THE EPOCH OF THE XV CENTURY
22. MYSTERIOUS CENTRE WHICH THE WAVES OF THE GLOBAL MIGRATIONS WERE SPREADING FROM.
Let us get back to the close ties between America and Eurasia in allegedly 'pre-Columbus' time'. 'A multitude of very specific parallels, - says Gordon Ekholm, - guards against any possibility of a random coincidence' , p.33.
And further: <<A famous Mexican ethnologist and art critic Miguel Covarrubias suggests that 'the great traditions of the Teotihuacan culture were brought to the Mexican Valley… by some MYSTERIOUS FOREIGN ELITE, WHOSE MOTHERLAND WAS SITUATED SOMEWHERE IN THE EAST… Having mastered the more primitive local tribes, the strangers, according to him, STOOD AT THE TOP OF THE NEW CIVILIZED SOCIETY, FORMED ON THE BASIS OF THE CULTURAL FUSION OF THE TWO CULTURAL STREAMS: LOCAL AND FOREIGN'>> , p.77.
And yet more: 'But, perhaps, the most extreme position in the debate about the origin of the Teotihuacan civilization was adopted by the Swiss explorer Sigvald Linne, who for many years conducted excavations on the territory of the city. He was arguing that … the LOCAL POPULATION WAS ALTOGETHER DRIVEN OUT FROM THE BENIGN VALLEY BY SOME UNKNOWN ALIEN PEOPLE, WHO OVER TIME CREATED A BRILLIANT CIVILIZATION OF THE CLASSIC ERA. Thus, the majority of the experts on the Teotihuacan civilization, who worked for a long time at the town's site and were familiar with its culture better than anyone, concurred that the local civilization was imported either from the East, the West or the South, anything but originating in Teotihuacan itself' , p.78.
And also: <<Even in the late XIX – early XX cc. the scientists- Americanologists – Leonard Adam, Carl Gentze (Карл Гентце), Paul Rivet, Hoze Imbellione (Хосе Имбеллиони) and the others – drew to attention the ASIAN-AMERICAN PARALLELS IN ART. The substantiatial works by L.Adam and C.Gentze pointed out some interesting similarities in the motives, ornamentation and stylized design of various articles of merchandise of the people of Eastern Asia on one hand, and North-West coast of America and Mexico on the other... The course of ancient history looked primitively simple according to this concept: 'THE GIVING' EAST AND 'THE RECEIVING' PROVINCES, WICH INCLUDED NEARLY ALL OF OUR PLANET… In this respect a considerable part was played by the works of German and Austrian ethnologists, the creators of the theory of The Kulturkreis ('culture circles' or 'cultural field')- F.Graebner, W.Schmidt, B.Ankerman, V.Coppers and the others, who tried to prove that THE CULTURES OF ALL THE PEOPLES IN THE WORLD ORIGINATE FROM SEVEN OR EIGHT WAVES OF CONSECUTIVE MIGRATIONS OF A GIGANTIC SCALE, EMANATING FROM A CERTAIN MYSTERIOUS CENTRE, WHICH SHOULD BE LOOKED FOR SOMWHERE IN THE SOUTH-EAST ASIA and regions of Oceania adjacent to it >> , p.20-21.
The mysterious centre was sought for a long time. But they failed to find it. We can point it out. The scientists, not knowing it themselves, discovered the outcomes of the Horde-Ottomania's (Atamania's) conquest-resettlement which was expanding in every direction, resulting in the birth of the Great Empire. Hindered by an incorrect chronology, the historians looked for the centre in the 'distant' past'. They didn't find it there. Because it is in Russia and The Ottoman Empire of the XIV-XVI cc.
It was the erroneous chronology which literally at every step of the way was preventing the historians to arrive at our conclusion. They write this way: <<Unfortunately, nearly all the parallels presented here are of a purely superficial nature, AND THE CHRONOLOGICAL GAP BETWEEN THEM SPANS EVERY TIME OVER A GREAT MANY CENTURIES. If, let's say, the lotus relief from Amaravati (India) date to the II century AD, then their Mexican 'doubles' from Chichen Itza were created at best circa the XII century AD. In Cambodia the step pyramids for the first time appear only in the X century AD, whereas in Mesoamerica – in the early I century BC >>, p.30.
Take away the wrong dates from here, lift all these parallels into the epoch of the XIV-XVI cc., and everything will fall into place. The mysterious mass parallels will transform into a bright picture of intercommunication between CONCURRENT civilizations of the XIV-XVI cc.
