A.T.Fomenko , G.V.Nosovskiy

Chapter 7.



The famous seven wonders of the world are often recalled. We are persuaded that they, with the exception of the Egyptian
pyramids, were destroyed in the Middle Ages. 'The seven wonders' are [572], p.135:

1) The PYRAMIDS OF Egypt: survive. 2) Hanging Gardens of Semiramida, i.e. Hanging Gardens of Babylon: destroyed. 3) Temple of Artemis at Ephesus: destroyed. 4) Statue of Zeus at Olympia: destroyed. 5) Mausoleum at Halicarnassus: destroyed.6) Colossus of Rhodes: destroyed. 7) Colossus of Rhodes in Pharos: destroyed.

What wonders of the world did the 'ancient classical' authors speak of? They wrote, as we understand it, in the XVI-XVII cc. We managed to identify the 'seven wonders' with the constructions of the Middle Ages. For example, the 'Hanging Gardens of Semiramida, created in Moscow in the XVI century, already existed in the XVII-XVIII cc [6v2], ch.2:4.14. It appears that the rest of the 'wonders of the world' either exist until today, or were destroyed quite recently. So.



In regards to the Egyptian pyramids we do not have any differences with the Scaligerian version. Except for the dating, of course. These gigantic constructions rightfully head the list of the 'Seven Wonders of the Ancient World'.


We spoke about the 'gardens of Semiramida', or about the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, in [6v2], ch.10:4.14. They are – THE FAMOUS ROYAL GARDENS ARRANGED ON THE ROOF OF THE KREMLIN PALACE IN MOSCOW (XVI-XVIII cc.). The historians and archaeologists cannot present us today with any remnants of the 'hanging gardens of Semiramida' in Asia, where Biblical Babylon was erroneously placed. They were searched for long and hard. But in vain. Having come to a standstill they declared several semi-covered earth trenches near a small town in modern Iraq to be the remains of the 'gardens of Semiramida [572], p.41. By the way, what do the hanging gardens have to do with it? Given that the gardens of Semiramida were 'hanging in the air', but did not grow in the ground.


It is considered that this enormous temple, whose glory echoed throughout the ancient world, was built in Ephesus, a city in Asia Minor. But this hypothesis is erroneous. It's no coincidence that the historians and archaeologists cannot point out any distinguishable traces of the famous temple close to a place in the south of Turkey, which was precariously declared in the XIX century to be 'the great ancient Ephesus' -572], p.58. In the end, having found no remnants of the temple of Artemis projected above the surface of the ground the archaeologists began excavating.

Frankly, in seven years they haven't found much. They write this: 'THE REMAINS OF THE BEST OF THE EPHESUS BUILDINGS – ARTEMISIONA – APPEARED TO BE INSIGNIFICANTLY SMALL … The statue of the goddess did not survive either, its appearance is being reconstructed based on the image on a coin and using a copy found in 1956. The archaeologists and architects recreated only the plan of the famous temple with any certainty' [572], p.59.

The idea occurs to look for the famous temple of Artemis in a different place. Could it still exist? As well as the great trading city of Ephesus itself. It is likely that THE TEMPLE OF ARTEMIS AT EPHESUS IS THE FAMOUS GIGANTIC TEMPLE OF HAGIA SOPHIA IN ISTANBUL. This magnificent construction, as we have explained above, was the first experiment in massive temple building. The huge Sophia built, most likely in the XV-XVI cc. made a strong impression on contemporaries [6v]. Even today the magnificence of the temple is striking. It is possible that in the name EPHESUS there might be the sound of the name SOPHIA if read backwards: EPHESUS – SOPHIA.

There is one other possibility to determine the place of the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus, which was also called the Temple of DIANA. It is cape Fiolent near Sevastopol. Legends circulated about the Temple of Diana in Crimea. In the beginning of the XIX century A.S.Pushkin was searching for its traces and found them near Saint George Monastery in Cape Fiolent. As we have found out, the genuine Grotto of the Nativity is located there [XP]. In 1152 Christ was born there. Pushkin, naturally, did not know anything about it. But it was near Saint George Monastery where he found the remains of a large 'pagan' temple and suggested that it was the Temple of Diana. In light of our discovery, the Pushkin hypothesis is even more plausible. It is precisely here, in the birth place of Christ where the majestic temple of the Blessed Virgin Mary should have stood. It is highly unlikely that the Czar-gods of the Great Empire, Christ's relatives, wouldn't have erected an appropriate temple to Diana-Mother of God near the Grotto of the Nativity. To remind you, Diana was one of the names of the Mother of God in the times of the 'Royal' Christianity.

Today there are no remains of the Temple of Diana found near the Saint George Monastery. There are only the legends left that here once upon a time there used to be the Temple of Diana and also her grotto. Notably Diana's Grotto really exists. It is the Grotto of the Nativity, where she gave birth to Christ. Today there is the Church of the Nativity situated in the grotto. It's altar, according to the legend, was set by Apostle Andrew the First-called (St. Andrew the Apostle). I.e. by Christ himself. [TsRS].


