Turks and The World - The Secret Story Vol 2 Murad Adji

TheTurkiandtheWorld,TheSecretStory
Adji Murad Moscow, 2007

1st volume http://adji.ru/book10_0.html 2nd volume http://adji.ru/book20_1.html (please see following documents for relavent pictures and maps) http://www.scribd.com/doc/72802697/ http://www.scribd.com/doc/76347999/
1 / 342
Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22
Table of Contents
Aryana Vajeh Aryan Vast ......................................................................................................................3 Forgetten Motherland................................................................................................................................3 The Hindustan Peninsula and Its Inhabitants..........................................................................................13 Persian Melodies Of The Turkic Anthem...............................................................................................25 The Near East Foothold...........................................................................................................................40 Hospitality In New Europe..................................................................................................................55 Litareture Part I (main sources)........................................................................................................69 Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky........................................................................................................72 Barbarians Of Wild Rome...................................................................................................................72 Rich Harvest of Altai...............................................................................................................................86 About Catholicism, without Latin.........................................................................................................101 Second-Rate Religion for the Masses................................................................................................115 About Catholicism Again, this time with Latin....................................................................................131 Literature Part II (main sources)...................................................................................................148 Under the Sign of the Cross and Crescent.................................................................................................151 Arian Europe........................................................................................................................................151 Bulgarian Slavdom................................................................................................................................168 East Changes Its Face............................................................................................................................184 Changing The West...............................................................................................................................203 Literature Part III (main sources) ..................................................................................................224 Muscovy and Russia..................................................................................................................................227 The Russian Card...............................................................................................................................227 About The Bible And Koran Again......................................................................................................241 Christianity and Islam in the Russian Tsardom.....................................................................................261 How Rus Became Russia......................................................................................................................281 From Russian To Slavic........................................................................................................................303 Avid Khan is not Higher than a Farmhand............................................................................................324 Literature Part IV (main sources).................................................................................................340
2 / 342
Part I
Aryana Vajeh Aryan Vast
Forgetten Motherland
Legends reflecting official history and not letting the Europeans think of their real past have been prevailing over Europe for centuries. A very questionable idea West is West, and East is East fills consciousness of many generations. It makes us divide the whole planet in twain and consider ancient Greek statutes, Roman Civil Law and Christian commandments as the source of human civilization representing all the rest as barbarism, ignorance and ferocity. Is that right? For instance, Greek statutes, and the same goes with temples with columns, appeared not all of a sudden, statuary arts and architecture came to Europe from Persia, which is to say, from the East. And it turns out that Roman Civil Law originated far from Rome; it existed together with other Christian symbols and ceremonies in the barbarous East at least 500 700 years before Christ was born. And a simple question arises in this connection: where East and its culture ended? Or where West and its culture began? One might be surprised with the answers. Because during different historical epochs the concept of East and West was changing, if it ever existed at all. In modern division one can find the traces of colonial epochs when division of the world was contrived. Someone wanted certain Europeans to forget the truth of themselves, of their western roots, and believe in legends. So that they would launch wars in the fullness of time like toy soldiers. So that they would despise and scorn one another speaking about beneficence. So that Indeed, can't that be the reason of coldness between the Englishmen and the Scots? Or the French and the Spanish? Deadly feud of the Serbians, Albanians and Croats also has a source? Let alone the
3 / 342 Aryana Vajeh Aryan Vast
Germans dislike towards them is well known, it is even mentioned in proverbs and sayings. What if even centuries-old confrontation of North and South in Italy or France has its explanation?.. Historical subjects mentioned in this book were established late in the Middle Ages, during the epoch of great geographical discoveries, when colonialism first appeared. Conquest of countries and nations became widespread and required justification or invention of official myths, to put it more preciously, where glorious West had all honors. It was useful to spread ignorance. Ignorance and people's trust helped the rulers carry out political adjustments on the Eurasian continent and in the rest of the world they determined the enemies and launched wars. Because it is known since Rome that if a nation is deprived of its history, in two generations it is to turn into a crowd and in another two generations it can be ruled as a herd. And the main peculiarity of a human herd is that it never threatens its shepherd. Quite the opposite it admires them History is the whole of crimes, madness and disasters, - said Voltaire, the French philosopher. In the XVIII century Edward Gibbon, the English historian, had a rooted objection to it: History is something more than a list of crimes, madness and disasters. And he was absolutely right: it is not the list of events that teaches and enlightens people; it is the knowledge that does it. Knowledge is akin to birth of the spirit The Europeans started to distort the truth of themselves at least one thousand years ago when the Church was divided between East and West. The Byzantine Emperor was sitting on the throne but dared not suggest anything the power of the master of Mediterranean was slowly disappearing. Those were his final days. Events, moving to an inevitable end point, reached the climax later, in two centuries, when the crusaders captured Constantinople
and the Pope obtained all the power. History was kind of changing, those days it became noticeable for new postulates. Having declared the Second Rome, the Pope declared Byzantium a colony, and Eastern Europe the area of his interest. That was the first and a very obvious declaration of intentions to divide the world. Eurasian vastness has changed at that very moment the idea of aggression appeared. The idea of world domination! In 1204 Tsargrad became the capital of the Latin Empire, the Second Rome, that was, according to the Pope's plans, extend the boundaries of the Western Church up to Siberia The word empire reappeared in Europe; again Rome performed the part of the leader in world politics. Everything seemed to be as it was a thousand years ago. But we should mention that Europe was becoming Latin, not Roman. And that was the essence of all changes: not the rebirth of the emperor, but strengthening of the Pope's power was considered as the most important event by winning politicians. The world should obey to the Church they desired to perpetuate its domination. That was a brand new stroke of policy; it bore omens of many coming events in the future. That was a new force which was to launch new geopolitics in Eurasia. Since then it has been the main factor in almost all major events there. The outlines of colonialism were becoming evident. They were distinguishable in the Pope's plans, but at that time people were not able to discern them. The Latin Empire existed on a map a short while in 1261 it fell. But its idea wasnt dead It could not die! That was a very important feature of time it divided the epochs of the Middle Ages and the New History where the Pope was the only master. The idea of the Second, and later the Third Rome was cautiously being introduced in different countries and regions;
goals of nations and dynasties were directed by it. A new fight was to start the fight in which power consecrated by the Pope and the Church was the award. At first the rulers did not even understand that the Latin Empire proclaimed Eurasia as a patrimony of the First Rome that Rome couldnt find enough space in the West. That was the beginning of a real colonial expansions which they tried to cover under religious symbols. As if with a fig-leaf. Christianization is the distinctive feature of new colonialism its face and its result. This assertion may seem too harsh but that is how it was. That time is marked by the crusades to the East expansion started with them After the crusades military expeditions to Africa, Asia, America took place and everywhere soldiers were followed by planters or missionaries with Latin crosses in their hands What is it if not a colonization? Or Christianization? What are the differences between them? History knows no Moslem or Buddhist colonies they are all Christian. That is the face of the Pope's policy. These are the results. It is also useful to remember that up to the XII century the eastern boundary of the Christian world lay within the Roman Empire occupying a part of the right-bank Ukraine. The Latin Empire had pretensions to the lands lying to the north and to the east where another spiritual culture prevailed. Christian Catholics seeking for world domination turned there. Those far eastern lands of Europe which are called Russia nowadays, by the decision of the IV Oecumenical Council belonged to the Greek Church, they were referred to the Antioch Eparchy. But Christian envoys were not honored there; their sermons could do nothing with the belief in the Heavenly God with which people had been living there for ages. There were several attempts of Christianization. And they were all vain. The
legend of the alleged Baptism of Kievan Russia in the X century remains just a popular legend having no historical proofs. Having despaired to find way to the East, the Byzantines called those western people Hanifs and their belief Hanif confession considering it to be stronger than Christian belief Later Macarius, the Patriarch of Antioch, acknowledged that telling in the XVII century of his visiting Moscow Russia. Having declared of the Latin Empire in the XIII century, the West decided to repeat the route of the Greek Christians in order to deny a theory of impregnability of the East. And thus to strengthen its positions. A painstaking preparation of an ideological aggression, that lasted for centuries, commenced. The game was worth the candle since it could extend the boundaries of the Christian Empire for thousands of kilometers beyond Ural, which strengthened the power of the Pope to whom even the Byzantines bowed their heads, but not the Hanifs Looking ahead, let us say that finally the Catholics managed to destroy the Hanif belief they destroyed it through Romanovs, the Russian tsars. That dynasty executed the Pope's purpose having destroyed the old belief, it launched Christianity in Russia, introduced western innovations and destroyed old traditions, in a word, it deprived the West of its national culture and entity In fact, thats what our book is about every page of it tells of an unknown tragedy. Russia was slowly deepening into unconsciousness, turning the nation into slaves (cp. the Slavs). The Russians paid a dreadful price for the coming of Christianity, for its introduction to the West. Paving the way for a new culture, Romanovs made the nation forget its native land the country that existed before Russia and Rus on pain of death. Romanovs needed neither the old belief in Heavenly God, nor the old past they were preparing their new past, bringing lies to the forefront. Russia, or most of it, to put it more
preciously, was formerly called Dest-IKipchak. That was a powerful steppe country extending from Baikal to the Alps probably the most powerful country in the world. The Roman Empire paid levy to it in the IV V centuries. Former greatness of the steppe country was to be forgotten: those were bad memories for the West. Even certain allusions. Historians turned the most powerful country of the Middle Ages into the Wild Field, into the back of beyond, and its nation which could be conquered neither by a sword nor by a word into wild nomads and pagan Tatars. These are key words in the official Russian history thats how ancestors are now called in Russia. Steppe nation has become a castaway at home; it hasnt been able to recollect itself for ages. It was told a lot of lies and sent to sleep. It has obediently fallen asleep Romanovs appeared unexpectedly in the Russian politics there were no people with that non-Russian family name in Russia. Puny Michael Zakhariev-Koshkin, the founder of the dynasty, took it in 1613 he realized that having become Romanov he would become Roman. That was the son of the Russian false Patriarch Filaret, the very same Filaret that obtained clerical titles from Ljedmitriy 1, and was made Patriarch by Ljedmitriy 2. The person who graduated from a Jesuitical college in Vilno turned out to be among the first Russian Jesuits. Thus, following the scenario of the Third Rome, the eastern part of Europe was turned into a colony of an invisible Latin (Christian) Empire. They called those times the times of troubles. Everything sort of happened of its own accord. In order to choose a new, their tsar, the Pope's monks that managed to come to Moscow destroyed the former dynasty. Most of Riurikoviches were simply poisoned with arsenic and mercury, which was proven by modern experts. And the main reason of that was their reluctance to conspire with Rome Ivan the Terrible refused to accept Christianity and the Pope's power voluntarily.
Analysis of the time of troubles evinced the truth. Who are they, those Halifs with their strong belief? Unfortunately, Russian history dissembles it; chroniclers of Romanovs' Moscow deliberately misrepresented the facts. Thats why they started history of Russia from the misty IX century, from Kiev. They invented the baptism of Russia, Bosporus and Scythia, ancient Russian cities which in fact were the cities of Desht-I-Kipchak, as well as the Slavs and the Scythians in order to conceal the Turki who had been living in steppes lying from Altai to the Alps from of old. They even concealed that steppe inhabitants called themselves the Kipchaks (Kypchaks). Thats how the steppe nation called itself. Transcriptions in this book are worth saying a few words. No doubt, certain experienced scientists would protest. But the author intentionally abandoned academic transcription trying to avoid endless and empty disputes characterizing orientalism, namely Turkology. Giving pronunciation clear to readers, he tried to simplify them and to show that the modern Turkic language consists of dozens of equal dialects and that now it has no strictness and accuracy peculiar to the literary Turkic language in ancient times shown by the Ancient Turkic Dictionary. This seeming liberty being inconsistent with scientific traditions is for readers' convenience Especially since such simplifications dont diminish scientific authenticity of the text. The main object of the Russian historical studies of the XVIII century is distortion of the past. Hence is silence of Hanif belief and appearance of Christianity in Moscow Russia in 1589. Although that was not a secret as early as in the XVII century when Romanovs obtained power Desht-I-Kipchak, the steppe country, which is usually passed over in silence in Russia, was created by the Great Nations Migrations the Huns moving. In the II V
centuries uninhabited lands of Eurasia were being massively inhabited. Rich lands where it was very hard to live. People came there from valleys and steppes of Altai it was the source of the Great Nations Migrations, its vital force. Speaking about Altai, we mean another territory as compared with that associated with Altai now. Ancient Altai is the whole Southern Siberia with Baikal in the East and Pamir in the West that was Altai in the times this book is about. A vast mountain country reaching Tibet was called Altai. The modern map keeps the traces of those times: Mongolian Altai and Gobi Altai still exist. From here from Altai ran human river which originated from little streams five centuries B.C. or even earlier and directed to the Northern India, and later Persia, the Near East and Northern Africa. Then it came to spanless Eurasian steppes. That was a real unprecedented demographic explosion. Its participants had different names: the Huns, Saks, Scythians, Arians, Geths, Goths, Turki, Saxons, Polovtzians, Germans, Burgundians, Kumans More than thirty names were invented for the Altaians. And they were all correct. But those thirty nations spoke the same language the Turkic language. And they had one ruler the tsar, or the Great Khan who ran the nation. Their appearance was almost the same riders with bronzed faces. They called themselves the Turki: the Oguzes or Kipchaks. Hence their name of their country Desht-I-Kipchak, i.e. the Kipchak steppe. The word desht (dasht) is considered to be borrowed from Iranian languages, which is absolutely wrong. The Iranians and the Turki understand it in absolutely different ways geographers brought that to notice long ago. For the Kipchaks it was blossomy steppe, valley, for the Oguzes and Iranians stony, rocky desert (from the ancient Turkic tashta > dashta on a stone). Borrowing has nothing to do with it. And nevertheless, in Azerbaijan the Mugan valley is called Dashti-Mugan, which means that some time ago the Mugan steppe was famous for rich pastures. Today
similar deserts can be found in different regions of the Middle East in Afghanistan (Dashti-Margo), Iran (Deshte-Kevir, DeshteLut), Pakistan (Deshtestan) sometime they were bloomy oases, and the Turkic speech prevailed there. It hasnt been forgotten until now. However Desht-I-Kipchak is not the same. In the XIV century Ibn Battuta, the Arabian traveler, described those lands (between the Crimea and Volga) as follows: That is a green and bloomy steppe there are no trees, mountains, and hills there. It seems the usual form dasht (desht) hides the stem having another meaning. In the ancient Turkic language the word tash (dash) meant not only stone but also exterior, layout, overflow, overflow the banks. The word is an element of the term meaning foreign lands tash yer. It is obvious that this geographical name appeared when the Kipchaks inhabited the steppe. They were on the outside (tashta) from the lands where they formerly lived. Thus tashta kipchak dashti-kipchak became the name of new territories, something like Outside Kipchak Lands. However, it is also possible that in the name Desht-I-Kipchak there is the form tash overflow, spill over banks + affix forming a past participle - -tuk: tash + -tuk > tashtuk (overflowing, spilling over banks). Tashtuk Kipchak means the Kipchaks spilling overbanks. That is also possible. But most likely the name appeared as a result of the Great Nations Migration when the Kipchaks, having united a great many tribes, settled on vast territories from Baikal to Danube. In popular etymology it has taken a more common form: tashtuk kipchak tashti kipchak dashti kipchak. Of course, other variants are possible. It is obvious that unprecedented Altaic migration determining fate of millions of people, could not be of no social consequences of the same importance. And it had consequences it turned Eurasia into an organic whole. Into a region! The Great
Nations Migration, moving through the continent, sort of united the centers of different civilizations of the ancient world. It united the planet. The West saw the East and the South saw the North. The planet was changing beyond recognition. Thousands of families were moving, new countries and cultures appeared, old traditions collapsed. That was the process akin to creation of the world. For example, population in Europe increased at least two-fold, at that population of Altai was decreasing, which says a lot of those events to an educated person. Millions of people found a new native land is it not an Event?.. Those were glorious times a new world was born, the world we are living in now; outlines of the political map were becoming visible Eurasian continent was being formed. New times were characterized not by space or population, not by the size of new cities or prolific crops but by nature of people living in the new world and their culture. Culture! It was changing. Newcomers from Altai shared their skills and wide experience, traditions and knowledge with Eurasians. That was perhaps the most important thing of those times exchange of developments which moved human progress on. The old has had its day and retreated; the new was winning. Society made a new step in its development; the spiral of civilization was rapidly expanding. In 312 the Roman Empire fell after seven hundred year-long domination in Europe. Antiquity disappeared together with it: Greco-Roman paganism was changed by the religion called Christianity. Thats when it originated in the IV century!.. With arrival of the Kipchaks (Huns, Barbarians, Germans, Goths if you like, which, as a matter of fact, is of no consequence). The antique epoch was over it was
changed by another epoch medieval i.e. Christian and Moslem. Based on Turkic monotheism. The early Middle Ages, as it turns out, were notable not for wild hordes of nomads that destroyed Rome. There were no wild hordes there. They were invented later. Rome itself was wild and backward; it surrendered to riders showing its powerlessness: it had no force to fight for its own hand its huge but rusty army was beaten to sticks under the walls of Rome Are comments necessary here? That was an ignominious defeat. And in order to be justified in the eyes of descendants, the Romans later wrote their history where they besmirched steppe inhabitants. Of course they were not the first to do so slander is the lot of weak people. One can take that for granted. Desht-I-Kipchak could be neither wild nor nomadic since people there lived only in towns and villages Kiev, Poltava, Bryansk and dozens of others. Iron was widely used in the country: tools and weapons were made of it. And in the Roman Empire the Bronze Age was going on; iron was rarely used there only commanders of the best Emperor's regiments had steel swords but it is a big question without an answer how they would get them. In the Roman Empire there were no ironstone deposits corresponding with technologies of those times. The method of burnout of iron from ore supposed presence of not less than eighty percent of useful component in it, otherwise technology was inefficient. It is obvious that they used imported iron ore. But where was it imported from? It is indicative that even in the pick of the Roman army shields were still made of copper since steel was too expensive. According to the facts, barbaricarii, i.e. certain tribes of barbaric (foreign) origin were skilled in blacksmithing in Rome. They produced weapons and armor. Their smithies and workshops were situated somewhere to the East, from where iron was furnished to
Rome. The Kipchaks would wage wars riding horses while the Romans reckoned basically upon heavy-weight foot troops that reminded of the times of Egyptian pharaohs. Cavalry of the Roman army became strong only by the end of the IV century foreigners, i.e. that very Barbarians from the East were taken to it. The Romans themselves were bad riders; for a long time a horse remained an article of luxury for them only very rich people moneylenders, major merchants, rich landowners used to ride a horse carefully. E. Gibbon marks that in their best days in a Roman legion of 6100 warriors there were just 700 riders. More information on this point can be found in the book by A. Jones this work is a good addition to Gibbon's book. Its bibliography includes classical works on the history of the army of the late Roman Empire and interesting sources including rare documents like military credentials in Notitia Digitatum, family papers of warriors from border districts of the VI VII centuries in Atswana, papers of soldiers from bastions in the Southern Palestine and other. Much is said there of realities of the Roman army. And this historical fact also counts in favor of the East that came to Europe, as far as we know, riding a horse. However, not a horse, not weapons were the most important things in those times but the spirit for which the Turki were famous. An equilateral cross the symbol of their belief in Heavenly God was on their flags, while the Europeans were pagans. They knew neither a labarum, nor a cross. It was not until the IV century that they saw a Holy Cross only when the Kipchaks came. They saw it on their flags and shields. In Altai flags were used since the old days: every family had a flag there which was called tug. (Hence the word spirit (pronounced as dukh) in the Russian language). It was also called khorug or alabarym which are also Turkic words that mean guardian and perish of fiends. Because, according to an ancient Altaic
tradition, the spirit of the family lived in a flag. Thats why the Turki considered it a disgrace to bow a flag; and to drop it was a big trouble. Loss of the flag meant death of the family; even if it was in the prime of life nobody would take it seriously. Families united by one common flag were called tukhum. That is the second Turkic social unit after a family ulus, horde and nation began with it. Three colors were present on flags of the Altaians, since the Eternal Blue Sky which they deified had three colors blue in the afternoon, red in the morning and white in the evening. In the XIII the Turki knew of celestial origin of colors of the range on their flags, which is witnessed by the ceremony of election of the Great Khan that was practiced then. However, that ancient Altaic tradition remains in Europe until now Altaic colors are present on flags of those countries which population was brought there by the Great Nations Migration. During a ceremony of election of the Great Khan white flag symbolized the West (sunset, evening), red flag symbolized the East (sunrise, morning), blue or purple flag symbolized the center (midday). Colors of the Sky never faded away It's amazing that traditions live on their own they just need to be noticed. Altaic flags are well known to science; so one can make a lot of conclusions on this point. One of the images the most ancient in Europe! scientists found on a stelae in Khornkhauzen (Halle, Saxony). The image is almost one and a half thousand years old. There is a cross and three ribbons on the flag. It is the symbol of the newcomers the riders. Similar flags can be found on rocks of Ancient Altai, much has been written about them, drawings which are more than two thousand years old were elicited A.P. Okladnikov, the outstanding archeologist, studied them One would think: Germany and Altai are not close to each other. However, not only similar flags were found there but also runic inscriptions, which allows any unbiased person to think of signs of unity
of cultures of East and West. And if we add that ancient runic inscriptions of Europe and Altai are read identically, we will possibly have another reason to think of the obvious of solidarity of the language. However, that has been proven in the XIX century by V. Thomsen, the Danish professor, who was the first who managed to read ancient runic texts. Knowledge of the Turkic language helped the scientist As we can see traces of times and places are always present in History they can be noticed and can be neglected but still they are present Nothing in this world passes away without leaving a trace; thats why the truth is eternal, it can never fade away. It turns out Catholic Rome called Attila, the leader of the Kipchaks, Scourge of God, not by accident it stood in awe of its invincible spirit. The Kipchaks believed in the Heavenly God, the Creator. Their spiritual culture was notable for monotheism and an equilateral cross which symbolized the rays of grace of God coming from the single center to the four corners of the earth. Hence is the name the Huns which meant people of the sun, children of the sky. Monotheism and its symbols are core of Hanif belief. They conceal the reason why not much is known of the Turkic culture, why the memory of it has been extirpated for centuries. It gave rise to Christianity! And to Islam! Hostile efforts of the West made people forget that the first prayers which have later become Christian prayers were read in Europe since the IV century (since 312) in the Turkic language. That the Christians worshipped Turkic icons up to the VIII century since they didnt have their own ones. That first bishops and Popes were ordained and blessed by Turkic priests because in the city of Derbent, in the Caucasus, the Patriarchal See of Christian Churches was placed since the IV century. Here, in the center of the new culture, the Europeans learned to believe in Heavenly God and worship Him.
