A.T.Fomenko, T.N.Fomenko, G.V.Nosovskiy
RUSSIAN ROOTS OF THE "ANCIENT" LATIN

Languages and written languages of the Great Empire

Volume 7, Book 2

The present book is issued in a new edition, made by A.T.Fomenko. It considerably differs from the previous ones.
It appears that 3500 basic Slavonic words generated at least 20300 "foreign".

FOREWORD

A METHOD OF SEARCH OF CORRESPONDENCES BETWEEN DIFFERENT LANGUAGES: FINDING WORDS, CLOSE IN PRONUNCIATION AND, AT THE SAME TIME, CLOSE IN SENSE.

The present book is issued in a new edition, made by A.T.FOMENKO. It considerably differs from the previous ones. You see the first book of the 5th volume of the seven-volume book "Chronology" (the seven-volume is divided into 14 books).

Volume 1. FIGURES AGAINST LIE. - A.T.Fomenko.

Volume 2. ANTIQUITY IS MIDDLE AGES. - A.T.Fomenko. Book 2. WE CHANGE DATES – EVERYTHING CHANGES. - A.T.Fomenko

Volume 3. Book 1: STARS TESTIFY. V.V.Kalashnikov, G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko. Book 2. CELESTIAL CALENDAR OF THE ANCIENTS - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko, T.N.Fomenko.

Volume 4. Book 1. NEW CHRONOLOGY OF RUSSIA. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko. Book 2. THE MIRACLE OF RUSSIAN HISTORY - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko

Volume 5. Book 1. EMPIRE. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko. Book� 2. RISE OF THE TSARDOM. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko

Volume 6. Book 1: BIBLICAL RUSSIA. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko. Book 2: OPENING OF AMERICA BY RUSSIA-HORDE. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko. Book 3: SEVEN WONDERS OF THE WORLD - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko.

Volume 7. Book 1. WESTERN MYTH. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko. Book 2. RUSSIAN ROOTS OF THE "ANCIENT" LATIN. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko, T.N.Fomenko

The present book takes a very special place in our studies on chronology. It can't be considered as an independent proof of the New Chronology. From the other side, after our restoration with mathematical and astronomical methods of the skeleton of correct chronology, it is very interesting to look at the evolution of languages and written language from new point of view. According to our results, in the Great = "Mongol" Empire of the XIII-XVI centuries (that is during several centuries) the main languages were Slavonic and Turkic. Probably Slavonic was a state language of the Empire. Only at the rebellion epoch of Reformation of the end of the XVI - XVII centuries, after the split of Empire, in its separated fractions, the reformers, who usurped the power, actively started to create new languages, in order to separate from the mother country of the Empire (Russia-Horde) not only politically, but also in a language, cultural relation.

Exactly for this purpose in the XVI-XVII centuries new governors engaged special people, who had to "create new languages". As a result they created a science, named "linguistics". It was created for a rather practical (and important for rebellious reformers) purpose. That is, for creation of new languages in the new, just separated from the mother country states. But at the base of quickly created languages ("ancient"-Latin, "ancient"-Greek, French, English, German, Spanish, Italian etc.) inevitably lay Slavonic in its general understanding. The reformers simply didn't have any other material. Consequently, except their will, all the invented by them new languages and dialects should have bear deep "Slavonic stamp". And in our book many evidences of this are collected. It is great that they remained until now. Earlier nobody paid attention to these "Slavonic traces", or, having paid attention, hided this, as people of the XVII-XX centuries are accustomed to use a wrong Scaligerian chronology, in which a thought about the origin of the "ancient" Latin from the Slavonic language was not acceptable. New chronology puts off this unspoken prohibition.

Let's remind an important circumstance. As it was already told in detail in the book "Figures against Lie", most ancient texts were written with only consonants. For example, the following is known regarding the Bible: "The Jewish written language initially had no vowels, no replacing them signs... Books of the Old Testament were written with only consonants" [765], p.155.