What is Olympus and what kind of gods dwelled there, we discuss in [4v2], ch.2:22. 'The Olympic gods' are the Czars of the 'Mongol' Empire = Biblical Assyria = Israel. In the distant provinces people made up legends about their distant and mysterious rulers. Thus emerged the 'Ancient' Greek myths about the Olympian gods.

The 'Ancient' Greek Olympia is Velikii Novgorod = Yaroslavl of the XIV-XVI cc. Therefore the 'statue of Zeus' in Olympia is some holy object situated in Yaroslavl or nearby. The legends about this 'statue' most likely originated from the stories of the Western merchants and travellers, who visited the trade-fairs of Velikii Novgorod.

It is thought, that the 'main relic of Olympia was the legendary Temple of Zeus with the statue of the supreme god, created by one of the most genius Greek sculptors – Phidias (i.e. a certain Feodor, Fedya – Author)' [572], p.62. We would like to draw your attention to the fact, that the 'statue' was situated inside the temple. This simplifies the answer to the puzzle. The interior decoration of the Russian churches indeed contained an object which was known only in Russia and made the Russian cathedrals different from all the other ones. It is the iconostasis. In a large cathedral it is a huge construction. It rises in height to the cathedral vaults. Iconostasis separates the altar – approximately one third of cathedral's length – from the rest of a cathedral. Some of the Russian iconostases were exuberant. The iconostasis surface, free of the icons, was covered with golden engraving – leaf-gold on wood. In the main Russian cathedrals the lower rows of the icons had the golden icon plating with the precious stones, wrought silver, filigree work, gold seeded into enamel.

In the other countries the chancel screens were either not made at all, or, like in Greece, for example, it was the iconostasis which served as a chancel screen, but a rather low rising wall or a simple SCREEN (ZAVESA in Russian). There are Holy doors made in an iconostasis furnished with a SCREEN (ZAVESA). Hence the entire iconostasis could have been perceived as a STANDING SCREEN (ZAVESA) OR STATUE-ZAVESA. Which could have easily in the telling the legends turned into the STATUE OF ZEVESA, i.e. STATUE OF ZEUS.

The historians put forward a hypothesis, that the 'Ancient Olympia was located in Greece'. However, 'there were no remnants of the legendary statue of Zeus discovered among the numerous architectural and sculptural pieces in Olympia. And nor indeed could they have been found, as it is well-known that the statue of Zeus was completely destroyed in the fire' [572], p.64.

But if the statue was completely destroyed in the fire, then, most likely, it was wooden. It is all correct. The iconostases were made of wood and adorned with gold over the wooden carving. During the fire the iconostasis could have been completely incinerated.


It is thought that this enormous temple-mausoleum was built in the city of Halicarnassus on the coast of Asia Minor as the family burial chamber for the King Mausolus and his wife Artemisia. 'Mausolus accumulated great wealth. This overabundance allowed him to build a tomb-temple for himself, it was so magnificent that it survived in the people's memory until the present day as THE UNSURPASSED EXAMPLE OF FUNERARY ARCHITECTURE. Its reputation was so great, that the Ancient Romans called all the grand monumental constructions – mausoleums… As envisioned by the architects the burial tomb of the King Mausolus WAS THE MOST LUXURIANT AND REMARKABLE STRUCTURE IN HALICARNASSUS HAD TO BE SITUATED IN THE CENTRE OF THE CITY AND BE ITS MAIN ADORNMENT' [572], P.78-79.

It is thought that the Mausoleum at Halicarnassus was destroyed. And the 'most wealthy and beautiful city' itself indeed turned into wasteland [572], p.77. Later 'in place of the ancient Halicarnassus and the mediaeval fortress-castle of St. Peter – there emerged the Turkish fortress of Bodrum' [572], p.85.

So, in the XVIII century the historians suggested that 'ancient Halicarnassus' was located somewhere in Asia Minor. They began their search. There are a lot of 'ancient classical' ruins. They declared one of such places, namely Turkish Bodrum to be 'the ruins of ancient Halicarnassus'. They began to 'dig up proof'. However without much luck.

Could it be that the Mausoleum at Halicarnassus is the gigantic temple-reliquary of the Magi, Cologne Cathedral in the German city of Cologne [6v1], ch.3.? It was built as a mausoleum for Balthazar, Melchior and Caspar. The first two were the Magi-Kings and Caspar was inferior in rank so to speak. Could it be that Balthazar and Melchior were Mausolus and Artemisia of the 'ancient classical' writers? Incidentally the name HALICARNASSUS or HALICARNASSUS (as R and L converted into each other) is close to HALI-COLOGNE. It could have meant HOLY COLOGNE = COLONY or LIGHT COLOGNE = COLONY, as in German 'Heilig' means Holy, and 'Hell'- light, clear, bright. Alternatively HALI-COLOGNE meant GALLIC COLOGNE, or GALLIC COLONY.