evil, verity and falsity. They took the ceremony of divine service from the Turki from the Halifs. There were no others in the world who could teach to believe One should take a good look at returning pictures of the past its turns out they didnt vanish, they are simply neglected. It is striking that the word Turki which was widely used in the Middle Ages and meant monotheist, i.e. Hanif disappeared from European languages. The word had rather a religious than an ethnic meaning. Later it has been substituted by the neutral Turk, i.e. one living in Turkey, which is absolutely different. The new word doesnt tell the profundity of the former sense, it limits its scope. The Turks are a drop in the endless ocean of the Turkic world. The fact that the Hanifs have been buried in oblivion explains a lot: the Turki were an obstacle for the West; their history showed that not the Rome was the leader of this world. Christian Church where the Pope proclaimed himself as the Vicar of Christ originated not from Peter. Everything was otherwise as compared with books where there are too many blank pages and the dark centuries last for too long. Thus impotent lies gave rise to Panturkism, the meaning of which nobody can explain. Hence is centuries-old persecutions of the Turki proclaimed as heretics from the time of Holy Inquisition by the Church It all started from the pontifical inquisition of the XIII century when policy of the West became colonial and misanthropic. Hence, by the way, is full obliteration of the steppe nation in its native lands in Russia. They deliberately mixed up everything and hid the traces. But the truth was known to certain Jesuits taken into the secret those were the heads of the Society! The Church tried to conceal it, but it failed. Documents of those times remained they are guarded day and night in special archives of Vatican in the Jesuit library. That is the fight between the light and the dark, God and Devil, good and
One would think, how is it possible to conceal God's appearance in the culture of Europe? Too easy. The Turkic belief was called heresy and its followers heretics. And that was it. After that physical destruction of them commenced in which black friars were probably the most active participants. Executions continued up to the XVI century. After that the Jesuits got involved who were more sophisticated in killing they used not an axe but a word. Finally people were made to forget everything. It is not likely that any European is able now to call the name of the Most High, the Creator; the Christians dont pronounce His name since they have forgotten it. God the Father, whose image was brought to Europe by the Turki, remained without a name and without worship for them. A figure of minor importance in their divine pantheon. Religious tradition of the Turki, as witnessed by the history of the East, was formed five centuries before Christ, its origin has been lost in centuries. It is most likely that the birth of religion was connected with metal manufacture which changed the life of the Altaic nation. An ancient epos connects that event with Geser the Prophet who told the Altai inhabitants of Tengri - the Heavenly God and learned them to smelt iron. Connection between new God and new iron is evident. They were one for Altai inhabitants. It is not by accident that in poetics the nation of Altai called iron a celestial metal the gift of Heaven. This name contains tremor and delight of a person finding an air stone since those stones sent from the sky gave ancient people iron which doesnt exist in nature without impurities. The earliest iron knives and daggers known to science are made of air stones. Chinese sources (Thaipinhuanyuitszi) report of the Ancient Altai: Their lands produce gold, iron, tin [also] their state has iron of celestial rains, it is picked up so as to make knives and swords; [it] differs from [common] iron Some time ago they asked an envoy from
there [how the iron was obtained], he was irresponsive and concealed that. He just said: iron is very solid and sharp and work with it is hard and skilled. Because their lands produce iron. Trees freeze in the rain, and [iron] appears. After some time it is devoured by soil. Thats why [it] is picked and sharp. At that every time people pick up [this iron] after the rain, there would always be defeated and killed. The reason is not clear. Source: History of Khakassia from Ancient Times up to 1917, page 79. God whose heaven pantries were full of precious metal gave people the skills to smelt ore and obtain iron. Thus Altai inhabitants offered prayers to Him. That was the basis of their philosophy that was developing together with society giving rise to world view and forming spiritual basis which later turned into a religion. Of course other ancient metallurgic centers are known to science: the Caucasus, Minor Asia, but traces of any religion similar to that of Altai are absent there. Why? Another technology was used there it allowed production of metal of low quality and thus iron could not affect peoples lives there it still remained a rarity, a precious thing which was worth more than gold. In spite of a prevailing aberration, iron did not supercede bronze. During the Iron Age there were even more bronze items than during the Bronze Age, - writes M. Bekkert. In the II millennium B.C. iron cost 15 20 times as much in comparison with copper but later the price for it fell, however, it remained very expensive and iron balls were kept in tsar's treasuries. Such buried treasure 160 tons of iron was found in the palace of Sargon II, the Assyrian tsar (722 705 B.C.) while carrying out excavations near Nineveh, his capital. Nobody in the world used to smelt iron ore. Nobody could. Iron was burned out of ore, and that is a painstaking work requiring a lot of fuel. In Altai people learned to smelt! Their new life was the gift of Heavenly God. Thus is the image of Tengri Eternal Blue Sky and worshipping ceremonies. For example, the feast dedicated to the Most High
was started by a stroke of a hammer over an anvil made by the tsar. Hence is a bell. A bell (pronounced as kolokol in Russian and kalyk kol in the Turkic language) in Turkic means pray to heavens. The ring of bells certainly gave rise to spirit in honest men, and later that spirit turned into belief. Only the deaf could not hear it but they felt it. Iron spirit became the peculiarity of the Turkic nation This assertion is logical since Altaic ores are the best and the most abundant ores in the world, they gave the Turki iron and weapons which could become the weapons of freedom and victory in heir hands according to historians and experts in metallurgy. The unity of iron and Monotheism accompanied the Great Nations Migration being its symbol, sense and sound. Altaic smelting technology and new belief appeared together with the Turki as it was in the Northern India, Persia and later in Europe along Don, Dnepr and Rhine. This unity was everywhere. Thus the new culture demonstrated itself and attracted to itself. And thus it was firmly establishing! It was not imposed; it was taken as the best one. Buddhism, Jainism, Zoroastrianism, Manichaeism, Judaism appeared not on a sudden. They are the branches of the Turkic belief, its continuation in new cultures of India, Persia and the Middle East. These religions represented changes of society which followed the Great Nations Migration. It is symbolic that Zoroaster and Mani, for instance, preached the teaching of the Turki, their dualism, but they did it using other language and symbols and dealing with other conceptions familiar to local nations. Hence is a striking similarity of religious teachings that has repeatedly perplexed the experts. But nobody could explain that. The source of belief was the same everywhere, most of educated people feel that it is read even in the rewritten (codified in the times of Sasanids) Zend-Avesta, the ancient collection of Iranian sacred books. But why? Nobody knows. However, it can
never be understood without knowing the Turkic history. Of course, dualism of Zoroaster's teaching did not mean that the sage was against monotheism. It developed the conception of coming of the last stage of existence of the world, when Good and Evil will be separated from each other. Zoroaster taught that each human being takes part in destruction of Evil and recovery of Good before which everybody is equal. According to R. Fry, the well-known Orientalist: Those who regard Zoroaster followers as amicable shepherds of herds and consider nomads reaving and killing cattle as their enemies find more in the sage's words than they contain. Cultural changes which started before Christ in the Northern India and Persia convince that metallurgic Altai was the only place to be the spring of human river which dabbled Eurasian lands and gave birth to new cultural plantlets. Because a scientific and technological revolution took place there the most mysterious revolution in the early human history; the world was getting familiarized with its achievements. The Altaians invented not only a metallurgic furnace they saddled a horse using a steel bridle and saddles with stirrups, they created animal (horse) transport, constructed a plough and new weapons and armors. Scores of inventions appeared, iron forming their basis. Heavy crops of barley and millet, comfortable dwellings are the results of that high culture. And of abundance. Legends of abundance and generosity of the Ancient Altai existed in the Turkic world for centuries; peoples epos didnt let them fade away. Here is, for instance, their reflection in the poem Iskander-Name by Nizami Gianjevi:
We sow the seeds in due course And entrust them to the Sky that feeds us. What are we to do then? There's no question. During the harvest time we will have a lot of millet: After half a year after sowing, We will plenty of harvest.
prosperity lead to a demographic explosion, to population overgrowth and finally to the Great Nations Migration. One is the result of another, certainly, under some circumstances. Prosperity agitated for beauty and desirability of the Turkic culture, and it did it better than words. At some time, it seems, neighbors guessed themselves: the tsar of Altai is in the great secret and started to render special honors to him, his descendants were invited to run other countries, they were granted privileges. India, Persia, Transcaucasia, Syria, Egypt, Ethiopia are the best illustrations tsarist dynasties and grand people used to speak the Turkic language there. They were the natives of Altai. And, judging by remaining drawings and bas-reliefs, they wore Turkic clothes! Those rulers were generally from tsarist families of Barsa or Kushan. A bird (kush in Turkic) the mediator between the Sky and earth patronized the Kushans; that was their family sign (tug, khorug). A falcon personifying the tsarist family has been especially treated in the East since then. That proud and brave bird was chopped on ancient coins and seals, its image can be found on art objects which remained in biggest museums of the world objects of the times of Achemenids, Arshakids, Kushans, Sasanids and other tsars of the Middle East and India whose ancestors came from Altai. A heraldic symbol time has no power over it even handsome lies fade away. In ancient Iranian mythology the image of Kushan was very important; they (Khushanghi in the local language) are ancestors of the Iranians, the people of foreign origin who brought iron and plough agriculture. They came from Altai, from the North, which is witnessed by the famous historical book Shahname (Book about the Tsars), it is almost two thousand years old they started to put it together in the times of Arshakids. According to Zend-Avesta, a
Only economic well-being, only

hvarenah a falcon for hunting is the symbol of the crown. It has become the part of heraldry, which is symbolic in itself. By the way, later they started to depict dragons with wings, panthers with wings, horses with wings so as to emphasize belonging to the tsarist family of those who would place them on their heraldic symbols. Eastern art is very rich. All patrons of new tsarist dynasties had wings. They were like guardian angels. The Turki started the Great Nations Migration, the top of which was belief in Heavenly God, not empty-handed. Tengri was the name of the Most High, which in their language meant Eternal Blue Sky. Good and evil, amenities and troubles are sent only by Tengri, - the Altaians told themselves. He is the judge, He is the highest wisdom turned to people. Those later called the Hanifs by the Greek lead their lives believing in Him.
formed long ago and it is unlikely that it was an Altaic invention; that light image contained the unity of the past and present for many eastern nations. Unity which is inseparable and has no author. It seems that cult was absent on Hindustan since the Indians turned their regard on it and retained it in their myths. A serpent was not worshipped there. And besides, according to Altaic legends, a serpent is connected with fire and water it could fly up in the clouds and simultaneously touch the bottom holes, caves, sills of rivers where it hid its treasures. It gave people iron ore, gold and other riches of its depths. All metals were hidden in its pantries. An ancient Altaic legend asserts that once a serpent born a man in a shirt or with wolfskin, which was a good sign. When it was needed he could turn into a wolf, panther, bear or any other animal. He just needed to dap in order to do it Hence one important consequence: a totemic sign the protecting spirit appeared in Altaic families with that man in a shirt. Most commonly those were a serpent, panther, bird or wolf that protected the family. Thus varmints became symbols of aristocratic families. They were painted on flags and blazons, sacrifices were made to them and, of course, they were never offended. Hence another Altaic tradition expressed in arts animal style. It was the peculiarity of Turkic ornaments and stories. A drawing on a bone or a statuette made by an ancient craftsman expressed the life the struggle of families. A panther clawed a bull, a wolf bayed a boar Plastic arts of images are amazing and original. It just needs to be seen once and it will remain with you as the sign of Turkic culture for the rest of your life. It will be the face of Altai. Only then in ancient times people knew arts like that. Images of living world had been widely used in Altai before Geser the Prophet came, i.e. before Altai inhabitants accepted
The Hindustan Peninsula and Its Inhabitants

Rumors of omnipotent Tengri who helped people were circulating all over the world. About two and half or three thousand years ago they reached Hindustan, and Indian pages of the Turkic history were opened; the wave of the Great Nations Migrations touched the north of that exotic country. Those times havent been forgotten; legends of the Nagas created at that time still exist. According to beliefs of the Indians, Nagas are the newcomers from the north, white people demigods with human faces and serpent bodies, they could turn either into people or into serpents as they wished. They loved poetry and music; their women were famous for singular beauty Why serpents? Because according to the Eastern legends, human beings originated from serpents. A serpent, or a dragon is the sign of ancestors not only for the Turki; it is also the good genius, the keeper of home. It was a sin to kill a snake. The image of the serpent was
the belief in Tengri. But the totemic sign did not disappear after a new tradition was established. Sacrifices which had been practiced earlier disappeared But it should be mentioned that much is known of those distant times. Maybe even more than of times not so remote. And that is another paradox of history as a rule close events are subject to censure. In India there is Mahabharata manuscript, or The Great Story of Descendants of Bharata the chronicle of ancient Hindustan. Some pages are dedicated to the Naga there. Their native land, as it is seen from the legends, is to the north where teeming treasures and an iron cross are hidden. But another thing is the most interesting: than man in a shirt that was born by a serpent in Altai became known on Hindustan after the arrival of the Turki. The Indians gave him the name of Bhima. Mahabharata makes one think so there it is said that a newcomer has the wolf's belly, i.e. that is a man with wolfskin. If we keep the origin of that image in mind, such assertion doesnt seem incredible; in the text Altaic subjects are revealed one after another. The more especially as the Nagas formed a tsarist dynasty which left a real trace in the Northern India early in the I millennium. Mahabharata consists of eighteen books. According to Orientalists it is the fullest history reflecting the course of events of the I millennium B.C. in the world. Legends being the basis of those rare books were formed two and half thousand years ago and even earlier, they are connected with newcomers from the North, which is read perhaps in each of one hundred thousand distichs of the text. Culture which is absolutely different from culture that had existed on Hindustan before is in question. Serious monographs and researches of many generations of scientists are dedicated to it. Having thoroughly analyzed the ancient text, scientists determined that the epos was written about one and a half thousand years ago and not much has been changed in it since then.
But who were those newcomers heroes of ancient legends? Where is their native land? And are there answers to these questions. Here a great variety of opinions exists this is the beginning of politics! Some send them to Ural, others to Tibet. But not to Altai! Thats how strange corporate unity of the western science is shown. As though following someone's orders, it connects nothing on the continent with the Turki. A taboo Well, let it be so. But Researches, including those from the West, turned their attention to the fact that ancient Indian epos (Mahabharata, Ramayana) and Vedic literature often describe natural phenomena which native Indians were not able to see. Even theoretically. For instance, immovable Pole Star and the Great Bear. An in addition snow, ice and frosty nights lasting for months. A long day with the midnight sun, let alone northern constellations which could be seen high in the sky only in regions lying not further to the south than the fifty fifth degree of the north latitude. In India the Great Bear is hidden beyond the horizon, it cannot be seen there. Nevertheless poetical compositions are dedicated to it Isn't that strange? And who, apart from natives of Ancient Altai that lies on that very latitudes, could see the northern sky? It cannot be seen from tops of Tibet. Ural version is even less reasonable, it could only be suggested by a person who has never visited the Polar Ural and knows nothing of its nature and archeological capacities. Those nature phenomena can be met only in Altai! Alas, geography meddles history here, and it cannot be suppressed by censorship. Maybe thats why the Earth is still round? It is good that at least this remains without changes. Geographical discoveries are everywhere in epos of the ancient India. Here is another example, perhaps the most important one, characterizing the native land of newcomers. Mount Meru. Thats not a mountain, that is a mountain chain stretching
14 / 342
from East to West; Meru is called the Golden Mountain in epos. That is God's abode where the soul of all creatures is. It turns out there is a day in a year when radiant sun, having come round Meru, returns to its bottom. That is how the sun turns round. Thus the pradaksina appeared the rite of circumambulating in a clockwise direction an image, relic, shrine or another sacred object. The ceremony which showed respect to relics. Even the sun does it. That sacred mountain is situated in Altai in Ondugai Region; it is called Sumer. That is the heart of Altai the most sacred place for the Turki. It can be compared only with Kailas. There are hundreds of ancient barrows there, solitude and prayers. A real temple in the open which is thousands of years old. For thousands of years people have been visiting it. Sumer is the altar of Altai where one shouldnt shout and hunting is not allowed. In summer there is a day when the sun rises from one side of the mountain and sets from the other. That could never be invented. The same as the fact that top of the mountain is covered with snow and each snowflake is somebody's soul, its material state. It is dazzling in the sunshine, which is the explanation of the following line in Indian Vedas: That wonderful mountain shone with flights of wondrous birds thats how they used to talk about Meru, the eternal snowfield, the source of a sacred river, pure and the most transparent in the world. Souls of sinners are cleansed here, in the furnace of ordeals. Su means water in the Turkic language; it shows the meaning of the name Sumer. Heavenly Ganges of Indian Vedas has its source there in the spring of world spirituality Later two neighbor tops made the Altaians speak of Uch-Sumer as of certain integrity of the world. There is its certain philosophy which is as hard to cognize for a profane as to cognize Time What is Time, indeed? And Altyn-Kel (Teletskoye Lake or Milk Sea) was also known in India; they knew
of its life-giving water and banks covered with groves and forests, glades redolent of flowers and they also knew that in winter only half of the lake freezes over and even not every year, although it is located on the northern hillside of Mount Meru. Thats right. Even milk water in winter described in the Indian legend. That is frazil, acicular ice; it is white as snow and it covers the surface. One cannot walk on it A natural phenomenon of Altai no censorship can change it. The reason lies in hot underground sources flowing into the lake. White Milk Lake is also described in a Khakas legend where the same geographical coordinates connected with Sumer mountain are given. In the legend it has golden banks reminding of a horse's eyes Mahabharata is amazing due to the fact that it describes Altai from the point of view of an eyewitness, at that it describes it as a country of bliss, the sacred abode, paying more attention not to nature but to people for whom divine justice is common. It emphasizes the worship of Heavenly God!.. Such words can be written only about the native land that one had left; they come from the heart, not from the mind. These are religious rites of white men, laws connoisseurs and righteous men. marked with all good signs, shining like the moon, they penetrate eternal God. That was Altai, that was the belief of its inhabitants. That was for real! The first book of Mahabharata could be really interested for turcologists since it contains information of Nagas and their way of life. As a matter of fact, that is the ancient history of Altai, the history of the Turki which is absent in most other sources. Peoples epos of India is a unique memory storage. Legends inadvertently confirm not only the Great Nations Migration but also its consequences. Indian scientists are absolutely sure that the Nagas are real historical tribes that came to the north of Hindustan. Twenty five centuries passed after their coming a long
time and archeology confirmed the coming of the Nagas. As a matter of fact, Mahabharata is not a collection of fairy tales; it is a historical book consisting of many legends that was the cultural tradition of India where scientists regard historical legends as reliable documents of the epoch. As against Russia, ancient texts are sacred there; it didnt even occur to anyone to correct or rewrite them Can the past be changed? Certainly not. The Indians dont conceal that they took Prajnaparamita that has become the base of diversified culture of Hindustan from the Turki. It has become a kind of Indian Bible or Koran. That is the primordial collection of wisdom. Only outstanding enlighteners people with crystal souls were allowed to read it, since not every man of mould could conceive high thoughts and sooths contained in it. It is striking that it contains phrases and even whole plots that have later become part of the Bible and Koran. Thats how the Indians did the honor to world culture they retained the unique relics of Altai. They retained for humankind something the Turki themselves have discreditably lost The legends of native lands of newcomers are transformed into the legends of Shambala. Shambala their faraway land had geographical coordinates; it started from the bottom of Sambyl-Taskhyl mountain in the basin of the Khan-Tengri river. It turns out this information is also reliable. The Tengri (Tengeri) river is in Altai. Khan-Tengri top is well-known; it is situated where modern boundaries of Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan the Turkic states come together. According to the legend, there behind the icy haze towns, monasteries and tabernacles are hidden. Maybe they remained, even though in ruins, but no one of our contemporaries has ever searched for them. There are different variants of spelling of this name: Shambhala, Shambkhala, Shambala. It seems it ascends to the phrase qam baluq (qma baluq
kambaluk chambaluk shambaluk shambala) consisting of two ancient Turkic words: qam (clergyman) and baluq (town, fortress). Translation Town (Fortress) of a Clergyman, which accurately reflects the legends of Shambala of ancient northern Buddhists. The head of a monastery is called shamo in Tibet. The Aksu river flows in Altai. The founder of the Sun Dynasty of Indian tsars was born on its banks, as it is written in history of that country. Mysterious Shambala was well-known on the Hindustan; it was regarded as the cell of monks who had sacred knowledge, or the house of human intellectual elite. Who knows, maybe thats how it really was? By the way, Altai is the native land of legendary Arians. Much has been written in India about it, but one should be able to read it. See detailed information in: BongardLevin G.M., Grantovskiy E.A. From Scythia to India. Ancient Arians: Myths and History. Verbitskiy V.I., Altaic Foreigners. Much people used to search for the mythical Shambala, but nobody managed to find it. They think it is hidden in an inaccessible valley of Tibet where mortal life adjoins the sense of heavens. Such opinion was expressed by leading Orientalists that (alas!) did not know geography of the Turkic world, and certain people such as N.M. Przhevalskiy, the traveler and ethnographer, N.K. Rerikh, the philosopher, E.P. Blavatskaya, the enlightener and other researches who used to search for the mysterious country agreed with it due to their ignorance. Maybe there were some reasons for the Tibetan theme, but Another but. The scientists were really mistaken and thus they failed to fund anything. They were searching in a wrong place! The mistake was their first step the idea of an expedition to Tibet. Not having the map of the Time, not knowing the roots of the Great Nations Migration it was impossible to read the
ancient legend and find information hidden in it. A person with a blindfold will inevitably fall down and stop his way sooner or later. Here it is important to understand that our planet was being inhabited not spontaneously, not by someone's will but under demographic laws. That is the system of knowledge the science that is called social geography. Any migration has its peculiarities and interrelations: in production, transport, everyday life. At that each migration component has its own role in expansion of territories. Nothing happens (and can never happen!) by chance here, there are no unconsidered actions; the Time gives rise to events and puts everything in its right place. Life is the price for a mistake here. Only a prepared nation is able to move to new lands and live there. Those were only the Turki who could do it two and a half thousand years ago after a scientific and technological revolution in Altai. And we should remember that. Nobody in the world would use iron items to the same extent as the Turki. Nobody had that perfect animal transport, construction technologies and architecture. In the XIX century, when they started to talk about Shambala, the scientists knew nothing of Altai, its unique nature, facilities and culture. It was a blank page. Not much was known until archeologists came there. For some reason Rerikh didnt notice it either. Why didnt his heart stand still? Because it was empty He didnt have enough knowledge! Having disguised the history of Altaic Turki, Russian authorities thus stalemated world science and even recognized scientists were making mistakes they had a bad compass on their way they didnt know that belief in Heavenly God came to Tibet and Hindustan from Altai it originated and had its deep roots there. Being not sufficiently familiarized with events, scientists neglected certain important facts. For instance, the fact that native Tibetans and Indians called themselves nonArians thus emphasizing that not they came from the North. The fact is indicative, it was
written in a legend! It is confirmed by another fact that is also disregarded: the word Arian is concordant with the ancient Turkic word aryg (pure, sacred, noble) Much has been said about it in Indian legends, but Turcologists and Orientalists have always disregarded these facts; they were not interesting for scientists. Lamaism, the northern branch of Buddhism, remained in Tibet. That is another reserve of the eastern culture! It appeared much later. Its foundations were laid in the I century at the IV Buddhist Council by Altaic Turki, the tsar Kanishka referred to below was honored to approve the new belief. Not only Altai, but also Mongolia, Buryatia, Kalmykia, Tuva continuous keepers of that religion still remember him. That wasnt by chance that Buddhist pilgrims came there to Altai, to the Central Asia on order to make progress in belief and obtain sacred texts thats how pilgrims from China determined their goals in 260. The word obtain should be noted it meant to get paper kagit as it was called then. For a Turkologist Lamaism is interested due to the fact that it retained customs deriving from Altaic ceremonies. It also knows the immortal name of Tengri. It is obvious that eastern religion is a unique relict of spiritual culture of humankind. It is the branch of Hanif belief, it is noticeable for Monotheism but with another understanding of the highest image remaining within the frames of Buddhism. In Lamaism there is no God, Creator or Supreme Being. As far as we know, the cult of Buddha and bodhisattvas was formed there. Maytreya (Maydar, Maydari) plays a special part there the only bodhisattva acknowledged by all schools of Buddhism. As the Turki were moving, worship of Maytreya (under the name of Mitra, Mikhra, Mhera) appeared in cultures of nations taking shape of an independent religious cult. And that is indicative! These are the signs of the contact of cultures that started after the Great Nations Migration. One would think everything is evident
here is Altai, here is Lamaism. But it was also disregarded, which, unfortunately, is not a surprise any longer: Lamaism followed the Turkic religion. Under the official conspiracy of politicians and the Western clergy, the term Lamaism has been eliminated from European scientific language since 1970. It was secretly forbidden. That religion was also sentenced to oblivion by the West Nothing can be added. Another fact to swallow like bitter medicine and wince. Altai, the same as the image of Tengri, had not been forgotten in India for a long time until western colonizers came. Is that by chance that Buddha is still depicted with blue (Arian, as the Indians will say) eyes? Isn't it a backwash of forgotten happenings? For instance, those connected with unknown people that came from the North. Because the Indians called those people not only the Nagas and Arians; participants of the second and third wave of the migration bore the names of Saks, Shaks, Shakies. They were also the Altaians: with blue eyes, red hair and fair skin, they also rode horses and wore the same clothes, they had the same traditions and culture Is it another coincidence? Certainly not, the Great Nations Migration had its face. Even in clothes. That is the culture of the nation, its unique traces cannot be confused. The roads of the ancient world led not to Rome but to Altai Archeologists registered the presence of the Saks in Pamir and Hindu Kush from the beginning of the V century B.C. They also fixed their routs. Much of scientific literature is dedicated to the culture of the Saks classical works by S.V. Kiselev and S.I. Rudenko should be emphasized. The work by K.A. Akishev, an outstanding archeologist who has made a unique discovery stands apart. He published ancient Turkic inscriptions found by him in burial places of the Saks those were runic writings that opened the language of the Saks for the world and allowed to assert that the Saks are one of the Turkic hordes. At least they spoke the Turkic language, wore Turkic clothes and rode horses.