This situation is typical. For example, an ancient Slavonic text – this is a chain of consonants, sometimes even without "vowelling signs" and separation on words. That is a stream of consonants.

Probably a rarity and high price of writing materials in the Ancient Times made the penmen economize materials, throwing away vowels when writing. "But if we will take now the Jewish Bible or manuscript, we will find in them a skeleton of consonants, filled with points and other signs... meaning missing vowels. These signs didn't compose belonging to the ancient Jewish Bible... The books were read by only consonants, filling them with vowels... as one could do it and according to the seeming requirements of the sense and oral legends" [765], p.155.

For example, a combination of ��� could mean: �����, ������, ����, ������, �������, ������, ������� etc.; a combination �� - ����, ����, ��� etc. An arbitrariness of vocalization in the ancient languages is extremely big. Many combinations of consonants could be vocalized with tens of different means [765]. Gezenius wrote: "It is easy to understand, how imperfect and not clear such means of writing is." Quote from [765].

In our study we pay main attention exactly to the skeleton of consonants, as the accepted today vocalizations ("coloring" of the skeleton) appeared not long ago. Reading our Dictionary, first of all pay attention to the skeleton = a skeleton of consonants in a word. Our Dictionary brightly shows that different vocalizations ("colorings") of the same skeleton of consonants were a typical occurrence at transmission from one language to another. For example, a Russian word ���������, ������ (translate, explain). It evoked, for example, the following "foreign" words: TALK (to speak, in English), TALA (to speak, in Swedish), TOLK (interpreter, in Swedish), TULKKI (translator, in Finnish). A "Skeleton" ��� remained the same, but the vowels "float", and sometimes considerably.

What methods used reformers-"linguists" of the XVI-XVII centuries? Resting on the results of New Chronology, we discovered several such means. They turned out to be rather simple. Let's list some of them. See definite examples of distortions of Slavonic words further in our Dictionary.

# In the ancientry writing of some Slavonic letters didn't yet catch on, and even their position on the line was not fixed. For example, the same letter (for example, �) could be written in a different way: putting sideways (appears � or �), turning upside down (appeared something like �=m or "��" handwritten). And so on. In different geographical areas of the Empire existed a bit different means of writing of the same Slavonic letters. But at that far time difficulties of reading, most likely, didn't appear, as the population of the Empire knew (in one or another degree) the Slavonic language, and that's why different orientations of the same letter didn't prevent people from understanding each other and written texts. For example, the khan's ordinances and state acts. Reformers-"linguists" fixed many of these different means of writing of letters, after what they cunningly announced them "very ancient", stable and, allegedly, having no any relation to Slavonic tracings. It was "ordered" to forget forever about the initial Slavonic primary base. A tradition of reading of ancient texts in Slavonic was seriously disturbed. The next generation of young people, which started to learn in the reformatory schools already in a new way, of course, didn't know anything about the former rules of reading. Their parents died and the bearers of the ancient language tradition gradually disappeared. So, young people were quickly retrained. And their children, moreover, grew at the atmosphere of new rules of reading. Many old texts became incomprehensible and were forgotten. For example, famous et-Russian signatures. Not much time is needed for such "progressive reform". Just one-two generations.

# Another "reformation method" is well seen on example of French. People were made not to voice (not to read aloud) some letters or their combinations. A modern example: instead of Peugeot (Peugeot) it was now necessary to read "Pezho". As a result, the voiced text was seriously differing from the ancient original. By the way, during travelling of A.T.FOMENKO and �.N.Fomenko around France, we were informed, that in some villages (for example, on the border with Spain) people in an old way (mainly in household) read aloud all the written letters. But when they come to state bodies or fill official papers, they speak "as intended today", that is missing and distorting the sounding of some letters. Such "progressive method" of the XVI-XVII centuries was, of course, effective, as it dipped into oblivion the former Slavonic sounding of many ancient words.