There is an incredible fact well-known in the XV century history. Castile, as a part of Spain, and Portugal divided the world between themselves! One of the major documents consolidating the division of the world is called quite openly: The Treaty of Tordesillas between the Kings of Spain and Castile REGARDING THE DIVISION OF THE WORLD. 7 June 1494." , p.375. This very division of the world is ratified in the papal bull of the 4 May 1493 , p.240. Also the papal bulls of 1452, 1455 and 1481 speak of the distribution of the spheres of influence worldwide between Castile and Portugal , p.246-247.
The crux of the matter is as follows. Castile and Portugal divided the world between themselves by drawing a line of demarcation along the meridian in the Atlantic from North to South, fig.56. A part of the world to the East of the line was granted to Portugal. The rest of the world to the West of the meridian was granted to Castile. The division was accompanied by the debates: the division line would shift one way or the other. In fig.56 can be seen the demarcation lines of the years 1481, 1493 and 1494 , p.248. The main border of the division of the world was the meridian passing through the Atlantic [6v2], ch.6.
It is reported: <<That is how appeared the famous papal bulls of Pope Alexander VI … placing the kings of Castile INTO POSSESSION OF THE MASSIVE BODIES OF WATER AND LAND TERRITORIES… It is believed that Alexander VI was the conciliator in the Castile-Portugal dispute and that he, wishing to reconcile the litigant sides', 'divided the world' between both of the Iberian powers>> , p.247-248.
So in the late XV – early XVI cc. the entire world was divided between Castile and Portugal. Notably with much éclat and on a large scale. A straight division line was drawn rather simply – along a meridian across the Atlantic. The seas and the lands to the right of the meridian would belong to Portugal. Those to the left – to Castile , p.248-249, 376.
Today this treaty is perceived by the historians as something 'rather strange'. They could not have failed noticing a surprising inconsistency between a massive scale of the affair and an apparent insignificance of the two 'rival countries' – Castile and Portugal. Have a look at the map. Find a small country which is called Portugal today. Then find a small region in Spain called Castile. The population of both of these countries is numerically insignificant. These countries were not particular wealthy or rich in natural resources in the Middle Ages. The historians themselves write: 'WEEK, TORN BY THE FEUDAL WARS, UNSUCCESSFULY TRIED to compete with Portugal in the waters of the Atlantic ocean. THE CASTILIAN PEOPLE WITH GREAT EFFORT MANAGED TO KEEP POSESSION OF THE CANARY ISLANDS' , P.245. In regards to Portugal's status up until the end of the XIV century they write: 'IT WAS ONLY A REMOTE EUROPEAN BACKWOODS' , P.244.
So, 'week Castile' and 'remote European backwoods' – Portugal – allegedly divide the world between themselves. And what is most surprising, they do not encounter any opposition. They had disputes only between themselves. And only in regards to where to draw the demarcation line. And the Roman pope approves of this division! It is strange
The role of the pope also surprises the historians: 'It is relevant… to pose a question, on which grounds did the pope take charge of the seas and lands which did not belong to him and what could these privileges mean?' , p.245.
But all the oddities appear because the historians look through the prism of the Scaligerian history. Our reconstruction puts everything in its place.
In the late XV – early XVI cc. the only two mighty superpowers of that time – Russia-Horde (Castile) and The Ottoman Empire=Ottomania (Atamania) (Potugal) – come to an agreement about the division of the world. Both of these states were a part of the 'Mongol' Empire. That is why they agreed quickly and with no particular problems. The purpose of the agreement is clear. To regulate the actions of the Russian and Ottomanian administration in the vast territories colonized by the Empire in the XV-XVI cc. I.e. they have divided between themselves the Biblical Promised Land. This way it was easier to control the distant provinces and to organize normal life there. It is difficult to do so from one centre in view of the sheer size of the Empire which has expanded incredibly.
The reason, why it is Porte-Head, i.e. 'Portugal' ('gal' = 'golova' = 'glavny' meaning Head or Main in Russian – Прим. переводчика) (The Ottoman Empire), that a part of the world east of the Atlantic meridian went to, is clear. The fact is that during that epoch the Ataman (Ottoman) navy ruled exactly in the Mediterranean and in the Eastern part of the Atlantic. And Russia-Horde colonized a significant part of the North-Asian continent situated to the West of the demarcation line, fig.56. Russia-Horde was advancing into America not only with the Ataman (Ottoman) fleet, but also from Siberia, via the Bering Strait and then across Alaska into inland America.
