefore, for me, in a note 77 (“Dispute about the Varangians”) Oleinichenko does not spare the whip condemning words (I quote with the author’s spelling).

“ Typical planting ideas Nor Mannism And perversion Ancient Russian stories is Job Kleina , dispute O Varangians . This Not Scientific Ra Bota , and quicker Popularization Varangian themes V style Suvorov - Rezun . No new arguments , by comparison With those that​ more on Normanistic dawn disputes were You are moved Normanists He Not Passing , therefore stop On them Not has meaning " . According to Oleinichenko, in this book , “supposedly written In 1960 , ” I only deal with the fact that myself“ PR ”. And a decisive conclusion follows: “ Already One It shows who​ finances That publications And For whom So Starting Klein ".

Well, of course, you need to diminish my scientific authority in every way. “ When I am saw This The book , me surprised that about​ Clay I Nothing Not heard to You move this Books . Although V The VII foresaw It is written that This Famous archaeologist . But So How Articles this " great " archaeologist I Not Could Remember the thread , and Which such great contribution He introduced V archeology USSR , I. I tried it find V Internet information about this Light historical science . Already Sam combination Lion Samuilovich and shovel archaeologist Difficult Obimo " . Well, the very incompetition of these concepts says something about the inner world of my critic. But let's listen to him further. He found that Klein was engaged in theoretical archeology. And the critic presents the crown argument: “ You You can imagine that​ Such theo​ Archeology , or Theor and physical Medicine ? Others The words mi Lion Samuilovich was chatterbox ".

"But Here I struck Perestroika And Our theorist fast I realized How For racing And on than for​ What The West will be Pay . " Further, Oleinichenko is lamented about the publication of the “huge circulations” of my book “The Spore about the Varangians”. " AND If You Open And Look who​ publishes This profanation , then See a child All That the same fund Eurasia , who published And Woe - professor From the sorbonne Reg Buaye " (This professor of the Sorbonne also did not please the stern Kievan, and he dealt with him in previous essays). The critic and European university scolded, in which I taught (apparently, one word "European" scares him already).

Mr. Oleinichenko is indignant at the fact that Wikipedia has placed a huge article about Klein, "which Not Smies V his own book pour mud ours historians And blame them in incompetence , spat on history Russia " (Can you have examples?), But about true large scientists, “ Books which on Hearing ” , there are no such articles. It now shifts my targeted and personal criticism of some scientists (after all, “antinormanists” now) . All words ( sic ! - l . ) Domestic historians And scientists only That and They were engaged in what Perverted and Twisted History origin Old Russian go of the Sudar . Well A Certainly on For the case nobody This Not I studied there Continuous objectivity and Impartiality . "

And conclusion: the promotion of Klein and his work, which is a continuous "Beleberd" shows that "Normanism For West is​ Part ideological struggle against Russia . AND How One of elements this ideologists War He purposefully Financed And about moving . "

One could pass by these attacks, writing off everything on non -education and bad influence. But, firstly, Oleinichenko reads a lot, thinks, tries to subtract from the sources what would suit him. Secondly, its mood is typical for many readers who are confused by a long Soviet and post-Soviet propaganda. Therefore, I want to contact a Kyiv lover with a serious and friendly letter.

Dear G - n Oleinichenko !

It was very embarrassed for me to read your Philippics. It is embarrassed for you. You can not give an “anger and addiction” to cover your eyes like that. I will not limit myself to correcting your elementary mistakes, but I will try to help you realize and something more.

1. The word “theoretical” (so you have three times) is actually written through E, “Beleberd”-through and.
2. The “dispute about the Varangians” was not published by “huge circulations” (fear has great eyes), but with a circulation of 1000 copies and completely sold out.
3. I do not need to defend my authority and indicate my contribution. Unless for accuracy: if you count with reprints and translations, this is my 22nd monograph (after now, half a dozen has come out), and more than 500 I have came out. If they are bad (this, of course, is possible), then why are many in the main archaeological publications? Including in Kyiv. Why they didn’t catch your eye, I don't know. I admit that you would not like them. I can’t at all admit that you have not read these publications. Probably flaws of memory.
4. As for theoretical archeology, the theoretical industry exists in every science worthy of this name, and it would be desirable to understand this for the correct interpretation of facts. However, I was engaged not only in the theory, but also by specific crops (for example, the bronze age of the Northern Black Sea region).
5. “Eurasia” is not a “fund”, but a small St. Petersburg publishing house created by two Russian writers, not having the slightest ties with foreign funds.
6. At the European University in St. Petersburg, I taught three years (part-time), and the main place of work was the Leningrad/St. Petersburg University (there-decades). My works about Scandinavian antiquities were completed there, my seminar worked there.
7. In many foreign universities, he taught at the invitation, nowhere in them he did not give lectures on the “Norman question”, since this question is not at all interested in them. There was no need to criticize Soviet scientists there (although it was for what), since I read other objects there. But Western scientists just criticized and argued a lot with them (read my work). After 2001, I did not go anywhere due to illness. Here are my books and articles, including criticism, translate.
8. In 1960, when my “dispute about the Varangians” was written (not “supposedly” was written, but really written), even to think about some connections with foreign funds was unthinkable. I submitted it to the publishing house with the recommendation of the dean of prof. V.V. Mavrodin (by the way, the anti -Normanist), and the publishing house did not dare to print, but the manuscript then read a large number of archaeologists.

   Who financed my studies of Scandinavian antiquities on the lands of Ancient Rus'? First of all, I myself - from my post -graduate scholarship. Then the University of Leningrad, who paid me a salary. And then, you compensated me for something, Mr. Oleinichenko: after all, you bought my book, here is a part of your money (though very small) and went to the fee from the publishing house. You write with such confidence that mine, from your point of view, “Normanist” classes are funded from abroad, that I have a temptation to inquire with you, where did the debt of foreign funds have accumulated me-where is my money in the currency? Would very come in handy.

9. I guess where you got this ideologue about the division of the population into “ours” and “non-“ ”, about the financing of“ non-people ”from abroad, etc. We have a lot of people considers the United States a treacherous enemy, only thinking of capturing our wealth. And in the States, only 2% of the population called the enemy Russia and 1% - ourselves. And they fear unpredictable Iran (which is much closer to us!) And to a lesser extent - China.
10. If you read my work calmer, without bias, then you may find a lot of useful things in them - many find. I advise you very much - discard the warlike tone, suspicion and nationalist excitement. The advantage of the nation is not in the selection of flattering facts about the past, but in an impartial study of the experience of history and in the smart organization of the present and future. And there is no Normanism. This is scared, invented to justify antinormanism.

All the best!

L.​ Klein