Chapter 6.
15. THE CONQUEST OF CENTRAL AMERICA BY ATAMAN (COSSACK LEADER) YERMAK =
CONQUISTADOR CORTES.
It appears that Yuri Vasilievich, the brother of Ivan the Terrible, is described by Herodotus as 'ancient' Dorieus. Herodotus gives a detailed account of him as a brother of Cleomenes. Thus we were lucky to come across an old document containing the most interesting facts of the mysterious story of Ivan IV the Terrible's brother – Yuri Vasilievich, the son of Solomonia Saburova, the first wife of Vasili III [163], p.250-251. 'Ancient' Herodotus unexpectedly lifts the veil off an important page in Russian history hitherto obscured by the Romanovs. It is for a good reason that the historians still ardently dispute whether Yuri Vasilievich, brother of Ivan the Terrible, ever existed at all. It turns out that not only he existed, but also accomplished remarkable deeds.
We discovered that the famous Cossack ataman Yermak Timofeev of the second half of the XVI century was described by Herodotus as Spartan Dorieus, the brother of king Cleomenes, i.e. Ivan the Terrible. Herodotus informs us about Dorieus' campaign, his conquest of the city of Sybaris and his death [ZA], ch.7. It was the second campaign, following the one in the early XIV century, being the colonization of Siberia and its subjection to the metropoly of Russia-Horde.
According to the Romanov sources at first the relationship between Ivan the Terrible and ataman Yermak-Vasili was hostile. The chronicles accuse Yermak of robbery, looting and insubordination to authority. Herodotus says something similar about Dorieus. Dorieus is also resentful, clashes with his brother and refutes his brother's authority.
According to Herodotus the confrontation between the Spartan king Cleomenes and his brother Dorieus resulted in Dorieus, at the head of the army, LEAVING THE KINGDOM AND ESTABLISHING COLONIES OR SETTLEMENTS IN DISTANT COUNTRIES. The two Spartan kings could not coexist in the same country. One of them had to leave. A plausible excuse was concocted – to conquer the far off territories. That is where Dorieus set off to.
According to the Romanov chronicles, following the animosity between Ivan the Terrible and the Cossack Ataman Yermak-Vasili, the latter sets off to conquer Siberia at the head of the Cossack army equipped with the firearms. Not only did Yermak conquer the cities, but founded new settlements. A vast and wealthy country is being colonized. It is probable, that Yermak-Vasili was purposefully 'pushed out' of Moscow as far as possible, when an honourable, but dangerous occasion turned up. Something in terms of: Let him fight! And if he is killed, as it did happen in the end, we will glorify him, proclaim him a great conqueror.
We will repeat that Herodotus unexpectedly illuminated the dark Romanov version of Ivan the Terrible's reign. Herodotus has got the details of Yuri Vasilievich = Dorieus, the brother of Ivan the Terrible = king Cleomenes. Moreover, we discovered an astonishing fact: in essence Herodotus claims, that Ivan the Terrible's brother was that very same famous Yermak-Vasili, whose name was so popular in the Russian history of the XVI century.
Where did this 'classic' name DORIEUS originate from? As it points to Yermak, it could have been connected with his great campaign to the East. Immediately the name 'DAURIA' springs to mind, which was very well known in the Far East: 'DAURIA is a country stretching from the Yablonoi Mountains to the East up to the river valley of Arguni. THIS NAME OCCURS SINCE THE RUSSIANS EMERGENCE THERE and originates from the Tungus tribe inhabiting it' [988:00], 'Dauria'.
The facts that we discovered about Dorieus-Yermak are interesting and unexpected. Notably it would be impossible to uncover them without the New Chronology. Hence it is clear how vital it is to have the correct dates at your disposal.
Furthermore, the core of the narrative of Yermak's conquest of Siberia is the colonization of America by Russia-Horde and Ottoman (Ataman) Empire in the XV-XVI cc. In the Western sources all of this is described as the conquest of America by the Conquistador Cortes.
In [6] we showed that the voyage of Columbus is the reflection in the Western chronicles of the conquest of America in the XV-XVI cc. carried out by Russia and the Ottoman Empire, where the troops of Russia-Horde invaded the American continent not only from the East, having crossed the Atlantic, but also from the West, having made it through Siberia, via the Pacific Ocean. The Cossacks entered America also via Alaska. Having colonized a continent, little populated at that point, the Cossacks and Ottomans-Atamans created here the civilization of Maya, Aztec, Inca and Toltec… These civilizations perished during the epoch of the Reformation of the XVII-XVIII cc., when the troops of the Western European armies who were crushing the 'Mongol' Empire, arrived to America. Including its distant American colonies. Later the atrocities of the 'progressive reformers' were attributed to the Horde colonists of the XV-XVI cc.