It should be mentioned that the Akishev's discovery is very important. Because scientists dealing with the Great Nations Migration didnt use the word Turki, they used the terms Saks, Scythians etc. Their caution had political reasons: the West and Soviet Union were jointly struggling against Pan-Turkism and grimly extirpated everything Turkic in Europe and their colonies. In such conditions even fair scientists were forced to temporize with their conscience so as to avoid persecution and continue their work. And what else could they do? They worked under surveillance and, as the censorship required, were loyal speaking of the Iranian language of the Saks and Scythians. They tried not to go into details concerning the term Iranian language But a lot of discoveries were made at those times. As a matter of fact everything we know today. Akishev's work was a breakthrough in science the oppressed truth triumphed in it. In this connection we cannot go without the conclusion to which professor Rudenko came after his fascinating expeditions to Altai: Archeological excavations in the Mountain Altai showed that in the 1st millennium B.C. an original and outstanding culture existed here. He was not allowed to say more; politicians guarded their dark secrets, but even this brief phrase was the victory of the truth it was the result of long work. Items of the Turkic culture found in excavations spoke for themselves better than thousands of words. Unfortunately a lot of facts from the study of the Great Nations Migration are concealed only because of politicians. Blank pages are everywhere. And there are a lot of ambiguous things, for instance, why were not all the newcomers to Hindustan followers of Monotheism? It seems a spiritual dispute grew warm after the new religion came to Altai, which divided the nation thats how it should have been. One part of the Altaians accepted the belief in Tengri Heavenly God and His protection and their opponents left
native lands having lost the dispute?.. Or not? These are very interesting questions waiting for a researcher. What if actually in consciousness of the Altaians there were different conceptions of the world? Isn't that the reason of appearance of religions and religious schools in the East after every new wave of the Great Nations Migration? That is very interesting. Because Buddhism arose on Hindustan after the Turki had come there. A certain man now known as Siddhartha Gautama came to the next conclusion looking for the meaning of life: Monotheism is impossible (that is an evident continuation of the spiritual dispute which existed in Altai at that time). The philosophy suggested expressed thoughts that perplexed the compatriots. There are Altaic legends of TengriTedygech (predictor) that wrote the teaching of the belief and argued with people in his own way asserting that they shouldnt pray as they used to and that the real belief is the belief he wrote about. Our world is not permanent, thought that wise Turki, but the essence of existence is in its impermanence. Any moment of life is not like the previous one. Everything around us and we ourselves are permanently moving, every moment something is born and something dies. Consequently man doesnt have his permanent self, since he is not permanent either, he is moving And in this case how can eternal soul be in question? And eternal God? Life is a succession of moments every single one of which gives place to the next by its disappearance A thought is simpler than a drop of water but it reflects the essence of existence. For that genial insight that cannot be expressed by the words Siddhartha Gautama was called Buddha, which meant Clarified. His philosophy gave rise to a new religious teaching. Today Buddhism is the most popular religion in the world, and then, in the days of Buddha it was practiced only by inhabitants of the Northern India by those
who came from Altai. As D. Kosambi noticed, in its native land in India Buddhism didnt hold its ground; today remainders of Buddhism remained only in the north-east of the country to some extent. Such decline of Buddhism in the country where it was born is in strange contradiction with its success outside India. Even today a majority of educated Indians would be indignant if someone tells them that Buddhism that they regard as a temporary aberration is the most important contribution of their country to world culture. And another fact is even more interesting: legends of the Nagas have become the part of the Buddhist mythology according to the legend Buddha preached to them. They became the keepers of the most important Buddhist text Prajnaparamitahrdaya-sutra. And Siddhartha Gautama himself regenerated into a Naga several times before becoming Buddha. Another thing is also interesting native Indians called Buddha Shakyamuni, which literally means Turkic god. And the Turki called him Tanghri Burkhan, i.e. Tengri's Messenger. Thats why he is still drawn with blue eyes, the same as all other Turki. They dont know another Altaic appearance there. In Nepal, near Rummindei, there is a column where the name of the founder of Buddhism is carved the name of a human being from Shakya family who came from the North. The column was raised in the III century B.C. It marks the place where Buddha Shakyamuni, the sage from Shakya family or the Turkic God was born. The tsar Kanishka accompanied Buddha's image on coins by the inscriptions Sakamano Boddho and Bogo Boddho. The first inscription emphasized the belonging of Buddha to the Turki and the second is translated as God Buddha. That is to say that starting from the I century he was identified with Tengri, which was logical for the Northern Hindustan and Middle East that were absorbing the Altaic culture. Much is in common between the belief
in Tengri and the belief in Buddha, but at the same time there are many differences. It is natural and not accidental. Buddha's ash was buried under a barrow (dagoba) on a crossing according to the last will of the Master and a Turkic tradition. So that any stranger could pay tribute to him and have an opportunity to be born in heavens in the next life. (By the way, the word dagoba is translated from Sanskrit as ground barrow). In that barrow there was a camera to store relics. The barrow itself was girded by a road for a solemn clockwise walk (posolon) These are the facts speaking for themselves. But they also give rise to certain thoughts. Why arent there any Buddhists in India the native land of Buddhism? The situation is unexpected and it is unlikely to explain it not knowing a changeable and sometimes contentious Turkic temper. The decline of Buddhism started in the Middle Ages when the sultan Makhmud Gaznevi came to the Hindustan and strengthened Islam there millions of people again returned to classic Monotheism having become Moslems. The rest turned to Hinduism having brought Buddhist traditions into it thus they were called Hindu Buddhists. However there were those who remembered the belief of their ancestors Tengri. Not less than fifty million people live with that old new belief in Heavenly God in India. They are neither Buddhists, neither Moslems, nor Christians. They have other ceremonies, other symbols, they recognize Tengri's equilateral cross and not Christ's cross. Are they Hanifs? The Western Church calls them Christians of St. Thomas, Arians, Nestorians; it has been desperately trying to convert them since the XIV century. In 1775, for instance, in Rome they published Catholicized service books of the Christians of St. Thomas that forgery was primarily for the Indians. But they failed. Colonial seizure of Hindustan did not help break the spirit of the people. The colonizers, having approved of inquisition,
buried Indian clergymen and ancient service books. They killed parishioners. Later Catholics were changed by Anglican clergymen theyve also done a good job. As a result much has been lost from former history of the Hanifs and their ceremonies. But not everything. It is possible that that is the only place on the Earth where fragments of the Altaic belief remained? Who knows We know that nothing leaves without a trace. Unfortunately Turcologists have never visited this place. And traces of the past are usually revealed unexpectedly when nobody is waiting for them. It was noticed that reasons of great victories, the same as sources of great rivers, are barely perceptible. But they exist! All one has to do is find them if one knows where to search and for what one is searching. Iron is another example its history on Hindustan is expressive and detailed; it also shows that the truth cannot be abolished. Western researches still want to do India the native land of iron due to its multiple ancient traces. However, carbon analysis of findings put everything it its right place; censorship can do nothing here. Mass distribution of iron commenced in the VI III centuries B.C. And that coincides with the arrival of the Altaians. Thats when iron became a common material in India of which weapons, agricultural equipment and tools were produced. The Turki taught the Indians to plow with iron ploughs, take in the harvest with iron sickles, which is shown by legends and confirmed by archeologists' reports. How can one object here?.. Words are the shadows of deeds, as people say in the West. Even ploughs found during excavations in Altai and the history of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh unite separate facts concerning the Indian Turki. In the North of India iron was occasionally found during excavations of layers of culture of gray painted ceramics of the XII XI centuries B.C. They are connected with arrival of the tribe of steppe circle (Arians). But such findings are seldom. In the South appearance of iron is also explained only by external influences pointing
to a specific character of burial places of those times and burials of horses as well as findings of items connected with horse breeding. Famous Indian cavalry also appeared after the arrival of the Altaians. Another fact that cannot be disregarded. Archeologists' findings convince stronger than words: bridles, saddles, bailers were taken from Altaic barrows. Ornaments and shapes are practically undistinguishable they are absolutely identical. And the same goes with remains of horses. Judging by found ancient remains, Altaic horses were excellent stallions. Being 150 cm and even more in height, they were at least as good as the best horses of the world if not outclassed them, as the notable scientist, professor S.I. Rudenko wrote about his findings in Altai in 1953. Those stallions were closer to Akhaltecian Turkmen horses and, of course, did not resemble steppe horses. Traces of a centuries-old selection are more than just noticeable in them. Both in India and Altai. Everybody can understand what it means. I suppose only one thing can be added in the Turkic language there are more than forty epithets meaning horse colors. Only colors! None of world languages is that rich in horse terms It turns out, in Altai horse breeding was really known not by hearsay. How can one be surprised, when children there were firstly taught to ride a horse and then to walk. Researches agree that cavalry was peculiar only to the northern army and that it was connected with the Saks (Arians), born horse breeders who entrusted their destiny to a horse both in battles and in times of peace. In India where many nations lived only they the northerners were known as horse worshippers. Other nations did without horses they cared about elephants, buffalos and camels breeding. Ceremonies of horses sacrifice should be mentions the Turki retained them
for thousands of years. In ancient Indian mythology it was called ashvamedkha. A horse purposely selected was set free, but the tsar (or an appointed commander) followed it with a host. Masters of regions where that horse was running were either to obey the tsar the owner of the horse or fight with him. In a year the horse was taken to the capital and sacrificed in the presence of conquered inhabitants thats how historians describe that ceremony. That was not a murder of an animal. It performed its function. The sacrifice was accompanied by three ritual hearths and a big altar directed to the East In Altai this ceremony existed as far back as the XIX century. In India it was forgotten earlier after the country was colonized by the English. It is interesting that the Turki had the saying: Where horse hoof steps, it is our land. A horse was everything in the North of Hindustan. It was treated like a family member. And it couldnt be otherwise that was a tradition. According to the legend Nasatya (Ashvins) appeared from the nose of a horse (an Altaic plot!). 54 hymns are dedicated to it in Rigveda. They were the youngest gods in the divine pantheon of Hindustan they banished the darkness and thus in the morning people would pray only them. Worship of brothers began and continued during the Vedic epoch and after that it turned into Hinduism having become part of its ceremonies. Nasatya, an Arian name, the Indians translate as born by a horse not knowing that its stem has an ancient Turkic expression anasy at (literally: their mother is a horse). It is indicative that in Altai there are legends of twins heroes born by a horse. In this connection an ancient Khakas epos AiHuuchin is very interesting a virgin and her twin brother who became her horse are its heroes. The plot is very similar to the Vedic one that one can hardly say where that ancient legend appeared in Altai or in India? The Turki were not regarded as guests on Hindustan for a long time. Their children became its citizens for whom the peninsula
was turning into a native land. A very expressive reformation it was typical for the times of the Great Nations Migration. The newcomers were becoming the natives. Under a rough estimate it turns out that family trees of perhaps every fifth Indian or Pakistani start with Turkic roots. However, in effect it could be even more. These are hundreds of million of people. Their faces are recognizable even today; their blood keeps the genes of Altaic ancestors, which can perplex even sophisticated biologists and geneticists. But even the most unbelievable reality, as far as we know, is just the continuation of the past thats what Buddhism teaches. Of course such resemblance cannot be seen in those faces at once since not every wedding was carried out in accordance with Turkic rules in India. There were also mixed marriages. Daughters of the Turki married local men for the purpose of peaceenforcement, which is also confirmed by legends of the Nagas and Arians. Their women became beloved wives of rulers and heroes What else can be said? Life required that injustice. The Sun Dynasty one of two tsarist families had power on Hindustan for many centuries. The Dynasty was founded by Ikshvaku; according to his family tree in the V century B.C. he came with his people from Altai where he lived in the valley of the Aksu river. His Grandfather's name was Adja. Having seated on the throne, Ikshvaku pledged the town of Ayodkhya (Ajodakha) the capital of Koshala (from the ancient Turkic expression kosh al- add and conquer). The town still stands there is the Museum of the Sun Dynasty with a lot of information about Altai and its people. It seems that is the only museum dedicated to the Turki in the world. There is even a list of tsars made across the generations. Ayodkhya, as any other town, had its ups and downs. For some time it was called the capital of the Northern Hindustan because of influence of Koshal that included the
territory of modern Pakistan. After that the town declined and fell into desolation, after which another rise took place. With the arrival of the Altaians life on Hindustan became disquiet. Pakistan and India still fail to sort out their relationship. So many centuries, so many wars. And no perspectives. Because the Turki are fighting on both sides the Turki that have forgotten themselves and their customs. They shall never surrender. They will keep on fighting to the bitter end. The reason of their dispute was Kashmir and its temples which were the places of pilgrimages of the Altaians. Should the sacred Kashmir be Indian or Pakistani? This question keeps on the alert. It was skillfully raised by colonizers for whom it was important to make the free nation fight, to make Kashmir the hearth of permanent strain. Not peace but wars. And nobody told the Indians and Pakistani that it is improper to fight where our common ancestors prohibited even to talk loudly. The river on which Ayodkhya stands is called Saraya here is another example of the Turkic toponymy on Hindustan. The name points to the palace that stood on the bank. And that is true that was the capital with palaces, temples, beautiful houses. Tsar's palace gave the name to the river. In 1996 professor E.M. Murzaev, the well-known expert in toponymy, wrote as follows: It is generally admitted that the Central Asia was the native land of the ancient Turki. It is likely that Turkic toponymy also originated here. Place names were spreading from here together with people up to Tibet, India, Karakoram Range, North Africa. And of course the age of the Turkic toponymy varies: the farther from the center, the younger it is in the Central Asia it is about three thousand years old. Toponyms on the map are not silent! Take, for instance, Hindustan How did this word appear? Isn't it connected with Tatarstan, Kazakhstan, Dagestan? In the Turkic language stan means country, habitat. And the Turki were moving to Hindustan in families; their migration lasted
for centuries. They were becoming local elite and thus were entitled to name this or that region as they wanted. Their high position in society is shown in family trees of certain aristocratic families, for example, maharajas Udaypura, Djodhpura, Djaypura all of them originate far from India in Altai. The Indians called these people the Rajasthans, Rajputas, and their ancestors the Saks, Huns, Turki (in Sanskrit rajah putra means son of the tsar). They were the rulers of Indian rajaships That is written in Indian books. There is nothing new in it. A special book should be written about Urdu language the official language of Pakistan and certain northern states of India. It is widespread and it is archly called a dialect of Hindi. However, it is not clear why it is full of Turkic words and expressions. And construction of phrases is also Turkic. Why very few Indians understand Urdu while any Azerbaijanian can easily speak it several days after coming? It seems that is the ancient dialect of the Turkic language Oguz dialect. But it is practically impossible to convince linguists of it. And how can it be done since they find in Urdu plenty of Arab, Persian words and not a single Turkic one? Lack of foresight. It is pertinent to note in this connection that in the XV century Vasco da Gama, having discovered India for the Europeans for the second time, had no difficulty talking to maharajas. They spoke close dialects of one language and understood each other. That was the Turkic language which at that time was spoken both in Europe and the Northern India and left an inerasable trace in base Latin of the West as well as in Urdu of Pakistan and India. In order to deny that one would have to provide some unlikely arguments. Or to lie. By the way, as every educated person of that time, Columbus also knew the Turkic language. Setting a historical sail he took the letter to the Great Khan of India. The letter, of course, was written in the Turkic language. The discoverer of America, meeting the Indians of the New World, exclaimed in
surprise: They dont understand Turkic!. And thus there was a lot to doubt he understood that he had arrived not to India. Base Latin, so-called Vulgate peculiar to the West of the Middle Ages, is referred to later. Marco Polo has also written a lot about khanates of the Turki on Hindustan and in Iran; almost one third of his Book is dedicated to them on certain pages the words Great Khan and the Tartars appear perhaps in every line. In the XIV century those were the rulers of the West they ruled as they wanted and lived as they could. Servants of the Pope hadnt befuddled them yet. The famous Venetian traveler also described the Karans a Moslem nation that used to roam mountain steppes those were the aborigines headed by the Turki who preferred to ride horses. Modern Pakistan and Afghanistan were the provinces where Turkic speech was common in towns and villages. Other natives of Altai were called the Pushtuns - they had more Turkic spirit than can be found in Tartar villages of Russia: divisions for the same tukhums (families), thee same peoples traditions and ceremonies Everything is the same, everything is Turkic, everything remained. To tell the truth, Western ethnographers after Marco Polo havent called the Turki with this name. It is not customary. Other names were invented for them But that happened in terms of politics. By the way, the hero of Pakistani epos bears the name of Altaic Adamkhan. Traces of the olden times remained in clothes of the nomadic nation (bloomers, kalpaks, vestment) and in food (sour milk, dry cheese, mutton broth, kebabs). They dont have feasts without horse-races, weddings without jesters with their noisy retinues. Felt decorated with Altaic ornament is an obligatory attribute of every Turkic family, any home. What else do ethnographers need? Language, way of life, history
everything is present. There is no recognition, since the Church prohibited to call the white color white. By different estimates, the number of tribes inhabiting modern Afghanistan reaches four hundred. Taimen (sub-ethnic groups: Kypchak, Durzai, Khazara-Taimen, Kakar), Firuzkukhs, Djemshids, Gilzais, Mogols, Teimurs, Charaimaks and dozens of others are evident descendants of the natives of Altai; Turkic elements participated in their ethnogeny even according to official reference books. Thus their bellicosity and invincibility is easily explained it has deep roots. For these people as for real Turki there is nothing to fear. Archeologists found items witnessing of their Altaic origin in Afghanistan more than once. But excavations in the north of Afghanistan (the town of Tillia-Tepe) provided researchers with unique materials. Six two thousand year-old burial places of tsars were found there. The burial ceremony, clothes, implements, objects of art, burial of horses and decorations everything pointed to connections with Altai, but nobody has ever freely said that. It was not further than Turkic elements. While an original culture should be in question! The Great Nations Migration. Hindustan and Altai lived as a united country they were connected by Biysk and later by Nerchinsk tract. And the first road to India was the Hanging Passage the mysterious road of ancient times today only legends and hanging bridges which have been built in Pamir and Tibet since then remind of it. Altaic riders passed mountain rivers and bottomless abysses on hanging bridges. They rode astride above clouds. Like celestials! Those were other times with other people; they had a superior purpose to bring their belief. Tien Shan mountains, the first obstacle on the way to Hindustan, was called Tengritag Tengri Mountain. Roads to the south opened only for those getting over it. Pilgrims used to walk along that road for centuries. They wanted to visit Kailas the
sacred mountain. For those who lived in the East it was a great pleasure to see Kailas this adornment of the world. They thought that anybody who saw it would be happy for the rest of his life. Kailas was the resting place of Tengri. As a matter of fact, the mountain is the temple created by the Most High; all buildings raised by men are just its copies, according to a legend. Kashmir, its Golden Temple, for which people are fighting today, was the next goal of pilgrims.
Persian Melodies Of The Turkic Anthem

Not only the Northern Hindustan was perceiving Heavenly God. Long before the Common Era white strangers of Altai arrived to the Middle East which represented a pitiful sight: the country was declining, it was exhausted by wars with Babylon. The locals themselves invited the Altaians and entrusted their fate to them. They had no choice that was the only way to be saved from Babylonian slavery. The date of coming of the first wave of the Great Nations Migration here, in contrast to India, is not known, but the dynasty of Achemenids reminds of it it came to power in 558 B.C. The tsar Cyrus was the first of all Altaic tsars; he created a great country known as Persia. He conquered a half of the ancient world, including Egypt, Babylon and the whole Mesopotamia, for which he was called the Great. The tsar belonged to a noble family; a panther was its patron. It seems hence is the name of the country which Cyrus founded Parsa (Persia) (panther is pronounced as bars in Russian). That is the Turkic word connected with people of the Arian seed who came from the north thats how the Achemenids described themselves. There is another opinion on this point. In the Turkic language pars also means tiger, but tigers have never lived in Altai, unlike in the Middle East. It is possible that a tiger became the patron of the tsarist family after Persia had appeared. Thus the image of the winged panther appeared in Altaic arts. The country of the tiger (or panther?) prospered, the tsar was deified, he was called Messiah, i.e. sent by the Savior to the Earth in order to establish his reign forever. Later that plot appeared in the Revelation. Those were the first horsemen headed by a white leader; the whole world saw it And it showed surprise. An epoch-making event! The core of Cyrus's army was formed of the immortal a thousand of best riders.
