This exercise follows a procedure of circular and systematic analysis (from different complementary readings), with the purpose of deepening and contrasting the evidence of the integral manipulation of the Global History, especially during the 17th, 18th centuries the 19th century.
In order to complement the historical reconstruction of reference introduced by the NC, this exercise follows this approach:
- Assume certain premises a priori,
- incorporate an exploration hypothesis on which to structure the research and,
- contrast the proposed hypothesis.
It is not a global reconstruction or definitive, it is only an approach that seeks to broaden the space of analysis and reconstruction, based on a principal or reference hypothesis, for the NC.
Complementarily, a new actor is incorporated into the NC: the Laskaris Komnenos. They are the family that is declared a descendant of Andronicus Komnenos (Christ), and are legitimate bearer of the rights of the Greek Empire. They are the Laskaris Komnenos that the Official History makes emperors of Nicea and moves to Western Europe in the 13th century. According to this exercise, they are at the root of the Habsburgs and the Holy Roman Empire, which would have taken the Laskaris shield, and at the root of the Borja, who would have designed the Vatican project from Italy, in a pact between the powers European Christians. The Habsburgs would be a renovated lineage in Austria, but the Laskaris Komnenos would have persisted in their original vocation: claiming real rights, not creating false ones, as guarantors of the Hellenic Constantine project. His story is literally fascinating.
The main premises are that throughout the second half of the 17th century, and especially in the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th, the historical narrative is modified on a global scale. Until the 17th century there is a global worldview, imperial, in the government of the peoples of the world, directed from the Nil-Volga axis. That is to say, it is the Egyptian, Greek and Roman Empire according to the Official History, with the peculiarity that is an empire that begins its expansion in the 12th century and the 17th century suffers from its implosion, the result of the appearance of multiple nations. In this scenario, it is of special interest that the character of Jesus is, in origin, the same as the Buddha and Krishna, and corresponds to an idealized vision of the beginning of a ancestry that extends to Eurasia, Africa and America intensively throughout the 14th and 16th centuries. This episode would correspond to the Greek expansion to Persia, with the Gothic incursions of Roman times and the Mongol expansion of the Middle Age to the 17th and 18th centuries. Jesus, as the NC rules, would be the equivalent of Alexander the Great. Both live 33 years and are judged without mercy for their own people. However, the historical reconstruction proposed here highlights the fact that it is not until the 18th century that it is manipulated and, in a way, the historical narration is rebuilt. As the NC says, the main reference is the chronological map of the ancient civilizations promoted by J.J.Scaliger, from 1583, after the incorporation of the Gregorian calendar in 1582, but this work would have been done in the 18th century, not in the 16th century. This hypothesis is argued. As the NC emphasizes, the books of the 15th and 16th centuries are written in the 17th and 18th centuries, suggesting that the printing press was created in the 17th century or that, ultimately, they burn or become disappear all previous books. Well, one of these works would be the chronological reconstruction of Scaliger. That is, this story is written in the apogee of the European pretensions for the control of the World. That is to say, according to this approach, the most intense stages of world colonization, as well as the manipulation of History, came together in the 18th and 19th centuries. The Vatican, as it documents and explores the NC, also appears at the time, at the second half of the 17th and is finished in the 18th century. The architecture, ornate and baroque, and its monumentality, reinforces this scenario.
The exploration hypothesis of the NC proposed here is simple and, at the same time, clear and understandable, if the process of creation, manipulation and reconstruction of the historical narrative is understood by manipulating the order of events and creating a dilated chronological scenario in its totality. It is based on showing how, between the year of the martyrdom of Christ (which would be the year "0", as in the old calendar of Alexandria, which is based on the martyrdom of Alexander the Great, dated formerly in 312 BC.) and the year 1185 AD. (the year in which, according to NC, real martyrdom takes place) there are two chronological jumps. First, a 1000-year leap, as is explicitly indicated in the story of the Biblical Apocalypse, and secondly a 185-year complementary leap, for reasons of a change of power. The first added serves to create the myth of the Roman Pax and to immortalize Christ. The second one is to clear the recent past, creating a new one. In this way, they would have been written 185 years twice, and doing it so would have left written official history distorted, but codified. The result of the work concludes that duplicity is really triple, and that the story of 185 years would have tripled, until "fill" 555 years, a number that, on the other hand, is significant. That is to say, throughout the 18th century, history is rewritten, intensively, in a project that is maintained throughout the nineteenth century and also in the twentieth century. How was it done? ...destroying the past and supplanting it for another? This is an option, but there is one complementary one. The past can be left uninhabited, destroying or manipulating documentation, and creating a future. That is, if you want to rewrite the past writing a new temporary space can be written, it is not necessary to delete the previous one. For this reason, as proposed here, there is a leap to the 185-year calendar in the future, and the previous ones 185 are rewritten, manipulating minimally the real past. This option is valid for NC search. This work may seem complex, but it is not so if you contemplate the fact that in the 18th century the Holy Inquisition, the Company of Jesus, the Illustrated Absolutism and the Freemasonry, coexist while Europe intends to impose its "moral", his "religion", his "politics" and his "privileges" while colonizing the World. If all this was proposed and, to a large extent, he achieved it, why should not he propose imposing his "history"?
