A.T.Fomenko , G.V.Nosovskiy
HOW IT WAS IN REALITY

Chapter 8.
THE EPOCH OF THE XIII CENTURY

7. PIEBALD HORDE

When was 'ancient Chinese history' written and who by? It appears that in the XVII-XVIII cc., in China, under the Manchus, a great deal of history writing was undertaken. [151]. This activity was accompanied by disputes, whitch-hunts, persecutions and the obliteration of books. The history of China was practically written under the Manchus. And it took place in the XVII-XVIII cc. [151].

In [5v2] we show, that THE CHINESE HISTORICAL LITERATURE WHICH EXISTS TODAY WAS WRITTEN AND CONSIDERABLY EDITED AFTER 1770. A lot was edited. The chronicles, lists of comets, the history of dynasties and the entire Chinese history in general.

Thus, following the Romanovs seizure of power in Russia and the crushing defeat of the Russian Horde, the surviving representatives of the Horde dynasty fled in different directions. In particular to the East. Some, however, made attempts to return to the Moscow throne. It appears that the Stepan Razin and Yemelyan Pugachev 'uprisings' were among such attempts.

But some fled to the East. The most Eastern Horde was the Piebald Horde, situated at that time along the borders of present day China. Possibly the territories occupied by it were called KITAI. And is now modern day CHINA, according to Afanasy Nikitin.

The escaped group of the Hordians was not great in number. They were the Manchus = 'Mongols'. It was probably them, who had with them a minor prince. Incidentally, the mysterious (for the historians) prince Alexei was also involved in the Razin uprising. Having rounded up troops in the Piebald Horde, they conquered China, settled there and took all the necessary measures not to be absorbed by the Romanov Russia. For that purpose, in particular, the Wall of China was created either in the middle or at the end of the XVII century.

In 1644, as they tell us, the Manchus seized, but most likely FOUNDED the city of Peking. Or as it was called then – PEZHIN from PEGAYA (means PIEBALD in Russian) Horde. A minor prince SHIH(-zu), who was brought with them from The Golden Horde, i.e. from Volga (where Stepan Razin was fighting at the time), was proclaimed the Emperor.

The conquerors forces marched off almost without any women. That is why to continue a pure Manchurian = 'Mongol' bloodline was possible only for the Emperor's court. And even then only just. In the very end the bulk of the Manchus became integrated. It happened approximately a hundred years later. Consequently the nature of the Manchurian army completely changed. By the end of the XVIII century the 'Manchurian soldiers … have long lost their former military efficiency' [151], v.5, p.318. The Manchurian language is the language of Piebald Horde. Naturally, it is nothing like Chinese.

To conclude, THE MANCHURIAN GOLDEN HORDE IN CHINA OF THE XVII-XVIII CC. IS THE SPLINTER OF THE RUSSIAN GOLDEN HORDE. The Manchus are those 'Mongols', Russians and Tatars, who in the XVII century fled from the Romanovs.

8. ABOUT THE HISTORICAL SOURCES OF THE PRESENT DAY MONGOLS.

They can tell us: but there are present-day Mongols. Living on the territory of Mongolia. What is the story of their ancient history? They must have their chronicles and annals…

Most likely, the present-day Mongols are the vestiges, the descendants of the Piebald Horde, which had conquered China in the beginning of the XVII century. Their very name speaks of it: Mongols = Manguls = Manchurs. Therefore it is interesting to have a look at their historical sources. It is thought that there are many of them, but ALL OF THEM, EVEN ACCORDING TO THE HISTORIANS, WERE CREATED, OR TO BE MORE PRECISE, FIRST WRITTEN IN THE PERIOD FROM THE XVII TO THE XIX CC. [5v1], ch.6.

As a rule, the Mongolian chronicles, despite the fact that they were created in the XVII-XVIII cc., are brought to the Manchurian conquest. THEY CONTAIN THE OLD LEGENDS ABOUT THE QING DYNASTY. And also about Genghis Khan and his descendants ruling in 'Mongolia' [5v1], ch.6.