Wearing armors and helmets, they were the lifeguard of the tsar. They were called the Khazars It was all new in Persia. Everything was gorgeous and amazing. The same as in Altai. In the Turkic language the name Cyrus means begin, i.e. one from whom the family begins. However, Persia was even more successful under Darius who was famous not for wars but for the state reform. He launched the state structure of Altai in his country, which has made his name immortal. That was perhaps the first administrative reform in the world on the model of the Turki. The Turki ran Persia for about two centuries, they achieved a lot, but their power was undermined. Priests of old beliefs turned out to be stronger; their conspiracies made the prosperous country fall without any resistance. The tsar could have made them obey, but he didnt. He could have killed them, but he didnt. He showed toleration since he knew from his ancestors: belief cannot be imposed. That was the reason of the end of Achemenids dynasty. How exactly did the dynasty perish? History doesnt have reliable facts on this point; one can only turn to peoples legends which are as follows. The tsar was killed by his nationals, which was in accordance with traditions of Altai. If the tsar could not make the nation prosper, he the Lord's Anointed was killed in the public, or, more preciously, he was sacrificed. That was the tradition. The Turkic leader was not allowed to make a mistake, otherwise ho was not a leader Religious passions of the Great Persia made it dance like autumn leaves in the wind Alexander the Great had nothing to do with its fall. It is possible that he has never been to Persia at all his campaign seems to be very unlikely; it looks like a mediocre myth where the author didnt trouble himself substantiating his assertions. The years of disorders in Persia (or in what remained of it) lasted for long until, finally, the power was taken by the newcomer
from Altai his name was khan Arsak. He was from a tsarist family but he didnt call himself with the name of bad Achemenids. And he did not dare use their emblem. His name is translated as the Red Sak. He founded the tsarist dynasty of Arshakids and a new country Parthia with an Altaic falcon as its symbol. It happened in 250 B.C. Since then the Middle East has become intimate with the Turkic culture forever it dominated in towns, minds and hearts of enlightened people. The words of Messiah (the Savior) became real. The new country (part of former Persia) was raising and becoming strong rapidly. Legends of Aji-Dakha shed light on that history connected with the Great Nations Migration. But in Iran there is less information about those days in comparison with India. And this information is not in sight. Aji-Dakhaka was a foreign tsar who obtained power in the Middle East. Ancient epos depicts him as a serpent, dragon (like Nagas in India). It is known that Aji-Dakhaka was struggling for belief in Heavenly God, however, not everybody understood him. Most people remained fire-worshippers; Monotheism was alien to them As a matter of fact, it was the same historical plot as in India the natives were unwillingly converted into the belief of newcomers adhering to the former spiritual culture. Only the elite were changing their belief; they wanted to find a compromise between new and old population. Appearance of Zoroastrianism and later Manichaeism in Persia had its reasons. Those two religions adjusted the Turkic belief to local conditions. And they were successful in it. Hence is the reason of fall of Achemenids who wanted to do a very difficult and risky thing to change peoples consciousness. It seems the rulers went wrong to an extent and overestimated something; they placed confidence in some people and were left overboard. History of spiritual culture knows plenty of similar examples when strong dynasties fell because of religious contradictions in society. The first Altaic dynasty in Persia suffered that sorrowful fate. Everything could not be good. After all, those were different nations and
different cultures Analysis of that distant conflict opened the unexpected. It turns out, there were more Turki than aboriginals in Persia. It seems unlikely, but still. Such proportion still remains in the Middle East. Today the population of Iran is called the Iranians, but the paradox is that thats how the newcomers, i.e. the Turki, were called. Population was not called the Iranians under Achemenids and Arshakids. The aboriginals in Persia were fireworshippers. They were the people of another spiritual culture and another anthropological group. Even Monotheism (its pre-Islamic and Islamic interpretation) accepted by Persia did not change consciousness of those people. Fire-worshippers always remained in the Middle East. They were the children of their parents. Swarthy, narrow-faced with black luminous eyes, not very tall those were the descendants of the nation (or nations?) that invited the Turkic tsars. At the same time most of Iranian Moslems today are the Turki who also call themselves the Iranians. They changed their language but not appearance they have another Turkic (!) body structure, which comes as no surprise. From the times of AjiDakhan those descendants of the Altaians used to pray Tengri (Khodai) and live morosely in settlements and auls. The youth was taught under Altaic rules there, it was taught three things to ride a horse, to shoot using a bow and to speak the truth. And the people passed memories of their ancestors that served at court of Aji-Dakhak across the generations. They retained the warmest words, the most intimate and sincere ones. The tsars of Arshakids dynasty that strengthened Monotheism in the Middle East were in question. It is indicative that power of those tsars did not cover the whole territory of former Persia, which is primarily the evidence of tolerance of the rulers, of their legibility and wisdom. They did not strive to show their strength in spiritual life and, nonetheless, attracted more and more new countries sending their relatives as rulers there.
States that hadnt formerly existed appeared in place of Persia Parthia, Bactria, Armenia, Syria and others they were all distinguished by spiritual culture. Every country had its own clergy, but the dynasty of the rulers was the same everywhere. And of course that did not affect progress. Altaic impact is evident here; it is read in archeological findings, documents, ethnographic sketches. Altaic traces are especially evident in Parthia. Its lands included the southern coast of the Caspian Sea and stretched to the south up to the river Indus. Part of those lands is now called Azerbaijanian Iran; its population still knows the Turkic language. Relatives of Parthian tsars ruled in Armenia, Media, Caucasian Albania. That was a very strong dynasty; it represented perhaps the whole Middle East in politics of the ancient world. Parthia successfully competed with Rome; it was the center of spiritual culture the image of Heavenly God and Altaic traditions dominated there. In the I century B.C. the country reached its climax; its glory was spreading all over the world. The backwash of that glory remained in the Revelation. It is full of belief into horsemen arrival so as to release nations from Rome's power. Scientists have been arguing about who Arshakids were for a long time, and they fail to come to any conclusion. Because certain important details are disregarded while disputing. For instance, the tsar's seal that is kept in the National Museum of Iran. Distinct Turkic runes can be seen on it. Maybe for some scientists it is not a proof, but coins and gems of the tsars witness of the same. Their writing also gives evidence of Turkic origin. And the language What else do they need to say who Arshakids were? However, their family tree is ascribed to any nation, but not to the Turki. These evidences disturb confidence to the studies of Iran which neglected not the tsar's seal, not their documents and history, even worse there is connection between
Altai, the Great Nations Migration and Persia. Researchers did not mention the connection allowing to draw an important conclusion: Iran is the heir of Parthian culture. Thats why Islam has its face Shiism here; it is the top of Altaic Monotheism in the modern world. That is an early branch of Islam the most conservative one. The Shias keep the past almost untouched Because after Persia Parthia with its Hanifs existed for five hundred years and after that Iran. And nothing else!.. Culture was not changing, it just changed its names. Of course the tsar's seal is not the only evidence of it it is confirmed by the whole history of the Middle East. They started to distort the past in the times of Sasanids who deposed the tsarist dynasty. For the successors who proclaimed themselves not tsars but shahs it was very important to humiliate their predecessors and they introduced the term Iran trying to extirpate the memories of Parthia, Arshakids and Altai, but they did it awkwardly. By the way, renewed Zoroastrianism became the official religion of Iran and its clergy consisted of mages and priests Interesting scientific researches were written on this subject. It turns out Sasanids doubly shortened the term of Arshakids' reign in the official chronology and laid their hands on foreign achievements. They were making everyone forget about the Turkic Parthia, which was later reflected even in Shahnama The Book about the Tsars, but they failed to change existing culture: Islam appeared in the world of the Middle East Monotheism was back and the power of Sasanids ended. R. Fry, the American Orientalist analyzed discovered facts. He wrote: We know about the Parthians less than about their predecessors. The tradition of slander established by Zoroastrian priests existed for a long time and it is even possible to assert that it still exists. In the West Parthian period was simply ignored even in major scientific works as though it has never existed, the same as the Turki in Iran. Is that science?
There are two directions in studies of history and culture of Parthia. The first is connected with scientists like M. Delafoix; his work was published in Paris in 1885 and by now it has gone out of date. For him the Parthians (or the Turki) are a rough barbarous nation which hordes are similar to those of Attila. This phrase made it all clear about himself and the sponsor of his researches; they denied Parthia so as to conceal its culture and the contribution in development of European civilization it has made. Of course such approach gave rise to a great many responses; at first it was all about doubts in alleged inferiority of Parthian culture. But it obtained evidentiary force after findings of archeologists during excavations in Dura-Europos (Tura-Europos) and the South Turkestan; such findings made even the most talkative foes lapse into silence and showed that their works are far from essence. In Parthia sources of unique arts and architecture were discovered; their impact is evident in antique creative works, which cannot be called into question. It turns out, Parthian craftsmen and artists were teaching the Greeks while the latter were creating their beautiful statues and palaces. Of course frame-ups should not have been mentioned here at all, but there is one interesting thing in them special attention should be paid to the name Iran (Eran, Ariana) or, more preciously, to its origin, since it conceals the unexpected. Perhaps all the Orientalists see the word Arian in this name: Eran, Arianam country of the Arians. But how did the toponym appear? And when? It turns out, it is connected with the arrive of Arsak khan, with Parthia, its lands and people were called the empire of the Arians or Ariana, as it is written in documents of those times. Historians agree that Ariana essentially coincided with the Parthian empire. It coincided! Thats why the history of Parthia is interesting! Another name Iran appeared with coming of the second wave of the Turki
and was later risen up by Sasanids who were suspecting nothing. Ariana Vedja the toponym meaning Arian Vast has been living in the Middle East since then. It relates only to the Turkic regions of Iran. Thus it is shown once again that the truth cannot be concealed. Arshakids also gave a new written language to the country: runes and cursive writing. They used to write with black ink on leather or crocks. In the history of Iran it has become known as written language of Arshakids and at the same time it was known in the East as Sogdian or Uigur written language. It is interesting that the German scientist D.G. Messersmidt who discovered ancient Turkic written language (Yenisei writings) was right when he mentioned that not all those signs were the runes they were possible mixed with ancient Parthian characters of another type. Before the coming of the Turki, i.e. before Persia appeared, as far as we know, wedge writing was used in the Middle East, and such writing had no impact on its further culture. It left without a trace. But the written language of the Parthians remained it was called Parsava or Pehlevi. However that was not a new language; it was known in Persia before Arshakids. To tell the truth, it was used only in commercial and international correspondence: in tsars' messages to Altai, Northern India, Armenia, Egypt. Why? Indeed, why was wedge writing (the language of inscriptions) official in Persia while the written language of Arshakids who had gone for good was still used as an unofficial language? And on closer view that is perhaps the most mysterious thing. This situation is ordinary but at the same time it is indicative. On the one hand it shows how cultural traditions were changing. And on the other it is absurd caused by passions and madness. But it is just seeming absurd if to forget that as a matter of fact Turkic written
language was in question the language that Achemenids and all other Altaians used. Of course Arshakids are not the authors of that language since it had appeared many centuries before they obtained power. That was the language and the writings of their Altaic compatriots. In other words, that is another external sign of the Great Nations Migration. Its language! One would think, this is a strained misunderstanding with Iranian written language; it can be settled quickly. Well, no! That Turkic writings were ascribed to one of Semitic languages. And they called it Aramaic. However, one can easily come to that conclusion neglecting the Great Nations Migration. The author of the dubious hypothesis did not consider that the Semites were Babylonian slaves at that time and it would have never occurred to the rulers of the great Persia to turn the language of its slaves into the language of public law. Cyrus released the Jews from Babylonian captivity and allowed them to return to their native land (it happened in 515 B.C.). And that was it. Neither language nor writings were taken in return. He had his own written language. Everything in Persia was its own. It had strict features of a Turkic state, especially after reforms of Darius. Cavalry dominated in its army; it had not been known in the Middle East before, hence were all that great military successes. The Turki introduced the mounted postal service that delighted Herodotus. It means they wrote letters Another witness of their uniqueness is the fact that Achemenids had non-Iranian names, which was mentioned even by researchers studying Iran Was that by accident? And besides, which Aramaic written language can be in question since the Semites themselves did not have it? And here another interesting detail, that was also deliberately neglected, emerges. In the times of Achemenids the Jews who were released introduced the new Judaism: Torah became the law of Israel And in the ancient Turkic language torah
means law. It cannot be regarded as an accidental happening. The more so, as the books written by the organizer of the Jewish community Ezdra (Ezra) and Nehemiah (Nihemiah) contain documents of Persian tsars and tell about the course of events of those times from their lips. Judaic-Israeli culture was being created for the new Judaism. The Bible was put together on the basis of Turkic liturgical codes which were also used while writing Vedas in India and Zend-Avesta in Persia. It stands to reason that a new edition of the Altaic spiritual heritage was in question. And it is extremely important that it was all happening simultaneously on different territories of Eurasia! That is not denied even by Jewish orthodoxes fragments of text of the Bible, Zend-Avesta and Vedas are identical, scientists found hundreds of coincidences. Not two, three or ten hundreds of them! Hence is similarity of spiritual cultures of different nations of Eurasia, which shows that religion (yes, religion in its different aspects) originated from one and the same root. From Altaic Monotheism. That opinion was offered in the XIX century and even earlier. But it was not offered audibly. Cyrus, releasing the Jews and allowing to restore the Temple of Jerusalem on the territory dependent on Persia, did it in the name of Heavenly God. That is reported by the First Book of Ezdra citing Cyrus's order: That says Cyrus, the Persian Tsar: reign and lands were given to me by the Lord Heavenly God; and He ordered me to build a house in Jerusalem, Judea for Him [(1) Ezd 1 2]. That is from where the news of Heavenly God came to Judea. From Altai! From the East From the Turki. They gave the name Jerusalem (Jerushalaim), where jer means earth and salem means concord, spiritual testament. The Bible (Books of Haggai,
Zachariah, Malachi) reflected new traditions which appeared in Judea and Palestine, in the Northern India and Persia itself at that time. That was perhaps one of the most important features of the epoch that meant a lot. Thus, by the example of the Jews, the Syrians called the Old Testament Bible Peshitta; in faraway India it was known under the same name. Why? Because the name goes back to the ancient Turkic besh ita five giants, five bases given to Moses. Five Books of Moses are considered to be the most ancient books of the Old Testament Bible Coincidences cannot be in question here. It would be too blasphemous and foolish to call the birth of a new spiritual culture a simple coincidence. It sheds the light on appearance of the cults of Buddha in India and Yahve in Judea; Yahve was their guardian who was deemed to be the heavenly parallel to the tsar of Asia, i.e. Cyrus these words were also taken from the Bible. The world did not know other heroes alike Cyrus. Zoroastrianism and Mitraism the dogmatic religions were waiting for their dawn, for which it was necessary to accept other traditions of Monotheism And they accepted it and thus became religions and not beliefs. Turkic spiritual culture appeared in the West through renewed Judaism. In this connection it is also interesting that the word book is also of Turkic origin it means in a roll. Ancient Torah was kept in rolls on leather. And that is the Altaic method of book printing, the same as character of sacred writings. However, Jewish priesthood never tried to conceal that their state was created by virtue of Cyrus whom the Jews identified with Messiah the Lord's Anointed, savior, man of the truth Heavenly God raised him from the East But it is better to read the Bible on this subject for example, the Book of the Prophet Isaiah [Is 41 2; 45]. Thats right, Aramaic written language that appeared at that time reminded of that of Altai or, more preciously, was its calligraphic variant, which is seen from
comparative tables provided by D. Diringer in his book Alphabet. Unfortunately, the author, being very biased, ignored the Turkic alphabet describing ancient alphabets of the world. He did not even mention it! Instead, not suspecting anything, he compared Aramaic (Syrian) written language with that of Arshakids as well as Sogdian and Uigur writings. A striking similarity. And it let the author down. Not comparing events and time, he took the liberty of making a discouraging conclusion that the written language of the Middle East originates from the Semites. However, Diringer was just expressing the opinion of the West that had not been analyzed for a long time. He did not consider that a written language is just the means of transferring confidential information for long distances; it was begot not by trade but by power, be the state. Changing of calligraphy is not an invention of a new written language. Aramaic inscriptions dated by the times before Achemenids, i.e. before the VI century B.C., are nonexistent in nature and they have never been in Syria itself. None of them. Even late ones. If western scientists were not afraid to face the truth, they would have seen that Uigur, Sogdian and Arshakid written language existed before appearance of Aramaic writings. And they mentioned it having found traces of the written language of more than three thousand years old (!) in the South Altai in 1923, but they kept silent. And if they had translated the word Sogdian, they would have written all their books otherwise. In the ancient Turkic language Sugda (that was the name of Sogdiana some time ago) meant close to water and related to the Turki that settled in oases of the Central Asia. The Sogdians are not a separate nation, which means their written language is not separate either. They were inhabitants of Persia, the Turki. But nonetheless the West should be respected for Diringer's words in the book Alphabet: Brahmi written language is the great forefather of that in India; Korean
alphabet and Mongolian writings originated from the same source as the Greek, Latin, runic, Jewish, Arab and Russian alphabets, which means from one source. The author did not name the forefather of the written language Altai but, knowing about the Great Nations Migration, we can do it by ourselves. Because two and two makes up four. In India, in Egypt, in Israel. Everywhere. Even in Korea where they dont conceal their belonging to Altaic roots Achemenid empire, - marked one famous Orientalist, - was the only real empire and the Persian tsar was the only real tsar not for the Greeks only but also for the Indians. The Turki were strengthening their positions in Eurasia. Their tsarist families gave eminent rulers to the world; new belief, new laws and new written language came with them. Thats why wedge writing and hieroglyphs have gone for good in the Near East. They were too old and inconvenient. Like a stone-ax. When the dynasty of Arshakids fell early in the III century, the culture of Parthia did not disappear. The language of the Parthians (Persian dialect of the Turkic language!) became the literary language of Iran. That was the will of new rulers from the dynasty of Sasanids who, having declared the revival of the Persian Iran, simply called everything Turkic with the word Iranian. That gave rise to misunderstandings which leaked even to The Book of the Tsars. Sasanids were right: the toponym Iran, in comparison with Parthia, was evidently wider and sounded more optimistic. For the young dynasty that was the chance to weld the population of former Parthia and neighboring khanates since the Turki dominated in towns and in the army. So they took the name native for them Iran. That is perhaps one of the most intricate features of the history of the Middle East. But it means and explains a lot. For instance, why medieval poets that lived in khanates governed by Iran made their verses not in their native language but in Parthian (eastern Iranian) dialect. Thats how it was with Rudak, Nizami Giandjevi, Amir Khosrov
Dehlevi, Omar Khayyam, Dede Korkud and other famous poets. All of them are the continuators of the Parthian culture. Hence is book Pehlevi and Tadjik-Persian Azerbaijanian and old Uzbek literature. Hence is striking similarity of plots of peoples epos of Iran and Altai; they are often practically the same. The famous Orientalist V.V. Bartold described the differences between the Parthian language and that formerly spoken in Persia: Literary language of the Sasanid epoch was derived from Parthia and thus it was called Pehlevian. Armenian authors of the first centuries of Islam knew that the word pahlava (late linguistic form - parthava) related to the Parthians; The Arabs only knew that the name pahlau related to northern, not southern regions of Iran. Pehlevi did not have many differences with modern Farsi. A modern Persian could easily understand the language his ancestors spoke 1500 years ago; it was more difficult for a Persian living in the epoch of first Sasanids to understand the language of the epoch of Achemenids (wedge writing is in question here M.A.) divided from it just by six hundred years. This explanation has the answers for many questions. For instance, why do the Azerbaijanians easily understand the Iranians. Why are there Turkic regions in Iran And even why the Iranians conceal their Turkic roots. It has been forgotten that in the Middle East there existed the literary dialect of the Turkic language from the times of Parthia poets and philosophers spoke it. The literary language is an ancient tradition of Altaic culture that allowed different nations to understand each other. It united the Turki into one Turkic world. Not an ordinary language, but the language of poetry and delight pure as a diamond cut by generations of poets. That was the birthright of self-expression. That made Altaic written language complex. The same as its culture. It should be mentioned that Turkic speech has not been forgotten in Iran. There are towns and villages there they are called Azerbaijanian where only Turkic is spoken.
How many of them? Nobody knows. But in the Western Azerbaijan alone there are more than thirty million people. And in the streets of Teheran every second is a copy of Baku inhabitants the same faces, the same manners. They look the same, but their speech differs. It turns out not the seas divide the people but ignorance. Today in Iran there are the Kadjars, Shahsevens, Bahtiars, Kypchaks, Kakshkians, Afshars, Karapapakhs, Karadags, Kengerlu, Inalu, Baharlu, Nafar, Khurasans, Pichags, Karayas, Bayats, Karagozlu, Teimurtash, Goudars. All of them played an important part in formation of Iran, but they are called tribes and nations. And there is only one explanation politics By the way, the dynasty of Sefevids united Iran by hands of these Turki in the XV XVI centuries. The Turki are a bulwark of power, its self-perpetuating keepers that is how it was in the times of Aji-Dahak; that is how it is now. The whole history of Iran is connected with descendants of the Altaians: beginning with the dynasty of Achemenids and Arshakids and ending with Kajars (1925). In the middle of the VII centuries Iran was run by the Arabs, in the XI XII centuries under the Turkic dynasty of Seldjukirs, in the XIII middle of the XIV century power was obtained by direct descendants from Altai by Khulaguids. Early in the XVI century, with assistance of the Turki, Sefevids united Iran. And from the end of the XVIII century till 1925 Iran was run by the Turkic dynasty of Kajars So when was Iran non-Turkic?! And that is the history written by the Iranians themselves. Iranian nations were called Dakhian. The Dakhs are mention in famous Zend-Avesta. They formed the cavalry of Parthia and were excellent breeders. Exact translation of the word Dakh is allegedly unknown according to the western researchers of Iran. Is that right? This mysterious word is of Altaic origin, the same
as the nation to which it related in the ancient Turkic language dakh (tag dag dakh) means mountain, and dakhdakhi (tagdaki) people living in the mountains. Everything turns out to be very simple. And very accurate. Isn't that the reason why Aji-Dahaka became the symbol of the ruler that had come from the mountains? Take note of this name. Its first part points to the cross of Tengri that the Altaians bore, and the second to the mountains from where they came. Doesnt it explain something? According to traditions of literature, the Parthian empire was founded by the tribe of the Parns being a part of the confederation of the Dakhs related either to the Saks or to the Parthians. In the IV century B.C. the Dakhs lived between the rivers Oks and Yaksart (Amu-Darya and Syr-Darya). They served in the army of Darius III. Strabon wrote about tribes of breeders known to the Greeks as the Dakhs (Dais). The expression tagdaki dakhdakhi related to people living in towns was widely used by Turkic nations. That is witnessed by runic inscriptions on the monument in honor of Kiul-Tegin (732) on the table land KoshoTsaidam. Take, for instance, the Iranian nation called Kadjars they speak the Kadjarian language. What kind of language is it? It relates to the Turkic group of Altaic languages, as it is written in ethnographic reference books about it. And thus everything is clear. Or take another nation the Shahsevens; it is the same about them. The Shahsevens are very close to the Azerbaijanians; their languages are practically identical the same Mugan dialect. That nation appeared in Iran in the XVI century when the shah's household troops were being formed (in the Azerbaijanian language shahysevan means people loving shah). And it was being formed, as it is written in history of Iran, of Turkic tribes the Kyzylbashes Could anyone like to protect power more than the Turki?
