Morozov on the terrorist struggle page. Academician S.I.

• Morozov N.V., Ganiev I.M., Gallyamova I.N. Resource-saving biotechnology for wastewater treatment from waste lubricating oils of industrial enterprises to recycling water supply standards / N.V. Morozov, I.M. Ganiev, I.N. Galliamova // International. scientific conf. theory and butt. developments “Scientific developments: Eurasian region”, - M.: Publishing house. Infinity, 2019. - pp. 191-197.

• Morozov N.V., Ganiev I.M., Lebedev N.A., Almazova G.A., Ibragimov T.R. Neutralization of used lubricating oils in industrial wastewater using a consortium of microorganisms in a spray-settlement bioreactor / N.V. Morozov, I.M. Ganiev, N.A. Lebedev, G.A. Almazova, T.R. Ibragimov // Bulletin of the Technological University. Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, Kazan. national research technol. univ. - Kazan: KNRTU Publishing House, 2018. - T. 21. - No. 12. - P. 78 - 83.

• Morozov N.V., Morozov V.N.; Ganiev I.M. Biotechnology of deep biodestruction of lubricating oils in wastewater of enterprises and agricultural facilities / N.V. Morozov, V.N. Morozov, I.M. Ganiev // Mat. III International Scientific Internet Conference “Biotechnology. A look into the future", in 2 volumes, Kazan, IP Sinyaev, 2014. - from 18-20.

• Morozov N.V., Ivanov A.V., Akhmetov A.A., Grigorieva E.N. Optimization of environmental conditions for hydrocarbon-oxidizing microorganisms used for controlled biodestruction of oil pollution. //Materials of the VIIth Moscow International Congress “Biotechnology: status and development prospects” M.: 2013.-P. 250-251.
• Akhmetov A.A., Morozov N.V., Grigorieva E.N. Intensification of biodestruction of oil in agricultural wastewater with sorbents of plant origin.// Materials of the International Scientific and Practical Conference “Biotechnology: Reality and Prospects in Agriculture”. Saratov, 2013.-S. 241-243
• Morozov N.V., Zhukova O.V. The use of strains of hydrocarbon-oxidizing microorganisms for the purification of wastewater from agricultural enterprises from oil products in small sewers.//Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference “Biotechnology: Reality and Prospects in Agriculture”. Saratov, 2013.-S. 265-267

• Morozov N.V., Ivanov A.V., Akhmetov A.A. Biotechnology for the elimination of oil pollution by associations of oil and hydrocarbon-oxidizing microorganisms immobilized on sorbents of various natures. // Materials of the International. scientific tech. Conference "Pharmaceutical and Medical Biotechnologies". M.: 2012.-S. 463-464.

• Morozov N.V., Ivanov A.A., Zhukova O.V., Chernov A.N., Stepanov V.I. Biological products of industrial design and their use for controlled purification of surface waters from oil pollution (in case of emergency or local entry).// Materials of the VI Moscow International Congress “Biotechnology: status and development prospects” M.: 2011.
• Morozov N.V., Zhukova O.V., Ivanov A.V. Biotechnology for the elimination of oil pollution with indigenous strains of hydrocarbon-oxidizing microorganisms immobilized on sorbents of various natures.// Materials of the VI Moscow International Congress “Biotechnology: status and development prospects” M.: 2011.

• Zhukova O.V. Applicability of biopolitical categories to the forms of behavior of microorganisms / O.V. Zhukova, L.Z. Khusnetdinova, N.V. Morozov // Environmental biotechnologies in the XXI century. Collection of scientific articles. Edited by Doctor of Biological Sciences, Professor N.V. Morozova. - Kazan: TGGPU, 2010. - pp. 106-124.

Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov, working at the “junctions of sciences”, using facts and methods from various fields of knowledge, became the founder of a systems approach in science. He is rarely remembered, although the new Chronology of Fomenko and Nosovsky, for example, is based on the legacy of this particular scientist.

Honorary Academician N.A. Morozov is known as an original scientist who left a large number of works in a wide variety of fields of natural and social sciences. N.A. Morozov performed work in various fields of astronomy, cosmogony, physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, geophysics, meteorology, aeronautics, aviation, history, philosophy, political economy, linguistics. He wrote a number of well-known autobiographical, memoir, poetic and other literary works.

The highest intellect and rebellious spirit of the Russian intelligentsia were focused in the personality of N.A. Morozov. Next to him you can put, perhaps, only V.I. Vernadsky. Both of them personify the bygone era of scientists - encyclopedists. His style of thinking is somehow elusively reminiscent of the scientists of the medieval Renaissance. The "Silver Age", which is often written about, is characteristic not only of Russian poetry, art and culture. It can also be seen in science. At the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, Russia experienced a rise. In everything that N.A. Morozov wrote and pondered and thought about, the steps of tomorrow could be heard. In terms of his encyclopedic knowledge, enormous ability to work, productivity and creative potential, N.A. Morozov is an exceptional phenomenon.

Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov was born in 1854. At that time, lighting in the village was also provided by a torch and a candle. He experienced the first steps in the development of technology, steam and electricity, and completed his life's journey in the initial period of the era of atomic energy, the possibility of which he foresaw before most physicists and chemists.

Life among nature since childhood awakened in Nikolai Alexandrovich a passionate interest in natural science. Having received his primary education at home, as was customary in noble families, at the age of fifteen he entered the 2nd Moscow Gymnasium. Nikolai Aleksandrovich unites around himself a group of young men who, like him, strive for knowledge, and organizes a circle called the “Society of Natural Science Lovers,” at whose weekly meetings scientific abstracts were heard. Members of the circle publish a handwritten journal under the editorship of Nikolai Alexandrovich.

Until 1874, N.A. Morozov led an intense life full of scientific quests, deeply studying mathematics and a number of disciplines that were not included in the gymnasium curriculum - astronomy, geology, botany and even anatomy. At the same time, he is interested in social issues and studies the history of revolutionary movements.

The difficult fate of N.A. Morozov was programmed from the first days of his life. The eternal drama of children born in an unequal marriage. In the case of N.A. Morozov, the noble blood of his father, who was related to Peter the Great, was diluted with the genes of his mother, who came from a serf family. History is replete with numerous examples of such children growing into extremely talented and intelligent people. This is one of the manifestations of the greatness of the nation. At the same time, such examples show their vulnerability to common philistine ideas. The position of an illegitimate child and the associated experiences forced N.A. Morozov to think about social injustice and material inequality in society.

In 1874, N.A. Morozov met some members of the revolutionary circle of the “Chaikovites” (S.M. Kravchinsky and others). Their ideals and activities captivate Nikolai Alexandrovich so much that, despite disagreeing with some of their views on the peasant issue, he, after being expelled from the gymnasium with a ban on enrolling in any Russian educational institution, embarks on the path of revolutionary struggle.

N.A. Morozov leaves his family and “goes to the people”, lives and works in villages as an assistant to a blacksmith, a wood sawyer, wanders, doing propaganda among the people, calling on them to fight for their liberation. But the ardent young man, who longed for heroism for the sake of high ideals, was not satisfied with “going to the people” and the subsequent activity in workers’ circles in Moscow.

At the suggestion of his comrades, N.A. Morozov moved to Geneva, where he edited the magazine “Rabotnik”, which was illegally transported to Russia. At the same time, he continues to study natural science, sociology and history.

In the spring of 1875, while crossing the Russian border, he was arrested and imprisoned in the St. Petersburg house of preliminary detention. While in prison, he persistently studies foreign languages, algebra, descriptive and analytical geometry, spherical trigonometry and other branches of mathematics.

After three years of imprisonment, in January 1878, N.A. Morozov was released and soon joined the new revolutionary organization “Land and Freedom”. He becomes one of the editors of the magazine "Land and Freedom" and the custodian of all illegal documents, money and press.