# Earlier two means of reading the words were used: from the left to the right (as modern Europeans use) and from the right to the left (as, for example, Arabs or Jewish use). Reformers actively used this. In many cases they changed the direction of reading of words. As a result ancient Slavonic words became nearly unrecognizable. That was the purpose of the "creators of new languages".

# In Russian tradition a nod of the head meant (and means today) agreement, and a shake of the head means rejection. At the epoch of Reformation on the territory of Bulgaria these gestures were exchanged, and now here they nod for rejection and shake heads for agreement.

# The present book could be conventionally called a "Short Dictionary of Parallelisms". It was created for a long time, for several years. Compared to the previous editions of our Dictionary, the present version, which appeared as a result of huge work in 2001-2011, is considerably widened and went to a totally new level. First of all, due to discovered by us new and rather multiple parallelisms of the SLAVONIC LANGUAGE WITH LATIN AND GREEK. Now there are around 3520 Russian words in our dictionary. The book is organized in the following way. THE FIRST and main its part, containing around 3030 Russian words, consists of correspondences, which are, in our opinion, rather reliable. THE SECOND, smaller part of the Dictionary, consists of 490 words, correspondences with which seem us less reliable. But we also included them in the Dictionary, as a material for future studies.

With this, it was discovered that from 3520 Russian words appeared at least around 3400 "notional bushes" of Latin words, around 2750 bushes of English words, around 1120 bushes of German words and around 1050 bushes of Greek words. Let's underline that we indicated here a number of bushes, each of them containing actually many separate words. We paid the main attention, of course, to Latin, which is considered today a foundation of many Western-European languages. Totally in our dictionary there are around 20300 words, which are considered foreign today (Latin, English etc.). That is, from 3520 Slavonic words in the Middle ages totally appeared around 20300 "foreign" words. Consequently, at an average, from each Slavonic word-"parent" appeared, as we see, around SIX "foreign" words-"children" (20300 : 3520 = 5.77). It should be told, that 3520 words were in our Dictionary for November of 2011. But the Dictionary constantly and rather quickly fills. So, today there are considerably more words in it.

We would underline, that three is a half thousand basic Slavonic words, which appeared in our Dictionary, probably were enough for substantial communication of people in the Middle Ages. This was a foundation of communication. Mainly Slavonic. With this, we suppose that we discovered far not all the correspondences.

# A principle of comparison, proposed by us as a ground of the Dictionary of Parallelisms, is rather easy, although, probably, is new. We searched for words, CLOSE IN SENSE AND CLOSE IN SOUNDIND, THAT IS HAVING CLOSE "SKELETONS OF CONSONANTS". We conventionally called it "a method of notional equations". Let's clarify our idea.

First: moving sequentially, for example, through Russian-Latin dictionary [666:1], we searched for Slavonic words and MEANING THE SAME that is HAVING THE SAME SENSE Latin words, usually indicated in the dictionary as translations of the corresponding Russian word. Otherwise speaking, "corresponding" Slavonic and Latin words should be NEARLY THE SAME IN SENSE that is MEAN THE SAME, and moreover, should SOUND SIMILARLY (to have close skeletons of consonants). Next, with the same way we also checked the Latin-Russian dictionary [237]. That is, moving step by step through Latin words, we analyzed their Russian translations, finding correspondences – that is CLOSENESS OF SENSE AND AT THE SAME TIME CLOSENESS OF SOUNDING.

Second: having found MEANING THE SAME, AND ALSO CLOSELY SOUNDING words-synonyms (Russian and Latin, and also, Latin and Russian), we thoroughly compared their writing, that is the used letters, their graphics and reproduced by them sounds. As a result appeared those linguistic transmissions, which turned former Slavonic words into Latin. With this it was becoming clear – which exactly sounds turned into which, which letters "turned upside down", which were "mirrorlike reflected" etc. As a result we often managed to reconstruct transmissions of the Slavonic words into Latin.