But these are once again the legendary recollections about the Golden Horde and famous Russian Grand Prince Georgii Danilovich. The chronicles were brought to the territory of the present-day Mongolia by the Manchurs – the natives of the Golden Horde. That is the reason why the chronicles end with the Manchurian conquest. Following that the Mongols themselves as a rule for some reason didn't compose any historical writings.

We are aware that it might be immensely difficult for our reader to part with a myth of the archaic antiquity of China and the Eastern civilisations in general. However, the impartial analysis shows that the age of the Eastern civilisation is approximately the same as the Western one.

But the written accounts in the East are in a much worse state than in the West. If in the West the majority of the surviving manuscripts and books were produced not earlier than the XVI-XVII cc. and they convey to us European history beginning with only the XI century, than in China the situation is worse. There practically all the documents were produced not earlier than the XVII-XVIII cc. That is why we would hardly be able to learn anything about the Chinese history prior to the XV-XVI cc. We would like to repeat that its final version was created only at the end of the XVIII – beginning of the XIX cc.

9. JAPAN.

The second wave of the 'Mongolian-Chinese', i.e. Scythian colonisation of Japan belongs to the XVI-early XVII cc. During this time they began to break the 'Mongol' Empire into pieces. Japan, which has already been safely absorbed by The Horde earlier in the XIV-XVI (the first wave), has unwillingly become one of such splinters countries in the XVII century. Japan of that time remained faithful to the idea of the Horde Empire. As a result, in the beginning of the XVII century various demographics among the European Cossack population of Horde (and first of all of the East Piebald Horde) moved to join their brothers on the far away Japanese islands, escaping the invasion of the pro-Western Romanovs. The unyielding Hordians-Samurais had left the mainland for ever. It is for a reason that there survive Japanese records of exactly the time the shogun Tokugawa IEYASU (1542-1616) arrived to Japan [1167:1], p.20. They possibly refer to the appearance on the Japanese islands of a new wave of Christian Cossacks under the banners of JESUS Christ, i.e. crusaders samurais-Samarians (natives of Samara).

The period between 1624-1644 is referred to in today's version of Japanese history as 'Kan'ei period' [1167:1], p.20.I.e.the period of the KHANS. It is curious, that during this epoch Japan completely shuts itself from the outside world. Presumably, the Hordian khans, the rulers of Japan, were striving to isolate their country and to save it from the 'progressive reformers' of the XVII century, who were greedily dividing at that time the vast heritage of Horde in Eurasia and America.

Today it is thought that in the XVI-XVIII cc. in the history of Japan and particular its central region, metropoly Edo, an important role was played by the RUSUI [1167:1], p.6. The Japanese historians say: 'We should not forget about the RUSUI (Auth.), who were present in Edo from every feudal province (of Japan-Auth.). THE RUSUI HAD A HUGE INFLUENCE on the culture of both Edo metropoly, and in each regional district… The Rusui from different feudal districts cooperated with each other' [1167:1], p.6.

Speaking of the Rusui with deep respect, the contemporary Japanese historians do not specify here – who are these Rusui. Our idea is simple. The Japanese sources have preserved the records that the Japanese islands colonised by RUSSIA-Horde. The descendants of the Cossacks-Hordians were called Rusui in Japan for a rather long time. And the samurais as well.

The military regime of the samurais headed by Shogun lasted until the middle of the XIX century. The historians report that the 'Chinese cultural influence on Japan was enormous, especially in the epoch of Edo' [1167:1], p.11. As we have already pointed out, in the XIV-XVI cc. the name Kitai (China) referred to Scythia.

It has already been stated that in the samurai epoch of the XVII-XIX cc. the Japanese islands isolated themselves from the outside world. They wished to protect themselves from the Western rebels. However, by the middle of the XIX century the division of the heritage of the 'Mongol' Empire in Eurasia and America was over and the greedy gazes turned to the faraway Japanese islands, which remained the pillar of the Imperial samurai spirit. Japan's turn had come.