As a result of the internal struggle, "Land and Freedom" splits into "People's Will" and "Black Redistribution". N.A. Morozov became a member of the Executive Committee of the Narodnaya Volya party and in 1880 emigrated again to publish a magazine abroad called “Russian Social Revolutionary Library”. At the same time, he writes “The History of the Russian Revolutionary Movement”, studies at the University of Geneva, where he listens with particular interest to lectures by famous naturalists.

N.A. Morozov decides to invite Karl Marx to collaborate in the magazine, for which purpose in December 1880 he goes to London, where he meets with him and receives the “Manifesto of the Communist Party” and a number of other works of K. Marx and F. for translation into Russian. Engels. According to the promise given to N.A. Morozov, K. Marx and F. Engels wrote the preface to the Russian translation of the Manifesto.

Returning from London to Geneva, Morozov receives a letter from Sofia Perovskaya and hastily heads to Russia to help his comrades in the struggle, but is arrested at the border. After the murder of Alexander II, according to the “Trial of 20 Narodnaya Volya”, N.A. Morozov was sentenced to life imprisonment without the right to appeal the sentence.

In the Alekseevsky ravelin of the Peter and Paul Fortress, the strictest regime reigned. N.A. Morozov did not have the right to walk, did not receive books, and due to poor nutrition he developed scurvy and tuberculosis.

Exceptional will allowed N.A. Morozov to survive these difficult years and, maintaining firmness of spirit, continue his scientific creative work. Two years later, the prisoners of the Alekseevsky ravelin were transferred to the Shlisselburg fortress, which had a particularly strict regime. Only after five years of N.A. Morozov’s stay in the fortress, after a number of deaths among prisoners, the prison regime was somewhat weakened, and Morozov had the opportunity to read scientific literature and write his own works.

In the Shlisselburg convict prison he wrote 26 volumes of various manuscripts, which he managed to save and take out upon his release from prison in 1905. In conclusion, N.A. Morozov studied French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Old Slavic, Ukrainian and Polish.

There he also wrote his memoirs, “At the Beginning of Life,” published in 1907. Subsequently, they compiled the first part of his memoirs, “The Tale of My Life.”

In the fortress, he first began to read the Journal of the Russian Physico-Chemical Society. Here he wrote a theoretical work, “The Structure of Matter,” which remained unpublished. Other works, in particular “Periodic Systems of the Structure of Matter,” were published only after leaving the fortress.

Research carried out at the end of the 19th century by scientists from various countries showed that both our planetary system and the most distant stellar nebulae consist of the same elements that were found on Earth. Establishing the unity of the chemical composition of world matter was of paramount scientific and philosophical importance.

In 1897, N.A. Morozov reported to his relatives from Shlisselburg: “Now I’m writing a book about the structure of matter. I’ve already written almost one and a half thousand pages, and there are no more than five hundred left. Although this book is probably never destined to ever get into print, but nevertheless, I have been working diligently on it almost every day for the past three years and feel inexpressible pleasure every time when, after much thought, calculations, and sometimes sleepless nights, I manage to find order and regularity in such natural phenomena that until now seemed mysterious "

The inner world of the prisoner “with a dried-up body” turned out to be so rich, his self-control so high that he not only did not die or go crazy in the terrible conditions of prolonged solitary confinement in the “stone tomb” of the Alekseevsky Ravelin and the Shlisselburg fortress, but, on the contrary, filled his life through creativity. N.A. Morozov looked forward to every new day, since every new day allowed him to move forward in the development of scientific ideas. Many years later, Morozov would say that he was not in prison, but “in the Universe.”

So, not far from St. Petersburg University, where D.I. Mendeleev worked at that time, in the Shlisselburg fortress there was a man who tirelessly thought about the essence of the periodic law, about the theory of the formation of chemical elements. Despite the lack of systematic chemical education in a higher educational institution, despite the fact that N.A. Morozov did not go through the proper experimental school, thanks to his amazing talents, he mastered the heights of various chemical disciplines and two to three years after his release from the fortress he taught chemistry , wrote books on general physical, inorganic, organic and analytical chemistry. D.I. Mendeleev, with whom N.A. Morozov met shortly before his death, spoke with approval of the work “Periodic systems of the structure of matter”, and on his recommendation for this work in 1906 N.A. Morozov was awarded, without dissertation defense, scientific degree of Doctor of Science.

N.A. Morozov was released as a result of the 1905 revolution. He devotes himself entirely to science and begins to prepare for publication his works written in prison. During the same period, he made many lecture trips throughout Russia. He gave lectures in 54 cities of the country - from St. Petersburg to Vladivostok. His public lectures on problems of chemistry, aviation, and the history of religions were brilliant and attracted huge audiences. All this frightened the authorities, and they often banned lectures.

The multifaceted scientist had another gift - poetic. He wrote stories, novels, poems. For the poetry collection "Star Songs" he was sentenced to a year in prison. In conclusion, he began to write his memoirs, “The Tale of My Life,” which is distinguished by an intense plot, beautiful language and apt images of his contemporaries. These memoirs were highly appreciated by L.N. Tolstoy.

In 1907, at the invitation of P.F. Lesgaft, N.A. Morozov began teaching a course in general chemistry at the Higher Free School. A few years later he was elected head of the astronomy department at the Lesgaft Higher Courses.

In 1911, at the II Mendeleev Congress, N.A. Morozov made a report on the topic “The past and future of the worlds from a modern geophysical point of view,” where he expressed the bold idea that new stars arise as a result of the explosion of old stars, which occurs as a result of the decomposition of atoms of matter that have become radioactive. Nowadays, this previously disputed hypothesis, in a slightly modified form, is shared by a wide circle of astronomers and physicists.

N.A. Morozov was interested in many branches of mathematics - from differential and integral calculus and the algebra of complex numbers to vectors and projective geometry, as well as probability theory. His interest in these issues was closely related to the application of these mathematical disciplines to natural science. From 1908 to 1912, he published three large works on mathematics: “Principles of vectorial algebra in their genesis from pure mathematics”, “Fundamentals of qualitative physical and mathematical analysis” and “Visual presentation of differential and integral calculus”.

The most fully original and original ideas of N.A. Morozov in the field of astronomy are presented in his work “The Universe”. He takes a new look at questions about universal gravitation, the origin and evolution of the solar system, star clusters, and the structure of the Milky Cloud. N.A. Morozov worked a lot on issues of the theory of relativity. His remarkable ideas also include the hypothesis about the relationship and periodicity of astrophysical and astrochemical phenomena. For a long time he worked on the fundamental work “Theoretical Foundations of Geophysics and Meteorology,” in which he showed that the influence of the Galaxy on the meteorological and geophysical processes of the Earth is of a natural nature and is so great that without introducing it into calculations one cannot even dream of scientific weather prediction.

N.A. Morozov showed great interest in issues of aviation and aeronautics. He became one of the pioneers of scientific aeronautics in Russia, received the rank of pilot, was the chairman of the commission for scientific flights, lectured at an aviation school, he himself flew on the first balloons more than once, proposed a system of automatically deploying parachute, as well as special suits for high-altitude flights (prototype modern clothing for pilots and astronauts).

During the First World War, in 1915, N.A. Morozov went to the front and here, at the forefront, as a delegate of the All-Russian Zemstvo Union, provided active assistance to the sick and wounded. He reflected his memories and thoughts about the war in the book “At War,” published in 1916.

After the October Revolution, N.A. Morozov transformed the Lesgaft Higher Courses into the P.F. Lesgaft Natural Science Institute and became its elected director. At the same time, N.A. Morozov headed the astronomical department of the institute and created an observatory in which he himself worked.

Since 1918, N.A. Morozov has been working with enthusiasm for many years on a large fundamental work, “The History of Human Culture in Natural Science.” Part of this large work in the form of seven volumes was published under the title “Christ” (published 1924-1932). Three later volumes of the manuscript remained unpublished.