It is also quite possible, that the mausoleum in Hali-CARNASSUS is a colossal Ancient Egyptian temple at KARNAK [6v3], ch.1. The temple comprises three parts, the middle of which occupies an area of approximately 30 hectares! It is possibly the largest temple in the world. According to our findings, the Temple at Karnak was the MAIN FUNERARY TEMPLE OF THE GREAT EMPIRE [6v3]. That is why it fully deserved to be called a wonder of the world. The name HALICARNASSUS or HALI-CARNASSUS itself might mean 'Sunny Karnak'. To clarify, HALI = HELIOS is the name of the God of Sun. The name of CARNASSUS can convert into KARNAK on account of the ambiguity in pronunciation of the letter 'C', which could be pronounced as [S], [K] or [Ts].


According to the descriptions of the 'ancients' the Colossus of Rhodes is a gigantic structure cast in bronze. The word COLOSSAL, i.e. very big, originated from the word COLOSSUS.

The Colossus was made like this. At first a large mould of clay was prepared in an EARTHEN PIT. 'Creating cast bronze statues was a very labour intensive process requiring great mastery and technical skills. At first the sculptor moulded in clay… an exact copy of his bronze statue. The clay figure was a kind of nucleus, the basis of which was covered by a layer of wax, the thickness of which the sculptor wished his bronze to be… When the wax surface was ready it was again covered over with clay in such a way that the upper layer closely adhered to the wax and matched the inner nucleus exactly … After which the mould would be heated up, causing the wax to flow out through the outlets which were left open… Bronze flowed inside the clay filling the space freed by the wax and evenly enveloping the clay nucleus… It took 500 talents of bronze and 300 talents of iron, i.e. approximately 13 tonnes of bronze and 7,8 tonnes of iron to make the Colossus' [572], p.94-95, 101.

Our thought is simple. 'The Colossus of Rhodes' is RADNY (RADA) BELL, i.e. VECHE BELL. The word RADA = assembly is the same as VECHE = assembly. The 'ancient classics' turned the word Rada in to Rhodes. All the details of casting the Colossus perfectly correspond with bell casting technology. And indeed the word 'COLOSSUS' itself is probably a slightly distorted Russian word KOLOKOL (OR COLOCOL) (meaning BELL in Russian – Translator's note). As the Latin C was pronounced both as K and as Ts, C.

The fact, that an enormous veche bell (watch bell, radny bell) Russian bell amazed the foreigners, is understandable. It was in Russia, in the metropoly of the Empire where the cast the largest bells in the world. It is clear why 'ancient' Philo of Byzantium, who probably wrote his works in the XVI-XVII cc., pays main attention to the installation of a bronze giant. It is very difficult to remove a large bell from a pit and raise it high. For example, they failed to fit the gigantic Czar-bell on display in the Moscow Kremlin, though the casting itself was successful. But the other huge bells were successfully lifted and smoothly installed.


The seventh wonder of the world is a lighthouse on the island of Pharos, allegedly not far from Alexandria in Egypt. It is thought that it was built under the Ptolemaic Kings and was later destroyed. 'The lighthouse was simultaneously a fortress, where a large military garrison was located. An enormous cistern with drinking water was housed in the underground part of the tower in the event of a siege. The lighthouse was also an observation point, as the ingenious system of metallic mirrors allowed to keep the ocean space under surveillance from the tower's apex and to detect enemy ships long before they appeared in close proximity to the city. The octagonal tower was adorned with the bronze statues (bells? – Author)… Allegedly there also was a statue which pointed with its hand or arm towards the sea in the event of the emerging hostile fleet and produced a warning signal when the enemy was approaching the harbour (a bronze bell or a cannon? – Author) … This incredible structure stood until the XIV century… This monument excited the admiration of the Arabic writers, who noted the beauty and grandeur of the ruins of this grandiose construction' [572], p.111-112, 118.

As we have already said earlier, the famous 'ancient classical' Pharos (Etrusscan) Lighthouse is the well-known Ivan The Great Bell Tower in Moscow [RI], ch.7. So this wonder of the world indeed exists in present day. The Moscow 'Pillar of Ivan the Great' was described by the 'ancient classics' as well as the 'Ancient' Roman Military Column and as the famous Tower of Babel.


The remains of the vast underground city called 'underground Moscow' still exist. Throughout several centuries this construction has been surrounded by legends. Numerous underground corridors, tunnels, ample chambers, storage facilities, wells, staircases, connecting passages, hiding places, caved chambers, walled-up doors, flooded passages… Many of them were lined with white stone. It is thought that somewhere about here there is hidden the famous library of Ivan the Terrible and that it is possible to travel long distances along the underground tunnels below Moscow. That having entered under the ground in the city centre, it is possible to exit it far outside of Moscow. There exists a specialised occupation – Moscow diggers. They have been exploring the underground city for many years.