Otherwise, "equaling in sense" two words, that is Russian and corresponding to it (in its sense, notion) Latin, we get a "notional equation", from which it becomes clear – which exactly transmissions of sounds and letters happened in past. The proposed by us method of notional equations could be useful for further analysis of the appearance of many modern languages from the Slavonic first principle at the epoch of the XIV-XVI centuries.

# Some parallels were noticed by linguists earlier, but the Scaligerian chronology prevented them from evaluating them and fully doing a work, like ours, and actually forbade itself the principle of such comparison.

Some interesting parallels we shown to us by the readers of our books and the participants of our site chronologia.org. We are deeply grateful to all of them.

# An important note. Separate correspondences, provided by us, could at first glance seem unexpected. But most often they turn to be special cases of some general, "mass" parallelism, appearing in the whole group of close in sense words. That's why we recommend to read our Dictionary not in hurry, evaluating not separate examples, taken from the context, but the whole group of close words, the whole "notional bush".

We paid main attention to Slavonic-Latin parallels. It is well known, that LATIN ROOTS ARE PRESENTED IN MANY EUROPEAN LANGUAGES. THAT'S WHY, HAVING ESTABLISHED THE FOUNDATION OF THE "CLASSIC LATIN" FROM THE SLAVONIC FIRST PRINCIPLE, WITH THIS WE AUTOMATICALLY ASSERT THE SLAVONIC ROOTS IN MANY OTHER WESTERN-EUROPEAN LANGUAGES.

An electronic version of our Dictionary will be useful for the readers, as search of foreign words is easier in it. The issue is that we put in order our Dictionary according to Russian ABC, but often it is useful to find some foreign word. Here an automatic computer search is rather convenient. One can use an electronic version of the preliminary variant of the present Dictionary, placed on our site chronologia.org. This first variant of the Dictionary is included into our book "Reconstruction", published in the Moscow publishing house RIMIS in 2005, as an Application, written by A.T.FOMENKO, G.V.Nosovskiy, �.N.Fomenko. The text of this book is fully placed at the indicated site.

# The implemented by us idea of "notional bushes" turned to be rather useful. Many parallels become much more clear and obvious, when "close words" from several languages are compared.

As it appeared, many Russian words, considered today adopted from the "ancient" Latin, "ancient"-Greek and other foreign languages, actually are of a native Slavonic origin. But forgotten later. A reader can learn all this from our Dictionary. Now we will list the examples. Many of them are unexpected.

But in order not to overload the present Foreword, we will not right now indicate their Slavonic "parents". When you will read our book, you will meet all these words, "sunk" in their wide "notional "bushes" and you will understand yourself their Slavonic origin. For a quick search of the listed words it is convenient to use an electronic version of our Dictionary. We will repeat that its preliminary variant is placed on the site chronologia.org – in a Supplement to the book "Reconstruction".

It is worth saying that in many of the listed below cases a Slavonic origin of the "foreign" words is not obvious. It became clear only after we managed to collect together huge bushes of "foreign" words, which appeared from their Slavonic "parents". An ancient Slavonic word, turning to Western languages, slightly changed, and then "returned" to Russia as allegedly borrowed foreign. The distortions, appeared on that way (forward and back), prevent from immediate identification of the Slavonic original. But when "a way of the word" is restored, the picture immediately becomes clear. That's why it is necessary to study the whole "meaning bush", in which one or another word is "sunk".

From the other side, some of the indicated below "foreign" words are perceived as initially Russian today. We are accustomed to them. But if you address to definition dictionaries, you will surprisingly see, that the linguists often (and fiercely) lead their origin, for example, from the "ancient" Latin or from Greek. As we now understand, in many cases they are mistaken, as they rest upon wrong Scaligerian chronology.