Now not everybody knows who is who in the Iranian Iran. Some time ago Persia had vast territories; its borders lay far to the north beyond Derbent, and far to the west up to the Mediterranean Sea. This epoch is never remembered official history made of omissions is its backwash. Nations, legends, religions everything is mixed up so as not to awaken the memory and ease the pain. As a rule, the Iranians know their history from the VIII century when Islam was accepted and everything that had happened previously does not exist. Nobody keeps a secret better that those who dont know it, - they say in the East. It seems wisdom of Iranian rulers is shown in that they were not interested in the truth; for them it was important to conceal how theyve lost it! Iranian Turki true to Monotheism call Allah in a Turkic manner Khodai, they did not changed their native language for Farsi, accepted Islam and breathed freely. But lack of knowledge of a family tree does not mean it does not exist A panther can give birth only to panthers. They might be poor, but still they are panthers. Iranian Moslems will understand some day: only those are really powerful who can defeat themselves. People denying their ancestors become conceited and can be easily manipulated by politicians and colonizers. Thats what happened in Iranian Iran Alas. True words are unpleasant, but pleasant words are not always true this is life. Some time ago in the Middle East there was a prosperous country Bactria the richest eastern region of Persia. It was called Tocharistan (Tocharian khanate) in the II century B.C. That state, the same as Parthia, is hidden in the heavy scientific mist; its history is connected with any nation but the Turki although all travelers that visited Tocharia marked that customs and habits there are the same as those of the Turki. It is interesting that in Tibet tochar
means white head. But not a frosty head. Thats how peoples etymology keeps the memory of Altaic newcomers whose appearance differed from that of native Tibetans black-haired, swarthy people with hazel eyes very much. While describing the Altaians their contemporaries used the following words: fair-haired, blue-eyed white men with their bodies shining like the moon. And those with green eyes were described as having eyes like an unripe berry. The epics Mahabharata and Ramayana also contain information about the Tochars. This allows talking about their period in the history of Iran. Altaic tsarist dynasty ruled there for five centuries. In any case, Arsak khan who left Bactria and exalted Parthia started his family tree from the descendant of the Achemenidian tsar Artarkserks II and still regarded a panther as his patron. At that time tsars were elected by seven elders, the council of the family sort of temporality representatives they permitted to take the throne. Their decision was approved by another council consisting of higher clergy. At that they took the will of the last monarch into account Unfortunately, the history of Tocharistan does not contain many reliable facts it is covered by shadows. In the II century B.C. the power of the previous dynasty weakened. And early in the Common Era the dynasty of rulers changed there. New khanate was called Kushan, which is witnessed by coins of Tocharistan; other reliable evidences are absent. Lands of the Eastern Persia (modern Central Asia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, part of the Northern India) and even China were united by the new khanate. It was notable for unheard-of power. Unfortunately, its history was thoroughly written over by certain politicians and scientists; they distorted even the names of tsars and the founder of the khanate who had an ancient Turkic title yagbu is now called Kudzula (Kudjula) Kadfiz or Kiotziukyu in a Chinese manner. The name Tochars has not been found on any Kushan monuments yet.
Inscriptions on coins witness of belonging of the rulers to Kushan family, which is in accordance with the theory of tsarist families in Altai. The Chinese used to call the Kushans Guishuan; gui meant special peculiarities in Chinese mythology. They were depicted as demons with pointed heads and red hair. That expresses the look of Altaic newcomers red-haired in pointed headdresses made of felt. The same as all the Saks. Another detail headdresses of the rulers emphasized their belonging to tsarist families. That is witnessed not only by coins and gems but also by objects of art. For example, in the Guimet Museum in Paris the headdress of the Kushan statute is topped by the feathered bird's head the bird looks like a falcon. The same headdresses can be found on coins of the Kushan tsar Kanishka. Historians marked that headdresses of the same type with a falcon were widespread in Saks' (Turkic) lands. How did his name sound in Turkic? Nobody knows. Who he was is also unknown. However, Strabone reported that nations of the Middle East had the same languages. In other words, those nations and tribes (Sogdians, Khoresmians, Bactrians, Kushans and others) differed from the Altaians basically in their way of life, but not in language and culture. They spoke in a similar manner that was the same dialect. Modern science cannot deny that but, in order to embarrass the people, it relates the language of the Saks (of the Turki) and their neighbors to a special group calling it eastern Iranian. They would have better invented something else. And thus it is the same as to relate English or any other Germanic language to the American group. Relatives will certainly be mentioned but the grandson will be called the grandfather An imperceptible but important mistake. In the meantime, the name of the Iranian epic hero who opened the secret of written languages is Takhma-Urupa (Tamga Urup). The Turki clearly translate his name as one cutting magic signs. There are no other
variants here. Archeologists found a great many monuments of those times. On certain of them one can see Turkic runes and phrases exactly the same as in Altai. That is the language of the nation that has left it. But the texts were not read, according to certain scientists sophisticated in politics. For example, in Dasht-Navur (Afghanistan) the French found traces of a Kushan town and a nearby rock with runic inscription, but they did not carry out a detailed research. They found it and that was all In Kara-Tep, not far from Tashkent, a temple was found and on its ruins there were pieces with runic Altaic inscriptions. And they drowned in silence Archeologists are usually interested in Turkic gold, not inscriptions. It looks like sabotage or a secret conspiracy. Obliteration of culture is a striking phenomenon that has not been studied yet. Issyk barrow is a good example it is situated fifty kilometers from Alma-Ata. In 1969 Soviet archeologists found a Golden Man a unique burial place where clothes and other items belonging to the departed Turkic tsar remained. But they had better not found it. Analysis of the finding was carried out under instructions from Moscow. The skull disappeared on the instant it belonged to a European, which was not in accordance with the racist theory of wild nomads to which the West is adherent. The golden cross (adji) decorated with precious stones that was shining on the tsar's helmet also mysteriously disappeared. Just a little hole remained in the helmet. In the same barrow they found a bowl with an inscription approximately dated by the V century B.C. The text contains about 30 runic symbols the same as on the remains in Kara-Tep. Analysis carried out following a hot scent by the best experts in the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR allowed asserting that the inscription was made using an unknown alphabet. And that was all the Soviet science said: not a word about the Turkic language, although by that time runic writings of Altai
were known in the world. Even Turcologists worked in the named Institute. In the conclusion made by experts of that Institute it was thoughtfully mentioned that the text could not be read in Aramaic. But nobody asked to read it in Aramaic. They did not even have to read it in Chinese So Turcologists had to acknowledge similarity of signs on the bowl with Turkic runes. But since official science does not regard the Turkic language as an ancient one, Moscow experts came to discouraging conclusion they said the inscription was scratched later. It only remains to guess what meaning they put in that evidently provocative suggestion?.. One fragment of that runic inscription on the bowl ran: do what you have to do, offer to drink. If poison leaks, take it away. But Soviet scientists were struggling against Panturkism and thus came to their embarrassing conclusion they did not need to find the truth. The Kushan khanate was a real melting pot in which cultures of different nations were melting and changing. The Turki, Persians, Afghans, Indians, Chinese lived alongside, in one state and thus they were changing themselves and their way of life. They were changing each other. The Middle East was turning into a multinational society where synthesis of religions and beliefs was taking place. That is why in Kushan khanate new ethnic sainthood, new culture based on Monotheism was to be formed it became the soil that later accepted the seeds of Islam. Time was playing its part. How? Nobody knows that. Neighborliness is an inexplicable phenomenon of life; it changes nations and their appearances but does it imperceptibly Great pleasure and great sorrow are voiceless. Nobody noticed that Iranian Turki became different from their Altaic congeners. They saw the result and thus called them Oguzes. In the Turkic language oguz meant highly experienced, wise. Communication with other nations made them wise and patient.
Trade established in the Middle East by Achemenids, continued by Arshakids and Kushans who strengthened their positions in the valley of the river Indus after taking sea roots under their control is a good example. Caravans with goods were sent to India, China, Turkestan, Altai, Caucasus, Far East, even to the Volga coins of those times were found there. The Kushans performed seaborne trade with Africa, especially with Egypt (judging by coins and other archeological findings). When decline of Parthia commenced in the II century, those were the Kushans who controlled sea roots. Merchants carried to the West not only spices and luxury goods, but also paper and iron that the Europeans could not produce. And also pearl, cotton fabrics and raw cotton, rice, sugar, oils, medicines and fragrances, paints, exotic animals. The world learnt of grandeur of Kushan khanate in the I century; the Turki were glorified by the tsar Kanishka, luckily we know his name Khan Erke they used to mint on coins. However, scientists have different opinions concerning pronunciation of his name: Kanerka, Kanysh-khan or even Kanyk. The philosopher, poet and excellent ruler, he raised Altaic culture like nobody else and made it the highest of eastern cultures. In his times the word Turki was pronounced with trepidation, in the same way as the saint. In the year 78 Kanishka ascended to the throne, he ruled for twenty five years astonishing the nation by his wisdom: he lit the candles for the blind and people recovered their sight. Not a saber, lance, arrows were the khan's strongest weapon but a word. The strongest word in the world God, Khodai, Alla that is how the Turki addressed to Tengri. True belief led to victories! The great philosopher of the Middle West, Abu Reihan Biruni, quoted an ancient Indian legend of nobility and strength of the tsar Kanishka in his works it seemed so unbelievable to people that Kanishka and his troops were called mighty angels It is interesting that
the Indian calendar has a separate era of Kanishka thus emphasizing his special role. And since he was the native of Altai, the same year is the starting point of the era of the Saks. By the way, presence of the Greek before the Common Era the Indians connect with the era of barbarians. Curiously enough, Indian sources contain no particularities on this point; they do not contain the name of Alexander the Great either. Strictly speaking, not only the author of this book has serious doubts in connection with Alexander. His feats remind of those of Heracles and other mythic heroes. If one takes a look on Alexander's route to India it will become clear that he and his troops passed one hundred kilometers a day on lifeless lands of the Middle East. It is impossible for dismounted troops and it is even more impossible for a cavalry. At that they had neither a compass nor a map. We'd better not describe the details of that campaign Where did they get provisions in hostile territories? Where did they leave the wounded? Who replaced the wounded and the dead? How did they move battering-rams and other equipment? A military campaign is a very serious affair hundreds of questions arise in this connection. But the most interesting question is: why dont ancient Indian legends contain any information of arrival of Alexander the Great? There is no information at all. Archeological excavations also did not find any traces of his staying in the North-West India. So what was Alexander destroying? And did he reach it at all? Persian sources are also silent about his campaign. However, another thing is indicative: the image of the hero appeared late in the Middle Ages when the West started to prepare its colonial campaign against the East. The Europeans needed a historical hero in order to declare that the Asians had been suffering defeats from the Europeans from of old. References to Arrian, Diodor,
Plutarchos, Strabon were necessary to animate the legend. Although their original works were lost in the West long ago. (However, witnesses of direct participants of the campaign also disappeared those witnesses that Arrian and others allegedly used in their work after several centuries (!)). Thus legends of invincible Alexander the Great appeared those legends had nothing to do with reality It is hard to find other explanations. Such additions to history are widespread in Europe. Thus, for example, Dmitry Donskoy and Alexander Nevsky appeared in Russia. They became historical heroes after three and five centuries respectfully, because neither the battle of Neva nor Kulikovo Field have ever existed. Descendants, no Lies are cunning. And very tenacious. The tsar Kanishka gave the East hope, and that is the best present in the world. Excellent knowledge of ceremonies, prayers and service books helped him, his speech sounded handsomely and nicely people used to listen to it for hours. Khan's behavior and policies convinced the Middle East: the Turki appreciated not gold, cunning or power over other nations. They appreciated deeds and nobility that brought them nearer to their Heavens making them mighty angels. The ruler was the face of the nation; people believed him. It means they believed in Altai too. The tsar was severe with himself and gracious with others. He convinced that every person creates heaven and hell for himself and his nearest; people have only themselves to blame for their grief and sorrow because God gives people just what they deserve. That is the power of the Trial by Ordeal the fairest in the world. You, your deeds and God watching and judging you are under Eternal Blue Sky. God can never be deceived One can never escape from God's will. That is the whole base of the Turkic
religion, it is genial and simple: do good and the world will be better. When people understood that they agreed with it, which led to a new spiritual culture. Everything is in your hands you just have to remember that. The Turki, for instance, believed in the Creator of this world and his angels; they believed in eternity of the soul and its regeneration in the new life. Thus Monotheism strengthened peoples spirit and embraved them. Salvation is in deeds, taught the Most High. Thus deeds were top of priorities in Altai. Not gold, not riches but deeds. The foreigners were stricken by the ceremony in the name of Heavenly God it was notable for sedateness and regularity. In pagan world there was nothing of the kind. Pagans regarded the Turki as creatures from outer space with whom everything was better and cleaner, and thus in the Middle East Altai was called Eden Heaven on the Earth and its inhabitants were referred to as noble Arians. That name of Turkic native lands (the same as Fenugreek in India) remained for more than a thousand years. They composed legends about riders In the XIII century there was a map on which Heaven on the Earth was marked in Altai. And the Bible says the same. Returning to the Arians, let us once again remember that the most famous provisions of Indo-Iranian theory still remain hypotheses but are represented as documented evidences. That is an accepted method of Western science and its ideological inspirers Jesuits. Neglecting of Turki and their history entailed the fact that linguistic aspects of studies of India and Iran and philological interpretation of sources became determinant while analyzing the Arians' origin. And that is absolutely wrong. History was not defined by the words sounding but by peoples deeds. By the way, there are no sources, beginning with Rigveda, that relate the term Arya to nations which modern science calls Indo-Iranian, - reminds us one of researchers studying the East. Believers of the Middle East tried to
reach Uch-Sumer the sacred mountain; they offered prayers to Altai. Their tradition to turn their faces to the East while praying was later adopted by the Christians. And the Moslems used to turn their faces to the East in the times of Mohammed. That was the only way for Monotheists to pray. The towns of Kushan khanate woke up listening to bells ringing: tengriches (clergymen) called the people to pray All we can do now is imagine those exciting moments of the beginning of the day. Unfortunately, not much is known about that. Bells and belfries existed, there can be no mistake about it, they were found during excavations, but people failed to restore the ceremony. That treasure has gone for good. People used to pray near the temple, under the high canopy of Eternal Blue Sky like in Altai where people would pray near sacred mountains. (It seems at first barrows were made instead of temples this assumption is quite possible). Temples were not big they reminded of the sacred mountain and later became a part of architecture. That beautiful idea inspired the Buddhists they were the first who turned their dagobas and barrows into ritual constructions. Believers were prohibited to enter the temple; clergymen could enter it for a few moments but they did not even breathe inside. It was forbidden. That was a sacred place! The tradition was adopted by Zoroastrian priests they still put on bandages in order not to desecrate the fire with their breathing. Before praying the Turki would always burn incense in special bowls in censers. According to an ancient Altaic legend evil forces cannot stand the smell of fragrances; the ceremony of fumigation was called kadyt in Turkic it means to turn away, to deter. Incense (pronounced as ladan in Russian and translated as fir tree from Turkic) meant galipot with dry grasses, the word is derived from the Turkic expression ala tan abandon bad thoughts, which preciously reflects the place of fragrances in the ceremony.
History of the bell, censer and other items is described in detail in: Adji M. Europa's Asia. The names of heather and juniper aryan, arjan, archyn that were used for fumigation in Altai derive from the ancient Turkic ary- (to cleanse). Hence is the word aryg reflecting such terms as pure, clean; morally blameless, noble, decent, immaculate; true, not false, righteous, sacred, saint. As we can see, it is in accordance with the sense of the word arya in Vedas and Zend-Avesta. They offered prayers to Tengri listening to soft singing to the tunes of choirs. Those sacred songs were called Yirmas; literal translation is our songs And everywhere in spiritual culture Tengri's equilateral cross dominated; in the East it was called vajra and the Turki themselves were called Aji. (That is what Soviet archeologists have taken off the helmet of the Golden Man found in Issyk barrow the sign of Heavenly God, the symbol that seemed unnecessary to them). Many nations remember the tsar Kanishka; an epoch-making Event is connected with him: Monotheism superseded paganism in the Middle East Vajras, ruins of ancient towns and temples remind everybody of the era of Kanishka. They are the symbols of Hanif belief, the traces of memory. Time has been always taking mercy on them. Researchers put the following question: what religion did Kanishka exercise? But it was nothing more than just putting the question. They marked that he favored Buddhism but in a strange manner. Not accepting Buddha's teaching! Similarly scientists did not know to what belief Achemenids and Arshakids adhered. It differed from belief of Zoroastrians in Persia and Parthia or Jains in India everybody agrees with that. But what was it? Nobody specified it. In Kushan khanate there was its own divine pantheon. Its own religion.
Of course the simplest thing to do is to call it pagan and wild and call the Turki pagans, which is actually what was done. But that is not an exact name. And the same goes with the fact that the Turkic clergy were called shamans neglecting several important details. The word shaman, for instance, was highly respected in the Middle East in ancient times it related to preachers of the new religion. Later Buddhists started to use the word shaman to call their monks who elaborated the theory of religion and were intellectual scientists to the highest degree. After that the word was accepted by Islam and meant servant of non-Islamic cult ash-shamani. It did not have a humbling meaning either. Translation of the word kam (kam cham - sham) also had a lot of meanings infirmarian, healer, foreteller, conjurer, wizard, enchanter, magician, sorcerer. Modern Turcologists translate this word as shaman, although it is better to call the kams clergymen. That was the only thing said about them two thousand years ago. In Lamaism which kept Altaic ceremonies such clergymen were to communicate with spirits keepers of the teaching. It seems it was the same in Altai. In Lamaism titles of authoritative clergymen derive from the Turkic kam (sham, kham). Clergy is headed by a khambo, and the ruler of a monastery was called shamo. This and other facts allow assuming that for many centuries kams were the keepers of Altaic spiritual culture. That is why they were the first to be destroyed by the Europeans during colonization of the East. That is also witnessed by the records of Bar Daysan, one of the founders of theology in Syria he was the preacher of the Altaic belief in Heavenly God, for which the Christians later called his books heretical. He wrote down the story of ambassadors from the Northern India who came to Syria in the times of Marcus Aurelius (218 - 222). This is what those ambassadors said about shamans (samaneis): They live out of towns spending
their days talking of Heavenly God. They have cells (monasteries M.A.) and temples built by the tsar where there are appointed rulers who get food products from him. Listening to the bells ringing they take away all the strangers that came to the cell and set about praying. After praying the bell rings again. By the way, that was the first time they heard about monasteries in the West; nobody understood what they were. We cannot bring ourselves to say that Kanishka's heritage was wild or pagan. We would rather be proud of Altai and its culture to which the civilized world was rushing. And one can guess about distemper in peoples souls those people who did not believe in Heavenly God and slander Him. They are suppressed by weakness and fear, they suffer from their powerlessness and invent fairy tales to conceal their fear. They invent forgetting that that was the Turkic culture in which nations were interested in those times. Peoples interest was reinforced by the fact that they saw God's gifts with their own eyes: iron, prosperity of their country and an excellent army, which convinced none the worse than divine services or words of clergymen. Maybe even better. Isn't that the reason why Altai, Parthia and Kushania became spiritual centers of the East? Envoys of other nations left for there. They did it by themselves. For strangers spiritual training centers and Gandhara Arts School were opened there, which united culture of the ancient East forming its new look. Since then Eastern art has got its original features which have been distinguishing it until now. Altaic animal style, Parthian monumentality, Indian harmony and Bactrian elegance were brought together but not mixed up. They became more original than they were before. It means they became Eastern (Altaic, Turkic) ornament or a historical plot. In animal fights and plants artists managed to see life. But the life that existed only in imagination it was inhabited
by totemic signs, ghosts and patrons of families. And if a panther clawed a cow, in this bloody feast people saw not what we see now. Real art is splendid because it is figurative. Appearance of Gandhar arts gave rise to many contradictory hypotheses. Art historians mark a lot of common in the arts of the North China, South Siberia, Parthia and Northern India, i.e. the regions where Altaians lived. Many historians connect it with the impact of animal style. But the source of art traditions is pronouncedly neglected. Those cultural traditions are continued by the Iranian town called Kum the town of clergy, arts and science where a lot has been changed, but adherence to Monotheism remained. Addressing to the Most High they use the word Khodai there the same as in Altai. And they will do it forever. History of the town started in pre-Islamic rimes; by all appearances, the town was called not Kum but Kam then the Iranians themselves still call it that way. There were several intellectual towns in Kushan khanate later they became the bulwark of thought and theory of Islam. Great scientists of the East worked there they continued traditions of the ancient that is how Moslems used to call their Altaic ancestors. And their heritage they called the science of the ancient. And history has a reminder of those times an invention which characterizes that epoch better than anything else. In Kushania they invented paper kagit as they called it. Paper was made of hemp in the Chuya Valley, on the bank of the river Talas (Talasu). Invention stimulated deficiency calfskin on which religious texts and scientific tractates were written The Turki turned Kashmir into a sacred region too that was the place of pilgrimages of the Middle East. Only God owns the Golden Temple for which the Indians and Pakistani keep on fighting Nobility of the tsar Kanishka, like a crown of a big tree, protected the Turkic world from
rigors giving heavy crops to people. Buddha's followers convened the Council IV in Kashmir they accepted Tengri and his teaching there, which enriched spiritual world of the East with Mahayana the new philosophy. Today that is one of the basic branches of Buddhism. It is about the unity of the world, its harmony, compassion and mutual help, human ideals, appetence and surroundings. That is what the Turkic tsar taught his people; that is what Altaic belief was about. Those good wishes were reflected in the text minted on copper plates they remain the relics of Buddhism for a billion of believers in China, Mongolia, Japan, Tibet and Siberia. They, those plates, or the Council IV to put it more preciously, gave rise to a new branch of Buddhism the northern branch that was called Lamaism. Thus the arrival of the Turki gave the second birth to Hindustan and the Middle East; it gave them a new life. The life with Heavenly God.
