FOREWORD
The present book is issued in a new edition, made by A.T.FOMENKO. It considerably differs from the previous ones. You see the first book of the 5th volume of the seven-volume book "Chronology" (the seven-volume is divided into 14 books).
Volume 1. FIGURES AGAINST LIE. - A.T.Fomenko.
Volume 2. ANTIQUITY IS MIDDLE AGES. - A.T.Fomenko. Book 2. WE CHANGE DATES – EVERYTHING CHANGES. - A.T.Fomenko
Volume 3. Book 1: STARS TESTIFY. V.V.Kalashnikov, G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko. Book 2. CELESTIAL CALENDAR OF THE ANCIENTS - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko, T.N.Fomenko.
Volume 4. Book 1. NEW CHRONOLOGY OF RUSSIA. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko. Book 2. THE MIRACLE OF RUSSIAN HISTORY - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko
Volume 5. Book 1. EMPIRE. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko. Book� 2. RISE OF THE TSARDOM. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko
Volume 6. Book 1: BIBLICAL RUSSIA. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko. Book 2: OPENING OF AMERICA BY RUSSIA-HORDE. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko. Book 3: SEVEN WONDERS OF THE WORLD - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko.
Volume 7. Book 1. WESTERN MYTH. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko. Book 2. RUSSIAN ROOTS OF THE "ANCIENT" LATIN. - G.V.Nosovskiy, A.T.Fomenko, T.N.Fomenko
In the present book we rest upon new chronology, established based on the mathematical methods and empirical-statistical results, stated in the books "Figures against Lie", ch.5-6, "Antiquity is Middle Ages", ch.3, "Stars testify", "Celestial calendar of the ancients", and also "Seven wonders of the world", ch.2. The main chronological shifts, discovered in the "ancient" and medieval history, are given on a global chronological map - GKhM, created by A.�.Fomenko in1975-1979.
Studying Russian history in the book "New chronology of Russia", we discovered that its Miller-Romanovs version is SERIOUSLY DISTORTED. It appeared that MEDIEVAL RUSSIA AND THE GREAT = "MONGOL" HORDE – IT IS THE SAME. Of course, this is yet our supposition. But constantly appearing new data not only confirm it, but more and more increase its importance.
Based on this idea, a new, and probably, CORRECT UNDERSTANDING OF THE RUSSIAN HISTORY, TURNED OUT TO BE THAT KEY TO ALL THE MEDIEVAL HISTORY, which was missing at the time of our predecessors.
In the book "New chronology of Russia", ch.2, we showed that a correct dating of Russian-"Mongol" conquest – this is, probably, the XIV century, that is for around ONE HUNDRED YEARS LATER, than it is considered.
Earlier we considered the history of Russian-"Mongol" Empire "from the inside», that is from the center, where it appeared and from where it started to widen. To remind, this is Vladimir-Suzdal Russia.
In the present book we analyze the history of Russian-"Mongol" Empire "from the outside". We will tell about the history of those countries, including territories of the Western Europe, which in the XIV century were overflowed with a wave of the great = "Mongol" conquest, and then, in the XVI-XVII centuries, at the breakdown of the huge Empire, separated from the mother country and became independent.
Our book is devoted not so much to THE SEARCH OF NEW PROOFS OF OUR CONCEPT, but TO NEW EXPLANATION of different "blank spots" of history, based on it. And the concept itself, as it seems us, was already well reasoned before, in the first three books of the seven volume book "Chronology", based mainly on mathematical methods. In this book we take out the consequences.
They come out of the following three main results, received earlier with empirical-statistical methods based on the global analysis of the available today historical material.
1) NEW CHRONOLOGY states that the most of the remained until our time historical evidences actually describe the events, which happened after 1200 A.D. Some very few things remained from the earlier epochs of the X-XII centuries A.D. But this period turns out to be rather foggy and pretty much legendary. WE DOESN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE TIME EARLIER THAN THE TENS CENTURY A.D.
2) A NEW CONCEPT of the history of breakdown of Rome-Byzantium of the XI-XIII centuries. This breakdown is an event of the XIII century A.D., multiplied in the Scaligerian history as several famous wars: the Trojan, the Gothic, the Tarquinian etc. The brightest events of this breakdown were a capture of New Rome = Tsar-Grad, its transmission from hands to hands and battles around it. All this happened in the XIII century A.D.
3) NEW CONCEPT OF THE HISTORY OF "MONGOL" CONQUEST AND ITS NEW DATING WITH THE BEGINNING OF THE XIV CENTURY A.D., that is one hundred years later than the one, generally accepted today. According to our concept, the "Mongol", that is the great conquest, started in Vladimir-Suzdal Russia and was mainly Russian. More precisely, Russian-Turkic, that is multinational.