The title “Christ” proposed by the publisher does not quite correspond to the content of this work. In the preface to the 7th volume, N.A. Morozov wrote: “The main task of this great work of mine was: to harmonize historical sciences with natural science and to discover the general laws of the mental development of mankind.” The version of the chronology of ancient history accepted today was created in the period of the 14th - 16th centuries and was finally completed, in its main outlines, by the medieval chronological historians I. Scaliger (1540-1609) and D. Petavius ​​(1583-1652). Morozov was the first to understand that both ancient and medieval events needed re-dating. Based on the analysis of vast factual material, rechecking many historical documents using mathematical, linguistic and astronomical methods, N.A. Morozov put forward and partially substantiated the fundamental hypothesis that the Scaligerian chronology is artificially stretched and lengthened in comparison with reality. He pointed out ancient texts that probably described the same events, but then dated to different eras. Morozov pointed out that since ancient texts were rewritten several times and, as a rule, modified, they could deviate quite far from the original text. At that time, there was no such branch of science as mathematical linguistics. N.A. Morozov proposed to establish the authorship of texts and identify plagiarism by the statistical distribution of function words. In this regard, Morozov should be considered one of the forerunners of mathematical methods in linguistics.

When listing the works of N.A. Morozov, one cannot fail to mention his historical study of alchemy, “In Search of the Philosopher’s Stone.” This book was received with great interest by readers, and it remains one of the most fascinating works about the alchemical period in the development of chemistry. As you know, N.A. Morozov always sought to study history from primary sources. Having started writing this book, he subjected to critical analysis historical manuscripts that covered the most important facts from the development of chemistry. This is how he evaluates many of the historical documents that he had to use: “Everything that we know about the works of ancient authors is almost entirely taken by modern historians from collections of the 15th - 17th centuries, i.e. from persons who lived a whole thousand years after the death of those quoted them writers, from extremely gullible persons, who filled their messages with incredible stories about all kinds of miracles. It is almost impossible to distinguish the truth in them from plausible fabrications and later additions. Thanks to this circumstance, all our primary sources for the ancient period of the pre-printing era are real Augean stables ", for the purification of which a new Hercules is needed. But even Hercules alone could not do anything here. Here we need a special international society for the development of primary sources of ancient history."

However, the methodology of N.A. Morozov’s research into the history of mankind, his historical concept, turned out to be so revolutionary that it was not recognized by official historical science. The facts cited by the scientist are considered to be largely misinterpreted by him. Currently, research on the new chronology is continued not by historians, but by scientists from other fields of knowledge - mathematics, physics (in particular: M.M. Postnikov, A.T. Fomenko, G.V. Nosovsky, S.I. Valyansky, D. V. Kalyuzhny and others).

While still in prison, N.A. Morozov developed the idea of ​​the complex structure of atoms and thereby substantiated the essence of the periodic law of chemical elements. He passionately defends the proposal about the possibility of atomic decomposition, which at that time seemed unconvincing to most physicists and chemists, because there was not yet sufficient experimental evidence for this statement.

N.A. Morozov also expresses the idea that the main task of the chemistry of the future is the synthesis of elements.

Developing the idea of ​​J. Dumas, N.A. Morozov proposed a periodic system of hydrocarbons - “carbohydrides”, by analogy with the periodic table - “in increasing order of their share weight”, and constructed tables reflecting the periodic dependence of a number of properties of aliphatic and cyclic radicals on the molecular weight.

N.A. Morozov suggested that chemically neutral elements should exist among atoms. A number of atomic weights of elements of the zero and first groups calculated by N.A. Morozov coincided with the atomic weights of the corresponding isotopes determined many years later. A deep analysis of the properties of the elements of the zero and eighth groups of the periodic system of Mendeleev led N.A. Morozov to the idea of ​​​​the need to combine them into one zero type, which was also justified by subsequent works. “Thus,” wrote the famous chemist Professor L.A. Chugaev, “N.A. Morozov could predict the existence of the zero group 10 years before it was actually discovered. Unfortunately, due to circumstances beyond his control, this prediction was not could have been published then and appeared in print much later."

It is striking and indisputable that more than 100 years ago N.A. Morozov boldly and confidently accepted the point of view of the complex structure of atoms and the convertibility of elements, allowing for the possibility of artificial production of radioactive elements, recognizing the extraordinary reserves of intra-atomic energy.

According to Academician I.V. Kurchatov, “modern physics has fully confirmed the statement about the complex structure of atoms and the interconvertibility of all chemical elements, which was once discussed by N.A. Morozov in the monograph “Periodic Systems of the Structure of Matter.”

The results of research in the last decades of the 20th century mark the beginning of a genuine triumph of the once misunderstood ideas of V.I. Vernadsky, N.A. Morozov, K.E. Tsiolkovsky, A.L. Chizhevsky.

N.A. Morozov from 1918 until the end of his life was the director of the Natural Science Institute. P.F. Lesgaft, who was distinguished by his versatility of research in various fields of knowledge, as evidenced by the Proceedings of the Institute, published since 1919 under the editorship of N.A. Morozov. It was at this institute, on the initiative of the scientist, that the development of a number of problems related to space exploration began.

The principle of comprehensive research was embodied not only in the institute he led, but also in the work of the scientific center created in 1939 on his initiative in the village of Borok, Yaroslavl region, where the Institute of Biology of Inland Waters and the Geophysical Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences now operate.

The Soviet government awarded Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov two Orders of Lenin and the Order of the Red Banner of Labor. A museum has been organized in the house where honorary academician N.A. Morozov lived and worked. A village in the Leningrad region, not far from the Shlisselburg fortress, is named after him. Astronomers named a small asteroid planet after him. "Morozovia" was included in all star catalogs in the world. One of the craters on the far side of the Moon (5" N, 127" E) is also named after N.A. Morozov.

N.A. Morozov’s constant desire to work at the “junctions of sciences”, using facts and methods from various fields of knowledge, brings him close to a systematic scientific approach (which is now one of the leading methods in science) in the study of phenomena in their diverse and often unexpected connections , uniting seemingly completely heterogeneous phenomena and processes. The range of interests of the scientist extended from chemical elements to the essence of life; from the emergence of stars as a result of the explosion of cosmic bodies to the formation of clouds; from vector calculus to the theory of relativity; from processes occurring in the center of the globe to aeronautics; from ancient and medieval history to the results of science at the beginning of the 20th century. N.A. Morozov believed that in the future all individual knowledge would unite into one common natural science, merge into a powerful stream of united knowledge, and become a common natural philosophy of the future.]]>

Morozov, Nikolai Aleksandrovich (revolutionary) Prepared by Maxim Budylko, a student of the 8th “B” class of the NNOU Secondary School “Career” for a history lesson.

Content. 1 Biography 1. 1 Addresses in St. Petersburg - Petrograd - Leningrad 2 Assessment of activities 3 Works 4 Criticism 5 Memory 6 Bibliography

family of N. A. and K. A. Morozov, approximately 1910. (supra) At the beginning of 1907, in the church of the village of Kopan Near Bork, Nikolai Alexandrovich married Ksenia Alekseevna Borislavskaya (1880-1948) - a famous pianist, writer and translator. They lived a long life together, but they had no children. Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov was born in 1854 in the family estate of Borok, Yaroslavl region. Father - Mongolian landowner, nobleman Pyotr Alekseevich Shchepochkin (1832-1886). Mother - Novgorod peasant woman, former serf P. A. Shchepochkina Anna Vasilievna Morozova (1834-1919).

Nikolai was educated mainly at home, but in 1869 he entered the 2nd Moscow Gymnasium, where, according to his own recollections, he studied poorly and was expelled. In 1871-1872 he was a volunteer student at Moscow University.