name Oguz the name of those who came to the west from the south. The Great Nations Migration changed its character; it became massive and not episodic as it was in the times of Achemenids, Arshakids and Kushans. People inhabited lands where only certain families had been able to live before. The bravest families. There to the northwest stretched the road which remained for centuries steppe is a very severe natural zone of the Earth; haste is unacceptable while developing it. Generations changed before the word Itil appeared on maps. Claudius Ptolemy, who lived early in the II century, did not know it since he knew nothing about the Great Nations Migration. However the Turki themselves did not know about it either; they just lived inhabited new lands and moved forward not thinking of how their deeds will be called later by descendants and contemporaries. They just led the life that only they could understand. The average speed of their moving to the west did not exceed forty kilometers per year! They allowed themselves one day horse passage in a year. Borders of their country extended by millimeters on the map. It lasted for two and a half centuries. There, in the steppe, new towns and settlements, new roads and tracts appeared as if all of a sudden. Semirechye the small khanate lay to the west from Altai; archeologists found ruins of twenty ancient Turkic towns. Those towns were to the north from Kushania and either were on friendly terms or waged a war with it for a long time. One culture is seen in it by the naked eye; it was one nation brothers who used to quarrel and reconcile with each other After that the Great Nations Migration moved further to the west until it reached Yaik in the II century. Rivers were important landmarks. Settling on their banks the Turki gave them their geographical names. At times those names remind of what has already been forgotten by people. The farthest river was
The Near East Foothold

When the routs of the Great Nations Migration reached the Northern Caucasia, which happened early in the III century, the Altaians settled there too. Their way was hard and long. More than one generation of people changed after they had left Altai. One would think, could traces of that ancient migration remain? Yes they could. They remained, and the academician V.V. Bertold gave a significant example in his lectures. Referring to the Greek geographer Ptolemy, he noticed that early in the II century Europe learnt the Turkic name of the river Yaik (Daiks). That event is a new milestone in nations migration. The Turki reached a very high level, and certain families started to develop northern territories which had been previously inaccessible. They came to the steppe. Their name the Kipchaks became well-known; to an extent it contrasted with the
called Ilin (Lena) the Eastern River, Anasu (Yenisei) Mother River, Obe (Ob) Grandmother River perhaps the whole toponymy of the South Siberia is Turkic: Biya, Katun, Irtysh, Tobol, Kut, Ishim. Hundreds of names. E.M. Murzaev mentioned in this connection: It is not difficult to reveal Turkisms in toponymy of the countries of the Near and Middle East: Demirchai, Sarychai, Adjichai, Karansu, Karasu, Kyzyluzen, Akbolak in the north-western part of Iran. In Iraq there are small rivers Narynchai, Kurychai and Aksu in the basin of the river Tigris. In Afghanistan the deep river Kokcha flows into Amu-Darya. It is possible that the name of right confluent of Indus in Pakistan the river Kuram derived from the ethnicon kuram. In India, in Kashmir, there is a settlement called Kyzyllangar. Toponymic Turkisms are often met in China out of Xinjiang, in Gansu, in Internal Mongolia Not everybody knows that Turkic geographical names exist in the Plateau of Tibet, in its eastern and northern parts. It is indicative that everywhere where the Turki used to settle, Turkic geographical names appeared. The Great Nations Migration provided a lot of discoveries. The river Itil (Volga) was the next after Yaik. It should be mentioned that it flew into the Caspian Sea not where it flows into it now. Its creek lay more than three hundred kilometers to the south near foothills of the Caucasus. That was the desire to strengthen their positions on the great river, and especially in the Caucasus, in this natural fortress, that attracted newcomers from Altai. In the outfall of Itil they found the town called Semider future capital of Khazar Chaganate. The Northern Caucasia lay back from well-trodden roads. Neither Parthia, nor the Roman Empire looked at those severe unattractive lands. They lay near the borders of oecumene. The Sarmatians settled there in the III century B.C.; they left Parthia not being willing to obey to Arshakids. In the I century
the Alans joined them; they also decided not to live near the Parthians or Kushan khanate with their new orders. Those two nations inhabited the foothills of the Northern Caucasia; they did not create a state, but they were really strong and their neighbors considered them. Those were the ancestors of modern Ossetians, Circassians and Kabardinians. When first tilt carts appeared in the Caucasian steppe, it meant that the Turki came in order to stay there for a long time they laid roads, raised towns; traces of their state were found by archeologists. For example, they discovered location of fifteen ancient towns in steppe regions of modern Dagestan. The Caucasian Turki made the town Aktash the capital of their khanate it was raised in honor of the khan that led the nation to those new lands, according to the legend of Aktash the hero of peoples epos. Ruins of that grand town surrounded by tsars' barrows are located near Enderei settlement. The khanate the core of future Khazar chaganate was expanding since the III century To Derbent, perhaps the only town in the Northern Caucasia of those times, the Kipchaks moved not at once; Parthian lands laid to the south and it was insecure to trouble them. And there was no need in doing that. But time moved on, the world was changing. Those changes affected Parthia; in 224 the dynasty of Arshakids fell there as a result of a conspiracy of the priests. The new dynasty defeated the previous one due to support of the priests, Tengri's opponents whose religious beliefs could be called pagan. They had no influence in the times of Arshakids but, dreaming of revenge, they brought Sasanids to the throne and under their auspices they changed the belief in Heavenly God for renewed Zoroastrianism and thus made their power plenipotentiary. Khozroi, the tsar of Armenia, was the only one from the family of Arshakids who remained independent. In order to hold out he
turned to his brothers Caucasian Turki and together with them he made a stand against the shah of Sasanids. Results surpassed all expectations: the Iranians received a fatal blow and Armenia guaranteed its independence. Consequences of that small battle were really important not because it changed the alignment of geopolitical forces in Transcaucasia for which Parthia and Rome were fighting. They were important because the western world learnt about the third force about a new invincible cavalry standing in the north, near Derbent. Let us emphasize the word cavalry being a totemic sign of the Turki. Let us once again remember that the riders were those who created the state of Achemenids, conquered the Northern Hindustan, founded Parthia and Kushan khanate. The troops always came from the West, striking with their strength, armament and organization. The Altaic steppe with its vastness gave the Turki their most important totem cavalry, mounted troops That was the emblem of the Great Nations Migration. A horse and a man were brought together the planet was discussing the centaurs. For example Arshak IX (123 88/87 B.C.), having reorganized his army and created a cavalry, became really powerful. Researchers noticed that organization and armament system of the Parthian cavalry were copied from that of Altai. And that is also witnessed by the unity of the Turkic world. There were separate countries run by Altaic dynasties, but there was also a single center that coordinated their policies and material culture. It is possible that Altai was that center its tsar gathered his relatives, representatives of the dynasty, and gave them advices and recommendations. Unfortunately, there is nothing to do but to guess about it judging by remaining symbols. There are no documents, but traces of coordination remained. The victory of the Kipchaks over Sasanids is a good example. Historical victory over Iran run by Sasanids gave hope to those who suffered under the reign of the Roman Empire. Rumors of invincible riders reached eastern boards of the western world; they were
discussed in Asia Minor, the Middle East and Egypt. Those rumors were initiated by members of the sect called Atheists; they did not believe in Gods. Their belief was based on Apocalypse, on the words of St. John the Evangelist who augured the coming of riders liberators from Rome's power. The Messenger of Heavenly God (Messiah) gave that Revelation. The Empire will be destroyed, the riders are awaited they will come from the East to establish eternal justice. Atheists lived with these thoughts. And I saw heaven opened; and behold, a white horse, and He who sat upon it is called Faithful and True; and in righteousness He judges and wages war And the armies which are in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him on white horses And from His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may smite the nations; and He will rule them with a rod of iron. [Revelation 19 11 16]. Every word of Apocalypse was to be thought over, every word was taken from depths of life. Atheists were waiting for riders like no one else; they lived with news of them. It was clear from the text of the Revelation that the main weapon of the riders was a word uttered by God. And that was the word God. History of that sect is known, it is connected with the Judaic War that was waged in the I century in Palestine. Those events, the same as Apocalypse, are known to scientists except for certain details which for some reason are usually disregarded, namely: in the III century the sectaries were not called Christians, they were called Jews (Hebrews) and there were no significant differences between them and orthodox Jews. But even that is not the main thing. The Greek word Christ was not used at that moment. The world did not know New Testament; it was all to be born. Even legends of Christ. Population of the Roman Empire remained pagan worshipping Jupiter, Mercury and other gods. After that victory of Turkic riders over Iranians, of who even Rome itself was afraid;
the text of the Revelation obtained a new meaning prophesy was becoming real. Cavalry seemed to be an omen of the future and the Judaic sect the mouth of the prophet. That was a great event that certainly could not be disregarded by nations conquered by Rome. Those nations were those who shared the sectaries' beliefs. Heavenly God helped the riders the Armenians were the first who understood that. Khozroi, their ruler, was a spiritual ally of Altai; he had Turkic blood, due to which he successfully kept on fighting with the Iranians for thirty years. After Khozroi's death his son Tiridat found refuge in Rome. It should be mentioned that in those times the territory of Armenia was different the country stretched for about five hundred eight hundred kilometers to the south-west and was a kind of a buffer between Parthia and Rome. Or, more preciously, between East and West the strongest of them was to rule over Armenia. It was free and independent only in legends When its union with the Turki was broken, Armenia became a region of Iran its colony. The Roman emperor Diocletian took advantage of it his campaign of 297 was fantastically successful. The West moved its boundaries to Euphrates having conquered Armenia and regions of defeated Iran. No one would object to Rome; everybody was discussing the return of the Golden Age to it. Another wise man, today known as George, was reflecting upon it. Like many educated people, he also believed in prophecy of Apocalypse and was also waiting for the riders. According to an Armenian legend, he had a vision the sky opened and he saw an equilateral cross exactly the same as on riders' flags. And he heard the words coming from the sky; an angel ordered him to be the shepherd of the nation that inherited salvation, which was a clarification The plot was certainly made more mythical by the Armenian Church, but it was based on reality known to Armenian historians. It turns out that George, born in 257,
was the Turki he was from the family of Arshakids, which means he was a descendent of Parthian tsars. Today his life is legendary and full of myths; those days he was one of the few. Of course he knew about Heavenly God worshipped by all his relatives and ancestors. Of course he saw the cross respected by the natives of Altai the cross that symbolized their religion Tengrianity. As fate willed that was his, George's (!), father who was sent by Sasanids to destroy the union between the Armenians and the Turki and kill the tsar Khozroi. Thus George was to restore what had been lost and he perfectly understood his responsibility That is why he chose the Turkic symbols! And the Turkic belief! Not to go into details set forth in previous books of the author of this one and in works of medieval historians Agahangel, Favst Buzand and others, let us remember the known facts: the Armenian Greogorian Church appeared in 301. In its history it is written that they accepted the belief of the Huns and read prayers in their language. The power in the country belonged to a Turki to Tiridat, the tsar of Armenia. He also belonged to the family of Arshakids, the same as his relative George. The Armenians still regard those belonging to that family as their tsars. And the word Turki, or Kipchak, or Hun in the IV century had a noble meaning; it did not embarrass like today since it related to the nation to which not only Armenian tsars belonged. Armenian nobility (the Romans considered it to be arrogant and freakish) had also Turkic blood, which is confirmed by family trees. For example, Mamikonians still remain one of the noblest families in Armenia this family has Turkic roots. The founder of the family Mamgo was an exile in Altai because of tricks of fortune; the tsar Tiridat sheltered him and his people in Armenia Many well-known Armenian families originate from the nomads. And the families of Suren, Karen, Spendiat, Mikhran were previously members of seven noble families of Parthia and later moved to serve in Armenia since Altaic traditions of power remained there. It is interesting that memory of Altaic
origin of Suren family keeps not only the name (in the ancient Turkic language suren means leader), but also the toponym Sakastan (Sistan). This historical region was called in honor of the Saks to which their leader Suren (Surena) belonged. He was the leader of Sakastan. And before the arrival of the Turki the country (neighboring regions of modern Iran and Afghanistan) was called Drangiana. The history of Tigran the Great the founder of the great Armenia is very interesting. He remained the Great while he was supported by Parthia and its troops glistening with their armors and helmets. No sooner than the union was rejected, the Armenian tsar lost everything on the spot and died having survived his glory. And three years after his death Rome and Armenia controlled by it were defeated again: the Parthians, the Turki won the famous battle of Carrhae. The commander of the battle was famous Surena (Suren) he was not called an Armenian at those times. After the battle of Carrhae (53 B.C.) the world was divided between Rome and Parthia. However, the wars were not stopped, they continued in Syria, Mesopotamia, Armenia. Those wars led to creation of a boundary line with fortifications and fortresses between East and West. As a matter of fact, that was the first border between two worlds pagan and heavenly. In a word, the first Church and new ceremonies appeared in the West due to the Armenian Turki. The hearth of the new religion. Tengri's cross was its symbol. A little later its adherents were called new Christians (new since they were not Jews). However, Christ was not often mentioned his time had not come yet. It was just the beginning of the IV century. The Armenian Church was headed by George himself, later by his son and his grandchildren. One of his first orders said that only members of the tsarist family could head the Church. To an extent, that decision connected a mitre and a crown spiritual and temporal power.
George obtained the title of an archbishop from Altaic khans; they laid hands on him and called him katalyk, which means ally in Turkic. (The title Catholicos with a Greek ending os was introduced later). And after that the head of the Armenian Church took a chariot and, being guarded by Turkic riders, left for Cappadocia, the province of the Roman Empire neighboring with Armenia to announce about himself and his Church. It is well known that George took a relic with him a golden cross decorated with precious stones (adji), the sign of Heavenly God, in order to present it to the West. That was an open challenge to pagan Rome to which it was shown who was Armenia's ally But we will return to it in a little while. Thus, having accepted the belief and become the ally of the Turki, Armenia became independent of Rome without fighting. And the Roman emperor Diocletian could not even object, he digested an insult but in order to prevent appearance of the new God (Armenian belief as it was called), and proclaimed persecutions in the Empire. It was too late. The idea had adherents even in the Emperor's retinue; the word God emphatically entered peoples minds. It was connected with coming changes in which nobody doubted. Even the Emperor Diocletian who flirted with an idea of accepting the new belief. Eusebius Pamphylus, the contemporary of those events, wrote: After some time, because some tried to usurp tsar's power in the so-called Melitinskaya country (the region in Minor Armenia. M.A.) and others in Siberia, the tsar issued an order to imprison all Church celebrants. That was the beginning of the policy that has become a part of history under a frightening and incorrect name persecution against Christians. In 303 persecutions were carried out not against Christians but against followers of the Armenian belief. Christians simply did not exist then the name was unknown. Other nations willing to get rid of
power of the Roman harlot and be guarded by Heavenly God and the Turkic cavalry followed the example of the Armenians That was the time of distemper in the West; a new world revolution, a take-over was prepared. People felt coming of a hurricane that was to inevitably come from the East and sweep Rome away. Not the Germanic tribes were destroying Rome but the new belief. Belief in Heavenly God In Tengri. Another independent country Caucasian Albanian appeared in Transcaucasia. It was established and named by the Albans. That was an ancient Altaic union of families, a tukhum (also called juz); it took power, which is witnessed by the tamga of the family depicted on the emblem of the new country. However, the name really perplexes; it is not as evident as it seems at first. In the Turkic language Alp means hero, winner this word is very ancient. Later it has got the meaning to serve, servant. It seems there was an event that disappeared in the waves of the Great Nations Migration after which the family of the Alpans lost their former greatness in the Caucasus. When and how it happened before or after the Caucasian Albania was formed? Nobody knows. Unfortunately, not much is known of that country; the historians did not notice it, which is really strange. There are no serious scientific researches concerning the history of the Albans: documents were destroyed, and historical witnesses were edited by generations of scientists so that it is impossible to find logic in them. They are far from having those advantages necessary for a conscientious research. Greek myths are nothing as compared with modern scientific works. The fact that the lands of Albania had been settled before the Turki came there, i.e. before the beginning of the IV century, raises no doubts. But one cannot believe that the natives were the founders of the new state. What was it for? Transcaucasia was dependent from the VI century B.C., i.e. from
the times of Persia. And it lived under its laws. The master established them for the servant. Only external forces can make a colony independent. And besides, a country cannot be discussed separately from political situation around it. Whatever arguments opponents produce, the Caucasian Albania could not exist before the edge of the III IV centuries, i.e. before the Turkic Kipchaks had come to the Caucasus and the tsarist power was deposed in Parthia. That was world politics. It has its laws which can never be changed! Independent Armenia or Georgia (Iberia) also could not exist for the same reasons. However, they did not exist. The name of the first ruler of the Caucasian Albania was Vachaghan, i.e. khan Vacha. He belonged to the family of Arshakids and was also know as the Brave. He was changed by the tsar Urnayr, the contemporary of Tiridat and George; he became the main person in politics of the Caucasus. He became so due to Altai! What Urnayr has done is compared with deeds of Kanishka. In 304 in Derbent that Albanian tsar proclaimed the belief in Heavenly God (new Christianity) the official religion, he established the Church and the Patriarchal See where new believers were taught divine services and the Turkic culture. The Caucasian Kashmir appeared due to his noble efforts another melting pot for cultures of different nations. That was the sense of establishing a new state: history of the Middle East repeated, this time in the Caucasus. And that is another indirect confirmation of coordination of the Great Nations Migration. As a matter of fact, appearance of hearths of the Altaic culture was the result of that migration. The most important and the most noticeable result. And that was confirmed by numerous signs obtained by the western culture. It is interesting that the nobility of the Caucasian Albania was also arrogant and
freakish, the same as Armenian aristocracy, and it also consisted of the nomads. But in Albania the Turkic speech prevailed, people understood it; and in Armenia it was quite the opposite. As a matter of fact, that was the difference between two countries that were the first to turn to new Christianity. The grandson of George the Enlightener Grigoris headed the Albanian Church; he is known as Saint George and the reasons of it have become a secret after 495, when the Roman clergy prohibited mentioning Grigoris' deeds. However, memory of him remains; his tomb is located near Derbent that has been the place of pilgrimages of Christians and Moslems for seventeen centuries After the Armenians other nations saw the greatness of the Turkic belief and tended to it. Europe had not known any culture of that kind before. In India and the Middle East melting of cultures resulted in a new branch of Buddhism and Zoroastrianism, Manichaeism and other religions and in the Caucasus another belief was originating. The Europeans were to get the belief later called Monophysitism or Arianism. That was not Christianity but a step to it. The Armenian Church was being established on the principles of Monotheism; that has been the peculiarity of it of the Monophysite Church! up to now. The Albans, Iberians (Georgians), Syrians, Egyptians, Tigrai (Ethiopians) also created a similar Church where Heavenly God dominated. And they wanted to be the allies of the Turki. Thats why they called the heads of their Churches in a Turkic manner katalyks the same as the founder of the Armenian Church George the Enlightener. Strictly speaking, it was practically the same everywhere: first Churches were created, Jesus Christ was known there but not as God. Christian legends were to appear later in the Greek and Roman area The Caucasian Albania with Derbent, its sacred town, can be compared with Kashmir; it was an important spiritual center no only in the East, but in the West as well.
Derbent is mentioned in Koran and Hadithes and the Caucasus is described in the Bible. The road of the Christian Europe started there. In a baptistery constructed in the square of Derbent the Turki baptized future European bishops, their future parishioners (which of course could not be done in a synagogue!). Traces of that historical baptistery remained. And the first temple near which inaugural ceremonies were performed was also excavated by archeologists it is situated on a mountain behind fortress walls. Time made the building go deep underground, but it did not disappear. It remained. To tell the truth, the Christians have been evading Derbent since the VIII century. The town was conquered by the Arabs then and the Christians were exiled since they had other views concerning Monotheism and were not able to defend their opinions with weapons. Moslems destroyed the Patriarchal See, the temple was reconstructed into a jumah mosque it still has the traces of the Christian past; its architecture is really extraordinary. It seems in those restless times, in order to save their temple, the Christians covered it with soil up to its dome; upland allowed concealment. The baptistery had the same lot it was also underground. And soon it was forgotten But a layer of ground is not a hindrance for archeologists. Under the Arabs people in Derbent were not baptized anymore. And baptism, which meant three times steep into holy water is the ceremony of initiation into the Turkic belief. Every child underwent it in Altai as far back as five centuries B.C. The ceremony has not been forgotten; it is called ary-sili or ary-alkyn. Water was made holy by silver cross Antiquity is a thing that makes deeds noble and gives people confidence that is what the people of Altai thought. In any case, first Christian temples and bishops appeared in Derbent and Transcaucasia. Architecture of those temples reminded of cult buildings of the Turki in the
Middle East, for instance. Or in the steppe of modern Kazakhstan. They were exactly the same. These are the reasons of striking similarity of Kushan architectonics, Parthian cult architecture and religious architecture of Persia and Khoresm marked by many researchers. Sources of this similarity are in Altai from where traditions of temples building came to India, to the Middle East, to the Caucasus and further to Europe. However, according to historians, temples design in the form of a circle are also derived from traditions of nomadic tribes, i.e. from the Turki. And the Turki were the only ones who built temples on foundations in the form of an equilateral cross. Similarity of Kushan arts with temple Gothic architecture of Europe is striking. The academician G.A. Pugachenkova wrote: Sculptures of Butkara (I III centuries) and especially Hadda (II IV centuries) disclose an unexpected similarity with Roman and Gothic sculptures. Of course, no contacts can be in question here since they are divided by many centuries. However, the academician is only partly right here. Thats right, when Kushan masterpieces were being created, the Roman could afford nothing of the kind. Not because there were bad sculptors there or people did not value the beautiful. They did not believe in Heavenly God; there were other cults there. Only after the arrival of the Turki, when western spiritual culture began to change, they turned to God, which means to traditions of temple arts. That is why it took many centuries for Gothic sculpture to get closer to Kushan arts. That was the contact which, according to Pugachenkova cannot be in question that made the rise of temple arts in the West possible. First changes emerged in Derbent, they concerned its Patriarchal See, and that is from where Christian culture was spreading after accepting not only the Altaic ceremonies of Monotheism, but also its artistic images, architecture, philosophy. Having been
adopted and inventively remade in Parthia and Kushan, they kept on moving to the West. Alas, nothing new is possible without forgotten old. And the more solid the old is, the more significant is the new. That is right, figures of Christian apostles remind of Arhats of Butkara and Hadda; chimeras remind of demons; laughing angels of smiling devas; pensive Blessed virgins and martyrs of virgins gazing at Tengri Burkhan Because they were made using the same patterns. That is another trace of the Turkic culture in the world civilization. In the Caucasian Albania and Armenia where temples were not built wherever they wished but only in sacred places which people used to visit from of old. Ancient sanctuaries were being replaced by temples and monasteries. New belief, dissolving the elements of the old one in it, did not conflict with it. They changed holidays and sacred places and thus changed peoples morals; the Turki were very wise and clearsighted here. Maybe thats why ancient Albanian monuments are still visited by both Christians and Moslems. They call them their native ones Tolerance is the product of subtle policy and fine mind. It started in the Caucasian Albania and was slowly spreading all over Europe. That was the sense of the new Turkic state and its Patriarchal See extension of beliefs! At that time Rome was standing apart in the backyard of spiritual life since it did not know Heavenly God and offered prayers to Jupiter. And it proved the trueness of its belief by force or, more preciously, by persecutions. That was the witness of its powerlessness. The Eternal City was nothing at that time. Its time was gone. Those who were later called Judaic Christians, early Christians and his ancestors by the Pope, in the IV century all underwent circumcision and visited synagogues; their contemporaries called them Jews or Hebrews. The Emperor never ordered to persecute them. They were neutral people that constituted no threat. Nobody was
standing for them! Thus it was up to the Oecumenical Council I (325) In the IV century Altaic culture was being perceived not only by the Caucasus. The nations migration that was expanding increasingly covered new lands of the Mediterranean. But in the Near East its history differed from that in the Middle East. Those lands, too distant from Altai, did not obey the Turki after the fall of Achemenids they were part of the Roman Empire, and the Romans carefully guarded their purity. Preachers from Derbent were not let there; vice versa, they were persecuted. That is why inhabitants Europe and Asia Minor knew nothing about riders messengers from Altai not communicating with Derbent. However, God is merciful Derbent was opened to the Mediterranean to Syria, Egypt, North Africa. The word of Heavenly God reached it before the Kipchaks came to Derbent. How? Its way was really long. Geographical maps show that the Mediterranean coast can be also reached by the Indian Ocean. That way was ready long before the IV century from the times of Kushan khanate that conducted trade with Egypt. Through the Red Sea. Merchant fleets moved to ports of Barbarika, to Adulis, and Alexandria was the most important trade center of Egypt, which means of the whole Mediterranean. Strictly speaking, sea lane to Egypt was known before the Kushans. In the times of Achemenids the river Indus was explored and ships were sent from Persian lands in Gandhara down Indus to the Indian Ocean and further to Egypt. After that Darius conquered the valley of Indus and launched sea trade. Under Parthius trade became more intensive, because opening of the monsoon drift facilitated moving by sea. In Chinese sources there are witnesses of land contacts with Parthia, consequently, Chinese goods reached Europe through the Parthians, which increased goods turnover. After the decline of
Parthia the Kushans obtained mediation in trade and control over trade routs of West and East having become the main force in the Central Asia Of course, trade expanded cultural relations that is for certain. Arrival of Turkic preachers to Egypt or, more preciously, to the North Africa coincided with growth of the Kushan khanate, i.e. with the I century. That is when a delegation from the East came there in order to establish African colonies of Altai; in history of Egypt they are known as Indian communities. Soon they became recognized centers of Monotheism. Belief and trade with expensive transit goods made them famous far away outside Egypt. Such communities were placed in Alexandria, the White Harbor and possibly in Memphis and Aksum (modern Ethiopia). Historians know one such Indian merchant called Firm who lived in the III century and made a lot of money due to overseas trade. He was so powerful that he announced separation of Egypt from the Roman Empire. That man could buy any legion of the Roman army, any civil servant. And he bought them. The merchant grew rich due to trade with paper which could be produced only by the Turki and which the Turki themselves brought from the Kushan khanate. Of course, Indian communities did not disappear after the fall of Parthia and Kushania; trade guaranteed them a life of ease. Being influential, they supported the clergy of Derbent that sent their fosterlings to the West together with trade fleets Monuments of Armenia and the Caucasian Albania retained the look of those people in Turkic clothes, riding horses but without stirrups. Women and kamas (clergymen) were the only ones who rode horses without stirrups. How did they preach in foreign lands? There was nothing special about it. Belief in God is the language comprehensible even by the deaf. Omnipotent traders certainly saw about translators and safety of preachers. Everything was as usual; those traditions are still kept in Egypt by descendants of natives
of the Indian communities by the Copts. True belief gave the word Kipchak the meaning of the word saint there. The Armenians, Georgians, Egyptians remembered it in the following way: truly you will know them by their deeds. The Turki knew: belief cannot be imposed but inculcated. Fragile and vulnerable, it draws strength not from wise words and nice myths but from deeds of people of believers. Everything is of consequence here. Historians did not know much about Middle-East stages of the Great Nations Migration, of arrival of the Turki to Egypt; they based their activities on legends invented by themselves. But in 1945 Mohammed Ali al-Sannami, an Egyptian peasant, found hidden ancient manuscripts in the ruins of an ancient settlement (modern Nag Hammadi). There were thirteen volumes there. Sheets of papyrus were bound with skin. The peasant's wife, an ignorant and superstitious woman, threw the finding into the fire being afraid that it would bring diseases into their house. Thus one of the manuscripts was burnt; only a small part of it remained safe. But the found treasure was not lost; it was bought by Cairo museum. That is the lot of one of the greatest archeological discoveries of the XX century Coptic library from Nag Hammadi, one of the most ancient libraries of the world. It found its readers not at once. In 1977 James Robinson published its contents, and historical sciences learnt about fifty two works of which nobody had had the slightest idea before. The library contains about 1000 pages of the text. Unfortunately, many works by Robinson on that subject were not published in Russia. In 1981 he told the history of his discovery (see: Robinson J.M. From the Cliff to Cairo: The Story of the Discoveries and the Middleman of the Nag Hammadi Codices // Colloque International sur les Textes de Nag Hammadi. Quebec, 1981), and in 1984 he published a facsimile edition of Nag Hammadi codices. Each volume was a collection of
information written in the end of the III or the beginning of the IV century; Heavenly God is mentioned there and they are probably the only documents describing spiritual life of Egypt early in the Middle Ages. Those codices seemed to shed the light on the past. At any rate, hope appeared, as though a butterfly from Pandora's box. But Christianity without Jesus Christ was described there. Authors' (or author's) were so different from further interpretations of the Greeks or Romans and had so little in common with official Christianity that the western science suggested a special term Egyptian nonchurch Christianity. To tell the truth, it is difficult to agree with this suggestion since it is too unnatural. What has Christianity to do with this since there is no Christ in it? One should be too light-minded to believe in connection of those rolls with Christianity. And besides, why were they so sure? Nobody deciphered the texts to the end, nobody even knows in what language they were written. What can be discussed here? They judge about their contents considering certain familiar words meeting in local dialects. For example, A. Khosroev who has written a book about the ancient library, mentions: the place where the texts from Nag Hammadi were found was a Sahidicspeaking region. What language was it, could it be used in archives of the tower of Babel? One can never guess. Perplexity becomes stronger when you learn that in that language regardless of terrible orthography one can nevertheless recognize sub-Achmimic and not Sahidic dialect. Dialect of what? Of what language? And who were those Sahidic-speaking people? What culture did they have? Scientists keep silent about that Those scientific wiles are a tribute to politics; they are necessary in order to conceal the Turkic language in which divine services were conducted and which was used
for writing service books in Churches that accepted Monotheism Everything is clear. Certain scientists distinguished up to fifteen dialects in Coptic. Sub-Achmimic or Licopolic derived from Licopole (Coptic Asyut), to the south from which, supposedly, the area where this dialect was widespread stretched is divided into three other groups with their phonetic, morphological, lexical and possibly syntactic peculiarities. Sahidic dialect was deemed to be the dialect of the South, or Upper Egypt and was used near the ancient capital of Egypt Thebes (modern Luxor). Bohranic was the dialect of Base Egypt. It became, according to linguists, the language of the Coptic divine services, since Alexandria was the place where the Coptic Patriarch lived. The Turkic language which dominated in many Coptic (Indian) communities is not even mentioned by scientists, which puts them in an embarrassing position. Many things are revealed by the history of the Coptic Church and the Copts who were, as a rule, natives of the Indian communities, their fosterlings. In the III century those people settled in Nile headwaters; they were imposing their moral code. At that time Egypt, the same as the Caucasian Albania, officially accepted Monotheism. Today in Egypt they are called Christians in order to distinguish them from other adherents of Monotheism the Moslems. But the Copts keep traditions of divine services which the Turki from Altai had not much has changed there over the centuries, although Coptic Catholics and Coptic Protestants appeared. Their appearance is rather a tribute to fashion and time. The community still exists and keeps on trading as it used to do formerly it is a conservative organization, it has cared about its business for centuries and thus it retained its belief. In the Turkic language Copt means to rise, eminent. Egyptians that accepted Monotheism were called so some time ago. The official science provides absolutely different information about the Copts, which
has nothing to do with reality. They assert, for instance, that the Church was created by the Greeks for them. But the Greek Christians appeared after Egypt was conquered by Byzantium; they came to Nile when everything had been already done there. The word copt is derived from the Greek word Aigiptos Egyptian and from Arabic al-cubt, al-cybt, al-cobt Egyptians that accepted Christianity. But these are somebody's speculative theories. Were the Egyptians that stupid and not independent that they took a Greek name for themselves? The Arabic version is even less likely. The name Copt appeared long before the Arabic language appeared in the X century, which means it could not have been of Arabic origin. In the V century the Greeks forcedly subdued the Coptic Church having appointed their Patriarch in Alexandria, but the Copts did not recognize him. Two Patriarchs Greek and Egyptian have been acting there simultaneously since then. At that the Egyptian one called himself Cathalyk, the same as in Armenia, Albania and Georgia; the Greek word Catholicos appeared later. And at the same time the Copts had another title, Pope, or Apa as they had it, which means Holy Father in Turkic. The inscription apa can be found on Coptic icons of the IV V centuries This is not incidental information. And there is one more thing. The Coptic Church differed from that in Byzantium. The Copts have non-Christian ceremonies and dogmas. And there are many of them: it seems some things remained from previous beliefs of the Egyptians, others were taken from the Turki. It strikes the eye even after centuries. Anyway, in 1727 Wasil Grigorovich-Barskiy, the Russian civil servant, wrote having visited Egypt: The Copts, those who underwent circumcision, they perform baptism and circumcision and adhere to other heresies. And than: The Greek Patriarch and those around him are treated as miscreants. And interesting observation. But how can it be correlated with the Greek origin?
