А.Т.Fomenko, G.V.Nosovskiy

Chapter 2.





  After Christ’s flight the high priests, who had to decide what to do with Christ, held a meeting openly. I.e. a kind of official tribunal over Jesus. If earlier such meetings were described as the secret, conspiratorial ones, now in front of us there is a meeting of the winning party. On the agenda there is the question of what had to be done with the defeated opponent. Whether to execute him or not. Though he is not captured yet. The book ‘Passion of Christ’ gives a short summary of the speeches of the twenty high priests involved. Their names are rather interesting: Caiaphas, Teras, Jehoshaphat, Ptolomeos, Nicodemus, Diaravia, Rariya, Ravnit, Samekh, Meza,Potiphar, Rosmophia, Savvat, Echiers, Ioram, Iosepha, Pifar, Akhiar, Ravam, Simon[127],p.11-13. We would like to draw your attention to the purely Greek names – Ptolomeos and Nicodemus. Ptolomeos being the name of an ancient Egyptian royal dynasty (Ptolemaic Dynasty – Tr.).


It was decided to capture and execute Jesus.

"И от того часа начаша искати времени, како бы яти его... И совещаша множество сребренников дати тому иже бы обещался искупите Исуса от сродников Его, и от ученик, разлучите и предате Его Христа единого нощию"[127], p. 13-14.


A bounty was placed on Jesus’ head. Besides we can see a curious detail – a large sum of money was to be spent on ‘paying off Christ’s relatives’. This speaks of the fact that Christ had fairly influential relatives who could have obstructed his execution. It was necessary to bribe them. Otherwise it would probably be not possible to execute him. It says so quite straightforwardly: "искупите Исуса от сродников Его".  

   Besides it was decided to execute Christ not in secret, but openly."Дабы видевше народы верующие в Него таковую напрасную на кресте смерть Его, отреклися бы от Него, и учение Его не прияли бы, и во веки не

воспомянулося бы пресвятое имя Исусово" [127], page 14. Here, most likely, it is said that the incentive for the high priests to arrange  an open public execution of Christ was fear of the revolts in the state, as Jesus – a former king – had many supporters. So if he was not executed publicly the people might have hoped that he remained alive and then rebelled against the new rulers. This idea is expressed quite clearly here.  





   It is described how Jesus and his disciples were carefully hiding. ‘Our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God, who was at that time staying in Bethany in the house of Simon the father of Lazarus,  WITH GREAT CARE  with His disciples’ [127], p.14. It is stressed that Christ under the circumstances did not trust anyone, but his apostles. ‘No one did Christ trust, but as His twelve apostles who He chose to serve Him… With them He was eating and drinking and walking and sleeping…and was not absent anywhere from them’ [127] p.14.


   We can see now that here is described Jesus’ flight and wandering when hiding from the pursuit with His loyal people. Robert de Clari tells us the same thing, see below.





   The next event, still before Christ was captured, but already during his flight, the book ‘Passion of Christ’ gives account of was the beheading of St John the Baptist. The description itself does not give us anything new compared to the canonical Gospels. It is a well-known Gospel story. But what’s important here is the chronological place where this event was mentioned.


When referring to the canonical Gospels we will see that the Baptist’s demise was described only by two evangelists: Matthew (14:6-12) and Mark (6:17-19). They both place St John the Baptist’s execution in the first half of their narrative, BEFORE Christ’s entrance into Jerusalem. The evangelist Luke and John do not tell us about John the Baptist’s execution, though speak of him frequently. We would like to note, that evangelist John clearly knows of John the Baptist’s execution as he writes: ‘This was before John was put in prison’ (John 3:24). Nevertheless he does not give a description of the execution of the prophet itself. Hence there emerges an impression that the execution took place considerably later, at the very end the Gospel story. And that it was not described only because it was overshadowed by the more graphic death of Christ. In this respect the Gospels of Luke and John correspond well with the book ‘Passion of Christ’ which places the execution of John the Baptist literally several days before the Passion of Christ. Incidentally in the Byzantine descriptions of the story of Andronicus the execution of John the Baptist is also dated as approximately the same time as the execution of Christ-Andronicus.   