Revolutionary work. In 1874, he joined the populist circle of the “Chaikovites,” participated in “going to the people,” and conducted propaganda among the peasants of the Moscow, Yaroslavl, Kostroma, Voronezh and Kursk provinces. In the same year, he went abroad, was a representative of the Chaikovites in Switzerland, collaborated with the newspaper Rabotnik and the magazine Forward, and became a member of the International. Upon returning to Russia in 1875, he was arrested. In 1878, he was convicted in the trial of 193 and, taking into account the preliminary detention, was released at the end of the trial. He continued his revolutionary activities, conducted propaganda in the Saratov province, and went underground to avoid arrest.

He became one of the leaders of the organization “Land and Freedom”, and was the secretary of the editorial office of the newspaper “Land and Freedom”. In 1879, he took part in the creation of Narodnaya Volya and joined its Executive Committee. He took part in the assassination attempt on Alexander 1. As a result, with interruptions, he spent about 30 years in prison.

Addresses in SP Addresses in St. Petersburg - Petrograd - Leningrad. September 1880 - 25.11.1880 - apartment building - Nevsky Prospekt, 122, apt. 20; 1906-1941 - house of A. A. Raevskaya - Torgovaya street, 25.

Performance assessment. (about chemistry with physics) According to academician Igor Kurchatov, “modern physics has fully confirmed the statement about the complex structure of atoms and the interconvertibility of all chemical elements, discussed at one time by N. A. Morozov in the monograph “Periodic systems of the structure of matter.”

Problems of space exploration. A. Morozov from 1918 until the end of his life was the director of the Natural Science Institute. P. F. Lesgaft. Members of the Russian Society of Lovers of World Science, which he led, located in the building of the institute, began to develop a number of problems related to space exploration. Morozov personally took part in this work, proposing, independently of the Americans, a high-altitude hermetic aviation suit - the prototype of a modern space suit. He also invented the equatorial rescue belt, which allows you to automatically turn the upper part of the balloon into a parachute and ensure a smooth descent of the gondola or cabin to the ground.

works N. A. Morozov wrote many books and articles on astronomy, cosmogony, physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, geophysics, meteorology, aeronautics, aviation, history, philosophy, political economy, linguistics, history of science, mainly of a popular and educational nature . In prison he was cured of tuberculosis and created a vaccine against smallpox, but it was not used due to shortcomings.

Kriteka Author of a number of books in which he tried to reconsider some problems of world history, in particular the history of Christianity - “Revelation of the Thunder and Storm” (1907), “Prophets” (1914), “Christ” (in 7 volumes, 1924-1932) . These works were sharply criticized by professional historians and representatives of other sciences even in pre-revolutionary times. In Soviet and post-Soviet times, both Morozov’s historical concept and his research methodology were recognized by experts as erroneous. However, at the end of the 20th century, Morozov’s ideas found their continuation in the so-called “new chronology” - a pseudoscientific theory of a radical revision of history, created by a group of authors under the leadership of Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, mathematician A. T. Fomenko.

memory 1) A small planet (1210) Morozovia and a crater on the Moon were named in honor of Morozov. 2) In the Leningrad region there is a village named after Morozov. 3) Streets in Vladivostok and Ramenskoye are named after Nikolai Morozov. 4) Shlisselburg powder factories were renamed in 1922 to “Plant named after. Morozova". 5) In Borka (Yaroslavl region) there is a memorial house-museum of N. A. Morozov. 6) Monument at the grave of Nikolai Alexandrovich - the work of sculptor G. I. Motovilov. 7) I. E. Repin. Portrait of N. A. Morozov, 1910 8) The collection of the Yaroslavl Art Museum contains a picturesque portrait of N. A. Morozov, painted by the artist T. N. Glebova in the 1930s.

Bibliography Morozov N. A. Star Songs. M., "Scorpio", 1910. Morozov N. A. Stories of my life: Memoirs / Ed. and note. S. Ya. Streich. Afterword B.I. Kozmina. T. 2. - M.: b. And. , 1961. - 702 p. : p. (ed. 1965, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3) Morozov N. A. “Letters from the Shlisselburg Fortress” Morozov N. A. “The Terrorist War” Morozov N. A. Travel in outer space Morozov N. A. On the border of the unknown. In world space. Scientific half-fantasies. Moscow, 1910. Morozov N. A. A new tool for objective research of ancient documents Morozov N. A. Christ. History of mankind in natural science coverage vol. 1 -7 - M. -L. : Gosizdat, 1924-1932; 2nd ed. - M.: Kraft+, 1998

MIRAGES OF MEDIEVAL LEARNING
Due to the gullibility inherent in young people, all of us, studying the history of the ancient world at school, did not think about the question of when and how the works of the great thinkers of antiquity appeared in the European world. And we were quite satisfied with the vague information in textbooks about ancient writings, which, successively migrating from clay and wax tablets, first to papyrus scrolls, then to sheets of parchment, and from them to the paper of the first printed books, have reached our days. Although, it would seem, it was not difficult to guess that for such huge poems as, say, the Iliad or the Odyssey, there would not be enough clay tiles, and a whole cartload of parchment would be required. And in reality, of course, everything was completely different...
This is what it looked like, for example, when Plato’s works appeared on the European book market. In 1481, the Florentine Marcellino Ficino brought thirty-six of his manuscripts in Latin to the wealthy Venetian publisher Veneta and declared that this was a translation of the works of a certain ancient Greek philosopher Plato. Although Ficino did not show the Greek originals to the publisher, he hastened to publish the Latin manuscripts brought to him, and the name of Plato, which translated from Greek means “Broad,” thundered throughout the then reading world. And with him came fame and a lot of money to his translator into Latin, Ficino. In the next edition, he eliminated a number of anachronisms pointed out to him by readers, but still did not show anyone the Greek originals. Ficino’s heirs did not do this either. The heightened interest in these originals prompted another publisher of those times, Aldo Manuccio, to announce that he would pay a gold coin for each correction of ficin translations from the Greek original submitted by anyone. And now 31 years have passed since the first edition of Plato in Latin, and the Venetian merchant Mark Mazur presented to the publishers the Greek texts of these works that he allegedly found...
It turns out, Morozov said, that the cunning navigator, having learned about the publisher’s proposals, ordered during his travels thirty-six Greeks to translate one work from Ficin’s collection and, having collected them together, sold them to Italian publishers as the originals of Plato’s works!
This assumption well explains the fact noted by many researchers that Plato’s works contradict one another. Unable to admit that Plato's manuscripts were forged and written by different authors, experts in antiquity preferred the absurd assertion that Plato wrote these works at different periods of his life, and changed his political, moral and religious views to the exact opposite!
Having examined the Greek texts attributed to Plato using the method of linguistic spectra he developed, Morozov found that they belonged not to one unstable author, but to completely different writers, who in terms of philosophy and manner of presentation belonged not to antiquity, but to the 15th century AD!


A similar story happened with another Greek philosopher Aristotle, whose name translated into Russian means “Best Completion.” The authors of the Renaissance claimed that the great philosopher with such a strange name lived from 384 to 322 BC, and his numerous works, having lain for about a thousand years, appeared in Europe in Arabic translations in the 8th century AD, by the 13th century. XIV centuries spread among Western scientists and became so popular here that they brought their author the fame of “the supreme teacher in human affairs.” What really happened? The works of this enigmatic philosopher were first published in Venice in 1489 in Latin, edited and with commentaries by the Spanish-Arab philosopher Averroes from Cordoba. And six years later (time sufficient to translate them from Latin into Greek), Aldo Manuccio, already familiar to us, published them in Greek.