TODAY THE OLD PLANS AND CHARTS OF UNDERGROUND MOSCOW ARE MISSING. More importantly the Romanovs didn't have them either. It appears that to begin with the first Romanovs HAD A VERY VAGUE IDEA ABOUT THE MASSIVE SCALE OF THE UNDERGROUND CITY [851:1]. Only later the exploration and speculative excavations were begun in hope to stumble across either the treasures buried there or the royal archives, or the library of Ivan the terrible. The history of underground Moscow is described in the book by I.Y.Stelletsky [815:1].

According to our results, the Russian Czar-Khans of the XIV-XVI cc. were the Egyptian pharaohs of the Bible. Ivan the Terrible's capital in Alexandrovskaya Sloboda was presumably called Alexandria of Egypt. That is why the information about the famous 'ancient classical' (Alexandriiskaya) library of Alexandria could have been connected with it. Namely about the widely known library of Ivan the Terrible, which probably for some period of time was kept in Aleandrovskaya Sloboda [6v]. In which case the destruction of the 'ancient classical' library of Alexandria in the fire could be reflecting the true event of the destruction of Alexandrovskaya Sloboda in the Romanov epoch of the XVII century. Most likely Ivan the Terrible's library was destroyed, burnt down during the Romanov rule.

Moscow's construction as the new capital of Russia-Horde began only in the XVI century, under Ivan the 'Terrible'. Prior to that a small settlement was located there, which emerged in the place of the Battle of Kulikovo [4v1], ch.6. The battle site was considered to be holy. Here, near the mass graves of the warriors, monasteries and churches were probably initially built to commemorate the battle. The people would come here to worship. The emerged settlement didn't develop that much. There was no capital here for a long time. Over time various cities acted as such.

The Imperial capital was moved here either from Yaroslavl (Novgorod, Biblical Nineveh) or from Suzdal (Biblical Susa or Shushan) in the middle of the XVI century due to the deep split within the ruling class of the Empire [6v1], ch.6-7. The location choice was not accidental. As the place of the Battle of Kulikovo it was considered to be holy. Here, 'over the spilt blood', on the Moscow river bank, they decided to erect a new mighty capital of the Third Rome = Israel.

Most likely they began with using the open-mining or cut and cover method, they dug out 'deep cut and cover' tunnels, arcades, service areas, chambers, wells, etc. The construction was grandiose. When the huge bulk of the soil was removed, they began to build floors. They stoned the walls of the construction pits – the future premises - with white stone. Above the stone floor - ceilings were erected. Above them the next underground storey with rooms lodgings was constructed. And so on. The underground ant-hill was growing. Its 'roof' gradually rose up until it reached ground level.

In the first place the builders pursued defensive goals. It was possible to hide in the underground city during a war or a siege. As the enemies did not know the exits from the underground passages, the appearance of the Hordians 'from beneath the earth' was completely unexpected. The system of the underground pathways was most likely top secret. The architects-creators disappeared 'into nowhere'. So they didn't breathe a word of this. The maps-plans of the underground city were a state secret. During the seizure of power by the pro-Western-Romanovs the plans were either lost during the Times of Troubles, or the Hordians destroyed them in order to leave the enemy with no advantage. In the XVII century the underground Moscow was engulfed in the gloom of oblivion. Having come into power the first Romanovs had a vague idea about underground Moscow. A chance discovery of a part of the Horde archives there was a complete revelation to them.

Having finished with the underground labyrinth the builders started the construction of the above ground 'visible' Moscow. In the centre there was erected the stone Kremlin surrounded by a mighty triple band of walls (today only one row survives). Some distance from it, surrounding the Kremlin, was the second row of strong fortifications of Kitay-gorod. The third row is known as Bely Gorod (White Town) (there is Bulvarnoye Koltso (Boulevard Ring) in its place). Then the fortifications of Zemlyanoy Gorod ("earthworks town") were created, which encompassed all the previous ones. Nothing survived from the walls of Zemlyanoy Gorod; today there is Sadovoye coltso (Garden Ring) in its place [6v3], ch.3.

Today over ground Moscow has changed a lot in comparison with the way it looked in the XVI-XVIII cc. The system of the ring defensive constructions was entirely razed. Only their names and the old plans are left.

Nothing of the kind has been done before. The capital of the Great Empire which encompassed Eurasia, Africa and America was being created. The capital which was described in the Bible as the New Jerusalem, which was restored after the destruction of the first Gospel Jerusalem [6v2], ch.2.