As a result, appeared the Great = "Mongol" Empire, well known in the Scaligerian-Miller history as the Empire, spread from the Western Europe and Egypt to China. A radical difference of our reconstruction from the traditional one is that the core of this Empire, - that is from where it appeared, - these were not wild desert plains on the border of China, but Vladimir-Suzdal Russia-Horde. Moreover, the Scaligerian history considerably shortened the sizes of Empire, pretending, that many countries allegedly never were a part of it. That is wrong, as we will show.
In future, in around one hundred years, the Great Empire divided into two closely connected parts. The first was Russia-Horde, an Orthodox, mainly Slavonic part. The second was Osmania-Atamania=Otomania. This part was mainly Turkic, and then in the XVII-XVIII centuries became an Islamic country. We will adhere to the OLD writing of the name of Otoman Empire, instead of the modern - Ottoman. Earlier one � was written, not two �, like today.
The indicated national separation is rather conventional. In Russia there were and are a lot of Turkomen, and in Turkey-Atamania, before separation of the Balkans from it in the XIX century, there were many Slaves.
A separation happened as a result of religious split in the XV-XVI centuries of the united earlier Christianity of the XII century on Orthodoxy, Islam and Catholicism. But Russia-Horde and Osmania-Atamania right until the beginning of the governance of Romanovs in Russia were in a continuous friendly military-political union.
A famous Osman conquest of the XV-XVI centuries was a continuation of "Mongol" conquest and happened by agreement and with the participation of Russia-Horde.
Important sequences come out of these results, which help to understand the history of many countries of Europe and Asia. Consequences are the following.
If in the history of any country an ancient or medieval huge OUTLANDISH CONQUEST OF THIS COUNTRY is brightly described, then, it most likely happened after 1200, and that's why, probably, is a reflection:
of Russian-Horde, that is the great = "Mongol" conquest of the XIV century,
or of the following Osman=Ataman conquest of the XV-XVI centuries,
or both of them.
That's why at analysis of the history of one or another country it is useful to check, if there was such conquest. And if in its description there were clear traces that it was Russian-Horde or Osman=Ataman. If such traces are found, then, according to our results, this allegedly "ancient conquest", was actually Russian-Horde-Osman one of the XIV-XV centuries.
As a rule, after this, the remaining history of this country is easily interpreted and stays within the time period from the XII to the XVIII century.
For convenience of the reader we will enumerate the main consequences, which are described in the present book.
Consequence 1. New interpretation of the history of the Western Europe.
Consequence 2. New interpretation of the history of China.
Consequence 3. New interpretation of the history of Egypt.
Consequence 4. Possible solution of one of the most difficult miracles of the history – who were Etrurians.
Notice. The traces of a huge conquest remain in the language – mainly in names. That's why, at new reading of historical documents, we HAVE TO pay special attention to proper names and geographical names. Looking at them, we manage to learn already familiar to us medieval terms, which accompanied the Russian-Horde = "Mongol" or Osman=Ataman conquest.
Probably not all the proposed by us vocalizations, translations and variants of the ancient names and proper names were successful. But we provide them in order to give a possibility to our readers continue a scientific search themselves and, probably, to improve us in some things. We repeat once again, that our interpretations of many ancient chronicle names and proper names are absolutely not independent proofs of anything. THIS IS JUST A NECESSARY ATTEMPT TO READ ONCE AGAIN THE ANCIENT CHRONICLES AND DOCUMENTS FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW, which we got as a result of application of mathematical methods to history. We ask a reader to remember always about it. Anyhow disputable and ambiguous was sometimes an attempt of new reading, such attempts are necessary, if we want to restore an authentic picture of the past.
Of course, separate coincidences and consonances of names could be occasional, including some of indicated by us. That's why not separately each coincidence but THEIR ACCUMULATION is important. The appearance of such accumulation ADDITIONALLY TO GENERAL STATISTICAL RESULTS, received earlier, already provides a ground for definite historical suppositions.
We repeat, that such linguistic traces ARE NOT A PROOF themselves. They just help to clarify a rough reconstruction, ALREADY RECEIVED BY ABSOLUTELY DIFFERENT, MATHEMATICAL METHODS. Only in this sense they are useful. They help to "build up the body" on already existing skeleton of the new chronology.
Some medieval documents, which we will try to interpret from the new point of view, are dark, embarrassed, contradictory. These internal contradictions will inevitably appear in our reconstruction too. Sometimes we will propose opposite and even mutually exclusive interpretations of the same text. Of course, this will cause difficulties for readers. But we intentionally go for this, trying to introduce into scientific circulation as much as possible new facts. Even not till the end understood ones. Moreover, our knowledge of some issues is limited and we simply may not see some things, which some readers would see at once. We hope that they will participate in the future work, enlarging or even improving some our interpretations.
We intentionally give some names and proper names in their old, initial writing. For example, Otoman Empire. Today it is more often called Ottoman. Next, for example, Manzures. Today more often they are called Manchures. Etc.
A.T.FOMENKO, G.V.Nosovskiy
Moscow, Lomonosov Moscow State University
