A.T.Fomenko , G.V.Nosovskiy

Chapter 5.


The Ottoman Empire was founded by the Horde Cossacks who came from Russia-Horde (Biblical Israel) to conquer the Promised Land. Naturally there were many Slavs and Turks among the warriors. The Cossacks-Hordians had a strong effect not only on the Ataman (Ottoman) army's hand-picked contingent, but also made up the Empire's nobility from whom was elected the sultan and his court. It is not surprising that the sultan was proud to wear the Janissarian ketche (a hat), which in fact was a Hordian headdress [PRRK].
So it turns out that Janissary are one of the heirs of the Order (aka Horde) of the Crusaders, i.e. 'Bearers of Christ' of the XIII century = the participants of the Crusades on Czar-Grad. In memory of this Trojan war there were established the 'ancient' gladiator games, aka the mediaeval knight tournaments. And also the Olympic Games were created. [RE].
Right up to the XIX century the Janissary occupied a prominent social position in Ataman (Ottoman) and later on in Turkish society. However in 1826 they were massacred. In that epoch the efforts of Western Europe to tear Turkey away from Russia and to re-orientate the sultans towards the West were successful. The fierce Janissary obstructed this 'movement towards civilisation', kept alive the memory of the former unity with Russia. It became necessary to slaughter them on the sly. At the same time the documents connected to the Janissary Order, the customs, Janissary's banners, etc. were destroyed. The memory of the past was becoming wiped out.


# There are strong reasons to believe that in the suburbs of Yaroslavl there still survives an enormous sanded up crater of a large iron meteor which fell in 1421. Both, the geological data and the surviving traces of the 'iron names' surrounding this place indicate this: Zhelezny Borok (Iron Borok), Bolshoye Timerevo (Big Timerevo), Maloye Timerevo (Little Timerevo) ('Timer' means 'iron' in Tatar and Bashkirian) [PRRK].
# Among the archaeological excavations there were discovered some pieces with the clear traces of the meteoric iron.
# According to the archaeologists, here was a major manufacturing and trading centre of a European importance connected with the iron processing.
# Apparently, the well-known Arizonian and a lesser known Yaroslavl meteor craters are similar and the iron meteors which fell down there were of comparable sizes [PRRK], ch.5.
Please note the date: 1421. It turns out that Yaroslavl meteor fell in the first half of the XV century. Precisely during the epoch of the Ottoman conquest. Its beginning is described in the Bible as Moses' famous Exodus from Egypt with the Israelites [6v]. That is why the fall of the meteor could have been reflected in the Old Testament. Actually, there is such a narration. It is the handing of the stone tablets by God to Moses. Here are two themes closely intertwined with each other.
The first is the eruption of Vesuvius in Italy (i.e. the Biblical mountains Sinai = Horeb) accompanied by fire, smoke, thunder and falling of the volcanic bombs.
The second theme is the falling of a large meteor in Yaroslavl. Which also was accompanied by fire, smoke, thunder and falling of the meteoric debris. It is said in the Bible: 'On the morning of the third day there was thunder and lightning, with a thick cloud over the [Sinai] mountain, and a very loud trumpet blast. Everyone in the camp trembled.' (Exodus 19:16). It's no coincidence that Moses' stone tablets were broken.


