A.T.Fomenko , G.V.Nosovskiy

Chapter 6.


# The Russian sources identified the CORRECT dates of Yermak's campaign, specifically 1581-1584. The Spanish = Ottoman sources were MISTAKEN by approximately 60 years. They decided that allegedly Cortes'-Yermak's voyage took place earlier in 1519-1521.
# On the other hand the Romanov historians WRONGLY professed that the main events allegedly developed exclusively in Asiatic Siberia. Most likely it was a deliberate deception. In fact there was no war between Yermak and the Siberians. The main voyage of Yermak-Cortes developed in Central America. Here the Spanish = Ottoman chronicles are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. Yermak's troops could have set off to America from the shores of the Far East or from the Atlantic island of Cuba.
# The Romanov historians MISTAKENLY thought that Yermak allegedly died on an island in the middle of the large Siberian river Irtysh, and then was resurrected. In reality Yermak-Cortes was badly wounded on an island in the middle of the lake Lago de Texcoco in Mexico during the battle for the capital Meshico. Here the Spanish = Ottoman version is CORRECT, and the Romanov version is ERRONEOUS.
On the whole the Russian-Horde descriptions of Yermak's expedition despite all the distortions of the editors perfectly correspond with the Spanish = Ottoman chronicles telling us about the voyage of Cortes.
# Yermak-Cortes was Yuri, the brother of the czar-khan Ivan IV the Terrible. There are some vague stories that survive in the Romanov version of history. Herodotus also mentions him as the brother of the great king, calling him the 'ancient' Spartan king Dorieus.
# 'Ancient' Herodotus gives a brief description of the voyage of Yermak-Cortes and the conquest of Mexico as the expedition of 'ancient Dorieus' to conquer Sybaris-Siberia.
# There survive some sources, for example, a work by Isaac Massa, in which the development of the Asiatic Siberia is described as a peaceful colonization, except it was carried out not by Yermak, but by other people. It is all correct: Yermak was fighting in completely different territories. And Asiatic Siberia already belonged to Russia-Horde for a long time and there was no need to conquer it by force.
# Most likely, Yermak-Cortes didn't die in 1584, though he was badly wounded during the siege of Meshico, the capital of Mexico. The Spanish = Ottoman version quite rightfully claims that for some time the ataman-conquistador was alive, took part in the conquest of Central America, and then died in disgrace. The Russian chroniclers didn't know anything about the burial place of Yermak = Cortes. The Western chroniclers also flounder here. Most likely Yermak-Cortes was at first buried in Meshico, not far from the two Mexican volcanos. Maybe in one of the Mexican pyramids. Later his body was re-interred.
# When wiping out from the chronicles the very fact of the existence of the vast American domains owned by Russia and the Ottoman Empire up until the XVIII century (until the victory over 'Pugachev'), the historians fulfilled an order striving for geopolitical goals. Following the division in the XVIII century of the territories formerly belonging to Horde in America between the recently emerged USA and Romanov Russia, it was necessary to cast a veil over the true story of these 'Mongol' lands so that Russia could not demand the return of its overseas domains after it became more powerful. In the XVII-XVIII cc. the feeble Romanovs being at first the pro-Western minions, more or less toed the line of their masters. But later, in the XIX century, having partially forgotten the core of the matter, they altogether gave away to the USA the last remaining scraps of the former Hordian domains: vast Alaska, huge states of Oregon, California, etc. [6].
The rough scheme of the correspondence between the plots of the Spanish Conquista in America and the fragments of the Ottoman history of the conquest of Europe, looks like this:
# The Spanish-conquistadors are the reflection of the Ottomans-atamans, and in some cases – the Oprichniki of Russia-Horde of the second half of the XVI century.
# Sometimes the 'American Indians' are the reflections of the Western Europeans, and sometimes = the people of Russia-Horde during the epoch of the Oprichnina.
# In some narratives the conquest of the Indian lands in America by the Spanish is the reflection of the Ottoman conquest of Europe. I.e. the Promised land.
# Occasionally the description of the torments of the American Indians is the description of the torments suffered by the Western Europeans during the Ottoman conquest, and also the suffering of the population of Russia-Horde in the epoch of the Oprichnina.
# The Spanish conquistadors shocked the American Indians with firearms which were hitherto unknown to them. Similarly the Ottomans-Atamans were largely victorious in Europe due to their more powerful artillery. It is true that the Western Europeans of the XV-XVI cc. were already familiar with the firearms, but were not as skilful in using them.
# The atrocities of the conquistadors in America are in some cases the reflection of the quarantine 'cleansing' of Western Europe by the Ottomans-Atamans of the diseased as a result of the epidemics.