The intricate underground construction of Moscow clearly was perceived by contemporaries as a miraculous and mysterious Labyrinth, having entered which it was impossible to leave. It was dangerous to travel along the underground passages without some kind of map. The legends about this constructions spread all over the world at that time. It was underground Moscow which was described by the 'ancient' authors as the 'Egyptian Labyrinth' [6v3], ch.3. We will remind you, that Biblical Egypt is Russia-Horde of the XIV-XVI cc [6v1], ch.4.

'Ancient' Herodotus considered the Labyrinth as the most grandiose construction in Egypt, surpassing even the pyramids. As we are starting to understand, he was right. Herodotus describes underground and above ground Moscow of the XVI century. Its scale exceeds everything which was erected in the Empire before. [6v3], ch.3.

Later they started to construct their own 'small labyrinths' in some remote regions of the 'Mongol' Empire imitating the metropoly. The Hordian governors could have demanded from their builders the creation of something similar to the Main Labyrinth of the Empire. In [6v3], ch.3 we have talked about one such imitation in African Egypt. It is possible, that in the XVII-XVIII cc. they indeed constructed something 'resembling the Main Labyrinth'. But not a very strong resemblance.

Another imitation was constructed on the island of Crete. Today it is thought, that the ancient palace in the town of Knossos was built 'in the likeness of the Labyrinth'. Notably the Greeks called it specifically the 'Labyrinth'. The historians date its construction as the deepest antiquity – the XXI century BC. There is nothing resembling the vast unground constructions of Moscow whatsoever. Indeed there was less money in the province of the Empire than in the metropoly. And anyway it's not befitting to construct in the periphery anything more impressive than in the capital. The Khan could have been very surprised by such pompous provincial pride. So the 'Mongol' governors were cautious.

There were also some other imitations-labyrinths in the provinces of the 'Mongol' Empire. For example, the Egyptian Labyrinth (near Faiyum in North Egypt), Labyrinth of Samos, Italic Labyrinth (cuniculi) in a town of Clusium (modern Chiusi). Strabo also mentions some other labyrinths: 'Close to Nauplia there were caverns with the LABYRINTHS built in them, which were called Cyclopia' [819], viii: 6:2, p.351.

They were all built as pale imitations which couldn't hold any comparison with the capital's Main Labyrinth.


This 'composite' topic is concise and is of a generally symbolic character. Therefore we will give just a hypothesis.

The Biblical legend about the construction of the Tower of Babel is known to everyone. It is dated by the historians as deepest antiquity. In the books [2v1], ch.5 and [6v2], ch.1:10, ch.3:5 we pointed out that the mediaeval events are partial; reflected in this legend. In the Book of Genesis it intertwined into one 'knot'.

Firstly here is reflected the Trojan War of the XII century.

Secondly, here it is reminiscent of the 'Mongol' conquest of the world in the XIV century and the second Ottoman conquest of the Promised Land in the XV century.

Thirdly, these are the events of the Reformation of the XVI-XVII cc.,the Times of Troubles in Russia and the split of the 'Mongol' Empire.

In the Scaligerian history of the XVIII-XIX cc. the Biblical Babylon (Babel) was 'lost'. They write the following: 'In the beginning of the X century (allegedly – Author) to the Arabic geographer … Babylon was known JUST AS A SMALL SETTLEMENT WHICH EMERGED IN PLACE OF THE ONCE MAGNIFICENT CAPITAL. For the scholars Babylon became merely a name, some kind of symbol, the location of which they, apparently, had the vaguest idea about [391:1], p.29.

In the New Chronology, having identified the Biblical 'Tower of Babel' with the Heops Pyramid in Egypt and Moscow-Labyrinth, we present the largest constructions of the Middle Ages which exist today. Of course, they are partially damaged.


Apparently the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar, under which the prophet Daniel is acting, is the Czar-Khan Ivan IV the Terrible. Thus the Book of Daniel gives us an account of the turbulent events of the XVI century in Russia-Horde, the metropoly of the Empire. The famous sun eclipse described in the Book of Daniel which rang the death knell for Belshazzar (aka Balthazar)¸ the king of Babylon, is a comet appearing before Ivan the Terrible's death in 1584.

It appears that all the paintings, frescos, miniature pictures on the subject of the Book of Daniel were created not earlier than the second half of the XVI century. Here, for example, 'Hartmann Shedel's 'World Chronicle' allegedly of 1493 [1396:1]. In it we see three Jewish youths burning in the furnaces and the prophet Daniel [1396:1], list LV, on the reverse side, meaning that the 'Chronicle' was not written until the XVI century.