The Indian, Syrian and Damascus Steels are considered to be the most ancient [988:00]. The historians refer here to the territories of the modern India and the Middle East. However, we have shown that earlier 'India' and 'Syria' were used as names for Russia-Horde of the XIII-XVII cc., i.e the metropoly of the Great Empire. Besides the old D-Mascus (Damascus) is a kingdom of Mosokh, Moscovia, and later – the city of Moscow. Here D is the article denoting respect, alike to 'the' [6v]. The ancient Damask steel was first produced in Russia-Horde. It corresponds well with our concepts of the fall of the iron meteor near Yaroslavl, in the very centre of Vladimir and Suzdal Russia.
In the epoch of the 'Mongol' conquest the Damask swords which were in the armament of the Cossack (= Israelite) army of Russia-Horde, circulated rather widely. They turned up in various provinces of the Empire. Later, after its split in the XVII century, the Damask steel weapons remained in some places in the arsenals of splinter states. Its primary origin was forgotten. The new generations of the local warriors began to celebrate allegedly 'their own' ancient Damask steel, having a vague memory of ancient 'Indian', 'Syrian and 'Damascus' Steels. Not understanding any longer that all of these names on the whole meant the same thing, and at some point indicated the metropoly of Russia-Horde. After the sly editors 'drew' on the Scaligerian maps the new 'ancient' Syria, India and Damascus (where we see them today) the obliteration of the true history became even more tangible. Fairytale theories flourished of the ancient Damask steel being produced in the places where they had never made it.
As time passed, the secret of Damask steel was, as we are told, lost. Since then many tried to unsuccessfully reproduce it. Our explanation of all these failed attempts to produce the Damask steel anew in present days is very simple. Despite the fact, that Yaroslavl meteor was large, sooner or later its debris was bound to become exhausted. Though it was used very carefully and only as an additive to steel, however the original bulk of the material was still limited. When the debris came to an end, the manufacturing of Damask steel also stopped. It remained the legendary weapon of the past.
At the same time, there was enough of the valuable meteor iron to organize in the XV century the manufacturing of a significant amount of the Damask steel for the army of Russia-Horde. This, partially, explains the military superiority of the Cossack armies of that time. The Damask steel Russian (aka 'Indian') blades cut through the shields, armour and swords of their enemies. The Damask steel weapons were enshrouded in legend. The secret of the Damask steel was lost simply due to the fact that during that time they didn't yet know how to do subtle chemical analysis. This is the reason why the composition of Yaroslavl meteor remained unknown to the Horde=Damascus craftsmen. Once the meteor debris finished – the valuable additives to steel also were exhausted. And without the knowledge of the meteor composition, without its 'formula' it was impossible to reproduce these additives artificially. If the ancient steelmakers themselves invented the physic-chemical 'formula' of Damask steel (without the use of the meteor) they would have hardly forgotten it.
When and why was the art of the Damask steel production forever lost? We named the main reason: the debris of the meteor became exhausted. The second reason had the evolutionary nature. In the epoch when there were no firearms Damask steel played, of course, an exceptionally important role. It cut through the ordinary armour and shields. The soldiers steel-clad in chain armour with a Damask steel sword in their hands had of course a clear advantage in the battle field. But with the invention of the muskets and cannons the significance of the Damask steel lessened and gradually faded away. For some time, mechanically, they could have continued to forge the Damask steel weapons out of the remains of the old Damask swords and chain armour. But the speedy development of the firearms resulted in the chain armour fading into the past. They became useless against the bullets and buck shot. It became unnecessary to cut shields and armour. The swords and the sabres, of course, remained amongst the weaponry, but the requirements towards the quality of the metal became weaker. A sword made of regular good steel was sufficient to cut through the uniform and normal clothes. And it was not at all compulsory for it to be made of the legendary and expensive Damask steel. So Damask steel could 'survive' till the XVII-XVIII cc., gradually turning into collector's and museum armament.


