It appeared that the famous "ancient" works of Suetonius, Tacitus and Flavius describe the Great Russian Empire and rebellion of the Reformation of the XVI-XVII centuries.
FOREWORD. "ANTIQUE" SOURCES TELL US A LOT OF NEW AND UNEXPECTED THINGS ABOUT THE EVENTS OF THE XVI-XVII CENTURIES.
All the results, stated in the present book, are new and published for the first time. As we will show, the "antique" authors - Suetonius, Tacitus and Flavius – brightly describe the history of the XVI-XVII centuries, add much interesting and often unexpected to the stormy events of the rebellion of Reformation.
Our studies rest on the New Chronology, the basic results of which were received by A.T.Fomenko in 1974-1980 by means of created by him new empirical-statistical methods. Then the New Chronology got its development in the works of A.T.Fomenko, G.V.Nosovskiy, V.V.Kalashnikov, T.N.Fomenko and others. In the base of the New Chronology there is a total of modern mathematical and astronomical methods. They are described, in particular, in the following books:
A.T.Fomenko, "Foundations of the history";
V.V.Kalashnikov, G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko, "Stars", Part 1;
G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko, TN.Fomenko, "Stars", Part 2;
G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko, "New chronology of Russia", chapters 2 and 16;
G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko, "Biblical Russia", chapter 19;
G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko, "Reconstruction", chater 13;
G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko, "New chronology of Egypt";
G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko, "Ancient zodiacs of Egypt and Europe";
G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko, "Tsar of the Slaves".
In the present book we don't repeat the reasonings of the New Chronology, giving the readers a reference to the indicated works and to our seven volumes "Chronology. First Canon" (Moscow, publishing house RIMIS). See the full list of our publications at the end of this book.
Let's now address to the core of the present study.
In the previous books we "read with new eyes" (that is resting on the New Chronology) the most famous "ANTIQUE" GREEK sources: Herodotus, Plutarch and others. It appeared that they actually tell about the events of the Great = "Mongol" Empire of the XII-XVII centuries. Now it is turn of the "ANCIENT"-ROMAN texts. Of course we should start with the famous books of Cornelius Tacitus and Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus. The work of Suetonius is called "Life of twelve Caesars". It is considered that Suetonius and Tacitus tell about the "antique" imperial Rome. In our terminology this is the epoch of the Second Roman Empire, allegedly from the I century B.C to the III century A.D. Suetonius and Tacitus tell, mainly, about the events allegedly of the I century A.D. As we will show, in fact the most part of these famous works is devoted to the history of Russia-Horde of the XVI-XVII centuries, including the rebellion of Reformation.
In the first six chapters we show that "antique" Roman imperators Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius and Nero – these are reflections of the four Horde tsars-khans, united in the Russian history under the name of "Ivan the Terrible". In particular, here a reader learns, who were in fact the popular "ancient" heroes Daedalus and Icarus, who rose in the air on the artificial wings. And also, what was the famous Pharos sea-light – one of the seven wonders. So, return of the ancient sources "to their place" unexpectedly throws a bright light on the medieval events.
The contents of the fourth chapter is clearly seen from its name: "Commander Germanicus, a nephew of Tiberius, - it is Cossacks ataman-conquistador Ermak-Kortes, who conquered America". The issue is about the famous Conquista of the XVI century, described, as appeared, by the "antique classics" as the German war of the Roman commander Germanicus. In the Russian chronicles the same campaign is described as the conquest of vast "Siberia" by Cossack Ermak.
In the seventh – twelfth chapters we show that the final six life stories, provided in the books of Tacitus and Suetonius, which are the "biographies" of Gilba, Othon, Vitellius, Vespasianus, Titus and Domitian, tell about the Great Distemper in the Russian-Horde Empire of the end of XVI – beginning of XVII century.