   It turns out that John the Baptist was executed not by Herod from whom Christ was hiding before his entrance into Jerusalem, but a different Herod. I.e. Herod who came to power as a result of the plot against Christ. Judging from the book ‘Passion of Christ’ John the Baptist was captured and executed at the time, when Jesus had already fled from Jerusalem and was in hiding, but was yet to be caught.






    Further the events in the book ‘Passion of Christ’ are described as follows. Christ sends Judas to Jerusalem to buy some food. ‘Wicked Judas Iscariot was then sent by Christ to Jerusalem so he could buy something to eat’ [127], p.22.


   While in Jerusalem Judas finds out that some money has been offered for Christ and decides to betray Him. There is a description of Judas haggling with the high priests. The interesting thing about it is that Judas is depicted as a rather poor man who cannot quite imagine what sum of money he could get for his betrayal. He demands thirty pieces of silver, thinking that it is quite a lot. Though they were ready to give him much more. As a result both parties were very happy. Judas is under the impression that he got a lot, and the high priests – because they did not to have to spend much [127], p.24-25.  


    Judas informed the high priests that Christ was going to eat a Passover meal in the ‘house of Zebedee’ and promised to lead the pursuers there at night. "И егда совещаша с ним жидове, дабы нощию предати Его им, тогда рече к ним Июда, яко в дому Заведеове имать ясти пасху" [127], page 25. However, they did not give the money to Judas straight away, but promised to do so when the deed was done. [127], p.26.


    Then Judas returned to Christ and the Apostles to the house of Simon, the father of Lazarus, where they were then. When seeing Christ Judas bows to him and kisses him. Thus the book ‘Passion of Christ’ describes Judas’ infamous kiss in a way that’s not the usually accepted

version today, allegedly as a sign to the guards to seize Christ, as an identification signal. But simply as the hypocrisy of a traitor pretending to faithfully serve his master, whom he however has already betrayed [127], p.30.


   The described events take place on Wednesday. Until now it is considered in the Christian Church as the day when Judas’ betrayal is remembered.


   Then the book ‘Passion of Christ’ describes quite a detailed conversation between Christ, Mary Mother of God, holy women Myrrhbearers and Judas. In essence this conversation is about the deadly danger facing Jesus, the one, as he understands, is inescapable. Traitor Judas shows his hypocrisy here as if he was concerned about Christ’s safety.  


In particular, Mary Mother of God is asking Christ not to go to Jerusalem, and he promises her not to, telling her that he would only go with the apostles to a ‘zebedee house’. "Мати моя Марие, не имам итти во Иеросалим, но токмо в дом заведеов"

[127], p.33. Today the commentators think that ‘zebedee house’ belonged to a man by the name Zebedee. But a different interpretation is also feasible. It is possible that the origin of the word ‘zebedee’ house is Slavic. And it means simply ‘zavedenie’, i.e. a tavern, an inn, a bar. Or something like that. The picture becomes even clearer as Christ and the apostles did not simply go to this house, but specifically in order to celebrate the Passover. It is only natural that they decided to arrange a celebratory supper in some kind of a tavern, ‘zavedenie’.      


Incidentally, it is not the only example of the Slavic word and expressions emerging in the gospels and which were probably present in the old original, and not recognised by the commentators and translators. Another example is the famous words Christ said before his death: “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (Matthew 27:46). But here we can clearly see a Church-Slavonic expression peeping through: ‘Ala! Ala! Li mia sia vartani!’

The only difference from the synodical translation is that letter ‘X’ is replaced with letter ‘P’ and that (letter) Fita) was read as  ‘T’ and not as ‘Ф’. (We would like to remind you that Fita can be read in two ways – as ‘Ф’ and as ‘T’). So we can here the following “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”.