In the middle of the XIX century the European military ships (elusively referred to as 'merchant' in the textbooks) appeared at the shores of Japan carrying a large deployment of European troops. A military coup was underway, which led to the fall of the samurai rule. This period was later cunningly called 'the Meiji RESTORATION', i.e. meaning the return to former values [1167:1], p.104. In reality they referred to the barbaric invasion of the Hordian-Samurai Japan by the European Reformers. The last outpost of the samurais – the headquarters of the shogun in the North of Japan, in the city of Aizu-Wakamatsu was seized and savagely destroyed. The contemporary Japanese historians usually speak sparingly of this turbulent and dark era.

Thus in 1868 the Hordian-Samurai epoch came to an end. In the second half of the XIX century the Reformation swept through the vanquished country, i.e. sublimating Japanese life to the Western and American way. [1167:1], p.104. The samurais were crushed.

Over time in Japan there emerged a nostalgia for the epoch of the samurais: 'The people look back to the Edo era with much nostalgia' [1167:1], p.10. The mediaeval samurais (the Samarians) until now remain the object of admiration and respect in Japan [5v1].

10. THE MAP OF THE GLOBAL HORDE EMPIRE.

The major conquests of Russia-Horde and the Ottoman Empire –Atamania are not at all reflected on the Scaligerian map in any way. That is the reason why we had to draw the present map of the 'Mongol' Empire of the XIV-XVI cc. ourselves.

The Mighty = 'Mongol' rulers thought that the entire world should be conquered. And this plan was fully realised. Let us highlight the contours of the Russian Empire at the beginning of the XX c. on the world map with a thin red line, fig.95. Let us add to it the territories which, according to the historians, were a part of the 'Mongol' Empire, or as it was called in the XVII-XVIII cc. – Great Tartary, fig.96 [5v1], ch.1, ch.8.

As you can see, the Great Tartaria and the domains of the Mighty 'Mogols', i.e. 'Mongols', cover practically all of Asia and a significant chunk of Europe. It includes, in particular, the biggest part of modern China, India, Persia and Korea. Let us add to this Great Tartaria the following countries:

# The United Ottoman Empire = Atamania which was later given the name of Turkey, conquered by Tamerlane-Timur.

# A part of Egypt conquered during the 'Mongol' yellow Crusade allegedly in the XIII century.

# Eastern Europe, colonised by Baty-Khan.

These are the countries which fell under the rule of the 'Mongol' Empire according the historians themselves.

But that is not everything. Let us add the countries which according to the mediaeval records, essentially considered themselves to be the vassals of the Great Empire. Without showing any significant armed resistance. Such as Germany, France, Italy, England, Spain, Scandinavia, i.e. virtually the whole of Western Europe. The result is indicated with the continuous bald line in fig.95. These are the contours of the 'Mongol' Empire of the XIV century epoch.

Later in the XV-XVIcc. the Empire significantly expanded once again during the Hordian and Ottoman conquest of The 'Promised Land'. The overseas territories in the North and South America were annexed. These territories are included in fig.95 with a dashed line [6v2], ch.6.

Inside the Empire of the XIV century (thick contour) you see the Russian Empire of the early XX century (thin contour). Here could also be added the countries which were a part of the Russian zone of influence (USSR) from 1945 to 1985. How does the territory of the 'Mongol' Empire of the XIV century differ from the territory of the Russian Empire, let's say, of the early XX century?

Not more than twice. And to think that this is several hundred years later, following the break-up of the Empire. And if we compare it to the 'zone of influence' of Russia (USSR) of the XX century in Eurasia, then the difference would be reduced to only several per cent. Not to mention that Alaska, leased out by the Romanovs to USA in 1867 under Alexander II, is comparable to Western Europe. Though it was sold so cheaply – for 7.2 million dollars [4v1].

The Great Empire was rigidly centralised. In those times the creation of such a vast monolithic Empire with real longevity was impossible – due to the inadequate means of communication, for example. That is why the Horde Empire of the XIV-XVI cc. fell apart having existed for about 300 years. But the very idea of a multinational Empire remained appealing and lived long in certain parts.