Having analyzed the texts of “The Best Completion,” Morozov came to the conclusion that these “are not the ideas of the ancients, but the ideas about the ancients that developed during the Renaissance, when Western European scientists wrote on their behalf both in Latin and Greek their own thoughts and that these are not even the works of one person, but of an entire school”...
Even more amazing discoveries awaited Morozov when studying the history of Ancient Rome, the main information about which is contained in the works of Titus Livy - the Venerable Libyan. This extraordinary man, allegedly born in 59 BC. e., wrote 144 volumes of “History of the Roman people from the founding of the capital.” True, only 35 of them have survived to this day. The first edition of Titus Livy, printed in Rome in 1469 from a lost manuscript, contained 30 books that described events from the founding of Rome to 292 BC. and from 217 to 176 BC. Later, in Hesse, in the Benedictine monastery, the manuscript of five more books was “discovered”, continuing the story until 165 BC. e., which was immediately published in Basel in 1531.
The value of the works of the Venerable Libyan for Morozov was that they contained, as he said, astronomical clues - a description of five solar and lunar eclipses and one comet. The chronology of such events can be established objectively and compared with the historian's descriptions. Having done this very painstaking work, Morozov came to the conclusion that the astronomical events described by Livy, which allegedly occurred in the 3rd-2nd centuries BC, could not have been observed earlier than the 5th-10th centuries AD (!). It turns out, Morozov concludes, that Titus Livius is some kind of Renaissance author hiding under a pseudonym, who described much later events using fairly accurate documents, but also made up a lot of his own imagination. “Regarding the location of the action,” Morozov wrote, “I will only note that it was not the Italians, but the Greeks who always called themselves Romans (Romeans, from the word Roma - Rome), and then the City (Urbs) of the Venerable Libyan is more suitable for Constantinople than under Italian Rome."
They say that among the admirers of the works of Titus Livy were famous Roman political figures - Seneca (“Old Man”) and Marcus Cicero (“Withered Pea”), as well as the prominent historian Tacitus (“Silent”), who allegedly lived in 55-120 AD . The main work of this prolific writer is considered to be the Chronicles (the history of Rome under the emperors Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius and Nero) and the Histories (the troubled times of Galba, Otto and Vitellius). These works have long raised doubts about their authenticity, and Morozov here only has to present the works of his predecessors - Ross, Goshar Amfitheatrov, who published their research long before Morozov’s “Christ”. According to their research, the author of Tacitus' works was Poggio Bracciolini (1380-1460), a gifted Italian writer and linguist, an expert in Latin, Greek and Hebrew. Having begun his career as a copyist at the papal court, he ended it as chancellor of the Florentine Republic.
Leading the life of a reveler and a prankster, Bracciolini, who needed money, entered into relations with the king of the then book market, Niccolo Niccoli, to whom for many years he supplied translations of supposedly ancient authors, which were in fact fabricated by a group of capable but dishonest writers. In 1415, he offered Niccoli a large batch of ancient manuscripts, allegedly discovered in the ancient tower of the St. Gallen monastery. This is how the works of Quintilian, Valerius Flacus, Nonius Marcellus, Probus, and later the “Bucolics” of Calpurnius and several chapters of Petronius appeared in the spiritual circulation of Western Europe.
This release of supposedly ancient works onto the book market created a rush of demand, and kings, dukes, cardinals, and universities appeared among the clients of Bracciolini and the company. Under these conditions, falsifiers began to skillfully insert references to the outstanding historical works of Tacitus into the forged works of Pliny the Younger, Tertullian, Oresius, Sidonius and other supposedly ancient authors. A situation arose where many had heard about his great works, but no one had the good fortune to read them. And then demand gave rise to supply: Tacitus was found!
In November 1425, Bracciolini informed Niccoli that a certain monk, his friend from Germany, was offering a batch of ancient manuscripts, among which were several works by Tacitus. The delighted publisher immediately agreed to the deal, but Bracciolini was in no hurry. For four years he has been leading the publisher by the nose with stories that the monk is letting him down, and in the meantime he is negotiating these manuscripts with wealthy patrons. Finally, Niccoli receives and publishes the first manuscript of Tacitus, and Bracciolini spreads rumors that he has an older Tacitus from an inaccessible northern monastery...
These eternal mysterious monks were, according to Gauchard, part of the falsification system established by Poggio. They have never been seen or heard, but today one of them brings from Sweden or Denmark the lost volume of Titus Livy; tomorrow another mysterious monk is carrying Tacitus from Corveia or Fulda. And always for some reason from the distant, inaccessible north, and always exactly what there is a frantic demand for. Over the eighty years of his life, Bracciolini “discovered” Quintilion, the treatises and speeches of Cicero, the works of Lucretius, Petronius, Plautus, Tertullian, Tacitus and many other “ancient Romans”. By the end of his life, Poggio had had enough of his apocryphal literature and began to write exclusively under his own name.
The system of falsification of ancient manuscripts created by Bracciolini and others like him could not be kept secret for long: driven by ambition, the true authors could not resist boasting in friendly company that it was they who wrote the books of ancient authors whom enlightened Europe admires. And this explains the deep distrust with which contemporaries of the Renaissance greeted each successive “discovery” of all ancient classical authors without exception. “The Renaissance” was in fact the “Era of Origin,” Morozov wrote, “but due to the conditions of the religious life of his time and other reasons, this “birth” was expressed in a very original form - in apocrypha, that is, the systematic attribution of one’s own works to mythical persons of antiquity "
INTELLECTUAL FIELD OF ANTIQUE
Research similar to the above could be continued indefinitely, but this is not necessary, since Morozov has already done this work. Having collected the names of all the prominent intellectuals of ancient Greece and Rome, as well as the years of their life and activity in traditional chronology, he constructed a diagram, a simplified version of which is shown here:

