A.T.Fomenko , G.V.Nosovskiy

Chapter 5.


When describing the wars of the fighters for God = the Israelites, the Bible pays particular attention to the presence and quantity of the IRON CHARIOTS in the army. Therein worked an interesting and simple rule: those, who had more iron chariots would win the battle. The question is, if the iron chariots were some ordinary iron wagons or carts, why then would they lend such remarkable strength to the army? As we show in [6v1], ch.4, Biblical 'iron chariots' are the firearms, the cannons.

Furthermore, the Bible describes some 'hornets', i.e. something FLYING IN FRONT OF THE ARMY AND STINGING, participating in the battle and defeating the enemy. Notably, better than a sword or a bow. It seems like this is the description of the buck shot which was used to fire from the cannons. The analysis of the ancient Bibles shows, that the Old Testament describes the muskets or the musketoons which the fighters for God = the Israelites = the Cossacks were equipped with. 'Serpents' and 'stinging asps' (including the 'brazen serpent' made by Moses) which are often mentioned in the Bible, are also the firearms, muskets and cannons [6v1], ch.4.

The 'brazen serpent' of Moses is most likely a large cannon made by the Atamans (Ottomans) to repel the enemy, who also had the cannons=serpents at their disposal. As referred to in [533], v.2, p.131, the Biblical expression 'venomous snakes' meant literally 'fiery'. The later depictions of a 'Serpent of brass' made by Moses in the form of a high pole, with a snake wrapped around it, are the distorted interpretation of a gun barrel, on which sometimes the images of snakes and some other dangerous beasts were cast. In [KAZ], ch.1 we cite some images of the Russian cannons of the XVI-XVII cc. from the Nesvizh Castle. In one of them there is depicted a serpent-dragon. Hence this gave rise to images of 'venomous snakes', 'fiery aspens' and 'brazen serpent' so colorfully described in the Bible.

So, the Bible often mentions cannons and firearms in general. But the editors of the XVII-XVIII cc. blurred these references, and in today's version of the Holy Scriptures the 'firearm topic' is significantly obscured. However, some thing or the other happily slipped the editors' attention.

fig.53, fig.54. The Israelites are painted as mediaeval warriors in a mediaeval city. And they carry a cannon on a carriage with them! See [6v1], ch.4.


In the Book of Exodus there are vivid traces of Mediaeval Western-European geographical names: KNUN – Genoa, the river PRT – Pruth, the descendants of Lot - the Latini, the stream of ARNN – the river Arno, VASSAN - the city of Bassano in Italy, RAVVA – the Italian Ravenna, RAMAH – Rome, etc. The matter is that the Ottoman (Ataman) conquest, aka the biblical conquest of the fighters for God of the land of Canaan, rolled out all over Western Europe too. It covered the vast territories and could not be carried out solely by efforts of a single monolithic army. Various military divisions set off in different directions. In the Book of Joshua it is mentioned, as a rule, that the battles were fought not by all of the Israelites against their enemies, but just about several tribes-factions.

N.A.Morozov in [544], v.2, pointed out, that it is possible to read the unvowelized text of many excerpts of the Book of Exodus, taking into account the location of the Sinai mountain = Horeb = Zion in Italy. The Biblical descriptions of Sinai clearly indicate that it was an active volcano. Most likely it was meant to be the Italian Vesuvius [1v], ch.1:11. The Biblical geographical names have appeared in modern Palestine quite recently, after Palestine was incorrectly identified with the Biblical Promised Land. In the Middle Ages there were no such names there.


Moses was a czar-khan of the Ottomans (Atamans). In the Middle Ages they were often called the Saracens. This word is probably a variant of the word CZARIST. It turns out that there existed some Russian sources which directly called the Biblical Moses the czar of the SARACENS, i.e. the czar of the ATAMANS (OTTOMANS). This astonishing fact from the point of view of the Scaligarien history was brought across to us by the annotations to the mediaeval indexes of the 'erroneous books'.

Here we encounter the traces of the defunct mediaeval tradition which communicated the Biblical story in a dramatically different fashion to the way it is being painted for us by modern editions of the Bible. Many old books, which were denounced as false, were destroyed. So today we can judge their content only by such brief sketches.

The Biblical books in the XVI-XVII were changing, branching into various editions, while at the same time preserving the same name. For example, Exodus. But today only one version of it remains. Many think that THIS WAS ALWAYS THE ONE AND ONLY VERSION. It is not so. In the XVI-XVII cc. many biblical books were re-written, having changed the dating and the geography. At the same time the events in Russia-Horde were removed and shaded over. The old authentic scrolls were destroyed. Controversy arose around such practices. The repercussions of these controversies are still felt by us now. For instance: 'The heretics put together Exodus of Moses crookedly', - writes an author of the late XVI century [937], p.359. Meaning that: 'The Exodus of Moses was represented incorrectly by the Heretics'. And, as we can appreciate it now, his indignation is justified.