The main exploration that is proposed to investigate is the transfer of power in Western Europe between the 17th and 18th centuries, framed in the research space offered by the NC. Specifically, the meaning of the Ark of the Covenant of the Apocalypse is explored (which the Bible clearly places later in the 13th century) and the evolution of the symbol of Christ towards the modern version. On the way is the thread of the Great Khan, which is officially related to the lineage of the Roman Empire, of the Komnenos, and has in its conqueror of Europe the symbol of Catholicism: the Vatican. Batu Khan, the Mongolian conqueror of Europe (and founder of the Russian Horde), put the original name of the Vatican. For this reason it is coherent to consider that the Pope was, in fact, the last Great Khan, after having been Prester John, who would have guarded the Ark.
The NC, for those who are not informed, shows that the popes of Rome are a recreation invented in the 17th and 18th centuries, made by the Benedictine Order, along with the genealogies of the main monarchic currents in Europe. In fact, both the Pope and the Holy Roman Empire appear at the same moment, and both take control of imperial powers and symbols. The NC demonstrates, in comparative tables of the genealogies of the emperors of the Holy Roman Empire, that they are a copy of the dynastic powers of the Imperial Horde, which are repeated in the biblical chronicles of the Kings of Israel and with various episodes of the popes and the emperors of eastern and western Rome. That is to say, they are a non-existent power until, approximately, the second half of the 17th century. Therefore, it was an ephemeral power that, within the framework of the NC, assumed and directed the imperial challenge of reconstructing History, before its decline that took place in the nineteenth century.
In fact, the link between the Great Khan, Prester John and the Pope of Rome makes a lot of sense. The chronicles of the Great Khan, which are published after the second half of the eighteenth century (not before) indicate how, after occupying Eurasia, the power of Prester John is created, which is installed in the south of Egypt , to Abyssinia (where there is now Ethiopia). This leader, erased from the collective memory of Christianity, is the leader of the World until the 16th century, according to the Official History, although it is ignorated everywhere. But it is much more than that. He is in custody of the Ark of the Solomon Alliance, and he is representing, in all the maps of ancient times, the symbols that, in the 19th and 20th centuries, the Pope of Rome looks. The triple crown papal tiara of, and the triple cross, which are considered the unique symbols of the Pope, are the evident and contrasted symbols of the Prester John. Even, the symbols shown by the Prester John do not appear in Rome in any map. Now, in the 21st century, the lineage of the emperors of Ethiopia is the Master of the Order of the Ark of the Alliance (honoring King Solomon and the Queen of Saba) and Saint Mary of Zion.
As indicated, the Mongols represent, according to NC, the people of shepherds of Israel, the people of God. "Mongol" means the "head of the world". In the 17th and 18th centuries, however, as it is explored here, this header moves to the West, to Gaul (which would mean "head") and to all the nearby lands (Portugal, Galicia, Wales...).
In summary, the main exploration that is proposed to investigate this diagram is whether, as a result of a transfer of the powers of Egypt (Ethiopia) to Rome, throughout the 17th and 18th centuries, the authority of the Great Khan was moved to Rome, creating a new World Order. Its main mission would be, following this thread, to impose a new symbolic vassalage based on a universal Christian worldview. For this reason it would be necessary to remake History in its entirety. This scenario would be the reason that would justify the European colonization of the World, to impose its dominance, in parallel to the creation of new privileges that would converge in "capitalism", economic imperialism.
The colonial enterprise would have been, therefore, planned at the turn of the 17th and 18th centuries, along with the historical project. The Vatican, the Holy Roman Empire and the powers given to Spain and Portugal, as well as the Columbus project, would be part of this reconstruction.
Finally, the new actor of NC, the Laskaris Komnenos, represents the main challenge of this exercise. It is recognized, officially, that they are the most legitimized lineage to claim the rights of the Greek Empire, especially in the 19th and 20th centuries. Several documents, the Greek people and the Orthodox Church are testimonies. But they are not on the front line. Because? This question is crucial, but here it is not addressed. The periple of its descendants, who throughout the 19th and 20th centuries fought for the independence of Greece, as well as that of their Savoy relatives, who are struggling to reunite Italy and Spain, is a very interesting story to dedicate a later work. It is enough to leave it here as additional information to consider. What is approached is the past of the descendants who, between the 17th and 18th centuries, try to reconstruct the Roman army. This episode, not studied, is at the root of the Constantinian Order of Saint George that ends in the hands of Philip V of Bourbon. The control by his dominion would have been the fight for the control of the military empire, the continuator of the Januese project (Templar), but the official history has hidden it.
This exercise, as proposed here, intends to reconstruct the history of the struggle between two lineages of the Empire, the Angelus and the Laskaris Komnenos, who in the 17th century seek support in Western Europe. Both families flee from the Arab expansion of the Ottomans, and end up creating the myths of the kings of France (Angelus) and the Holy Roman Empire (Laskaris Komnenos). The first ones became the Anjou and the second ones the Habsburgs. All of them create several previous alliances, in the case of the Anjou they occupy Anglia, the germ of England (the NC has already documented and worked extensively). They would spread throughout Europe, competing for the control of France, Italy and Hispania, to create (artificially) the lineage of the Bourbons. This would be a contribution of this exercise, but the case of the Habsburgs, as descendants of the Komnenos, in this sense, would be the main "novelty" or "new actor" that is proposed here to incorporate. If they were, really, the legitimate imperial lineage, it makes sense for them to create the imperial project to transfer the Great Khan (or Prester John) to Rome, and to design the Holy Roman Empire. In the same way, it makes sense for them to approach the chronicles of both the people of Israel and the popes, the emperors of Rome, the emperors of Byzantium and the Mongol Horde. All are the same, all were "an empire", one of sol, and a single real chronicle.