Along the horizontal axis there are ten intervals indicating one or another type of mental activity: lyric poetry, satire, drama, oratory, etc. On the vertical axis there is a chronological scale from 900 BC to 1700 AD.
Having arranged the names of ancient writers and thinkers in columns in accordance with the years of their lives, Morozov received a chronological picture of the spiritual activity of Ancient Greece (blue segments) and Ancient Rome (green segments). By drawing horizontal lines through the points - 900, - 700, - 500, - 300, 0, 1200, 1300 and 1600 of the vertical axis, Morozov received a periodization of Greco-Roman and European culture (periods: epic, poetic, dramatic, didactic, Roman, Byzantine , Crusades, Renaissance).
The diagram makes clear the whole picture of the traditional intellectual history of Europe. Thus, in the most ancient - epic - period, we find activity only in lyric and heroic poetry (blue segment in column 1). Here Morozov enters 5 names, the most famous of which are Orpheus, Homer and Hesiod. In the second period - poetic - the boundaries of creativity expand: in addition to 13 poets in the first column (including Sappho, Pindar and Anacreon), 3 names appear in column 2 - satire - and 1 in column 10 - astronomers, geographers, mathematicians (this is the famous philosopher Thales, who argued that everything came from water).
After this, the brilliant classical period of Greek culture begins - the dramatic one. Poetry and satire disappear, but in column 3 - drama - 14 names appear, including Aristophanes, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides. Column 4 - oratory - 5 names, including Lycurgus and Demosthenes; in column 5 - pre-scientific philosophy - 7 great names - Heraclitus, Plato, Anaxagoras, Theophrastus, Democritus, Socrates, Aristotle; in column 9 - history - 5 names, including Herodotus, Thucydides and Xenophon; in column 10 - astronomers, geographers, mathematicians - 3 names, including Euclid.
In the next Alexandrian period - didactic - the spiritual activity of Ancient Greece concentrated on bucolic and didactic poetry - column 6 (8 names), on sophistry, philosophy - column 8 (Greek Voltaire Lucian); history - column 9 (3 names) and astronomy, geography, mathematics - column 10 (7 names, including Archimedes, Aristarchus of Samos, Eratosthenes, Heron, Strabo, Hipparchus).
In the fifth - Roman - period, the Greek world gives rise to the gospel teaching - in column 7 the names of 4 apostle-evangelists; the activity of the wise men continues - column 8 (4 names, including John Chrysostom); many historians - column 9 (7 names, including Josephus, Plutarch and Appian); the decline of scientific activity - in column 10 there is only one name, but a great one - Ptolemy.
The Byzantine period marks the decline of Greek culture, spiritual activity practically ceases, only in column 8 we see one name of John of Damascus and in column 9 - the name of the historian Socrates-Scholastics. True, it is in column 9 (the red line at the top) that the only bridge appears that connects the culture of the Ancient World with the era of the Crusades and, through it, with our time. Here, for the first time, authentic manuscripts appear, the age of which is not in doubt. There are 9 of them, including the Easter Chronicles, as well as the chronicles of George Amartol, George Kedren, John Zonar and Nikita Acominatus. And these are the most ancient manuscripts that historical science has.
As for Ancient Rome, its spiritual activity was concentrated at the turn of the old and new eras, around the year zero. The Age of Poetry - green bar in column 1 (10 names, including Flacus, Ovid, Virgil); satire - 7 names in column 2 (including Apuleius, Juvenal, Horace); drama - 9 names in column 3; oratory - 5 names in column 4 (Cicero, Cato, Crassus); pre-scientific philosophy - 4 names in column 5 (Pliny St., Pliny the Younger, Seneca); didactic poetry - 4 names in column 6 (Ovid, Virgil, Lucretius); history - 6 names in column 9 (among them Julius Caesar, Titus Livius, Tacitus)...
We already know that Morozov, like many other researchers, doubted the ancient origin of the works of Plato, Aristotle, Titus Livy, Tacitus. Reflecting again and again on the diagram, he became convinced of the complete implausibility of this, as he put it, “rotational farming” in ancient history. Here, no matter the name, there is a question. How could, for example, Pythagoras develop a theory of numbers a thousand years before the Arabs invented the decimal number system, without which there could be no talk of any theory of numbers? But isn’t Georg Stahl’s phlogiston, which was born in the last years of the 17th century, seen in the “fire” proclaimed by Heraclitus as the root cause of all things? Isn’t it amazing Democritus, who supposedly in the 5th century BC. e. spoke about atoms almost the same thing that Lavoisier said about them 2200 years later? And what about the oldest of philosophers, Thales, who, not knowing the length of the solar year, allegedly predicted a solar eclipse that would take place on May 28 minus 584 years according to the Julian calendar, which appeared almost eight hundred years later?
And such puzzling questions arise at every step. Why earlier than the 5th century BC? e. will only poets be born?
Why are there no historians in the time of Homer, who wrote huge poems in hexametric verses, although historical records are the first thing to which writing is attached? Why is ancient Greek poetry interrupted a thousand years before the Renaissance, and it is replaced by the richest drama? Why do playwrights disappear as suddenly as poets, only to be reborn after a thousand years, and are replaced by didactic poets and mathematicians? Why did the primitive annals and chronicles of the Middle Ages become a continuation of the deep and refined historical works of Herodotus, Thucydides and Xenophon?
Is it because, Morozov suggests, that all the so-called ancient authors actually worked during the Renaissance, when “it was fashionable to apocryphate lyrical and heroic poems in the most ancient centuries; dramas, comedies, philosophical and oratorical works followed this, and bucolic and didactic poetry even later. Historians inevitably had to be distributed over different centuries: after all, while dozens of comedies or poems with different contents could be written in the same year, it cannot be allowed that Greece had several different histories at the same time?”
Summing up his analysis of the diagram, Morozov comes to the conclusion that no ancient manuscripts existed in nature, that all the works of so-called antiquity have reached us either in manuscripts on parchment, the antiquity of which never goes back deeper than the 11th century, or in printed editions of the 15th-18th centuries centuries, and the manuscripts from which the typesetting was made disappeared somewhere without a trace. That is, Morozov writes, “they were clearly destroyed by the owners after printing.”
According to Morozov, when studying the history of the Ancient World, he was always surprised by the mysterious similarity of the three periods in the history of the Roman Empire. Thus, in Italy, a military-monarchical state arose from primary democracy, created by two brothers Romulus and Remus. Then Romulus killed his brother, became the sole ruler, was recognized as a saint, temples were built in his honor and prayer services were held. Having existed for two and a half centuries, this monarchy fell, a time of troubles ensued, then a republic was established, but then two co-rulers came to power and established a new monarchy. Then one of them - Octavian - killed the other - Anthony, was recognized as a saint - Augustus and died in glory. But again: two and a half centuries passed, the monarchy of Augustus was replaced by a time of troubles, a new wave surged, and the two co-rulers Constantine and Lucinius created a third monarchical state that extended its power over the territory of the Balkan Peninsula, the Middle East, Egypt and Italy. And the same story: Constantine, who killed the co-ruler, is canonized, prayers are served for him, and after two and a half centuries the monarchy disintegrates, and medieval republics and principalities arise on its territory...
“All this was completely incomprehensible to me until,” wrote Morozov, “until I was able to establish by astronomical means that the Gospel Christ was pillared (crucified - Ed.) on March 21, 386, that the Apocalypse was written on September 30, 395 and that the persecutor of Christians Nero is based on the emperor-consul Valens. during which there was also a persecution of Christians.” If Nero is Valens, then all the emperors of the Second Empire may have analogues in the Third. And it is possible that the same dependence exists for the kings of the First Empire.
After a thorough analysis of the sources, Morozov came to the conclusion: the entire Second Roman Kingdom, led by Augustus Caesar, was copied from the Third Kingdom, the only one that really existed in Byzantium, and the First Kingdom of Romulus and Remus, as well as the biblical “kingdom of David” turned out to be mirages of a mirage. Together with these kingdoms, “all Christianity of the first three centuries of our era and all of Judaism until the birth of Arius-Aron at the end of the 3rd century of our era disappeared from consideration. It also became clear that none of the solar and lunar eclipses came true until the end of the 3rd century, but from the 4th century all of them came true.”
But if there was no Julius Caesar, Pompey, Cleopatra, Hannibal, then where did the ancient palaces, triumphal arches, statues, and the Colosseum come from in Rome?
To answer these questions, you should, together with Morozov, make a foray into that very “dark Middle Ages”, which for some reason is sparingly written about in our history textbooks...
“For a correct understanding of ancient history,” wrote Morozov, “we must free ourselves from the idea instilled in us from childhood that the Roman Empire came out of Italian Rome.” This city, standing among the swamps forty kilometers from the mouth of the shallow Tiber, could never compete with Constantinople on the Bosporus, located on the shores of two continents and connected by sea routes with Balkan Romania, Rumelia, Greece and the Greek archipelago, Asia Minor, Egypt, Tunisia and Southern Italy. Naturally, Constantinople was placed at the center of the Mediterranean world by nature in 324 AD. e. the capital of the Great Roman Empire, whose citizens called themselves not Byzantines, not Greeks, not Hellenes, but Romai, that is, Romans. Italian Rome was at that time a tertiary town, having significance only as a religious center like Mecca or Lhasa.
But the importance of this town increased as Christianity took shape, exerting more and more influence on the political, social and private life of the people of Western Europe. And for several centuries, the main attention of the Roman church focused on several areas of activity necessary for the prosperity of the city.
First of all, the dramatic feature of Rome was that, while claiming spiritual power over the whole world, it could not defend itself even from small neighbors. And the constant concern of the Roman pontifexes, and then the popes, was the search for powerful secular patrons. Further, the prosperity of the city and the church depended on the influx of pilgrims, for which it was necessary to create and constantly maintain at any cost the prestige and glory of the city: by attracting all kinds of relics and relics, building luxurious palaces and temples, holding mass processions, entertainment and spectacles, disseminating information about past power and glory of the city of Rome. Taken together, all these events created the conditions for one of the greatest falsifications in history.
Here are some examples. Gregorovius is the most authoritative historian on the history of medieval Rome. He is so imbued with the ideology of the greatness of ancient Rome that, when describing majestic structures, palaces and buildings, he sees in them only pale semblances of what was in their places in ancient times. Thus, looking at the famous Pantheon, built under Pontifex Boniface IV in 608-615, he does not forget to note that an abandoned pagan temple stood on this site for many centuries, until Boniface IV built a temple again on its ruins, but this time a Christian one. Here is the famous aqueduct, supposedly “built by the slaves of Rome.” It came into operation under Pontifex Hadrian I (772-795), but Grigorovius again did not fail to remind: the water supply system was only “restored” by Hadrian.
The question arises: on what were such categorical amendments based? To answer this question, Morozov studied the two oldest guides to Rome, from which all subsequent authors copied, and came to the conclusion: these works are not based on anything other than the frivolity of the authors. “Monuments that are now considered classical are often designated by the names of churches that are now considered to have been built on the ruins of those monuments.”
In 1300, Boniface VIII organized a famous pilgrimage celebration in Rome in honor of the advent of the 14th century; a papal bull promised complete remission of sins to all who visited the basilicas of Peter and Paul - and the influx of pilgrims was expected to be unprecedented. For this celebration, Morozov believes, the famous Colosseum was built. “One cannot help but think that such a building was originally erected for some exceptional tournament in honor of the Madonna. His entire structure is adapted to this, and messages about his legendary past are all of a late date. By the way, as Morozov notes, gladiator translated into Russian means “sword-bearer”...
In the earliest documents of the Roman Senate, dating back to the 12th century, Morozov found information about the rental of the famous supposedly ancient columns of Trajan and Antoninus, as well as the Arch of Titus. From these documents it was clear that these buildings brought some kind of income to their owners, and if so, then legends about their ancient origin could be composed for selfish purposes. It is possible that the owners of these structures were not always able to resist the temptation and, during restorations and repairs, made inscriptions to prove the antiquity of the structure and the origin of the family.
At the same time, in the 12th century, families of artists and sculptors appeared in Rome and began to flourish. “Located in their secluded workshops,” Morozov wrote, “they, amid the noise and disasters of internecine wars, created all classical sculpture, since almost all popes, without exception, already took care of decorating churches and palaces with statues, including the Vatican.”
Morozov also answers the question about the origin of Roman ruins, which were considered by lovers and admirers of antiquity as irrefutable evidence of the existence of ancient Rome. In reality, these are traces of a fierce struggle for power between supporters of the popes - the Guelphs and their opponents, the Ghibellines, in the 12th-15th centuries. Once at the head of the Ghibellines there was a certain Brancaleone, who ordered the destruction of the castles and palaces of the Guelphs. “They dug up the base, supporting the tower with wooden props,” wrote an eyewitness, “then they lit them, and the tower fell”... Thus, in many cities of Italy, including Rome, dozens of luxurious buildings were destroyed, the remains of which were later passed off as antique ruin...
“And what do we see after everything that has been said in these volumes of our research? - asked Morozov, finishing the next volume. - Nothing real remains from ancient classical Greece and ancient classical Rome. There was nothing real left from Ancient Phenicia, Ancient Carthage and from the kingdoms of Israel and Judah."
What could Morozov count on after such statements? Least of all, the cessation of publication in 1932 and the imposition of a strict ban on the slightest mention of these works in the Soviet press for many fifty years...
Nikolai Alexandrovich was saved this time by his fantastic versatility: having stopped working on a forbidden topic, he switched to other problems, which he successfully developed until his death at the age of 92. The charge of vitality in this extraordinary man was such that at the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, having passed his eighties, he enlisted in the people's militia...
Only at the end of the 70s, a group of mathematicians - M. Postnikov, A. Fomenko, A. Mishchenko and others - began to further develop the problem posed by Morozov and published several articles in the scientific press. However, the attempt of the journal “Technology and Science” in 1982 to make these works publicly available resulted in strict reprimand from the CPSU Central Committee. And now we again offer to our readers a presentation of Morozov’s concept of the successive continuity of human culture and an article by mathematician Anatoly Fomenko, who talks about the methods of scientific analysis of historical documents developed by him and his colleagues. Read about this in the article.

Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov is a Russian revolutionary populist. Member of the Chaikovsky circle, Land and Freedom, and the executive committee of Narodnaya Volya. He was a participant in the assassination attempts on Alexander II.

In 1882 he was sentenced to eternal hard labor, and until 1905 he was imprisoned in the Peter and Paul and Shlisselburg fortresses. Mason. Honorary member of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

He is also known as a scientist who has left a large number of works in various fields of natural and social sciences. Also known as a writer and poet. Awarded the Order of Lenin (1945) and the Order of the Red Banner of Labor (1939).

Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov was born in 1854 in the family estate of Borok. He received his education mainly at home; in 1869 he entered the 2nd Moscow Gymnasium (did not graduate), where, according to his own recollections, he studied poorly; in 1871-1872 he was a volunteer student at Moscow University.

In 1874, he joined the populist circle of the “Chaikovites,” participated in “going to the people,” and conducted propaganda among the peasants of the Moscow, Yaroslavl, Kostroma, Voronezh and Kursk provinces.

In the same year, he went abroad, was a representative of the “Chaikovites” in Switzerland, collaborated with the newspaper “Rabotnik” and the magazine “Forward”, and became a member of the International. Upon returning to Russia in 1875, he was arrested. In 1878, he was tried in the trial of 193, was sentenced to a year and three months in prison and, taking into account the preliminary detention, was released at the end of the trial.

He continued his revolutionary activities, carried out propaganda in the Saratov province, and went underground to avoid arrest. He became one of the leaders of the “Land and Freedom” organization, and was the secretary of the editorial office of the “Land and Freedom” newspaper.

In 1879 he took part in the creation of “People's Will” and joined the Executive Committee. He participated in the preparation of a number of assassination attempts on Alexander II, and was a member of the editorial board of the newspaper Narodnaya Volya.

In January 1880, due to theoretical differences with the majority of the leadership of Narodnaya Volya, he withdrew from practical work and, together with his common-law wife Olga Lyubatovich, went abroad, where he published a brochure “The Terrorist Struggle” outlining his views.

If the Narodnaya Volya program considered terror as an exclusive method of struggle and subsequently provided for its abandonment, then Morozov proposed using terror constantly as a regulator of political life in Russia.

The theory developed by Morozov was called “tellism” (from William Tell). In December 1880, Morozov met in London with Karl Marx, who gave him several works for translation into Russian, including the Manifesto of the Communist Party.

In 1881, having learned about the assassination of the emperor and the subsequent arrests, Morozov returned to Russia, but was arrested at the border. In 1882, in the trial of 20, he was sentenced to life imprisonment. Until 1884 he was kept in the Alekseevsky ravelin of the Peter and Paul Fortress, and from 1884 in Shlisselburg.

In November 1905, as a result of the revolution, N. A. Morozov was released after 25 years of imprisonment. After that, he devoted himself to science, began to prepare for publication his works written in prison, and published a number of books and articles on various topics.

At the beginning of 1907, in the church of the village of Kopan near Bork, Nikolai Alexandrovich married Ksenia Alekseevna Borislavskaya (1880-1948), a famous pianist, writer and translator. They lived a long life together, but they had no children.

In 1908 he joined the Polar Star Masonic Lodge.

On January 30 (February 12), 1910, N. A. Morozov was invited by S. V. Muratov on behalf of the Council of the Russian Society of Lovers of World Studies (ROLM) to the post of Chairman of the Council and remained its only chairman for the entire existence of the society (before its dissolution in 1932).

Members of the Council were then repressed and some of them were amnestied only half a century later. Morozov, despite his critical position, was only forced to leave for his Borok estate, where he continued scientific work, including at the astronomical observatory built for him by ROLM.

Morozov did not share Bolshevik views. For him, socialism was the ideal of social organization, but he perceived this ideal as a distant goal, the achievement of which is associated with the worldwide development of science, technology and education.

He considered capitalism to be the driving force behind the latter. He defended the position that a gradual, well-prepared nationalization of industry was needed, and not its forced expropriation. In his articles he proved the inconsistency of the socialist revolution in peasant Russia. On the issue of the socialist revolution he opposed Lenin.