The Copts is a unique social phenomenon, it should be accepted as it is. Like a tree that retained its roots and grafted by what was brought from the East by Monotheism. Tengri's cross had been placed on top of temples since the IV century. The Turki did not impose their culture; the Copts took as much as they needed, that is why their new belief was so variable. Every nation retained its face and every Church its individuality. Armenian, Albanian, Iberian, Syrian, Coptic, Ethiopian Churches, basing on Monotheism, differed from each other. Even the cross did not level out differences. By the way, the same equilateral cross shone on tops of Buddhist temples from the times of Kanishka. It emphasized the similarity of beliefs, the unity of its source. In Egypt there are cemeteries, temples, bishops' residencies of those times the sign of Tengri, the Heavenly sign of Altai is everywhere. Unfortunately, those findings were insufficiently examined; archeologists keep on trying to correlate their findings with the Greek Christianity, which they are not able to do. However, the past is clarified not by archeological findings alone, but also by family trees of certain Coptic families. The Copts call their ancestors ahmar, which in their language means red, blond. Egyptian, Sudanese and Ethiopian legends tell about fair-haired and blue-eyed newcomers. Who were those people? From where? For instance, they assured that in their native lands water turns in transparent stones and in summer the Sun shines even at night. And their clothes were striking too trousers, shirts, hoods and boots. Of course, those people rode horses which the Near East had not seen before. There were donkeys and camels there but not horses. Ethiopian legends say: sacred texts of the IV century connected with the name of Heavenly God are written in the ancient Amharic language. But that language the Turkic language! was the language of the court and nobility. Its dialect has not
disappeared even now, although the language itself, certainly, has changed since more than a thousand and a half years have elapsed. But the stem remained since the Turkic language, as it was mentioned by experts long ago, is notable for strong resistance to changes. Five seven percent of its words get out of date during a thousand years. This rare feature is peculiar only to ancient languages. Influence of Indian communities on the language of Ethiopia and Egypt is not denied by scientists, but none of them explains how such influence is shown. By the way, in the language of the Copts living in regions of the Upper Egypt there are many Turkic words and expressions in use. Even certain phrases. From where?... But this question was put by non-experts. In Ethiopia the nation called Amhara (Amara) is related to the descendants of fair-haired newcomers; they changed the life of the country like the Nagas did in India. The ancient Amharic language in which sacred texts of the IV century were written, is called Ge'ez in Ethiopia. The name consists of two ancient Turkic words: ge (news, glory) and ez (essence), which literally means the essence of news. The essence of the teaching was in question! In that language the word tsar sounded as nagashi. Newcomers, whose patron was a serpent or dragon (and the same goes with the Nagas) gave Ethiopia and other countries of the North Africa belief and written language. Ethiopian written language was directed the same as that of the Turki from left to right. And they used runes which, to tell the truth, were slightly different. Let us assume that the language is a disputable issue. But the Ahmars also left barrows. G. Risener, the member of an Anglo-American expedition, was among the first who made excavations in that region; scientists examined one hundred fifty ancient cemeteries they faced about eight thousand burial places. But that was not everything. A lot of barrows were recently met in headwaters of Nile, to the south from Abu Simbel, Kustal and Ballan; and then everything went to the bottom of the Aswan
Reservoir. History was drowned in the proper sense of the word, as though on purpose. But it is impossible to conceal that ancient newcomers from the North buried their leaders in a vaulted crypt of a barrow putting silver crowns on their heads. An iron sword, a horse covered with a silver harness and four choked slaves, as well as crockery and other welfare items accompanied them to the other world How did the ceremony appear? Even a pupil getting a satisfactory mark at the lesson of regional ethnography will guess by his first attempt, which is of no consequence at all for the western science. And at the same time the science does not have its own opinion. One would think, what are the doubts based on? Barrows near Abu Simbel, Kustul and Ballan were examined by the archeologist U. Emery in 1931 1934. What he saw was really striking: burial places repeated tsarist barrows of the Eurasian steppe. Not only them, but also the tomb of Hilderik (the father of the baptizer of the Franks) in France, the famous Sutton Hoo barrow in the South England, Black Tomb in Russia. Geography and chronology of monuments coincided with the route of the Great Nations Migration. How can one not notice it? But they did not notice! Spiritual and material culture of Altai is unique in its images and subjects. Turkic motives prevailed in church graphic arts, they are the same in Nubia, Europe and Russia. Marking their striking similarity with Buddhist themes, scientists cannot explain what they see. Because Altai the source of that culture is hidden by a great many unbelievable hypotheses. There, in Altai, water freezes up in winter, the sun shines in summer for a long time and burial ceremonies are exactly the same as the Ahmars have it using crypts and barrows. Crowns, ornaments on swards they are the same, they cannot be mixed up. Ornament is the sign of culture, its tamga Turkic toponymy is not accidental in the North Africa. It is evident. On any
geographical map. And it is also unnoticed. The Europeans say Blue Nile, while it is more correctly to use the word Heavenly. The name is not based on blue water it is muddy there but the Sky reflected in it , which is witnessed by the name of one inflow of Heavenly Nile the Dinder-river (it comes from the Turkic Tengri). There, on the banks, were spiritual centers of the Coptic and Abyssinian Churches. Those sacred places are still visited by pilgrimages; they call the Blue Nile with the word known not to everybody Abay. The name remained on maps of Ethiopia. That is the Ahmaric language of red-haired ancestors of the Copts. But the Turkic spirit declares itself even better in another thing. It is commonly supposed that Egypt became famous due to pyramids; in fact it happened due to the School of Alexandria. It gave the West outstanding philosophers, mathematicians, astronomers, physicians. Not Greece or Rome were the centers of science of the ancient world; scientists got knowledge in Alexandria. That was a unique place on the planet East and West of the ancient world met there. Travels to get wisdom from Egypt to the Turki, to the Kushan khanate, were important two thousand years ago. Religious and philosophic ideas were brought from there. In Egypt Altaic concepts of Heavenly God were sort of polished. Gnosticism is in question it was in minds of philosophers in the I III centuries. As a matter of fact, those contacts of scientists paved the way for appearance of a new belief in Egypt and Europe. Belief could not appear from nowhere. It is not by chance that in a Turkic monastery near Issyk Kul, according to the legend, evangelist Matthew who has written one of the texts of the New Testament is buried. In the I century Dione Chrisostom, the well-known orator, expressed his disappointment in ancient civilization. Exalting
the customs of Egyptian Indians, the orator admired their spiritual counselors; according to him they are full of justice and love to the divine, they know the source of the truth. And in the II century many western philosophers connected their ideals with the Kushan khanate trying to visit that land of wisdom. Pilgrimages were popular among scientists and educated people of the West. Their route to the East started in Egypt. And of course in the first instance this phenomenon was popular in Egypt itself. It also took place in Meroe (ancient town in modern Sudan). Religious concepts of Altai that reached philosophers of Meroe through Kushania evolved there for another cultural media.
the sky you spit into your face. So it happened. Any denials are improper here. The facts witness: early in the IV century Altaic belief was accepted by both, East and West. And information that Jesuits later tried to efface the memory of the Europeans remained in Asia. For a long time the Christians fighting against paganism found support in Buddhism in which Buddha was regarded as analogue of Christ. That is why Gospels of Christ's Childhood and biographies of Buddha are so similar (according to the text); there are dozens of coincidences in them. St. Augustine (354 430), the founder of the Christian philosophy, remembered that relation; he considered Buddhism to be an approximation to the absolute truth of Christianity. And that was not by chance that he called Kushanian sages inhabitants of the City of God But that is referred to later. In order not to compromise their belief, in the Middle Ages the Christians denied all ancient Gospels having called them apocryphal, which meant they were not recognized by the Church. They rewrite them! And what happened? Nothing at all is known about Christ's early days now However, if not going into details, is not that the reason to think of the history of Christianity?! And not in Palestine? Texts of ancient Gospels arbitrarily repudiated by the inquisition give food for such thoughts. Having accepted Monotheism, Egypt accepted a new written language as an obligatory condition. They used to write with hieroglyphs there; the new alphabet symbolized the new culture which came not by peoples whims; it was because of Time. Texts found in Nag Hammadi told a lot: part of them was written with new letters in an unknown (or, more preciously, forgotten) language which as a matter of fact was not deciphered. In order to write sacred texts
Thus Alexandria turned to the teaching of Heavenly God the Creator of the world, immortality of the soul, justice of Heaven, heaven and hell, - in a word, it started to cognize the philosophy to which Kanishka adhered. The West called that teaching Egyptian non-church Christianity. Or Christianity without Jesus Christ. Here it is, an ideological platform, on which the Coptic Church stood. After Egypt was colonized by the Greek the teaching was called Gnosticism (from the word cognizant) and entered the history of religions with it. Nothing was changed except for the name, since that was the definition of the term religion. Clement the Alexandrian, the head of the Divinity School of Alexandria (died in 215) said that. He tried to prove that wisdom of the Greeks is not original and philosophical systems matching with those of the West existed in the East long before them. In his work called Carpets (200 202) he wrote: Philosophy had been popular among the barbarians for a long time, it gave the light to nations, and after that it came to the Hellens (bold provided. M.A.). And, naming philosophers barbarians, he emphasized Altaic shamans. Turkic wisdom teaches: if you spit into
belonging to another religious and language culture it is not enough to make a new alphabet; the language itself should be made. At that the language was to express religious reality unknown to Egyptians. That is a very important conclusion, which has never been really considered. And to agree with it is the only way to understand why manuscripts from Nag Hammadi havent been read and why there are so many blank pages in the history of the Copts and their Church. Writings found in Nag Hammadi were of Gnostic character. Their likeness with similar Greek texts has only one explanation: both, the Copts and Greeks had one and the same source of narration ancient texts of Altai. That is the old reason of contradictions between Greek and early Egyptian church Christianity. If one remembers that according to Greek legends Greek alphabet is connected with a foreign tsar being the husband of the dragon's daughter, similarity of written languages is explained to an extent. Written language was called Coptic, which is absolutely wrong. The same written language was used in the Armenian, Albanian and other Churches. In Derbent it was also used. That was the secret writing of adherents of Monotheism, they were the only ones who knew it. Written language is another sign of the new belief. The sign known to old priests whose time had gone. Letters of Pachomius who founded a monastery by the Turkic example in Egypt in the IV century were also written in that divine language. This language has not been deciphered yet. Of course it had nothing in common with magic cryptography; secret writing was used in order to conceal information from the foreigners, i.e. the uninitiated. The beginning of the IV century is a milestone in history of many nations. Not only the Egyptians and Ethiopians obtained the new written language but also the Armenians, Georgians, Albanians all nations that accepted the belief in Heavenly God. At that some took runic written language of the Turki
as the basis for their secret writings, as the Armenians, Albanians, Georgians, Copts or Amhars did, and others took Altaic cursive writing, as did the Persians and Syrians (Aramaeans). The Armenians connect invention of their alphabet with the name of Mesrop Mashtots and Patriarch Saak. It is interesting that Saak belonged to Arshakids and was aware of traditions of the Turkic culture and written language. Adjusting the new alphabet people were trying to make it compatible with phonetics of their language, which also led to differences. But here, in these differences, History is traced. Runic written language was widespread among the Turkic Kipchaks and cursive writing among the Turkic Oguzes. However, it could not have been otherwise since they taught to believe in Heavenly God in the Turkic language. Today there are about one and a half million Copts formally they are Gnostics, they set a high value on it although they cannot explain their history. In the world there are several similar communities lost in oases in deserts. They lead an instable life: among the Amhars in Ethiopia, among the Nubians in Sudan, among the Berbers in Libya and Algeria. And they have no approaches to the past. And they are direct descendants of the Turki, those newcomers from the north which were proud of their faraway native land and described it with delight. Before the colonization they had been speaking the dialect of their native language for centuries. It is known that in the times of Vasco da Gama Turkic speech could be heard in ports of the Somali Peninsula, Egypt and India. The loss of the language was not the most terrible loss caused by colonialism. The Copts lost their belief; its essence. The West used the British to destroy the original religion of the Copts. Temples and monasteries fell to desolation not by themselves sacred relics and books were carried out to Europe from there Colonizers were the masters there till 1952.
After Egypt became independent, the Coptic Church relived, but one can hardly look at it without sorrow. It is like a man whom unkind people teach to walk, eat and talk after a long disease. Tears run down his face, but nobody can tell whether those are the tears of happiness or sorrow. The Europeans inculcated false knowledge of impiety of their ancestors to the Copts who are now ashamed of their great past.
the harbinger of death of the Empire. The Great Nations Migration formed a new political climate, new sentiments, which is always dangerous for a despot. As a matter of fact, it often happens during periods of change. Danger is always unexpected and destructive, like a whirlwind or hurricane. The Roman rulers ignored it. They should have been thinking about a defence, but they did not. They simply did nothing. Being self-assured they were not going to defend themselves. And their rescue was lost. Rome did not understand that the Great Nations Migration was rather a cultural operation than a military one. Not a sword but the spirit was its strongest weapon. The war of concepts commenced, and legionaries were to play a minor part in it. Society turned to the new ideology, new culture that is what happens when epochs are changing. That was the first time in history when a word played the most important part the Sky made people talk. As it is written in the Apocalypse: And from His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may smite the nations. East came to Europe with an iron rod the symbol of power or, more preciously, of the new epoch. The Middle Ages were to change antiquity. An Altaic star shone over the world; it illuminated the planet with its steely glitter. The Jews were the first to see it in the times of Cyrus; they were followed by Buddhists that recognized Tengri in the I century and later by Zoroastrians, Manicheans, Armenians and Gregorians that were the first who heard the voice of the Most High in the West. Hence is Heavenly Nile, because the world begins in the East. Rome was the only one that did not turn its eyes to the Sky. It stubbornly kept watching under its feet It is striking that descendants of pagans keep on claiming for what their ancestors had nothing to do with belief in God. In order to affirm what they say they distorted and effaced peoples memory of such terms as Turkic culture, Great Nations
Hospitality In New Europe

After the coming of the Turki the West was changing rapidly; the Great Nations Migration changed the culture in the Middle Asian Caucasus, Near East and Africa at first. Stars in the sky started to shine differently in the Roman Empire, which was unexpected for its rulers. The Emperor Diocletian was the first who felt the coming storm, he was an experienced ruler. Not going into reasons of those changes, he returned the status quo: he suppressed distemper in Armenia and invaded into the western regions of Parthia. Later in 303 he proclaimed persecutions against new Christians that had become the fifth column in the Empire, its active enemies especially in Africa. The Emperor acted consistently and cautiously but it was too late; a war could do nothing then. Changes in Rome were coming slowly; the sky denoted an approaching storm, but self-affected rulers were not bothered. The Empire did not feel its approaching death; it did not see the changes coming. Centuries-old domination depraved it since its enemies and allies were the same for it. The West saw its strength in swords of legionaries and relied only on them. And the Turkic Kipchaks constituted a threat when they appeared near the boundaries of the Empire in the III century; their union with nations dependent on Rome gave the latter hope for liberation. That was
Migration and represented the Turki as Barbarians, as cruel creatures. But was it really like that? Before the union with the Turki that small group of people known today as early Christians did not call themselves that way. They went to synagogues, adhered to Jewish ceremonies and holidays, performed circumcision. To tell the truth, for the Greeks and other heathens apostle Paul did not consider circumcision necessary, but he used to say proudly about himself: I was circumcised on the eighth day, I belong the family of Israel, to the tribe of Benjamin, the Jew form the Jews (Phil 3 3-5). These are the words from the Christian Bible. That is why the scientific world called the early Christians Judeo-Christians. That is not the best name but it reflects the essence of first communities that worshipped the prophet Joshua but retained ceremonies and customs traditional for Judaism. The lines are dated by the I century and addressed to the Jews sectaries that rejected gods thus making people around them suspicious. Those were the people who lived in the streets and catacombs the masses. Scientists or educated people were seldom met among them. That is why it is doubtful to assume that the scientific theory of Gnosticism that had a philosophical meaning and was used in practice could be born among those people who rejected their gods. Such doubts are strengthened by works of ancient scientists (Eusebius and others). They report of atheistic sentiments in communities of the Jewish sect and that atheists were not called early Christians. That name came to them later, in several centuries. It is not even clear when the word Christianity appeared? And how? Let us say one more time: the Jewish sect of atheists was formed during the war of the years 66 73 in India; it was formed of the Jews that refused to defend their native lands. Their position is reflected in Apocalypse that was put together after acquaintance with the Parthian world. Today that text is connected with the name of Christ beginning with its first lines saying that that
was The Revelation of Jesus which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants the things which must shortly take place. But in ancient Apocalypse there were no words about Jesus Christ at all, which is recognized by reputable church editions a nameless lamb was in question there. Christian encyclopedia says: Apocalypse was written by different authors. The book with a Jewish base could be written in the 70s by apostle John and latter it was supplemented by certain inlets and additions. Those inlets and additions are of no legal effect, as modern lawyers will say. And they are right During the Middle Ages five chapters were added to Apocalypse two in the beginning and three in the end. And the text written by apostle John was edited. The ancient book, the sacred text, the revelation of the apostle to which chapters were added?! At that they were added not by apostles. It turns out anybody can rewrite texts being the basis of the Bible. They can be corrected for the sake of politics. And in what is their sanctity if anybody can touch it?.. Of course modern editors of ancient texts should consider new standards of language; nobody argues that. But they are not entitled to edit, rewrite and make inlets That is akin to counterfeiting. But everybody puts up with it. Just because the world did not know the words Jesus Christ in the I century! And when medieval theologians started in put them into sacred texts they thus disturbed confidence in Christianity and authority of the Church. Archbishop themselves often provoked sensible congregation for religious conflicts which were so common in the Middle Ages. Proclaiming persecution of heresy the Church often started persecution of the truth. In the history of the Western Europe that is the fight against Devotionalists, Cathars, Albigenses and other heretics whose only fault was that they did not want to abandon worshipping Heavenly God They did not need sacred books with inlets distorted by semiliterate monks.