The famous writing on the wall (cited in the Book of Daniel): 'Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin', ringing the death knell for Belshazzar, is probably a distorted Slavonic expression 'Znameniye Gorysheye P-Rusinam' The main word here is ZNAMENIYE (meaning sign of things to come, portent in Russian)(Mene, Mene). The letters 'Z' and 'M' differ only in the line placement : ZNA-MENIYE = Mene-Mene. It is specified that the sign is burning (fakel – meaning 'torch' in Russian) = Tekel) and it was given to P-rusinam (Upharsin). The portent-comet was 'burning' and appeared to the Russians. There survive some depictions where the sign is reproduced in short form : 'Mene, Mene'. For example a German picture allegedly of the beginning of the XVI century [6v3], ch.4.

It appears, that the German painter of the XVI century depicting a Slavonic word ZNAMENIYE as slightly distorted MENE, MENE, knew Slavonic. Therefore Slavonic language was also understood by the spectators, the connoisseurs of his art. Could it be that the majority of the wider public spoke Slavonic? From the point of view of Scaligerian history it is strange. But according to the new chronology it is only natural. In Western Europe of the XIV-XVI cc. Slavonic language was the state Imperial language.

Next Belshazzar ordered the vessels of gold that were taken from the Temple by Nebuchadnezzar in Jerusalem to be brought to the banquet (for a thousand of his lords so that everyone can drink wine from them). The order was carried out and the Holy relics were set forth for all to see. At that point God was enraged and punished Belshazzar with death. So, the Jerusalem's treasures of Nebuchadnezzar are the richest treasures of Ivan IV the Terrible, displayed by him to his guests and the public before his death [6v3], ch.4.

The fighting of the Babylonian priests with the Prophet Daniel and his supporters – is the fighting of the Russian Orthodox Church with the heresy of the Judaizers under Ivan the IV=III the Terrible.

The Book of Daniel also mentions the 'Story of Esther', i.e. the heresy spreading in the Russian-Hordian court in the XVI century. In the Book of Daniel it is the 'Story of Susanna'.

To remind you, the wife of the Czar's son turns out to be a secret Jewess and astrologer. The Czar-Khan himself becomes very fond of her. Family conflict erupts. The Czar sends away his first wife. Her place is taken by Esther, aka Elena Voloshanka, aka Elena Glinskaya, aka Biblical Judith, aka Biblical Jael. The Czar's son dies. The throne is surrounded by a tight ring of Esther's supporters – the Judaizers, Protestants, 'Latini'. The Czar takes their side in supporting heresy. The Russian Orthodox Church strongly opposes it. The ecclesiastical conflict grows and turns into a state revolt. In the second place in the state, next to the Czar-Khan appears one of the heretics. The split in the society emerges. It is the well-known Oprichnina of the XVI century. The Czar is compelled to leave the former capital of Russia-Horde and move it to a new place. Moscow is built, described in the bible as the New Jerusalem (in the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah).

Enjoying the support of the Czar-Khan, the heretics crush the enemies, named in the Bible as the 'Persians', i.e. P-Russians, the White Russians. In honour of their victory the famous Jewish celebration of Purim is established. But later the Hordian Czar-Khan repents. The Church Council is held where the heresy is condemned. The main heretics are captured, burned and exiled. The Khan's court returns to the Russian Orthodoxy. However there were serious consequences after the coup d'état in the court of Czar-Khan. In the beginning of the XVII century Rus-Horde descends into the Time of Troubles. Horde loses its control over Protestant, 'Latin', Western Europe. In the centre of Empire the pro-Western Romanovs are eager to cease power. The Empire breaks up. The Russian-Hordian dynasty is being cut down at the grassroots. In Europe, Asia, Africa, South and North America ferocious internecine feuds flare up between the Imperial governors and between the fragments of 'Mongolia'.

The Book of Judith recounts the same events, but through the eyes of the Western 'Mongol' governors. The punitive troops of the Assyrian king lead by Holofernes invade the West in order to quell the unrest. The Jewess by the name of Judith (i.e. simply the 'Jewess') arrives to the Assyrian camp. She penetrates Holofernes' tent and, having put him off his guard by deceit, decapitates him. The Assyrian army is demoralised and is defeated. The countries of the West are saved. Just about the same thing is told in chapter 4 of the Book of Judges in the story about the commander Sisera (i.e. simply a Czar and Jael (i.e. Elena), a woman who treacherously slayed him [6v1], ch.8:13.

The Book of Daniel also describes a story of Esther (as a story of Susanna), however from the ecclesiastic, religious point of view. Roughly speaking we can say that the Book of Daniel is an 'ecclesiastic' one, the Book of Esther is an 'inter-court' one, and the Book of Judith is a 'military' one. They highlight the same exceptionally important event from the different points of view.

It appears that under the name of Daniel here is presented DANIEL, metropolitan of Moscow and of all Russia. Understandably the Book of the Old Testament pays great attention to the head of the Russian Orthodox Church. As in the basis of the events lay the religion-church conflict. The role of a women-heretic was muffled.