So, let's provide, for example, the following well known, allegedly "foreign", words in Russian:

�) �����, ����������, ��������, �����, ��������, �������������, �������������, ��������, ��������, ��������������, �������, ���, �����, ��������, ��������, ����� (as action), ��������, �����, ��������, ���������, �������� (food of gods), �����, ������ (for example, of actor), ������, ���������, ��������, ������ (in different senses), ��������, ������, ������������, ��������, ������������, �������, �������, �������������, ���������, ��������, ������������, ����������, ����, �������, �����������, �����, �������, �������, �����������, ����������, ������, ����������, ����- (as prefix in many words), �����, �������, �����������, ���������, ���������� (person), �����, ����������, ����������, �������, �����, �����, ��������, ���������, ���������, ����.

�) ����, �����, ���, �����, ������, ����, �������, �������, �������, ��������, ������, ������, ����������, ����, �������(��), ��������, ������, �����, �������.

�) ��������, ������, �����, ������, ����������, �����, ����.

�) �����, ��������, ��������, �����������, �������, ����������, ���������, ���������, �������������, ����������, ��������� (strong exaggeration), ������, ��������, ������, ��������, ��������, ���������, ������, ����, ������, �������, ��������, �����, ��������, ������������.

�) ��������, �������, ����������, �������, ���������, ���������, ������������, �������, ����������, �����, ����������, �������, ���������, �������������, �������, ���������, �������, ����������, ������, �������, �����, �������, ��������, ������, ������, ��������, ��������, ����������, ��������, ����������, ���������, ����������, ������, �����������, ���������, ����������, ���������, ���������, ����������, ������ (scientific degree), �����.

�) ����, ����.

�) ���, ������, ������.

�) ����������, ���������, �����, �����������, �������, �����������, ���������, �������, ����������, ������������, ������ (indicator in a book), ����������, ��������������, ������������, ���������, ����������, �����������, ���������, ���������, ���������, ���������, ��������, ����������, ����������, �������, ���������, ������������, �����������, ��������, �������������, �����������, ������, ��������, �����������, ��������, ������, ���������, �������, ��������.

�) �����������, ��������, �����������, �����������, ������, ������, �����, ���������, ���������, �������, ����������, ����������, �������� (mathem.), ����� (mathem.), ��������, ����������, ��� (tsar), ����������, �������, ���������, ����������� (passion for theft), �������, ������, ��������, ������, �������, �������, ��������, ���������, ���������, ��������, ����������, �������, ��������, ����, �������, �����, ����������, �������������, �������������, ��������, ����������, ���������, ����������, ���������, �����������, ���������, ��������������, �����������, ������, ������������, �����������, ��������� (mathem.), ��������, �����������, ��������, ����������, ���������, ���������, ���������, ���������, ������, ���������, ������, ������, �����, ��������, ������������, ��������, �������, ��������, �����������, �����, ��������, �������, �����������, ������.

�) �����, �������, ���������� (doctor), ���������, ����������, �������, ��������, ������, ������, �����, �����������, ������, ����������, ���������, ��������, ��������, ������, ����, ������.

�) ��������, ��������������, �����������, �����, �����������, ����������, �����, ���������, ��������, �������, �����������, ��������, ��������, ����������, ������, ���������, ��������, ����������, �������, ������, �������, �������, ������������, ������, �����, ���������, �������, ������, ��������, ���������, ����������, �������������, �������, ������, ��������.

�) ���������, ������, �����������, ��������������, �����, ������, ����, ��������, ����, ����.

�) ���������, ������������, ����������, ������, ������� (doctor), ����������, ����������, ���������, ��������, ���������, ������, ������, ������, ��������, ������, �����, ����� (as an award or knights union), ����������, ���������, ��������, ��������, ���������, ��������, ��������������, ����������, �����������.