Was the colonization of America reflected in the RUSSIAN CHRONICLES? At first glance it wasn't. However, it turns out that the conquest of America is nonetheless described in the Russian sources. Only these descriptions are included as a part of the stories about the famous voyage of Yermak and his conquest of the 'vast Siberia'.
The Romanov editors GREATLY BELITTLED THE SCALE OF YERMAK'S CONQUEST AND NARROWED DOWN ITS GEOGRAPHICAL FRAME. Today we are led to believe that allegedly only several hundreds of Cossacks set off for the campaign. And they succeeded in conquering a huge country. Besides, in order not to insult the colleagues-reformers across the ocean, the Romanovs did their best to erase from the chronicles any mention of the fact that the Cossack army, having crossed Siberia, invaded America and founded their prospering civilizations – ones which later on were declared by the historians to be 'terribly ancient'. Following the emerging of the USA in the XVIII century – in place of the former territories of Russia-Horde – the true history of America was, by coordinated efforts, plunged into darkness.
The traces of the true events surface even in Karamzin's work – one of the most faithful of the Romanov historians. Karamzin himself, without our prompting, compared Yermak's voyage with the conquest of Central America by Cortes [362], v.9, ch.6, column 226-228. And it is correct. To a far greater degree than Karamzin believed himself. Correct - not figuratively, but literally.
It is for or a reason that the old depictions of Yermak's voyage show him navigating large rivers [ZA], ch.7. Of course some Siberian rivers are very wide. However, earlier the seas and the oceans were depicted on the geographical maps as rivers [1v], [2v]. That is why some old images of Yermak's voyage could have been describing the crossing of the ocean by the large Cossack ships.
Likewise Herodotus' account of Dorieus' army sailing across the sea to a faraway 'island of Sicily' could have reflected the crossing of the Atlantic or the Pacific Ocean by the Russian-Horde troops on their way to America.
When the historians radically minimized the scale of the events, it appeared that sailing from Greece to the nearby island of Sicily had begun to be considered 'very far-off'. What actually happened is that in the old original an account was given of the crossing of the Atlantic and the Pacific Oceans. I.e. about truly long-distance expeditions. The cunning editors of recent times started to assure us that the 'ancient' settlers of Dorieus were sailing not to America, but merely to the 'island of Sicily'. Purporting that it was 'too far and dangerous'.
Let us take a look at the name of khan KUCHUM who Yermak fights with. The name KUCHUM pointed not only to the ruler, but to the entire kingdom, which was sometimes called the 'Kuchum's Domain'. If the conquest of America is reflected here, then will we find KUCHUM and his kingdom there? Yes, we will. In [6v] we showed that during the colonization of America the name of the people of MAYA KICHE or KICHE MAYA emerges. It is plausible, that KUCHUM is a variant of the pronunciation KICHE MAYA which appeared in the Russian chronicles.
The name of the American people Maya Kiche is the marking of the Slavic conquest reaching America and engulfing it in the XIV-XVI cc. The first Hordian settlers could have appeared here in the epoch of the XIV-XVI cc. under the 'Mongolian' conquest. After two hundred years, in the XV century, the Cossack czar Yermak-Vasili meets the descendants of this first wave of the Horde-Cossacks. They called themselves Kiche Maya = Kuchum. We would also like to note, that KICHE is close to the word KOCHevnik (NOMAD in Russian – Tr. note), meaning the horse cavalry of the Horde.
The great significance attributed by the Russian chronicles to Yermak's voyage becomes clear. In the XVI century it was not Siberia at all that they conquered: there was no need to do so. As it is, Siberia was already a part of the Great Empire for a long time, since the early XIV century, when the 'Mongol' invasion swept through Eurasia. The second 'conquest of Siberia' by Yermak in the XVI century could have of course meant the suppression of the small rebellions or separatist tendencies on his way. But such a voyage clearly wouldn't 'cut it' to play such an outstanding role attributed to it by the chroniclers. But if the matter at hand concerned the COLONIZATION OF AMERICA, then the picture would be altered. The campaign in fact becomes a grandiose event.
Supposedly Yermak's troops crossed Siberia and the Far East quite fast. As they were HOME lands. But the main events began later. The Cossacks continued their journey across the Bering Strait and the Pacific Ocean towards the distant America. Called by Herodotus a 'distant ISLAND of Sicily'. Where the king Dorieus (Dauria=Horde?, Dal, Dalnii meaning 'Distance' and 'Distant' in Russian) had to sail his ships to. It is clear why the old Russian texts, wrongly ridiculed by Karamzin, claimed that not hundreds of Cossacks, but THOUSANDS of them were marching with Yermak. Obviously, in order to conquer a vast transoceanic continent, large numbers of the soldiers-crusaders were needed.