One of the famous stories in the Book of Daniel is an attempt to burn three Jewish youths in the 'fiery furnace' by the Babylonians. What event in Russian history can this refer to? Apparently this refers to the three main heretics burnt in a cage in Moscow in the epoch of fight against heresy of the Judaizers. These events of the XVI century with a shift of approximately a hundred years are artificially 'spread thinly' along the entire XVI century and even made it into the end of the XV century [6v1], ch. 7.

The burning of specifically three people and specifically in a 'furnace' for their faith under Ivan the Terrible is among most famous events in Russian history of the XV-XVI cc.

The peak of the struggle of the Russian Orthodox Church against heresy was the sobor (church council) in 1504. 'The main denunciator of the Judaizers was Joseph (Volotsky –Auth.). THE CHIEF PERPETRATORS Feodor Kuritsyn diak (secretary) Volk Kuritsyn, Dmitry Konoplev and Ivan Maksimov were given in charge of civil court AND THEN BURNT AT THE STAKE IN A CAGE on the 28th December in Moscow ' [578], book 2, v.3, p.211.

This burning of the THREE HERETICS IN A CAGE also reflected in the Book of Daniel as 'burning in the fiery furnace of the three YOUTHS (OTROK – IN Russian)' (HERETICS?).

Besides the main burning at the stake of the three leaders of the heresy in 1504, there were also other executions of the minor sectarians. But they were less striking. 'The blow against heresy delivered by church council in 1504 was very strong, but however didn't root it out terminally' [578], book 2, v.3, p. 211.

Describing the burning of the three Jews, the Book of Daniel insists on all three of them allegedly miraculously surviving. The flames did not touch them, though the fire was burning all around. So how was it possible? Could it be that the Biblical authors feeling compassionate towards the three youths symbolically depicted the matter in such a way, as if God helped them? However, it is most likely that here the two events were intertwined in the Russian history of the XVI century. We have talked about one of them. To
clarify which other event is mentioned in the Bible, we will go a little bit back, to the end of allegedly XV century.

Venerable St. Joseph Volotsky (Joseph of Volokolamsk) and metropolitan Gennady of Novgorod opposed the emerging heresy of the Judaizers. That said Ivan III the Terrible and a part of his court practically sabotaged the struggle against heresy standing in the way of the investigation. However under the pressure from the Russian Orthodox Church the inquiry was pushing forward albeit with difficulty.

'After such a great noise raised around the affair of the uncovering heresy, the prosecutor and investigative network was able to catch MERELY NINE PEOPLE in the whole of Novgorod and Moscow', v.1, p.496.

The Sobor's (Council's) verdict was seen considered as strangely mild. The Czar himself intervened on behalf of the heretics. Instead some kind of showcase, theatrical performance was organised. This time no one was burnt. Just several 'heretical hats' were symbolically singed onto some heads. Most likely they did their best so that no one came to any harm. It is not difficult to do. As the hats were made of birch bark. Birch bark burns fast. It's enough to dampen the hair or to put some kind of a cap under the birch bark hat so the head remained unharmed.

But the show itself gave a handle to colourful literary descriptions. One of them is in the Biblical Book of Daniel. The burning hats turned into the 'fiery furnace' (gluing this storyline onto a later one, the real burning of the three heretics in the scorching cage). But having done so it was rightly stated that the fire was burning AROUND THE CONDEMNED. In fact the birch bark was burning around the head. The fire kind of surrounded the people. And they 'walked inside it without being burnt'. The literary image was later heightened. Purporting that the fire which surrounded the youths burnt the 'bad people', Babylonians, who had stirred the flames. Those who opposed the heresy. That's what Bible says as well.

The Book of Daniel's benevolence towards the prophet and his supporters contrasts with the negative position of the Russian Orthodox Church towards the heresy of the Judaizers in Russia. It is possible that the Book of Daniel was created by the heretics surrounding the throne of the Hordian Czar-Khan, who supported the heretics for quite a long time. To put it plainly 'The Book of Daniel' was written in Russian by the Judaizers in (of) the XVI century.

As we've already said under the name of Daniel there was described Daniel the Metropolitan of Moscow and All of Russia. He occupied the highest post in the Imperial church hierarchy of the Empire and, so to say, the second place after the Czar-Khan. The metropolitan Daniel's activities correspond well with the description in the Bible [6v3], ch.4.

'The story of Esther' 1553-1584 is reflected in the past in a phantom like way. Her main duplicates are: the epoch of Ivan III the Terrible (and Elena Voloshanka) 1462-1505, and the epoch of Vasili III (and Elena Glinskaya) 1505-1533. Metropolitan Daniel's activities fall exactly to (at) the time of Vasili III.