During the creation and consolidation of the Great Empire the Horde army expanded in different directions. The military workshops, where they fixed and made weapons moved alongside the armies. There were probably also such mobile forges where they made Damask steel. To do so Yaroslavl meteor debris was necessary, used as the additive to steel. A certain amount of it was carried along and used when required. Obviously, it was guarded rigorously. The pieces were transported in special boxes. Several Horde armies had them. All of which contributed to the stories of the famous Biblical Ark, in which the priests carried the relics of the 'stone tablets', handed to Moses by God Himself. Thus the broken tablets could have been the debris of Yaroslavl meteor [PRRK].
But is it possible that the debris of some other meteor fallen in a different place was venerated? We will answer like this. Just the fact of meteor falling, even a very spectacular one, is not enough on its own for a strong cult of worshiping its remnants to be established. Of course the meteor blast could have impressed accidental witnesses. But those people who didn't see the fall would hardly be filled with reverence based only on a few eye witness accounts. Should the meteor pieces however be needed for the important military and social ends, then the picture changes fundamentally. The Yaroslavl meteor was not just a 'stone from the sky'. The production of Damask steel originated as a result of it. That is why the attitude towards the remains became very reverent. They 'guarded' people, 'presented' them with military victories and even prosperity. This is exactly how the Bible describes the qualities of the pieces of the stone tablets in the Ark.
The Bible believes that on the stone tablets there were WRITTEN the laws given to the Israelites by God. Where did this legend come from? Here is a simple explanation. The Yaroslavl meteor was of iron origin. The essential distinction between an iron meteor and an aerolite is that when you smooth the surface of an iron meteor, on the polished flat cut, complex shapes RESEMBLING INSCRIPTIONS will bleed through. But nothing of the kind happens with the aerolite. The 'writings' which appear on the polished section of the ferriferous meteor are called Widmanstatten patterns. When examining such patterns, our ancestors could probably decide that these were the exact divine laws given to Moses. Later the commentators 'successfully read' the arabesque like meteor patterns and wrote the required text into the Bible. Thus canonizing the laws designed by people with the authority of the 'Celestial stone'.
As it was said earlier, Kaaba most likely is the Biblical Ark of the Old Testament in the end 'emerging' in Arabia. It is likely that the stone debris kept at some point in Kaaba, were the pieces of the Yaroslavl meteor. The thought of them being those very pieces you can see today in Kaaba is very seductive. The remains of the famous 'shield from heaven' described by Plutarch. But, most likely, it is not so. The fact is that according to witnesses, the remains seen today, which are embedded in the cement, belong, it seems, to a stone meteor. However, as far as we know, their chemical analysis was never carried out.
During their military campaigns the Hordians and Atamans (Ottomans) carried the debris of the Yaroslavl meteor with them in a chest containing holy relics or in several chests, see the Bible. These portables boxes and cloth tents were the original 'Kaabas', aka 'cubes'. The troops traversed great distances. The 'Kaabas' moved together alongside them. One of them at some point landed in the Arabian Peninsula where it was hauled up. When the conquests came to an end this very 'Kaaba-Cube' became the focus of worship of the conquerors' descendants and the locals. It is Kaaba in today's Mecca.
So, at first Kaaba, or a number of Kaabas, came out of Russia-Horde. But if there survive the literary accounts of this important event, then the original Hordian 'Kaaba' could have also been depicted on the old maps. Notably, exactly in Central Russia. Are there such maps?

Yes, there are. And several of them. Here, for example, the world map by Pierre Ducellier, allegedly 1550 [PRRK], ch.5. Straight in the centre of Russia there is an interesting image. A commentator writes, albeit slightly perplexedly: 'A cartographer places Alexander's Shrine (from the shores of La Manche it appears to the cartographer AS MECCA'S KAABA) far in the North [40:c], p.12.
So, in Central Russia, closer to the North, there used to be situated a structure, which according to the historians, bore a resemblance to the Kaaba in Mecca. It was called the Shrine of Alexander of Macedonia. According to our result, the biggest contribution into the multi-layered image of Alexander was made by Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent of the XVI century. I.e., partially, the Biblical military commander Joshua Ben Nun. Therefore we are talking about the XVI century here, about the epoch of the Ataman conquest. So it appears that in that time in Russia there was a holy shrine resembling the Kaaba in Mecca. On the map, upstream of the river Don, there was depicted a black structure of a cuboid shape. We would like to remind you, that Kaaba is a big cubic building covered with a black coverlet.
Thus, in the centre of Russia-Horde, there was a structure resembling the Kaaba-Cube. It is probable, that inside it were preserved Yaroslavl meteor fragments. At first there were a lot of stones there. Maybe several hundred tons worth. A large building was required, a warehouse. Or it could be even a number of such 'Arks'.
The 'Shrine of Alexander' was very well known in Russia during the "Classical Antiquity'. It is depicted on Ptolemy's maps, Fig.60 [PRRK], ch.5. The 'shrine' was clearly considered to be a large building with windows. The contemporary Kaaba is also a building.
According to Ptolemy beside the 'Shrine of Alexander', in Russia-Horde, there was also another Shrine nearby – Royal (Ceasar's Shrine), fig.60. It is possible, that here were also kept the holy remains of the iron meteor. As it was mentioned before, the Cossack armies carried with them the pieces of the meteor for the forging of Damask steel. That is why there were several 'Shrines', they were mobile.