The pope's role in the division of the world also becomes clear. A treaty of such importance should be sanctioned by the spiritual authority of the Great Empire. I.e. the Pope. As was done.
The treaty between Russia and Ottomania (Atamania) remained in force up until the XVII century. Only after the victory of the rebellious Reformation and the breakup of the 'Mongol' Empire the Treaty became a subject of attack from the reformists. 'By the XVII century, when the initiative of the colonial expansion passes to England, France and Holland, and Spain (in fact Russia-Horde – Author's note) and Portugal (in fact The Ottoman Empire=Ottomania (Atamania) – Author's note) lose the significant part of their West-Indian and East-Indian domain in the crippling battle, the clauses of the Treaty in Tordesillas sound like an anachronism. However UP UNTIL THE END OF THE XVIII CENTURY The Treaty of Tordesillas preserved its legal validity in resolving the boundary disputes in the South-American domains of Spain and Portugal' , p.379.
In fact, PORTUGAL is PORTE-GALIA, i.e. Porte-Glava (porte=gates, glava=head) or Porte Glavnaya (glavnaya=main). Or Porte Helios, i.e. Porte Sunny or Porte Sublime. We would like to remind you that 'PORTE… (Ottoman Porte, High Porte, SUBLIME Porte) are the names of the domains of the Ottoman Empire… recognised in the European documents and literature', p.1038. Thus, Portu-Gal was one of the names of the Ottoman Empire.
So what is CASTILE of the XV-XVI cc.? It is possible that CASTILLA originates from the word CASTLE, i.e. a tower, a fortified manor-place or a city. It is quite possible that Cas-Tile is a distorted Cazy-Itil, i.e. meaning Cossacks from Volga. We would like to remind you that in the Middle Ages Volga river was called Itil (Or Atil). In other words, Cas-Tile could have been one of the old names for Russia-Horde or the Volga Cossacks.
In the XVII-XVIII cc. the history was re-written. The famous names of Cas-Tile and Portu-Gal survived in the Iberian Peninsula only as the names of the two small regions which were a part of the Great Empire. And today we were taught to think that these two names always referred just to contemporary Castile in Spain and to contemporary Portugal. Which is wrong.
To falsify the history of the discovery and colonization of America is far easier than to falsify the European History. The history of Europe needed a lot of work. It was necessary to break down the strong-minded resistance of the entire social strata of European society, who still remembered its recent history well. It was hard work to introduce the Scaligerian version [5v2]. Predominantly it was done by the military force. On the other hand the events in distant America troubled the Europeans far less. They were separated from America by the Atlantic. The scant information about America would reach Europe only with the ships which occasionally crossed the ocean.
The chronicle writing of America was in the hands of just a small number of Europeans. It was easy to negotiate. It was quickly explained to them – what they should write, and what they shouldn't. While the authentic Hordian-Indian chronicles were burning on fires. Having ruthlessly destroyed heaps of American manuscripts, the cynics like Diego de Landa, would then pick up a quill and write the 'correct history of the Native Americans'), shedding crocodile tears [6v2], ch.6.
The 'Spanish Conquista' of the early XVI century was, in fact, one of the waves of the Hordian conquest which reached America. The first wave is the conquest by Columbus of the late XV century, and the second wave of the early XVI century is known to us as the Spanish Conquista (La Conquista). See our book <<Завоевание Америки Ермаком-Кортесом и мятеж Реформации глазами "древних" греков>>. ('The conquest of America by Yermak-Cortes and the Reformation revolt through the eyes (as seen, viewed by) the 'Ancient' Greeks'.)
But then a question arises. Is it correct that the destruction of the flourishing Hordian-Indian civilizations of America by the Europeans dates exactly to the early XVI century? Did it not take place later, in the XVII-XVIII cc.? In the epoch of the Reformation in Europe. When the victorious rebels, having split from Horde-Ottomania (Atamania), with fire and sword spread their 'reformist ideas' into Central America as well. In the XVII century the troops of the West European Reformists finally made an incursion on the territory of America. In a grueling fight they broke down the culture of Maya, Aztek and Toltecs, which had developed over the preceeding 150-200 years. The wars were bloody. The sovereign rulers of Central America remained at most true to the idea of the 'Mongol' Empire. They warded off the attacks of the navy of the rebellious Western European governors for a long time. But in the very end the American Hordians were defeated.