The following rulers are the duplicates, the reflections of the same reality of the XV-XVI cc. One should not think that the Russian and Ataman (Ottoman) sources are perfectly accurate. Given that the Russian history was heavily distorted, [4v1], ch.1. The same sort of thing was happening in Turkey in the XVII-XIX cc. and even the XX century. That is why the 'phantom epochs' may contain mistakes in the dating and confusion amongst the rulers.

1) The Biblical epoch of Moses – is the time of the Ottoman Conquest in the first half of the XV century.

The character of Moses comprises: the Golden Horde Khan of the first half of the XV century Olugh Mokhammad (of Kazan) or Ulug Mehmed (the Great Mahomet or Muhammad) the founder of Kazan (=Medina?); the Ataman (Ottoman) sultan Mehmed I (1402-1421); the Ataman (Ottoman) sultan Murad II (1421-1451); the Ataman (Ottoman) sultan Mohamed II the Conqueror(1451-1481).

This very epoch is the same 'ancient classical' epoch of the wars of the Macedonian King Phillip II the Conqueror. It is at the same time the epoch of Kham Olugh-Mehmet in Russian History, circa 1420-1450.

2) The Biblical epoch of Joshua Ben Nun, who succeeded Moses, is the time of the Ottoman conquest, beginning with seizure of Czar-Grad in 1453 by Mohamed II, and culminating in the peak of the golden age under Suleiman the Magnificent (1520-1566). Suleiman was known as AL-QANUNI [336], �.5, �.148-149. It means the GREAT KHAN, as QANUNI AND KHAN only slightly differ in pronunciation.

This epoch is also the epoch of Alexander the Great of Macedonia who continued the conquest of Phillip II. The figure of Alexander is multi-layered. He embodied both the events of the XV century (Olugh-Mohamed I, Mohamed II the Conqueror and also of the XVI century. Including events from the life description of Andronicus-Christ of the XII century.
In Russian history it is also the epoch of Suleiman the Magnificent (1520-1566). And partially it is the epoch of his contemporary Ivan IV 'Grozny' (Ivan the 'Terrible').

The following picture of the disposition of the military columns, = 'tribes of Israel' of Joshua Ben Nun, takes shape fig.55. Six Cossack camps were situated in Bulgaria, and six other were scattered along the cost of Turkey. The Bible (Numbers 2:17) says that among those 12 camps there should be one camp of the Levitical priests, the guardians of the Tabernacle of Testimony, not included in their number (Numbers 1:48 and further). That's exactly what we see! Czar-Grad (Yeros) = Jerusalem, the holy place is situated practically in the centre. The columns located in Bulgaria defend it from the direction of Europe, and the columns situated in Turkey cover the Mediterranean coast of Asia Minor [6v1], ch.5.

The famous siege and conquest of Biblical Jericho by Joshua's (Ben Nun's) army is the famous seizure of Czar-Grad by Sultan Mohamed II in 1453. The entire description of the siege of Jericho revolves around its walls. Effectively the mighty triple belt of Constantinople's walls was considered a miracle the art of fortification. The Bible says that Jericho's walls were destroyed by the besiegers in some unusual way. Purportedly, using a 'loud noise' produced by some jubilee trumpets' (Joshua Ben Nun 6:3). It turns out the Old Testament 'jubilee trumpets' are simply the cannons. And a 'loud sound' is simply the cannonade'. The walls were destroyed by the heavy siege cannons [6v1], ch.5.

The Ottoman conquest of the Promised Land by Joshua Ben Nun is also described in the European sources as the conquest by Apostle Jacob (Ya'aqov (Ya akov) = James (Hebrew origin meaning Jacob – Translator's note). It is considered that the apostle St.James is buried in the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela in Spain. The famous Way of St.James is the later version of this map which was compiled in 1648, has survived until today as a military map of the conquest routes by St.James = Joshua Ben Nun in the XV-XVI cc. [6v1], ch.5.

The Ottoman conquest was rolling on from the East to the West. Joshua Ben Nun's army marched out from Russia-Horde and The Ottoman Empire-Ottomania (Atamania). That is why on the map of 1648 there are no 'ways of pilgrimage' marked on the Eastern territories. The Horde military field maps were intended for the conquest of exactly Western Europe, Africa and generally the territories to the West and to the South of Russia-Horde. The randomness of the routes also becomes clear. The 'Mongol' troops moved according to the requirements of the colonization-war. But the general direction was to the West, in particular, towards Spain.