Let us look at the Biblical Tabernacle, where the Ark of the Covenant was. The commentators assure us, that a tabernacle is something like a tent, where the box with the stone fragments of Moses' tablets stood. However, it is most likely that this is a much more recent perception of what a tabernacle was. Though the matter of the Tabernacle is not of major importance for us, however this topic shows how the real life events could have been fantastically interpreted in the chronicles.
The 'first' Arc of The Old Testament is a box where the fragments of the iron meteor were kept. These pieces of iron were used to produce Damask steel. But then a thought occurs that the TABERNACLE was simply a FORGE, A BLACKSMITHS' SHOP. Precious pieces of the meteoric iron would be kept exactly in the blacksmiths' shop, where they were needed by the black smiths and steelworkers. Here there was finished metal products (swords, cannons, muskets…), steel feeds, furnaces, anvils, hammers, clippers, water containers for thermo hardening, boxes with coal and charcoal for the forges, etc. Altogether a complex and secure Hordian manufacturing operation.
Curiously enough the Tabernacle is described in quite some detail in the Bible and in the Illuminated Compiled Chronicle. Let us see if it says anything about a blacksmiths. To begin with we open the Synodic translation of the Bible. We read and at the first glance we do not discover anything resembling a blacksmiths. There is a verbose, odd and obscure text in front of us. There many numbers in it. We open the earlier Illuminated Compiled Chronicle. Though the description of the tabernacle is also still hazy here, however there emerge some vivid details, which were either erased or distorted in the Synodic translation. They clarify the essence of the matter. It is likely to be a mediaeval alchemic fragment inserted into the Bible. The description is clearly intended for the initiated, 'for the benefit of the insiders'. It seems, before us we see the encrypted description of a blacksmiths and the process of Damask steel making. It is unlikely to be possible to fully restore the initial meaning of this instruction. But some striking similarities can still be detected [PRRK], ch.5.


It is generally thought, that Ayyub Sultan, the companion and the standard-bearer of Prophet Muhammad, fell at the walls of Constantinople allegedly in 669 during the rule of caliph Muawiyah (after Prophet Muhammad died) and was buried then at the site of his death. After that, as we are told, Ayyub's final resting place was engulfed in the murk of oblivion for many hundreds of years and even the place itself was completely forgotten. However after 800 years it was in some mysterious way remembered. In 1453 sultan Mehmed the Conqueror entered the vanquished Constantinople and immediately ordered the enclosure of the site of Ayyub Sultan's death and the commencement of the construction of his magnificent tomb. Ever since it has become Istanbul's Islamic sacred place.
The historians were compelled to justify how it was that Mehmed II suddenly learned of the burial place of Ayyub Sultan, when allegedly nearly 800 years had passed since his death. They say that a certain wise man Aksemsettin (the Seyh-ül Islam) dreamt of the burial place, woke up, found it and told Mehmed II. On the third day of conquering the city the Sultan gave a command to embark upon the development of the sumptuous shrine of Ayyub Sultan.
Our idea is simple. Ayyub Sultan was a contemporary and supporter of Mehmed the Conqueror. The tomb at the site of his death was erected IMMEDIATELY, and not after 800 years. Naturally it was possible only under the condition that Muhammad the Prophet and Mehmed II the Conqueror are the people of the same epoch. Or, as a matter of fact, the same person.
Presumably, it was that fatal night in 1453 beyond the city walls of Constantinople when the famous knight and the high priest, Caliph Ali = Biblical Aaron = Ayyub Sultan = the Russian epic hero Ilya Muromets = the Persian epic hero Rustam - instantaneously perished. Notably it is far from a complete list of names under which this legendary man went down in history [PRRK], ch.6.