Let's discus the 'story of Susanna' in the Book of Daniel. This book is ecclesiastical and describes the struggle of the Russian Orthodox Church with the heresy of the Judaizers in the XVI century. The canonical part of the Book of Daniel doesn't say anything about Esther = Elena Voloshanka = Elena Glinskaya. There is no sexual story in the 'official' twelve chapters of the Book of Daniel at all. It appears that the ecclesiastical authors considered the 'female storyline' as an inter-court one, domestic, concerning only the private life of the Hordian Czar-Khan. Nevertheless the trace of a 'woman Esther' in the Book of Daniel is still present. The 13th chapter (13) about Susanna which was not considered canonical is included in the end of the Book [936], v.1, p.461. At a first glance it has nothing to do with the main theme of the Book. However here is told, although in a distorted way, a part of the story of Esther. Where the storyline had a distinctly sexual emphasis.

Susanna refused to fulfil the erotic desires of the two old judges. As a revenge they tried to smear her reputation in front of the people and declared that allegedly 'a young man came to her … and lay with her. We were in the corner of the garden… and saw them lie together' (Book of Daniel 13:37-39. However the young boy Daniel intervened on behalf of Susanna to defend her honour, uncovered the secret scheming and lies of the old judges. Both of the corrupt judges were condemned and executed.

Thus the 'female aspect of the story of Esther' is reflected in the Book of Daniel, though very vaguely. Nevertheless here is presented one of the main storylines of the family drama of the XVI century at the court of the Hordian Czar-Khan and his co-ruler son. The sexual scene in secluded lodgings where both rulers found themselves in the young woman's bedroom in an ambiguous situation in an effort to possess her.

The particular attention of the Bible commentators towards Susanna is rather strange. What could be so especially attractive in this story? The two judges-rulers lusted after a young woman. They entered by stealth inside her place, then they besmirched her reputation, for which they were justly punished. But there are other much more important stories in the Bible which nevertheless didn't favour such close attention from the artists and authors of the XVII-XVIII cc. But for some reason they loved the story of Susanna. Now it is clear why. She was a part of the 'story of Esther' famous in certain circles, which played an important role in the split of the 'Mongol' Empire. Thus the West European artists painted the 'noble Susanna' fighting the two 'very bad' old judges. At first the commentators remembered the true meaning of the story. Then it was forgotten, but they were still obediently continued to praise Susanna by force of habit. The congregation was made to forget that in the image of Susanna there was the celebrated heretic Esther, aka a Jew Elena Voloshanka.

The Scaligerian historians date the Biblical Book of Daniel as 605-536 BC [936], v.1, p.461. They were mistaken by approximately 2100 years. The correct dating is the end of the XVI century.

Thus within the basis of the Old Testament Book of Daniel are the events in Russia-Horde of the XVI century. This is consistent with the fact that precisely in the XVI century the Russian Orthodox Church for the first time introduced the ceremonial rite of 'peshnoye deystvo'– a grand spectacular theatrical production held in a church celebrating the miraculous salvation of the three Jewish Youths from the fiery furnace.

Everything now falls into place. As we have already said the three leading Judaizing heretics were burnt at the stake on the 27th (28th) DECEMBER of allegedly 1504 [372], v.1, p.500. That is why the church connected the theatricalised 'burning of the three young men' with the Nativity of Christ also celebrated in DECEMBER. The fact that 'peshnyie' performances (costume devotions) originated exactly in the XVI century can be also explained very well. It was the time when the 'story of Esther' and the struggle of the Russian Orthodox Church against heresy has unfolded. The Church decided to commemorate it its rites 'pesnyie deistva' (Costume devotion of Fiery Furnace before Christmas Liturgy in Russian Orthodox Church). Originally the meaning of those pageants was austerely instructive. Via them in the XVI century the Russian Orthodox Church, which temporarily won, was warning its congregation in all the churches of the Empire against the re-emergence of heresy. They demonstrated punishment for state rebellion and the derogation from Orthodoxy. Punishment by fire in a cage! But later, when the Romanovs usurped the throne they reversed the meaning of the 'peshnyie deistva'. The pageant remained, but now they began to highlight the miraculous element of the salvation of the Jewish youths from the fire as God Himself was on their side. Black became white.
(The word 'Youth in Russian – 'otrok' can sound like the Russian word for Heretic 'Eretik', translators note)
Under the Romanovs 'The Book of Daniel' which had just been written was considered as giving an account of the events in Russia-Horde, which practically brought the new dynasty into power. Namely (i.e.) about the events pleasant to the Romanovs. In the XVII century The Book of Daniel was edited, in the required key, as important propaganda material which should be impressed on the minds of the congregation. The evaluation of the events of the XVI century were swapped. The heretics were declared good and the representatives of the Imperial Orthodox Church who were fighting against the heresy of the Judaizers were cast in a negative light.

As time went by in the XVIII-XIX cc. the relevance of the story faded. The 'story of Esther' became a thing of the past, forgotten. Today they don't perform 'peshnyie deistviya' in the Orthodox Church. But the instructive tableau and illustrations to the Bibles on the theme of the 'fiery furnace' were painted up until the end of the XIX century.