For example, there is a bright and astonishing fact that the famous "antique" imperator Domitian turned out to be a partly reflection of Michael Fedorovich Romanov (and also a partly reflection of evangelic tsar Herod and imperator Andronicus-Christ). So, as appeared, the "antique classics" described even the epoch of the first Romanovs in Russia. For example, Suetonius and Tacitus, as appeared, knew the story of Ivan Susanin, who saved in 1613 Michael Romanov from the Polacks. In particular, it appeared that the story of Susanin was not invented (as some later historians tried to insist), but was based on the real facts, which reflected also in the famous books of the "antiquity".
Next, it was found, that described by the famous Judaic author Josephus Flavius siege and capture of "antique" Jerusalem by Roman imperator Titus – this was actually the siege and capture of Moscow in 1610-1612 by prince Skopin-Shuyskiy, and then by Minin and Pozharskiy.
It is worth saying that now, when we opened the authentic contents of the famous "antique works", many events of the rebellion of Reformation and the Great distemper of the XVII century appeared in a new bright light, adding the facts, which earlier were by mistake moved to the "far past".
Like in our previous books we pay much attention to CALCULATION of new absolute datings of the ancient events in order to restore fully a reliable chronological canvas of the correct history of the past. First of all the issue is about astronomical datings. For example, about datings of the ancient zodiacs, which are ancient pictures, showing, in particular, in which constellations were the planets for one or another date, which the ancient masters fixed by means of "astronomical planetary calendar". In the present book we date a new, recently found by us ancient zodiac (nobody before us understood that this picture contains astronomical information). This is the zodiac, showing the birth date of Ivan the Terrible and expressed on his famous bone throne, see chapter 2. Earlier nobody from the researchers paid attention to it. An extremely interesting dating appeared as a result of astronomical calculations. It throws a new light on the famous events of the past.
Please pay attention to an interesting effect. As it appeared, the Scaligerian historians and editors, having much multiplied (on paper) authentic ancient evidences, as a result wrote a lot of books, telling about the same things. The same historical events are reflected on the pages of Suetonius, Tacitus, Herodotus, Livius, Flavius, Polybius etc. They were reflected in a different way, but the core of the issue just slightly changed. That's why today we have to analyze once again all the multiple duplicates-phantoms, in order to collect them together, "glue in one" the separate and different voiced sounds about the same. We restore the correct, "short" history, in which there are no such multiple repeats and "streams". It is worth saying that this is a big job. But we have to do it, improving multiple, rather big chronological mistakes of historians and chroniclers of the XVI-XVIII centuries. The problem is that there were too many mistaken writers. And they wrote huge texts. And they worked for a long time – around two-three hundred years. For example, we show on pic.0.1 and pic.0.2 modern editions of the books of Cornelius Tacitus, Suetonius Tranquillus and Josephus Flavius. It is well seen that these are huge works.
We, two authors of the new chronology (with participation of V.V.Kalashnikov and �.N.Fomenko) have to sort out the "Augean agglomerates" of the Scaligerian history in short terms. Of course, mathematical methods let us for the first time restore the "skeleton" of the correct history as a system of absolute dates. Otherwise we would get nothing. But except calculation of dates we also have to explain now to our readers – which events are described in ones or other "classical sources". As a result we had to write several books, devoted to reconstruction. The issue is that a tale about each our separate study requires analysis of big fragments of the ancient texts, in order to understand – what they tell about. As a result the volume of study grows.
In other words, a considerable amount of our explanations to our reconstruction is explained by too big mistakes and falsifications of the XVI-XVIII centuries. If the Scaligerian editors had written a bit less, we would have less work now. Our reconstruction itself takes not so many pages. For example, in a terse, but at the same time absolutely finished form, it is stated in the Introduction to our book "Tsar Rome in between-rivers Oka and Volga". These are just several sheets. But "covering the skeleton of reconstruction with body and blood", that is filling it with specific historical details, requires already much more time and space. We do all this now. Otherwise a reader will hardly understand, for example, what the real personage of the middle of the XVI century was reflected as "very antique" Icarus, who not carefully rose on the artificial wings close to the Sun, fallen and dead? And also - where stood the famous Pharos sea-light, and if it was really a sea light?
We are grateful to �.N.Fomenko for many valuable notes and additions.
Lomonosov Moscow State University