The conquest of the Promised Land by Joshua Ben Nun was not only the dispersal of the Christian faith, but also the military invasion. They were trying to convince not just by the word but also by the sword. And in the case of resistance – by the massive howitzer weapon, mortar-guns and cavalry encased in armour. In a sense the Scaligerian interpretation of the 'ways of pilgrimage' as the ways of 'James' conquests' is reasonable. The only thing which has to be adjusted is the very meaning of the events of the XV-XVI cc. itself. It concerns the Ottoman conquest by Joshua Ben Nun = St. James (Jacob) [6v1], ch.5.

Soon the entire world was conquered. The Cossack = Israelite army reached the Atlantic. But their progress didn't stop there. The Horde navy soon left the ports of the Western Europe, which set off further across the ocean to America in order to conquer the unknown lands 'the other side of the sea'.


In the XV century the second phase of the conquest began. The military navy of Russia-Horde = Israel and The Ottoman Empire-Ottomania(Atamania) = Judea crossed the Atlantic and disembarked in America. This event is known to us as the voyage of 'Christopher Columbus'. In the Bible all of this is described as the voyage of patriarch Noah crossing the 'mighty waters'. The other armies of Russia-Horde entered the American continent via the Bering Strait and colonized the Western coast of America and the North. Then they advanced to South America. In America the Horde and Ataman (Ottoman) colonizers have created cultures known to us today as the Indian civilisations of Maya, Aztec, Inca, Toltec and others (etc.) [6v2], ch.6.

In Spanish the discoverer of America was called Cristóbal Colón [797], p.603. It is not a name in a sense conventional today, but a nickname like Crusader Colón (Colonizer). The historians themselves recognise that the name Cristóbal originates from the word Christ, or Christian, or Crusader, and the word COLON meant: a colony, a colonizer, colonization. Today we do not know the actual name of this man. Only his nickname – Crusader Colonizer. I.e. a person under the banner of Christ, who discovered a new continent and started its colonization. It was as a Crusader that Columbus was depicted on some of the old prints [6v2], ch.6.

In the Middle Ages there prevailed some legends (which perfectly support our reconstruction) that America was discovered and populated by the TRIBES OF ISRAEL, who arrived there by sea. This is in the spirit of a biblical description: a patriarch Noah crosses some vast ocean and his descendants populate the New Land, the New World.


The Mormons is a religious movement of American origin. Besides the conventional Bible they revere equally or possibly to a greater extent the Book Of Mormon (The Mormon Bible).

The Mormons claim that their Bible is the authentic ancient document. Many don't believe that, as up until the XIX century it was out of sight of the Biblical Studies. When analysing the Mormon Bible [6v2], ch.6, we discovered that the Mormons are in the right here. This text could not have been invented in the XIX century. If it was true, then the historical records included in the book would have been obtained from the Scaligerian textbooks of that time. However, VARIOUS PASSAGES FROM THE MORMON BIBLE COMPLETELY DON'T COMPLY WITH THE SCALIGERIAN VERSION AND CORRESPOND WELL WITH THE NEW CHRONOLOGY.

The Book of Mormon is, most likely, one of the versions of the Bible, but it differs greatly from the European version. The main body of the Book of Mormon narrates of the events which are not reflected in the conventional Bible. The Mormon tradition claims that the Book of Mormon describes the events in connection with the American continent. It also tells a lot about the past of the Mormons prior to their relocation to America. These parts resonate with the conventional Bible. The chronology of the events described in the Book of Mormons which are recognised today, i.e. namely from the year 600 BC to the year 421 AD – relies entirely on the Scaligerian version. That is why it is incorrect. It turns out that this book tells us about the actual events of the XII-XVII cc. I.e. of the epoch which is also reflected in the conventional Bible.

The Book of Mormon describes the voyage of Nephi-Noah and his relatives in the Ark across the great waters, known to us from the European Book of Genesis. On the other hand the commentators of the Book of Mormon insist, moreover, in a plain language! - that this is a 'prophesy' of the 'foreseen' DISCOVERY OF AMERICA. Even in the Book of Mormon itself, in the subhead of The First Book of Nephi, ch.13, is clearly says: THE VISION OF… DISCOVERY (AND COLONIZING) OF AMERICA'. Indeed, it is difficult to disagree that here is the account of the first – or one among the first – voyages across the Atlantic. This was the voyage of Columbus at the end of the XV century.