Many works talking about the events of the XII-XVII cc., when erroneously dated, were shifted back into the past and declared to be descriptions of 'ancient events'.
For example, Ross and Hochart, the historians of the XIX century, discovered some clear traces pointing to the late mediaeval origin of the famous 'Annals' by Cornelius Tacitus. But Hochart and Ross were mistaken in the interpretation of their own conclusion. Unaware of the inaccuracy of the chronology of Scaliger-Petavius and considering Tacitus to be an 'ancient' historian, they appraised the facts discovered by them as the proof of the Annals' forgery . In truth, these facts point out the XV-XVI cc. as the time of creation of Tacitus's 'Annals' – the original text, which described the events of the XVI-XVII cc., but later tendentiously adapted by the editors of the XVI – XVII cc.
It becomes clear that in the XV-XVI cc. a well-known writer Poggio Bracciolini wrote various historical works about his time and about two-three previous generations. Later his phantom reflection under the name of 'Cornelius Tacitus' was dated as 'classical antiquity' and a number of writings by Poggio-Tacitus 'moved' to the distant past (with a shift of approximately 1400 years) [2v1], ch.1. In other words, 'Tacitus' is a pen-name of Poggio Bracciolini. He has 'doubled' on the pages of history. The original remained in the XV-XVI cc. and its phantom reflection found itself allegedly in the Ist century under the name of 'Tacitus'.
In the epoch of the split of the 'Mongol' Empire the historical chronicles about the Great Revolt were important for Western Europeans. The story of Esther of the XVI century (see the next chapter), i.e. the history of the state coup in the metropoly of the Empire, was akin to the rebellious reformists, who aspired to break away from Russia-Horde. That is why the works of Tacitus describing 'Ancient Rome, in particular about Ivan The Terrible = Nero and about the story of Esther, were embraced with special interest. Tacitus-Bracciolini was fairly well informed of the conflicts in the Imperial Court of Russia-Horde. His books about the events leading to the Reformation were of crucial interest [RE].
In [2v2], ch.4:4 we showed that Machiavelli most likely lived in the XVII century and not in the XVI century. It was moved backwards in time by a chronological shift of 100 years. The strong interest towards the works of Tacitus and Machiavelli in the rebellious epoch of the late XV - XVII century becomes natural and clear.


The researchers of Petrarch's work point out an oddity which is incomprehensible to them. Petrarch wrote many letters to his contemporaries. And in his Latin correspondence Petrarch strived - allegedly on purpose - TO OBSCURE THE REALITY OF THE MIDDLE AGES BY SUBSTITUTING IT WITH 'CLASSICAL ANTIQUTY'. When addressing his contemporaries, he used the ancient nicknames and names – Socrates, Laelius, Olympius, Simonides, etc. meaning that he wrote the way as if he 'lived in an ancient time'. We are told that he Latinised his letters on purpose, so they take assumed the form of antiquity. Even when talking of his own era, he 'disguised' it under the elegant drapery of the 'classically ancient'.
Possibly, from the pages of Petrarch's letters, even though 'carefully' edited in the XVI-XVII cc., arises the true epoch of the XIV-XV cc. This was in fact the real 'classical antiquity', forcefully banished by the historians into the remote past. So today it is necessary to seriously consider a theory purporting that Petrarch purposefully disguised the Middle Ages as 'the classical antiquity'.
Petrarch wrote "On Famous Men", a series of biographies. He, as it were, 'repeated' the work of the 'ancient' Plutarch's – 'Parallel Lives'. It is likely that PLUTARCH is simply another nickname of PETRARCH. As a result of the activities of recent chronologists Petrarch 'divaricated' on the pages of the chronicles. One of his reflections under the name of 'Plutarch' was moved into the deepest past. Approximately 1400 years back, as in the cases with Poggio Bracciolini and Alberti, see below.
Almost all the characters of PETRARCH are public figures of 'classical' republican Rome: Lucius Junius Brutus, Publius Horatius Cocles, Camillus, Titus Manlius Torquatus, Fabricius, Quintus Fabius Maximus, Marcus Porcius Cato Major, Scipio Aemilianus Africanus, etc. Most likely, Petrarch - aka Plutarch – simply wrote the biographies of the personalities of his epoch. Only later the editors of the XVI-XVII cc. reviewed these life descriptions and shifted them into the deep past.
Or there is Alberti (1414-1472), a major architect, the author of the fundamental architectural theory. He is reflected as a phantom 'in the remote past' (with a shift of approximately 1400 years) under the name of the 'classical' architect Marcus Vitruvius Pollio. He wrote a major work which apart from his theory of architecture also included information on mathematics, optics and mechanics.
Similarly, the mediaeval distinguished philosopher and author Georgius Gemistus of the XV century was 'split in two' under the quills of the Scaligerian chronologists and one of his phantom reflections, which 'moved into the past', is known to us today under the name of the famous 'classical philosopher Plato' [1v], [2v2], ch.1.