 

11. DIVISION OF THE RELIGIOUS HERITAGE OF THE EMPIRE.


The religious and political heritage of the Empire was divided between: the WEST, with the Catholic Rome in Italy; the EAST, with the Orthodox Third Rome = Moscow; and ASIA, with the Muslim Istanbul. Moscow, Rome and Istanbul were the religious centres. Thus in the XVII-XVIII cc. the three religions, which emerged from the sole Christianity of the XII-XIV cc., divided the spheres of influence.

The city of Jerusalem in Palestine was given its name and identified with the evangelical Gospels Jerusalem not very long ago [6v2], ch.2:10. Following the break-up of the Empire the main ecclesiastical forces of the Orthodox Christianity, Catholicism, Islam and Judaism could not agree on how to keep the former name of JERUSALEM for Czar-Grad = Troy = Istanbul.

There were too many political, historical and religious conflicts there. Following the split of Christianity none of the newly formed religious branches could agree to leave the old holy Jerusalem in the hands of one of the 'sisters' as its religious centre.

In the end in order to avoid offending anyone, it was tacitly agreed to strip Czar-Grad of one of its famous ancient names – Jerusalem. And it was bestowed upon the small settlement of Al-Quds in what is todays Palestine. Where notably the very name PALESTINE, - i.e. Bely Stan (White Camp) or Babel, Babylonian Camp, - was also transferred not long before.

It took place most likely in the XVIII century. The construction of the 'Jerusalem antiquities' dates to the early XIX century, when Egypt was conquered by Napoleon and Western Europeans for the first time arrived in Palestine [6v2], ch.2. At the end of XVIII-XIX cc. Al-Quds was quickly turned into the centre of the religious veneration, to where all the corresponding Gospel and Biblical events were transferred to – on paper.

The famous mediaeval name of Troy was also taken away from Czar-Grad and declared to be 'very ancient'. However the name itself didn't travel too far. Today we are told that Homer's 'classical' Troy was in fact situated close to Istanbul. Namely on the Eastern shore of Turkey, near the southern entry to the Dardanelles. Near a town of Kum Burun [2v1], ch.5.

12. REWRITING AND 'FRAGMENTATION' OF THE ANCIENT HISTORY.


To sum up. Among the Imperial splinters, which for an especially long time remained true to the idea of the united Empire, were, for example, Spain, Samurai Japan, Manchurian China and some Hordian-Cossack civilisations of America – Maya, Aztec and Inca in particular. The Hordian governors who ruled in the XVII century in China decided to break away from the usurpers-Romanovs. For that purpose in the XVII century The Great Wall of China was erected as the borderline marked point to point with low-rise walls and occasional towers.


In the XVII-XIX cc. all these pockets of resistance of the old 'Mongol' dynasties were suppressed. The Samurais-Hordians in the XIX century were crushed by the Europeans who invaded Japan. The Hordian civilizations in America were drowned in blood by the West-European reformers who intruded there in the XVII-XVIII cc. Later on all these atrocities were shifted by the historians approximately 200 years down back to the XV century and retrospectively accredited it to the rather peaceful colonisation of America by Horde-Ottoman Empire. Cunningly having called it 'the bloody Spanish Conquista'. Painted – on paper - white into black. Projected their own atrocities onto someone else.

In the XVII-XVIII cc. in West Europe the reformers fiercely suppressed the Russian = Scythian population and Slavic culture. Today textbooks evasively describe these punitive wars as the 'wars with Cathars' and are dated to several hundred years back to the XII-XIII cc.