Here his position was closer to Plekhanov’s. Morozov participated in the elections to the Constituent Assembly on the lists of the Kadet Party, being in the same ranks with V.I. Vernadsky.

On August 12, 1917, in Moscow at the Bolshoi Theater, on the initiative of the head of the Provisional Government A.F. Kerensky, a State Meeting was held, in which figures of the revolutionary movement were involved: Prince P.A. Kropotkin, E.K. Breshko-Breshkovskaya, G.A. Lopatin, G. V. Plekhanov and N. A. Morozov. In his speech at this meeting, Morozov argued that the proletariat cannot currently survive without the bourgeoisie.

On the eve of the October Revolution, N. A. Morozov took a conciliatory position, joining the Cadet Party, he was offered the post of Comrade Minister of Education, which he refused. N. A. Morozov was respected by all revolutionary parties as one of the few living Narodnaya Volya members.

According to Academician Igor Kurchatov, “modern physics has fully confirmed the statement about the complex structure of atoms and the interconvertibility of all chemical elements, discussed at one time by N. A. Morozov in the monograph “Periodic Systems of the Structure of Matter.”

N. A. Morozov from 1918 until the end of his life was the director of the Natural Science Institute. P. F. Lesgaft. Members of the Russian Society of Lovers of World Science, which he led, located in the building of the institute, began to develop a number of problems related to space exploration.

Morozov personally took part in this work, proposing, independently of the Americans, a high-altitude hermetic aviation suit - the prototype of a modern space suit. He also invented the equatorial rescue belt, which allows you to automatically turn the upper part of the balloon into a parachute and ensure a smooth descent of the gondola or cabin to the ground.

In 1939, on his initiative, a scientific center was created in the village of Borok, Yaroslavl region; now the Institute of Biology of Inland Waters and the Borok Geophysical Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences work there.

In 1939, Morozov, at the age of 85, graduated from Osoaviakhim sniper courses and three years later he personally took part in hostilities on the Volkhov Front. In July 1944 he was awarded the Order of Lenin.

N. A. Morozov wrote many books and articles on astronomy, cosmogony, physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, geophysics, meteorology, aeronautics, aviation, history, philosophy, political economy, linguistics, history of science, mostly of a popular and educational nature.

In the works on chemistry that attracted Mendeleev's attention, visionary statements about the complex composition of atoms and the possibility of transformation of elements and interesting observations about their classification, probably stimulated by the work of Lockyer, are combined with baseless speculative constructions. In the field of physics, N. A. Morozov tried to challenge the Theory of Relativity.

Finding himself in the Peter and Paul Fortress and having no other literature except the Bible, Morozov began to read “Apocalypse” and, by his own admission: ... from the very first chapter I suddenly began to recognize in the apocalyptic beasts a half-allegorical, and half-literally accurate and, moreover, extremely artistic depiction long ago thunderstorm pictures known to me, and besides them there is also a wonderful description of the constellations of the ancient sky and the planets in these constellations. After a few pages there was no longer any doubt for me that the true source of this ancient prophecy was one of those earthquakes that are not uncommon even now in the Greek Archipelago, and the accompanying thunderstorm and the ominous astrological arrangement of the planets according to the constellations, these ancient signs of God's wrath, accepted by the author, under the influence of religious enthusiasm, for a sign specially sent by God in response to his fervent prayers to indicate to him at least some hint when Jesus would finally come to earth.

Based on this idea as an obvious fact that did not need proof, Morozov tried to calculate the date of the event based on the supposed astronomical indications in the text and came to the conclusion that the text was written in 395 AD. e., 300 years later than its historical dating. For Morozov, however, this served as a sign that not his hypothesis was wrong, but the accepted chronology. Morozov, upon his release from prison, outlined his conclusions in the book “Revelation of Thunder and Storm” (1907).

Critics have pointed out that this dating contradicts the undoubted quotations and references to the "Apocalypse" in earlier Christian texts. To this, Morozov objected that since the dating of the “Apocalypse” is proven astronomically, then in this case we are dealing with either forgeries or incorrect dating of contradictory texts that could not have been written earlier than the 5th century.

At the same time, he firmly believed that his dating was based on accurate astronomical data; critics' indications that these “astronomical data” represented an arbitrary interpretation of a metaphorical text were ignored by him.

In further work, Morozov revised the dating of a number of ancient astronomical events (mainly solar and lunar eclipses) described in ancient and early medieval sources, as well as several horoscopes, images of which were discovered in archaeological sites.

He came to the conclusion that a significant part of the dating is unfounded, since it is based on extremely meager descriptions of eclipses (without indicating the date, time, exact location, or even specifying the type of eclipse). Morozov re-dated other ancient astronomical events, suggesting significantly later dates.

Analyzing the history of Chinese astronomy, Morozov concluded that ancient Chinese astronomical records are unreliable - lists of comet appearances have clear signs of being copied from each other and from European sources, lists of eclipses are unrealistic (there are more records of eclipses than could in principle be observed).

Ultimately, Morozov proposed the following concept of history: history began in the 1st century. n. e. (Stone Age), the 2nd century was the Bronze Age, the 3rd century was the Iron Age; then comes the era of a single “Latin-Hellenic-Syrian-Egyptian empire”, the rulers of which (starting with Aurelian) “were crowned with four crowns in four countries” and “at each coronation they received a special official nickname in the language of this country,” and in our multilingual sources we, according to Morozov, have four histories of the same empire, where the same kings appear under different names.

The confusion that arose as a result gave us what is considered the history of the ancient world; in general, all written history fits into 1700 years and those events that we consider to be at different times occurred in parallel, and ancient literature was created during the Renaissance, which in fact was the “era fantasy and apocryphation."

Morozov dates the crucifixion (“pillaring”) of Christ to 368, whom he identifies with one of the church fathers, Basil the Great. As for the cultures located outside the Mediterranean, their history is much shorter than is commonly believed; for example, India “does not really have any chronology of its own before the 16th century.” n. e."

Morozov's works were not taken seriously and received devastating reviews. After the revolution, however, criticism was greatly tempered by respect for Morozov's revolutionary merits. The term “New Chronology” itself was first used in a devastating review of Morozov’s book by historian N. M. Nikolsky.

Yuri Olesha left a testimony about the response of his contemporaries to “Christ” and other works of Morozov.

Morozov's ideas were forgotten for a long time and were perceived only as a curiosity in the history of thought, but since the late 1960s. his “Christ” was of interest to a circle of academic intellectuals (not humanists, mainly mathematicians, led by M. M. Postnikov), and his ideas were developed in the “New Chronology” by A. T. Fomenko and others (for more details, see History " New chronology").

Interest in the “New Chronology” contributed to the reissue of Morozov’s works and the publication of his works that remained unpublished (three additional volumes of “Christ” were published in 1997-2003).

Created by him in prison in the mid-1870s. the poems were published in the collection “From Behind Bars” (Geneva, 1877). After Morozov’s release, his collections of poems “From the Walls of Captivity” (1906) and “Star Songs” (1910) were published, which included works he created during more than 20 years of imprisonment. For the book “Star Songs,” which expressed revolutionary sentiments, he was sentenced to a year in prison and spent the entire year of 1911 in the Dvina Fortress.

In his poems, Morozov calls for the fight against autocracy, glorifies revolutionaries and calls for revenge for his fallen comrades; There is also a satirical element in his poems. In the 1900s he turned to scientific poetry, focusing, following the Russian symbolists, on the experience of the Belgian poet Rene Gil. Morozov's poems evoked a sharp assessment from Nikolai Gumilyov.

- Memory
* In the Leningrad region there is a village named after Morozov.
* The minor planet 1210 Morosovia and a crater on the Moon are named in honor of Morozov.
* Shlisselburg powder factories were renamed in 1922 to “Plant named after. Morozova".
* In Borka (Yaroslavl region) there is a house-museum of Morozov.
* Monument at the grave of Nikolai Alexandrovich - the work of sculptor G.I. Motovilov.