   Это, кстати, не единственный пример, когда в Евангелиях появляются не распознанные комментаторами и переводчиками славянские слова и выражения, присутствовавшие, очевидно, еще в древнем оригинале. Еще один пример - это знаменитые слова Христа, сказанные им перед своей смертью:  "Или, Или! Лама савахфани" (Матфей 27:46). Но здесь явно проглядывает церковно-славянское выражение: "Ала, Ала! ли мя ся вартани". Все отличие от синодального перевода лишь в том, что буква Х заменяется на Р и что фиту прочитали как Т, а не как Ф. (Напомним, что Фита читается двояко - как Ф и как Т). Итак, мы видим здесь следующее:  "Боже, Боже! или [ты от] мя ся отвратил". В переводе на современный русский язык это означает:  "Боже, Боже! или Ты от меня отвратился (отвернулся)?". Именно так, кстати, старинные переводчики и перевели данный, непонятный, а точнее не до конца распознанный ими,церковно-славянский текст "еще раз" на тот же церковно-славянский, а затем уже на русский:  "Боже Мой, Боже Мой! для чего Ты Меня оставил?" (Матфей 27:46).      Поясним здесь, что в церковно-славянском языке частица "ся", которую сегодня мы ставим в конце слова слитно, раньше часто ставилась в начале слова и писалась отдельно от него. То есть вместо "отвратился" писали "ся отвратил". Кроме того, в церковно-славянском языке слово "меня" писалось как "мя". А слово "или" до сих пор может заменяться на частицу "ли".  Например, сегодня мы скажем: "сделал ЛИ ты это?". Это же самое раньше могли выразить и так: "ИЛИ ты это сделал?".      Таким образом, старая церковно-славянская фраза исказилась в "древне-еврейское" загадочное выражение, по сути дела, заменой всего лишь одной буквы: Р на Х. Причем, такая подмена вполне могла произойти чисто случайно. Ведь церковно-славянские буквы Р и Х пишутся очень похоже друг на друга, см. рис.2.6. Основная линия у них одна и та же, но в зависимости от того, куда мы ставим вторую черточку, получается либо Р, либо Х.

We would like to also make another note in regards to the word ‘АLА’ (‘ELI’). It is known that ALA (ALLAH) meant God. But it is thought that only the Muslims call God by this name. The Christians allegedly did not call God by this name. However, this customary opinion is erroneous. Firstly, we would like to remind you, that Islam even according to the Scaligerian history, is considered to be a branch of Christianity – so called Nestorianism. That is why the fact, that the Muslims call God ALLAH could mean, that that’s what the ancient Christians called God. Even, we will repeat it, within the framework of the Scaligerian history. Besides, we came across various examples of the old Russian texts, written by the Christian Orthodox people, where the word GOD is presented as ALA. For instance, the well-known ‘Zapiski’ by Afanasy Nikitin, as well as the monastic robes of Simeon Ulyanov, whose burial was excavated in Uglich, see CHRON4, ch.13:3 [РАР]:5. Therefore there is nothing surprising in the fact that Jesus called God ALA (Eli). Then again, here our translation does not differ in any way from the synodical one. It also translated the word combination ‘ELI ELI’ as ‘My GOD My GOD’.






   Then Christ and his disciples proceed to the house of Yakov Zebedee, i.e. to ‘Yakov’s tavern’ situated outside Jerusalem not far from some stream. I.e. either from a sea or a river. There a room and a festive table was prepared for them. ’Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Son of God came to the house of Yakov Zebedee, near the city close to the stream Kedrasky with his apostles in the prepared room. The supper was prepared there’ [127], p.41. Further there goes a description of the Last Supper well-known according to the canonical Gospels.       


    Then Christ leaves with his disciples to the ‘Gepsimanievo (Gethsemane) village situated not far from that place. I.e. he walks away from the tavern (zavedenye) not far [127], p.48.






   When Christ and his disciples went to the Gethsemane village, Judas headed to the high priests, told them about the Lord’s Supper and claimed his 30 pieces of silver for pointing out where Christ was. The money was given to him and a party of soldiers was dispatched to capture Christ. The place where Jesus was, was situated on the other side of the Wadi Kidron. Incidentally it was fortified. "Исус же бяше в селе Гепсимании обон пол потока Кедрскаго, иде же бяше вертоград" [127],page 49. The word вертоград’(‘vertograd’) can be interpreted in different ways. It is usually translated as a ‘garden’ and considered that Jesus was in the Garden of Gethsemane. But the word ВЕРТОГРАД’(‘VERTOGRAD’) also means an enclosure : VERTO-GRAD, i.e. ‘enclosed all around’, see fig.2.7. A some kind of military fortification could have been called this way. By the way it is precisely in this way – as an ENCLOSED AREA – the Garden of Gethsemane was depicted by some Mediaeval artists, who, possible, still remembered the heart of the matter, though vaguely. See for example fig. 2.8.     