In the XV-XVI cc. Russia-Horde = Biblical Israel and Ottoman Empire-Atamania = Biblical Judaea were the integral parts of the sole united Empire. After its break up in the XVII century the Western rebels tried to drive a wedge between Russia and Turkey, the heiress of the Ottoman Empire. They succeeded in doing so. The meaningless Russian-Turkish wars began, exhausting the brotherly nations. In doing so the rebellious Western Europe succeeded in breaking free from the rule of Russia and the Ottoman Empire. In 1826 the rebels managed to draw over the Turkish Sultan Mahmud II. He ordered to abolish the famous Janissary corps – the former Slavic guards of the Ottomans-Atamans. They were treacherously shot down at point-blank with cannon buck shot. Sultan Mahmud II demonstratively swapped his Ottoman clothing for Western-European garments and Turkey openly set its course for Western Europe. Though their 'friendship' was never to be.

The memory of the 'Mongol' Empire recedes into the past. The important part was played by the historians of the XVII-XIX cc. fulfilling the order of the new authorities, had a vested interest in preventing the restoration of the Empire. It was necessary to destroy the very memory of it as quickly as possible. The order to rewrite the entire history in the requisite key followed purely political objectives, vital both to the Western reformers and their henchmen in Russia – the Romanovs. This explains the concurrence of historic falsification practically applied according to a unified programme across different countries. The 'Imperial idea' itself began to be denounced as a 'chauvinistic' one. Russia in particular endured a great deal, as it was constantly a suspect in the attempts to restore the Empire. They didn't like Turkey either.

As a result a distorted picture of the past was created, which was being forcefully indoctrinated into the peoples psyche in the XVIII-XX cc. Scaligerian chronology which dated many events of the XI-XVI cc. back into the distant past became the main instrument of this falsification. Some of the epochs of the X-XVI cc. were submerged into a fictitious obscurity: the 'dark Middle Ages' materialised. Classical antiquity in its turn, on the contrary shimmered with the phantom reflections of the events of the XI-XVII cc. which were declared 'very ancient'. For example, the Russian civilisation in Italy was declared to be Et-ruscan and was 'consigned' into the past. As a result the surviving records of the true history are perceived today with bewilderment and sometimes even with petulance. The topsy-turvy picture of the past was perpetuated even in the mind set. Some of our contemporaries, for instance, in Russia and Turkey, perceive our reconstruction with unease and awkwardness, according to which Russia together with Ottoman Empire at some point comprised the metropoly of the global Empire. The people feel somewhat awkward in front of the citizens of other countries who forgot more profoundly their own, in fact not so distant, past.

Now, when the true picture of the XIV-XVII cc. becomes clearer, the history of the new time appears in a different light. Primarily – the history of Russia and Turkey. The role of the ideological method used against them is clear. The Reformation would have remained unfinished without the falsification of ancient history. Sooner or later in Russia and in Turkey there could have appeared the idea of the restoration of the Empire. In order to prevent this, with the aid of the skilfully developed ideological method – the false historic and chronological version – the Russian troops were dispatched into war with Turkey.

In the regions of the Empire which gained independence the memories were becoming increasingly blurred. The local historians fabricated many allegedly independent chronicles of their own 'local Empires' from virtually one and the same chronicle of the global empire. The Arabs started to think that they had THEIR OWN Arabic Empire. The Germans happened – on paper – to have THEIR OWN whole Empire of the German nation. The Chinese – THEIR OWN Heavenly Empire. The Italians – THEIR OWN Roman Empire. And so on. All these empires were allegedly different, existing in different epochs. Thus one Great Empire 'spawned' several 'small paper' Empires.

Let's discuss in more detail. We discovered multiple duplications which identify the main 'Empires of the distant past' with the 'Mongol' Empire of the XIV-XVI cc. There appeared to be 12 such major overlaps [1v], [2v]. There is nothing surprising here. The Great Empire embraced practically the entire civilised world. Its history was written down by the chroniclers of various cities including those far from the metropoly. In Europe, Asia, America and Africa. The collective history of the Empire was the 'spine' of all the local chronicles, and especially the events in the metropoly, in Russia-Horde. The local events were then superimposed upon this 'common skeleton'. They were different for different regions, but the 'skeleton' was common – the Hordian one. The sole history for the sole Empire was shattered into multiple fragments, in which however, as in a hologram, the reflected history of the entire 'Mongolia'
remained frozen.