Aside from Russian Alaska, Russian Oregon and Russian California, the emergence of the entire Great Tartaria also becomes clear = Moscow Tartaria spanning Siberia as well as the significant part of the American continent [6v].
It is clear why the name of the Cossack czar YERMAK in a form of AMERICA began to apply to the entire continent. The conqueror named the country after himself. Besides, the name AMERICA or AME-RICA could have originated from MAYA-RICA, i.e. (meaning) MAYA-STATE, THE STATE OF MAYA, MY STATE. In the Middle Ages the word RICA meant STATE (for example, Costa Rica, etc.).
The stories about the famous conquistador Hernan Cortes came down to us from the Western European, mainly Spanish chronicles. In a nutshell the essence of the conquest of Central America by Cortes sounds like this. It turns out that it is necessary to repeat almost word for word the accounts of the Russian chronicles about Yermak. This will result in the following.
A great conqueror at the head of a small naval brigade, equipped with firearms, conquered a distant vast country, the inhabitants of which were brave warriors. Cannons and muskets, thus far unfamiliar to the locals, crushed their resistance.
It turns out that the surviving documents about Yermak's voyage emerged not earlier than the middle of the XVII century or even later. Most likely they were based on the old testimonies of Yermak's contemporaries [ZA], ch.8. However these texts didn't survive. Yermak died in 1584. It means that today we view his voyage based on the texts written at least 20-30 years later, and more likely half a century later. Or even later. The old testimonials were edited by the Romanovs' censors. They 'corrected the history' adapting it to the newly created version. The main purpose was to erase from the chronicles any traces of the fact that having crossed all of the Siberia and Far East, Yermak's army made an intrusion into the territory of Central America. It was there where the MAIN EVENTS unfolded. Also it is not impossible that Yermak set out to America either from the shores of Kamchatka or from the east, from the island of Cuba in the Atlantic Ocean.
The Siberian chronicles became accessible to the public only after the final division of the spheres of interest between the Romanov Russia and the USA in the second half of the XIX century. Since 1867 the Romanovs gave Alaska away to the Americans [4v]. After that the Russian sources were edited once again and in 1880 it was kindly allowed to publish the Kungur Chronicle.
What do we know about the documents giving us an account of the conquest of Mexico and Central America by Cortes allegedly in the first half of the XVI century? The picture is similar to the one in the Russian historiography. The surviving Western-European texts on this topic surface not earlier than in the XVII century. It is thought that the conquest of Central America was described mainly by the Spanish. This being said they mean the people who lived on the territory of modern Spain.
But most likely the 'Spanish conquest' is the Ottoman conquest. To recap, the famous division of the world in the XV-XVI cc. between Spain-Castile and Portugal was in fact the division of the world between Ottoman (Ataman) Empire and Russia-Horde. Certainly, some parts of the Ottoman and Horde troops could have consisted of the inhabitants of the Iberian Peninsula, where present-day Spain is situated. But at that time all of these lands as well as many others were part of the Great Empire. That is why when reading today about the SPANISH conquest of America one ought to understand that at the bottom of it is the OTTOMAN and HORDIAN colonization of the continent in the XV-XVI cc.
There survives information in the Russian Siberian chronicles informing us that Yermak was buried near some volcanos [RI], ch.4. So where were they situated? There are no volcanos on the territory of present-day Siberia. Hence Yermak was not buried in Siberia. But where? The answer is simplified by the fact that WE HAVE ALREADY FOUND OUT THE TRUE SETTING OF THESE EVENTS. They unfolded in Central America. Near the city of Meshiko (Mexico) there are indeed situated the two huge volcanos – Popocatepetl and Istasiuatl, more than 5 thousand meters high [ZA]. They are probably presented in the Russian Kungur Chronicle. Later on the Romanov historians 'dragged' (on paper) Yermak's voyage from America to the Asiatic Siberia and edited the old texts. But, luckily, they didn't pay attention to the volcanos described and even depicted in the drawings in the Kungur chronicle. Thus we yet again catch the falsifiers red-handed.
The mysterious phrase in the Kungur Chronicle becomes clear: FIERY COLUMNS CAN BE SEEN BY THE TATARS AND MUSSULMEN, BUT NOT BY THE RUSSIANS. Indeed, it is very far from the European and Siberian Russia to Mexico – across the ocean. It is in fact impossible to see the columns of fire and smoke above the Mexican volcanos. But the American inhabitants – Meshikas-Mexicans, Aztecs = Ostyaks, could see these 'great burning candles' really well.