�) ����, �����, �������, �������, ����', ���������, ����������, ���������, ��������������, �������, �����, �������, �����, ��������, �����, �������, �������, �������� (for example, in football), ������, ���������, ���������, ������������ (of letters), �������, ��������, ������������, �����������, ����������, �������, ����-����, ���������, �������, ��������, ����������, ������, �����������, �������, ��������, �������, ������, ������������, ������������, ��������, �����, ����, ����������, �����������, ���������, ���������, ������, �������, �������������, ���������, ������������, ���������, �����, �������, ��������������, ���������, ����������, ����������, �������, ������, ����������, ��������, �����������, �������, ���������, ���������, �������, ��������, �������, ���������, �������, �����������, �����, �������������, ������, ���������.

�) ����������� (of the agreement), ������, ������, ������������, ���������, �����(��), �������� (surgeon), ������, ����������, �������, ������, ������, ���������, ��������, ����������, ����������, �������, ����, ��������, ������, ����� (horse races).

�) �����, �����, ������, ���������, ��������, ��������, ��������, ������, �����������, �����, �������, ������, �����, ������, �������, ���������, �����, ���������, ����������, ������, ��������, ������������, ���������, �������������, �����������, �����, ���, ������, ���������, �������, ��������, �������, ������������, �������, ����������, ������, �������, ������, ������������, �������, ����������, ����������, �����, �����, �����, �����, ������������, ����������, ���������, �����, �������, �����, �������, ���������, ������, ������, �����, ����������, �����, ����������, ������������, ���������, ���������, �������, �����, �����- (as a prefix to the words), ������, ���.

�) �����, ���� (that is rhytmically), �������, ������, �����, ��������, ��������, ����, �����������, ��������, �������, ������, �������, �������� (doctor), ���������, ������, ����, �������, ����������, �����, �����������, ������, ��������, �������, �������, ��������������, ������������, �����������, ��������������, ���������, ��������, ��������, ������ (on the globe), ��������������, ������, ������.

�) ���������, ��������, ����, ������ (doctor), ����������.

�) �������, ����, �������, ������, �������������, ������, �������������, �������, ��������, ������, ������������, ������������, ������, ����������, ����, ���������, �����, �����, ����, ����, ��������, ����������, �����, ����, ������������, �������, �����, �����, ���������, �����, ���, ������.

�) �������, ������ (as document and paper), ����������, ����, ������� (historical), ����������� (for example, sick), ����������, ���������, ��������.

�) ����, �������, �����, "���������" (for example, suit), ����������, ��������, ������, ����������.

�) ����������, �����, �����, �����, �����, ����� (stamp), ��������.

�) �����, �����������, �����������, �����������, �������, �������, �������������, ������, ����������, ��������, ������, ������, ��������, ������������, �������, ����������, ������������, �������, ���� (Eros), �������, ������, ��������, ����.

�) ����, �����, �����������, �������.

Et cetera...

# Let's say about Sanskrit. In the book "Cossacks-Aryans: from Russia to India" we provided the composed by us bright dictionary of parallels between Russian and Sanskrit (also see our site chronologia.org). In the present book we supplement it with the links to the studies of other authors. It is worth saying that the fact of the closest connection of Russian and Sanskrit is in general well known to specialists. Yet since the XIX century. At the same time, this surprising closeness is not loudly discussed today. They pretend that this fact, allegedly, "doesn't mean anything". As Sanskrit was used, allegedly, many centuries before the appearance of the Slaves on the historical stage. So, actually accepting that the "ancient" Sanskrit lies in the origin of Indo-European languages, at the same time historians in all ways avoid discussion of its practical identity with the Ancient-Slavonic. So, it appears that in the origin of many "ancient" and modern languages lies Slavonic. And historians can't let this happen. That's why they made a cunning substitution, actually calling the ancient-Slavonic language as "Sanskrit-parent".

# Let's repeat, that the found by us parallels are not "mathematical considerations". Such parallels are sometimes unstable, and we don't insist on them. The issue is that a sense of the ancient words and notions could "float" at transmission from one language to another, what complicates the analysis. A reader should remember this.