The question is under what names the czar-khans of Russia-Horde were reflected in the 'distant past'? They had many names. Every Hordian emperor is reflected in the regional chronicles under different names: biblical, 'Ancient' Roman, 'Ancient' Germanic, 'Ancient' French, 'Ancient' Italian, etc. It is of course difficult to keep in mind all the parallels which we discovered and to remember which ruler is 'identified' with another. In [KR], Appendix 2, we organised this data. It resulted in a most interesting list of the main 'phantom names' of each Hordian 'world' Emperor from the XIV-XVI cc.

The old chronicles of the Empire of the XII-XVI cc. usually started with the epoch of Andronicus-Christ, i.e. from the XII century. Following the collapse of the Empire and the artificial multiplication and division of the very same main chronicle into numerous 'provincial' ones, Andronicus-Christ 'appeared' at the beginning of the written history of various newly-emerged states. But already as, allegedly, 'their own, local' czar. He was even known by different names. However in the 'biography' of each such 'local first czar', traces of the life description of Andronicus-Christ inevitably survived. Sometimes they were more obvious than at other times. As time went by they faded from memory. The fantasies of latter day chroniclers embellished these old accounts with elaborate and inventive detail.

To conclude, the purpose of the 'history reformation' was to prevent the restoration of the Horde Empire. People were to forget the location of its centre. It was declared that allegedly the centre was situated in 'ancient' Italy. Thus the centre moved – on paper! – to Western Europe. After that all the attempts to widen the borders of the Russian czardom, - and such attempts were often based on the subconscious striving towards the restoration of the peoples' unity, - started to look like 'Russian aggression'. The analogous attempts of Turkey – looked like the 'Turkish aggression'. Imposing false beliefs on the enemy, which to themselves were advantageous, was a rather effective technique.

The peoples of the XVII-XVIII cc. fought not only on the battlefield, but also on the pages of the history textbooks. And this is understandable. 'The historical arguments' are often launched to substantiate immediate political ideas. Unfortunately, the historical science is intertwined with the politics including that of today. This interferes with the peaceful scientific discussion of the paradoxes accumulated over time. Today it is high time to turn away from the political aims of the XVII-XVIII cc. and to adopt mutual efforts to restore to true picture.

13. WHY IN THE XVII-XVIII CENTURIES THEY ADMIRED CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY.

The Scaligerian-Romanov history taught us the following interpretation of the past. They say that once upon a time in small rocky Greece there lived the eminent 'Ancient Greeks', and in the centre of the small Italic Peninsula – the wonderful 'Ancient' Romans. And in a small desolate Palestine – wonderful biblical characters. Overall they were all common people. The Biblical heroes for example lived a simple life, tended the flock, ruled the tribal clans, herded cattle from place to place, etc.

Then later the biblical and 'classical' characters allegedly exited the stage of the Middle Ages. And were forgotten for many centuries. However the 'subconscious memory' of them proved to be allegedly so persistent that after many dark centuries the entire Western Europe and even barbaric Russia 'unexpectedly remembered antiquity' and started to worship the obscure shadows of the distant past. Moreover they developed such deeply 'ancient' Greco-Roman and Biblical memories that motivated them in their social and religious life and even in everyday life. All of this looks strange.

Our idea is simple. Russia-Horde of the XVII century and the territories of Western Europe which had just broken off (where the new state were forming: France, Germany, Italy…) were the successors of the 'Mongol' Empire, i.e. of 'Ancient' Rome = Biblical Israel. Having buried the Empire in oblivion and having declared it the kingdom of Horde-Tatar evil, at the same time its successors cherished the memories of it as of some ANCIENT beautiful Kingdom under the names of: 'Ancient' Great Rome, 'Biblical Israel'… And began to idolize the 'ancient archetypes', already forgetting that in fact these great ancestors lived quite recently (and not at all where the Scaligerian history has exiled them to). Hence the veneration with which the examples of 'Ancient' Rome and Biblical Israel began to be surrounded with from the XVII century. This is the exact reason why the palaces of the Russian czars and Western rulers of the XVII-XVIII cc. were filled with depictions of Biblical and 'classical' scenes. That is why the XVIII century is considered to be a century of worshiping 'classical antiquity'. They worshiped not some dilapidated country-pastoral fairy tales, but the recent and turbulent history of their own ancestors. Which they rightfully considered themselves to be involved in. And of which they were proud. But (in view of the changed policy) not under its true name – Great 'Mongolia' (Great 'Mongol' Empire), but under nicknames which were made to sound older – 'Ancient' Rome and 'Biblical Israel'.