Of course, the commentators of the Book of Mormon talk only about the PROPHECY of the discovery of America. Contrary to the clarity of the picture, they cannot say directly, that here is described the discovery of America in the XV century. Bound by the erroneous chronology, they shift the events into deep antiquity, allegedly 592-590 BC. See One Nephi, comments to chapters 16-18. This error has to be corrected and date it to the XV century. The shift of the dates upwards would comprise approximately 2100 years [6v2], ch.6.

When describing the voyage of Nephi-Noah (Columbus) the Book of Mormon refers to a compass, a globe, iron crossbows, firearms (described in a somewhat veiled way – cannons, muskets and other objects of the XV-XVI cc. epoch.

The Book of Mormon proclaims that the voyage of Nephi-Noah (Columbus) and Jared-Horde was the voyage of one of the Twelve Tribes of the children of Israel who left the land of Egypt or the land of Jerusalem. It is all correct. The Twelve Tribes of Israel are the armies of the hetmans (Cossack chieftains, attamans), who marched from Russia-Horde in different directions to conquer the Promised Land in the XIV-XV cc. KOLENO (BRANCH or LINE) meant KOLONNA (military COLUMN or military LINE), i.e. a military detachment (unit). Russia-Horde = Israel set off for the conquest of Europe and faraway America.

Is Columbus' voyage connected with the Exodus of the Twelve Tribes of Israel, notably from Spain? IT IS THOUGHT THAT THE VOYAGE OF COLUMBUS STARTED AT THE MOMENT OF THE EXODUS OF THE JEWS FROM SPAIN.

It is all correct. They referred not to the expulsion of Jews from Spain, but to the next stage in the advancement of the tribes = columns of Israel, i.e. the Russian-Horde (Hordian) and Ottoman (Ataman) armies. One of the Cossack detachments arrived to Spain. It paused there for some time as they were building a fleet. Maybe, for several years, as the Book of Mormons claims. And moved further to the West across the ocean. Such a major event in Spain of the XV century was interpreted by the recent historians as allegedly the 'expulsion of Jews from Spain'. The fact, that actually did take place, was given an entirely different meaning, fogging and obscuring the true meaning. The distortion was manufactured when creating the Scaligerian history.

Thus, the 'moors' or the 'arabs' were 'driven out' from Spain not at all by the indigenous population of the Iberian Peninsula. The Imperial army forced the people out further to the West. The lines-columns arrived to Spain under the order of the khan of the 'Mongol' Empire originally for the quarantine cleansing of the infected territories, and then, further down the line – to organise the relocation across the Ocean. The 'moors' or the 'arabs' who lived in Spain, were the descendants of the first great conquest of the XIV century. The new wave of the XV century was the second one.

Subsequently it turns out that the 'most ancient Babylonian and Sumerian documents call the Biblical Noah by the name of ZIUSUDRA (Zi-ud-sura or Xisuthros), i.e. Cristopher, and effectively describe him as Cristopher Coloumbus of the XV century [6v2], ch.6.

Presumably, in some of the regions of the 'Mongol' Empire, for example in the Middle East and Asia, they used to write on the clay tablets up until the XVII-XIII cc. Maybe there was very little paper and expensive parchment there. That is why the fragments of the Bible, which during that epoch was only just taking shape, were written down by the local scribes and priests onto the clay tablets. Later, when the writing paper was delivered to those regions, the clumsy tablets grew out of use and were soon forgotten. They were discovered in the ground 200-300 years later by the archaeologists of the XIX-XX cc. Brought up on the erroneous chronology, they declared their discovery to be the 'most ancient Sumerian' testimonies dating allegedly thousands of years BC.

Furthermore, we learnt that the 'most ancient' holy book Popol Vuh of the American Mayan people is another version of the Bible, which narrates about the events of the XIV-XVI cc.


Popol Vuh is a holy book of the American Indians Maya-K'iche. They were a powerful people inhabiting Central America. It is thought that the Mayan civilization blossomed in the XI century and was destroyed in the XV-XVI cc. during the invasion of the Europeans – the Spanish conquistadors. But this hypothesis of the historians is incorrect. It turns out that the epoch of Columbus is not only reflected in Popol Vuh, but the book itself begins with its description. Even Columbus' name is mentioned. Relocation from the Old World to the New World is one of the central themes of the book. All of this was taking place in the XIV-XVI cc. [6v2], ch.6.