  The Apostles lie down to sleep and Christ kept vigil and was walking around this reinforced area [127], p.52. Here the word ‘ograd’ even more clearly shows that it was not a garden, but specifically a fortification described there. Judas knew that place and brought the pursuers there. "Беззаконный же Июда ведяше оград той, понеже бо часто Исус со ученики своими прихождаша в той оград" [127], лист 52.   

When the persuaders approached the fortification, Jesus saw how many people were coming and understood that it was pointless to fight back and came out towards them. Christ "поиде ко апостолам и возбуди их, глаголя: восстание и видите, колик народ к нам идет, яти мя хотяще... и изыде из ограда и срети Июду и воинов жидовских" [127], page 59.





   Having seized Christ the soldiers tied his hands and PUT AN IRON CHAIN ONTO HIS NECK. It is mentioned a number of times. The book ‘Passion of Christ’ gives a detailed account of Christ being pulled by the iron chain put on his neck. It also says that his hands and feet were smashed up and therefore he could not walk. "Воини же жидовстии вземше Исуса связавши руце ему пречистя, и шею Его святую возложиша цепь железную. И начаша бити Его немилостивно... И влечаху Его по земли цепию за шею, и вельми сурово биша Его, на месте том, и пречистыя руце и нозе Ему отбиша. Потом же возставиша Его на нозе, и поведоша чрез поток Кедрский. Сами убо они окаянии жидове идяху посуху, Исуса же пхаху в блато. Толико же биша Его, яко с великаго их биения не можаше из грязи изыти, они же влечаху Его цепию за шею, чрез поток Кедрский.  Егда же извлекоша Его на сухое место, возложиша руки своя на Него... И приведоша Исуса ко двору Анны архиерея, понеже той Анна архиерей тесть Каиафе бяша: Каиафа же того лета церкви держа начальство. И тогда собрашеся множество жидов во двор Каиафин, прежде пришествия Христова, ждуще Исуса во двор той" [127], page63.


   This description is missing in the canonical Gospels. It is rather interesting. Firstly, MARSHY PUDDLES across which Christ is pulled, stands out. Mud is called marshy and it is also said that Christ couldn’t even get out of it himself as he was exhausted by beatings. The question is was it possible to find MARSHY BOGGY MUD outside of the modern Jerusalem. It is rather doubtful. Modern Jerusalem, i.e. Al-Quds is situated in the desert where there is very little water. Today the water is supplied with the aid of the hydraulic pump stations, and in the old days they were careful to preserve every drop of water. Therefore it is unlikely that there were marshy roads covered with wet squishy mud there.     


   Besides, the repeated mentioning of the iron chain put on Christ’s neck is also of interest. It is stressed that he was pulled by the chain across the ground. Such detail is missing in the Gospels. However is clearly seen in the biography of the emperor Andronicus, see below.


   In the old depictions of Passion of Christ sometimes it is shown that he was pulled by a rope tied around his waist, see fig. example fig.2.9. At the same time there survive a lot of images where it is shown that the rope was tied AROUND Christ’s NECK, the way it was highlighted in the old texts, see fig. 2.10, fig.2.11 and fig.2.12.  We can see that some artists of the XIV-XVII cc. still remembered that Jesus was dragged to his execution by the rope or chain ROUND HIS NECK. We could not yet found any images showing clearly the IRON CHAIN.

Though we have to say that a rope and a thin iron chain could have been depicted quite similarly.

Here we will pause for the time being. We shall proceed onto the analysis of the correlation between the Gospel story and the biography of the emperor Andronicus Comnenus.

Home in English