The following vivid facts become clear. 'The favourite and almost exclusive subject of interior art of the XVIII century… was an emblem, an allegory, which MOST OF THE TIME were used to express the ready-made pre-fabricated images and forms of ANCIENT CLASSICAL MYTHOLOGY. This, of course, was fully established by the GENERAL NATURE of education of the XVIII century, MOSTLY BROUGHT UP ON THE CLASSICS OF THE ANCIENT AND ROMAN WORLD. The plafonds and walls in the palaces and chambers of the noblemen were covered during that time with mythological images, where the pagan deities (in fact the distorted reflections of the Horde Khans of the XIV-XVI cc. – Author), half naked… were to embody the sacred thoughts and ideas of the contemporaries. NO MONUMENT, FESTIVITY, TRIUMPHAL ENTRANCE, ILLUMINATION OR FIREWORKS, WOULD FAIL TO BE INVESTED WITH THE ALLEGORIC IMAGES SO BELOVED BY THE SOCIETY OF THAT TIME. Such was the taste which characterised the epoch.' [282:1], part 1, p.154.

The following significant facts fit together. On the vaulted ceiling of the Kremlin Golden Chamber 'there were depicted KINGS OF ISRAEL standing upright, first there is David by the doors, then is Solomon and Rehoboam by the doors into the Golden Chamber, then Abijah, Asa, Jehoshaphat and finally, the busts … - of Uzziah, Jehoahaz and at the Dining Chamber door arch – there is Ahaz. These depictions of the standing kings somewhat served as an unmovable support for the images depicted in the heavens, in the chamber's vault, where a young czar (Ivan Vassilievich – Author), whose head was crowned with a royal wreath from from on high, from the hands of an Angel, WAS ALSO AT THE SAME TIME RECEIVING THE ROYAL STATURE FROM THE HOST OF THE ANCIENT KINGS OF ISRAEL' [282:1], part 1, p.161.

Everything is right. The ancient Kings of Israel depicted on the ceilings and walls of Moscow Golden Chamber were in particular the following Russian-Horde czars-khans:

# Dmitry Ivanovich Donskoi, aka Biblical King David;

# Suleiman the Magnificent, the Sultan of Judaea = Ottoman Empire, aka King Solomon);

# Georgy Danilovich = Genghis Khan, aka Biblical King Asa.

Thus the early designers of The Moscow Kremlin understood everything correctly. And accurately painted not just some hazy allegory, but the true history of Russia-Horde = Biblical Israel of the XIV-XVIII cc.

And so, there was a lot that was unusual in Moscow Kremlin from the point of view of the Scaligerian-Romanov history. But during the epoch of the XVII-XVIII cc. occupation almost all of the Horde's traces were extinguished.

Today we are being told about Kremlin of the XVI-XVII cc., mainly using the words of foreign travellers, diplomats, writers and merchants who visited Moscow and left some kind of notes. But where are the Hordian authors and documents? Much fewer of those survived. It was driven into our minds that in poor Russia they were allegedly bad at writing history down. May we question it. The Hordians wrote well and a lot. For example, they created the significant part of the Old Testament including the Pentateuch [6v]. But in the epoch of the Time of Troubles and the Romanovs pogrom-occupation they could not hold on to the major segments of their history. They took it away from us and attributed it to others. Instead they invented for us and bequeathed to us the 'gloomy Tatar yoke'. Which is still taught at school.


Home
Home in English
Contents HOW IT WAS IN REALITY
Continuation >>