The historians are convinced that the 'very ancient' Popol Vuh reflects only the local American history and 'by no means'; could have described the Biblical and Christian events in the Old World. As, they said, the regular contacts with Europe started only in the late XV century. Consequently, the historians reason, all the obvious parallels of the 'ancient' Popol Vuh with the 'ancient' Old Testament can be attributed to this. Purportedly, in the XVI century some scribes of the American book inserted into it Christian and Biblical motives, brought into America only in the XV-XVI cc. I.e., they say, they falsified the text [1348], p.18.

Any thought of Popol Vuh being written as a Christian book in the XV-XVI cc. from the very beginning cannot cross a modern historian's mind as it would contradict the Scaligerian chronology.

A continuously expressed statement in Popol Vuh claiming the community alliance of the settlers in America is absolutely correct. Russia-Horde, which created the Empire, expanded in various directions from the collective center. Our point of view differs from the traditional one in that, that the historians refer the words of the American Bible Popol Vuh exclusively to the history of Central America. We, on the other hand, claim that here is presented a grandiose view of the resettlement of the peoples of Russia-Horde throughout the world at that time. One of the final countries of resettlement was Central America. But it was not the only one [5v], [6v2].

Having arrived in America, the people of Maya-K'iche 'found many cities' [1348], p.193. As Popol Vuh informs us, soon the question of the New Kingdom's establishment and Benediction came up. It was required to send back to the East across the ocean the embassy of Maya-K'iche to the great Quetzalcoatl to obtain the authority to govern [1348], p.206-210. This section of Popol Vuh is extremely interesting.

As soon as the suspension of the Scaligerian chronology lifted, in the name of the Mexican god Quetzalcoatl we recognise Caesar-Catholic. The sounds L and R could cross over: Quetzal–Coatl = Caesar-Coatl = Caesar-Catholic. This immediately carries us over to Europe, where the Russian Christian church is still called the Orthodox CAPHOLIC, and in some countries the CATHOLIC faith is wide-spread.

Thus the embassy of Maya-K'iche from a faraway America, having crossed the ocean, appeared in front of the great Capholic (Catholic) King and received the powers and authority to rule over the territories discovered in America. This event reflected in the European sources as the return to Europe of the confederates of Columbus to receive from the king the authority to rule the discovered American lands. It is clear that such authority could have been given only by the emperor of the 'Mongol' Empire. Furthermore, it is possible, that Quetzal–Coatl in the Indian texts is the Emperor Charles V. Whom the famous conquistador admiral Cortes did in fact report about the conquest of America [6v2], ch.6. In which case, Quetzal–Coatl is known to us also as the Assyrian- Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar. Aka khan Ivan Vasilyevich IV Grozny (The Terrible).

The entire story with the respectful embassy of Maya-K'iche from America to the Eastern Czar-Capholic shows, that in the epoch of the XV-XVI cc. the hierarchical power structure in the Great Empire was clear. To come into the ownership rights of the discovered territories was possible only via the magnanimity of the Khan of Russia-Horde. He listened graciously and gave his permission. The members of the embassy breathed a sigh of relief. In Central America the civilizations of Maya and Toltec flourished.

There are strongly pronounced Evangelical storylines present in Popol Vuh. In particular, the appearance of the Star of Bethlehem in the sky, as on omen of the arrival of Christ and the Christophany (appearance of Christ) itself.

It would be more correct to call the Indian civilisations of Central America – Maya, Aztec, etc. – the HORDE-Indian. They appeared as a result of the Hordian-Ottoman (Ataman) conquest of America in the XIV-XV cc.


Today a great number of impressive testimonies of the close ties between 'ancient' Maya and 'ancient' cultures of Europe and Asia have been amassed. [6v2], ch.6. However the historians and archeologists shift these ties back into the 'distant past'. The result they arrive at is, that long before the voyage of Columbus there was continuous relations between America and Eurasia, the level and intensity of which was so high, that corresponded to the state of the civilization only starting with the XV-XVI cc. For the historians there is an insuperable chronological contradiction at the bottom of it. That is why on one hand they are compelled to acknowledge the 'ancient', close and regular relations between America and Europe. And on the other hand, they constantly make stipulations that purportedly the connections were occasional and rare. And in general, they say, don't pay any attention to them. The main thing is, don't ask us any questions about the chronology.

These authors, being under the influence of the erroneous chronology, were compelled to concoct some artificial theories to explain the close 'ancient' connections between America and Eurasia. It is clear now, that there is no need in them. It is sufficient to say plain and clear: Yes, in fact the regular communications did exist. However, it was not at all in the 'deepest past', but only starting with the XIV-XV cc. As a result of the colonisation of America by Russia and The Ottoman Empire. After that all the baffling questions accrued by the commentators become irrelevant per se.