After the victory of the Reformation it was decided to re-write the American history and to offload all the horrors of the XVII-XVIII cc. war onto the Hordian-Ottoman (Ataman) colonization of America of the XV-XVI cc. They killed two birds with one stone. Firstly, the Reformists white washed themselves. Secondly, in the face of Spain, they blamed the weakened Horde-Ottomania(Atamania) for their own atrocities on the territory of America. They said, they had split open the skulls of the Indian babies, etc.
Similar propaganda, blaming the Spanish conquistadors, allegedly of the XV-XVI cc., of the atrocities, spread over West Europe starting in the XVII cc. It is hardly accidental, that practically all the prints in the book of Bartolomé de las Casas were executed in the spirit of the 'information war'. Here are just a few of the gravures' engravings' names: 'The conquistadors setting the dogs on the Indians', 'Roasting over a slow fire', 'Mass torture of the Indians by the Spanish', etc. [6v2], ch.6.
This is the competent and enduring way that the history of America was falsified.
The majority of the North American Indians were mercilessly annihilated during the US wars as well as those Native Americans killed in the epoch of the XVIII century. It is considered that Holland, France, England and then the USA, in severe battles and in violent disputes among themselves, were seizing the former 'Spanish territories' in America , v.2. In fact, the conquered lands were the vast American domains of Russia-Horde and Atamania (Ottoman Empire) which suddenly 'became no one's' after Moscow Tartaria fell apart circa 1775 [4v1], ch.11. The founding of the USA in 1776 was accompanied by other distinguished events, which are now becoming clear. For example: 'In 1774 there was announced the freedom of the trade exchange between the colonial provinces… In 1778 a FULL REFORM OF THE CROSS-ATLANTIC TRADE took place', v.2, p.417
'Even Washington for a long time had to lead the wars with the Native Americans, in which the success was reached only by the merciless use of power and was connected with multiple heavy losses' , v.2, p.484.
A small number of Native Americans who survived, were forced into reservations where they, on the whole, remain until present day. A myth was created and forcefully introduced into the mass consciousness, alleging that the 'Indians are themselves to be blamed'. Purportedly, the well-mannered European settlers in America of the XVII-XVIII cc. were forced to defend themselves from the attacks of the proud Native Americans, who for some reason were protecting their lands. In the end the Europeans' patience came to an end and they had to shoot all the Native Americans with the cannons. In order to save the remaining ones from hunger and cold, they were honourably and altruistically provided with infected blankets. Many, for some reason, died. The surviving ones were freely inebriated with alcohol. They were recommended not to step outside the gates of the reservation. However they were savage, uneducated, not suited to a new life. So on the whole everything ended for them quite well. Now the descendants of the Native Americans, which are few and far between, are invited to share, as they say, in the fruits of European civilization.
Thus was the story of the employees of the Museum of Ethnography at the University of British Columbia in the Canadian city of Vancouver and the Vancouver Centre of the Native American Culture, heard by A.T.Fomenko and T.N.Fomenko in 1991.
It is interesting that on the maps of the West and North West of America of the XVI-XVII cc. there was an enormous 'white spot' [6v2], ch.6. As we have demonstrated, these territories even then were under the rule of Moscow Tartaria. The Europeans were not allowed there. In any case, up until 1775. Only from this moment, after the defeat of 'Pugachev', Moscow Tartaria started to fall apart, and the USA emerged. It is curious to see when exactly the USA populated, for example, the territories of San Francisco, one of the most fruitful regions of the West Coast of America. These territories to the North of the Californian Peninsula, constituted the 'white spot' on the maps up until the second half of the XVIII century. Here are the three images, two of which are very rare.
The first – is an engraving with a view of San Francisco in 1848, fig.57. Its coastline is practically empty. There are only four ships docked in the bay. There are just a few small houses in the valley. There are surrounding thick woods on the hillsides. There is obviously very few people there. The region is not developed yet. Everything is clear. The USA came here comparatively recently. The old Hordian-Indian settlements are already destroyed, and the new city has not yet been built.
The second image was made only ten years later, in 1858, fig.58. It is astounding that in ten years a big city had time to grow!
The bay is literally clogged with vessels. Young San Francisco has grown rapidly on the territories which were recently seized from the the Hordians-Indians.
The last image is a photograph of the end of the XIX century. There is already a big city depicted on it.