Let us recap. In the late XVI century in Europe there appears a centrifugal tendency, reinforced by the deep seated resentment towards the Russian-Horde authorities for the merciless 'medical' operation of the XV century. These feelings erupted into a major rebellion in the West. The Western governors increasingly exhibited independence. The epoch of the Reformation and Protestantism begins. The attempts of the central Imperial regime to crush the rebellion failed. In the Bible, in the Book of Esther, for example, these events are described as unsuccessful attempts of the Assyrian king Nebuchadnezzar, aka khan Ivan the 'Terrible', and his commander Holofernes – Malyuta Skuratov – to establish order in the provinces of the Persian-Babylonian Empire.
The Great Revolt begins in the Empire. The Western governors split from the centre. In the capital of Russia-Horde there emerges a religious movement, commonly known as the 'heresy of the Judaizers'. There forms a plot and the rebels-reformers manage to sow discord within the Horde Royal family. In the Russian chronicles it is the story of the heretic Elena Voloshanka allegedly of the XV century (aka the biblical Esther).
These events are described in the Biblical Book of Esther and Book of Judith as the victory of the Jews over the 'Persians', aka p-russians, the white Russians (Russii). In the early XVII century the Empire splits. The rebels' armies, amongst which there were particularly many natives of Western Europe, marched out to Russia. The Russian-Horde dynasty of the Empire is mercilessly butchered. The Romanovs, the pro-Western puppets, come to take power. A harsh occupational regime is established in Russia. Serfdom is introduced – effectively slavery – for the greater part of the population. Practically all of the aspects of Russian life conform to Western 'standards'. The epoch of the Horde Empire is declared by the Romanovs to be the epoch of the 'dark Mongol-Tatar yoke' in Russia. The Romanovs played the people of Russia-Horde against each other, driving a wedge between the 'Russians' – i.e. the Russian Orthodox – and the 'Tatars' – i.e. the Muslims. They foster nationalism in Russia. The Battle of Kulikovo is being 'repainted' from the religious battle between the Apostle and the Royal = Hereditary Christianity into an allegedly international fight between the 'enslaved Russians' and the 'invaders / Tatars'. The image of the enemy is being carefully fabricated.
The appearance of various works of art and literature dedicated to the subjects of Esther and Judith in the XVII-XVIII cc. is attributed to the 'joy of liberation' experienced by the Western Europeans. The meaning embedded into such 'works of art' was as follows. The enlightened West has finally defeated the barbaric East. Look: a beautiful European woman Judith with a steady hand decapitates the fierce Eastern monster of Horde. All of this was impressed onto their contemporaries by the rebellious governors of Horde. In order to supress any memories that were still fresh among the people, both the chronology of Scaliger and Petavious and the 'correct art' were called in for assistance.
But if many nations remembered their recent true history well, then how was it possible to force them to forget it? Apparently it was not easy at all. Moreover, it was incredibly difficult.
Various social strata of Western society and entire nations fought back tooth and claw. And then the sword was called in to support the word. The 'New Bible' and the 'new order' was introduced by fire and sword. Europe for a long time was shaken by the bloody wars, which are today evasively called religious. These are the wars of the times of the Reformation.
The terminology of the authors of the Book of Esther and the Book of Judith correctly reflects the realities of the XVI century. The Book of Judith uses the name of Israelites when speaking of the Western rebels who Nebuchadnezzar wishes to supress. Effectively, earlier, in the XIV-XV cc. Europe was conquered by the Fighters for God, i.e. the warriors, the Israelites, and became Khan = Land of Canaan. Their descendants rebelled in the XVI century. So it was the descendants of the sons of Israel, i.e. the warriors of Russia-Horde who had settled in Europe earlier - whom Ivan IV the Terrible – the head of Israel=Horde – wanted to punish.
The Book of Esther uses the term Jews. That is quite clear. Here the God praisers are referred to, the representatives of a different social class. They are not the warriors, but something alike to priests or Druids. They were located in the capital of the Horde Empire, amongst those close to the Czar's court.