Was that the conflict of belief or the conflict of conscience? Jesus Christ is a Greek name; nobody denies that it appeared in the Asia Minor in the IV century and related to the person whom Jews sectaries themselves called Joshua. Unfortunately, theological science did not find an answer to the question why Joshua, who was a Jew, obtained a Greek name three centuries after his death. It is considered, for instance, that Christianity was mentioned perhaps for the first time by Pliny the younger (about 61 114), the Roman writer and legate in Bethany (today in the territory of Turkey). In a letter to the Emperor Trajan he asked how to treat the new Jewish sect. Pliny's anxiety was caused by agitation in the Jewry. There is a question: could the Greek word Christ be used during interrogations of Jewish sectaries by the Roman legate? Certainly not. It seems that later copyists changed the Jewish word messiah by the Greek equivalent Christ that was more comprehensible and wellknown. Or why was that name connected with Heavenly God whom Europe did not know in the I century? More and more questions So where is it the source of religion of the West? That is not simple curiosity or abuse of the foreign belief. The Europeans themselves need to know the source of religion. That is a fine question. Contradictory answers were given to it. For example, L. Graham from the USA was categorical: the Bible is not God's word; it was stolen from pagan sources. Its heaven, Adam and Eve were taken from Babylonian legend; its flood is a summary of about four narrations of the flood. Its ark and Ararat have their equivalents in many myths about the flood some verses are a literal copy of Egyptian papyruses. And so on and so forth. 127 analogies were found between Jesus and Egyptian Horus; between Jesus and Krishna there are hundreds of them. How can the Bible be the revelation of the Jews? One can hardly object to the author. By the way, he is not the only one who thinks so.
Quotation: Kryvelev I.A. The Bible: Historical and Critical Analysis. P. 18 19. Ref. 1. It is taken for granted that one cannot accept this viewpoint but what can be suggested instead? Helpless interpretations of modern theology that are beneath criticism? That very science that has changed the sacred text of the Bible beyond recognition due to its negation of the Turkic culture? The Bible of the Christians appeared by the end of the IV century. Or, more preciously, fragments of the New Testament appeared while its more or less finished text appeared by 691. After the year 691 (after the Council in Trullo) the Christians, for example, have been painting Christ on their icons as a human being; before that they used to offer prayers to the image of Tengri in the Turkic language, and Christ was painted as a Lamb, i.e. a sheep. Starting to abuse the Turki, their Gnosticism and suggesting inventions instead, theologians had not a gaudy lot. There are two Bibles, two Sacred Writings, two different books with similar names. The ancient book of the Jews it was written according to the Turkic texts adding elements of the Jewish culture to them. These writings were put together after liberation of the Jews by Cyrus, i.e. in the VI century B.C. In the Middle Ages Greek theologians translated and supplemented it thus appeared Septuagint which has become the Old Testament of the Christians, the part of their Bible. But it should be emphasized! the texts of those books differ fundamentally. In order to dignify the Jewish text translators made an inexcusable thing: Yahve (one of the patrons of the Semites), Elohim (their deities and spirits) and Terafim (their idols) were translated as God; one word was used for it and thus a modest swindle was performed, as contemporaries would say about what they have done. With a stroke of a pen the Greeks
57 / 342
created certain Monotheism. Their evident forgery made orthodox Jews indignant: they did not pronounce the name of their patron Yahve. They keep silent about idols and discrepancies in the Bible although they are aware of them. Instead of Yahve the Jews often say Adonai. And that is in accordance with the history of Judaism. In antiquity, in the times of Cyrus, the name was pronounced exactly the same, it consisted of two Turkic words: atyn (his name, by name), ai (call). The literal translation is call by name: atyn ai ~ adyn ai ~ adonai. It happened that Cyrus's words became immortal. Another thing is interesting in this connection in Septuagint instead of Yahve the name Cyrios is sometimes used (meaning Heavenly God). The same happened with the name Jesus Christ. In the Greek language it means Anointed, i.e. Messiah, the Savior. It seems not the name but the image appeared at first. It happened when in the III century George from Armenia visited the Turkic Kipchaks by the will of God he was exiled for fourteen years to the snake pit, according to the legend. And he saw the sign the image as a matter of fact, the whole Armenian culture is based on it. A new epoch started from that sign: the Western world knew the Most High. Nobody had known about Heavenly God there before that. It is possible that George was the first one in the Roman Empire who understood that Joshua was a prophet. His prophecy was written in Apocalypse and it came true riders sent by Heavenly God appeared near the boundaries of the Empire. The Savior is near. And the people will become the allies of the Savior (Messiah) having accepted the new prophet. The image gave the idea that was to turn into a religion. The Turkic concept of the Savior and Lord's Anointed reflected traditional views on the part of the tsar in Turkic society; it also existed with the Jews. After liberation of Babylonian supremacy the Jews called Cyrus (the Turki) with that name. In the Book
of the Prophet Isaiah God addresses to Cyrus, His anointed, telling Him: My Shepherd, and he will do my will [Is 45 1; 44 28]. At the same time the Jews had the notion of the Servant of God sent to the Earth to save the people. In the Book of the Prophet Isaiah, in chapters written in the VI century B.C., the Servant of God who preaches the new belief and suffers in expiation of sins of his nation giving light to all nations glorified by God is described [Is 42 1 7; 49 1 6; 50 4 9; 52 13 53 12]. That was not Cyrus; that was the Messenger of God testament for nations and the light for pagans. The Turki also had the image of the Servant of God; it was formed in Altai and called Heser (Hesar, Ceasr, Cedar). With it the Turki connected the coming of belief in Heavenly God. However, he appears in the Bible under that name. Sing God a new song Let the desert and its towns and settlements where Cidar lives make their voice higher as it is said in the Book of the Prophet Isaiah about the Servant of God [Is 42 10 11]. In that description of the Servant of God the first Christian Church recognized a mysterious prophesy about life and redemptive death of Christ, - as it is written in comments to the Bible. Thus the Bible united ancient legends of the Turki, Jews and Jewish sectaries initiating the new religion Christianity. Gregory, the future head of the Armenian Church, was the first who understood that while he was in exile, which gave secular fame to Armenia the country which was the first that took the path of Christianity. Neighbors of the Armenians the Greeks learnt about it; they were also dreaming of being released from Rome's power. Who was the first who exclaimed: Jesus Christ! one cannot tell now. But the exclamation related to the one who foretold the future. It is possible that at first those words related to George, the would-be founder of the Armenian Church, himself. Anyway, the new name of Joshua Jesus Christ was the reply to persecutions
against the new Armenian belief declared by Diocletian. In other words those persecutions were against the allies of the Turki against the Christians. It is indicative that Jewish sectaries were not persecuted; certain Jews were even members of the Emperor's retinue, which tells a lot to an unbiased reader. However, soon, according to contemporaries (Eusebius and others), Diocletian himself started to consider an opportunity of acceptance of the new belief. He was a real politician; he realized that Jesus Christ meant much more than the Jew Joshua. It should be mentioned, that was no news. From ancient times people believe in mystery that is the nature of human soul fro which mystery is especially important. In antiquity change of gods and patrons was not forbidden; it was just necessary that a new God was stronger than the previous one. That is what happened early in the IV century; people in the Roman Empire saw that old Gods were powerless. The Gods of the riders that came from the East gave victories, which meant he was stronger. George was called the Enlightener for that concept given to Europe. He and nobody else! brought an equilateral cross the symbol of the new belief to Cappadocia (to the territory of the Roman Empire) on tsarist chariot accompanied by the riders. That was the first cross in the West; it has not been lost it still shines over the Armenian Church. It has been just changed a little. Early Christians, as we know it, did not know the cross, which is witnessed by the Christian Encyclopedia, and called it the sign of the beast. The escort that accompanied George the Enlightener was headed by the military leader Mamgo (Mamgon), he was the native of Altai, wrote Moses Khorenatsi, the famous expert in the history of Armenia. Mamgo and his horde lived near the boundaries with China, close to Sogdiana, but left his native land due to discords. Armenia sheltered the military leader: the tsar Tiridat offered to head the army of the whole Armenia, both
cavalries and infantry forces, and stay with the great tsar of Armenia. The family of Mamikonians originated from Mamgo, as it was mentioned. And not only it. The great tsar of Armenia Tiridat exalted his relative George: they had an advantageous union which revealed a lot Another interesting historical detail becomes evident the ruler of Armenia legalized his title tsar, but why? The ruler of the Caucasian Albania, having declared about the new Church, also obtained the title tsar. The fact that can hardly be explained not knowing the peculiarities of Turkic society. The Turkic title tsar or, more preciously, ksar or ser, had the khan with whom lived the head of the clergy. That was the highest title of temporality; other khans were obliged to obey to it. It is evident that the word is derived from the name Geser, i.e. from the name of the Turkic Prophet, the son of Heavenly God. Hence is devout worship of Gods known from literary sources; hence is permanent fight for the tsarist crown and trueness of belief. Dozens of new details appear in known stories which seemed usual and even common before. It is commonly supposed that the word tsar is derived from the Latin word Caesar. It is supposed that the name of the Roman Emperor Cajus Julius Caesar gave the name to the title which several monks used. However in the Roman Empire Caesars were called only relatives of the monarch, while for reigning emperors there was the title August. Not going into details concerning Roman customs, let us mention that the title kaisara was found on coins of Kanishka II, the ruler of the Kushan khanate That was not a Roman invention. Detailed description of traditions of tsarist power is provided later. By the way, crown is also a Turkic word; it means guard (korun); that was one of the ancient symbols of the East. The sign of consecration by God the same as the scepter and the ball. Khans were encrowned by the high clergyman who also gave the attributes of power the scepter and the ball, after which a khan was called the tsar. In the West, as we know, they had neither such title
as tsar not a crown before the coming of the Turki; Roman Emperors had a diadem on their heads, which is another thing. It turns out Armenia was the first region of the Roman Empire that accepted belief in Heavenly God and attributes of the Turkic nationhood. It turned away from paganism wishing to retain the secret union of Arshakids Tiridat and George. The people that opened Altaic culture to the West. They spirited Europe away from pagans. The memory of Altaic roots helped them become established in the new religion and new politics. After all, the Caucasian Turki with their cavalry standing near Derbent were not unknown foreigners for the ruling elite of Armenia. They were kindred souls. They were the support. It was not by chance that contemporaries called them barsils, which in the ancient Turkic language means panther tribe (in the Russian language panthers is pronounced as bars). In other words leaders there belonged to the same tsarist family as Achemenids in Persia and Arshakids in Parthia and Armenia. Thus another important conclusion can be made: the capital of the Caucasian Albania was called Barda (Partav, Parsava) in token of respect to common ancestors. That town is now located in Azerbaijan; its ancient ruins are noticeable near modern buildings. Here they are bonds between times and nations! The tsars of Armenia continued the great mission of Achemenids. They all adhered to precepts written in ancient Turkic books: to bear belief in Heavenly God. That is witnessed by the Prophecy of Cyrus in the Bible. I girded you, - God says addressing to Cyrus, his anointed so that everybody knows from sun to sun that there is no [God] except for Me [Is 45 5 6]. Thus a sprout of New Christianity appeared at the turn of epochs. Not Jewish ground gave birth to it What reasons did historians have to speak about the early Christians? There was only one reason lack of knowledge in
the Turkic belief and unwillingness to know it. By the way, Armenia came to harm due to allegiance to the union with the Turki; western Christians do not recognize its history, they deny the founders of the Armenian Church, its symbols and teaching. It has been so for one and a half thousand years, starting from the Council of Chalcedon unjust denial and anathema to those who opened the Christian world to the people. It was not by chance that Armenia fell soon after the Council of Chalcedon (431): it was divided between East (Persia) and West (Byzantium). That tragedy was accompanied by another one abolishment of the tsarist power of Arshakids in Armenia. Arsak's descendants were deprived of tsarist dignity which they had for more than 560 years, - E. Gibbon wrote. That was the blow of European Christians against the Armenian Church and Armenian spirituality simultaneously. It should be mentioned in this connection: today there are dozens of Christian Churches in the world uniting millions of people but every Church denies all other ones: Catholics are not recognized by Orthodox Christians; Orthodox Christians are not recognized by Protestants and so on and so forth. The Christian world is made of deliberate conflicts and denials. Where is the Truth in it? And the Truth is that in 325 Christianity did not differ from the Turkic belief that was called Monophysitism by western theologians. Early in the IV century such state of affairs was justified in terms of politics: the Great Nations Migration bore cultural fruits to feed everyone. The ceremony had an Altaic base, the same as divine services language. That has been forgotten after centuries (after the inquisition). Altaic Monotheism was called Gnosticism, which meant heresy. And appearance of the new religion in the IV century was the Event; it was mentioned by historians of the Caucasus, Iran, but not noticed by those from the West. Moses Khorenatsi paid special attention to it in The History of Armenia, the same as Favst Buzand who described certain
peculiarities of expansion of belief. It is indicative that the Turki had adherents in eastern regions of the Empire. First European Christian Churches appeared there or, more preciously, those were the communities of believers in Heavenly God or, according to church terminology, Monophysites they went to Derbent so as to become the followers of the new cult. For them the world began in the East. The flame was flaring in the sky of the Empire. Those eastern regions still obeyed Rome, but legionaries were afraid to appear there: rebellions, insurrections, fires, murders were common there. The Golden Age proclaimed by Diocletian was coming for good; everything was collapsing although there was no invasion of the foreigners. Not any foreign soldier appeared in sacred Rome; which was perplexing. Events happened as though of their own accord. Of course there were no Churches in the modern sense of the word; the ceremony was absent: there were no clergymen, there were no temples. They did not attract people. That was the idea!.. Tyrants are powerless against the spirit of the people, and belief in God strengthened the spirit of yesterday's slaves; it changed their consciousness. That is the victory of spiritual culture. Paganism was retreating cowardly. There was a real civil war in the Empire, but nobody saw any weapons. That was the most striking thing for the people. God's word stroke like lighting during a storm. Diocletian was at a loss he left his throne and voluntarily hung up fiddle to grow cabbage as his contemporaries would say. In 311 the new Emperor Galerius openly forgave the new Christians, i.e. the Armenians and their followers, and thus stopped persecutions against them. The condition of forgiveness was set forth in his order: let Christians become Christians again. That legendary phrase perplexes
even the most experienced researchers: New religion (nova religio, as it is written in the order) was in question there. These two words are key if one wants to understand the essence of the subject. Because the only thing in common between the new religion (Armenian belief) and the Jewish sect was worship of the prophet Joshua (Jesus). All the rest in the Armenian belief was Turkic. Galerius, appealing to the Christians to become Christians again, asked them to deny the nova religio and return to worship services of their own nation, or to Jewish ceremonies. The Emperor did not know or pretended he did not know that Jewish sectaries were not the ones who set the East on fire. Those were other people! One can understand the difference between ceremonies of the Armenian Church and Jewish sectaries even today if he visits the Sabbatarians, i.e. Christians Judaizers that keep the traditions of their predecessors (Judaic Christians), which are absolutely different things at the bottom. One of such communities now lives in the Azerbaijanian settlement called Privolnoe. For Rome appearance of the Armenian Church meant nothing: it did not care whether they were sectaries or were not. Not feeling the subtlety, it did not differ new Christians and Jews, hence it asked people to return to worship services of their own nation. Researchers of religion understand phrases from documents in another way as compared with governors. And the phrase: let Christians be Christians again was evidently an order. They, those who knew Heavenly God and saw the light of freedom were offered to become the slaves of the Empire again. No doubt, such condition could not be accepted. That was the destined hour of Rome. Leaving Rome and trying to save it, the Emperor Diocletian left tetrarchy state system providing the power of two senior Emperors with the titles of Augustus and two
minor ones. But the reform just poured oil on flames; rulers of eastern and western regions were at enmity from the first day. Everyone wanted to be the head of state. In this fight competitors were eliminated by hands of new Christians. Maxentius was among the first who gauged their strength. Proclaimed an Emperor in 306, he openly extended his patronage to the nova religio in Africa, reckoning on mutual support. Thus being born the religion was turned into a political instrument. That was the mark of Christianity that has been always connected with politics since then. However, in that race for power Maxentius was defeated by Constantine who was really sophisticated in intrigues; that happened in 312. Not the belief that Constantine did not accept interested him, that ruler without actual power, but the military union! He started from afar; he relied on eastern regions of the Empire. People there were dreaming of freedom and needed a military union with the Kipchaks, as it happened in Armenia Was it by chance that the new Christians found supporters among the Greeks? Desire of the Greeks to break free of the power of Rome was of advantage for Constantine in his fight against Maxentius and his further plans. In 312 near the Mulville Bridge, near the walls of Rome unexpectedly appeared Constantine's army consisting of Turkic riders and defeated the Roman army. Maxentius died in that fight. The Empire split after that fatal blow. Roman colonies realized: the words of Apocalypse came true; pagan idols were falling, although everybody understood the words freedom and Christianity in their own way. Before that fight Constantine ordered his warriors (Europeans) to draw an equilateral cross on their shields so that they were the same as the Turki whose shields had been ornamented with Tengri's cross from of old. Also that was the first time Europe saw flags with a cross Turkic flags.
From Altai. And after the victory in Rome a prayer to Tengri Heavenly God was uttered. In this connection one further comment concerning the cross is in order. In Jewish sects that worshipped Jesus (Joshua) a cross represented means of execution and thus was not the object of worship, which was made explicit by Minucius Felix, the early Christian author, in the III century: Speaking about crosses, we do not worship them at all: we dont need them, we, the Christians; you, the pagans, you for whom wooden idols are sacred, you worship wooden crosses, maybe, as parts of your deities; and your flags, banners and military signs what are they if not gilded and ornamented crosses? (Neihardt A.A. The Mystery of the Holy Cross. Page 21). The accuracy of translation of the terms Christians and pagans is not in question here. That is when it happened for the first time after the defeat of the invincible Empire! But the Romans did not understand the words of the prayer, they just felt their power With the help of adherents of the new religion Constantine gained a footing in the Western Roman Empire and Licinius, his crony in its western regions where he allowed preaching the new belief, which was not happening in Rome at that time. Constantine did not hasten. He was paving the way for a new fight for about ten years. He tried to suppress the power of the Eastern Church together with Licinius. In 320 he prohibited synods, limited activities of the clergy and removed the Christians from political offices, including officers that were the Christians. The war was inevitable everything was ready for it. Forty thousand Kipchak riders arrived to help Constantine in his fight against Licinius, which was mentioned by the historian Jordan. That was the march of the Turkic culture over Europe. They marched as liberators and fighters for a new spiritual culture. They rendered assistance not gratuitously but for payment for stipendia promised by Constantine. That was the first bargain of the Turki
in the name of the new belief and new politics! They were the first who accepted the rules of European communication for money! and thus they stepped closer to the edge of the gap they were to fall in later Of course, Licinius was defeated. In that easy victory of the year 324, the same as in victory over Rome, people saw God's will again. Truly, God and power belong to one, they said. And Constantine, having become the head of the Empire, was thinking how to arrogate the belief in God and make it and the Kipchaks his assistants. The Greeks rendered assistance to him; they were trying to establish the Turkic belief in Europe; the school of Derbent taught them a lot. That was another step of the Great Nations Migration; the step that could not be without a trace the Greek Church. Its power was rapidly expanding in the Roman Empire. Presence of belief in God, no matter it was not in soul but in consciousness, is the sign of Altai and the Great Nations Migration the eternal sign on the canvas of history; Time cannot erase it! Alas, the Greeks, having absorbed the Turkic culture, chose their own way in it the way of distortions. They made a farce in which religion had to play a minor part it was made an instrument of hypocrisy and politics. For the success of his play Constantine stuck at nothing: the defender of Christianity killed his wife, son and relatives having accused them of betraying. He liked to make an impression and be in the limelight. The ruler whom his contemporaries compared with bloodthirsty Nero turned into the father of Christian belief due to theologians, although he was a pagan for the whole of his life. He was the tyrant that trampled and mutilated religious relics in order to strengthen his power. According to accuracy of the church language, - mentioned Gibbon, - the first of Christian emperors did not deserve this title even unto death. He describes peculiarities of nimble explanations invented by church historians in order to accommodate
irresistible proofs of pagan superstition of Constantine with his supposed Christianity. Thus on the ruins of the Roman Empire Byzantium was being born, where belief was turned into politics and the clergy into Emperor's servants from the first day. It is striking that crimes can immortalize a man as well as great virtues. Constantine obtained power using others around him, he was liberal of promises and presents and did everything to retain Turkic warriors with him. Even if for a while. His efforts were successful; the riders stayed with him. They were sort of hypnotized they decided not to come back. They sent for their relatives instead. Later they were called Federates (federate is derived from the word agreement with the meaning federation); northern lands of Balkan Peninsula were given to them and they were obliged to defend the boundaries of the new state. In fact those were Turkic uluses that turned into a separate Byzantine army, its cavalry; they lived in a community exempted from taxes according to their steppe traditions. Almost nothing changed in their lives They just faced away from their motherland. And that was the end. However, it is important to remember one thing: not defeated soldiers and not those turned into slaves served as hirelings. That was an innovation in the West. The Turki joined the Empire on equal grounds. Voluntarily Not knowing what they were doing. Constantine tried to please the khans that were his commanders. He introduced a new calendar for them and made Sunday the day of rest, as the Kipchaks had it, and made it obligatory for the people to pray Heavenly God. Let us mention, since 312 till 325 the Turki prayed Tengri reading sacred texts in Turkic. There were no other prayers in the name of Heavenly God. At that time the newborn Greek Church did not differ from other Eastern Churches. This is an extraordinary fact that has been forgotten while it explains a lot in the history of Europe The Greeks minted Turkic
crosses even on their coins. That was not just a coincidence. The Turkic (Barbaric!) language became the language of the army that was being established in Byzantium; it was called soldierly or commanding language. Thousands of Kipchak families moved there; they were given lands and the Greeks paid in gold to khans of Desht-I-Kipchak for their moving. Everything was decorous; that was deemed to be the expansion of the new belief. Of course that moving was the part of the Great Nations Migration, its logical continuation. Or what actually happened was that people were being bought for gold? Who can explain where one thing ended and the other began? It sounds offensive, but it is hard to say it in other words: the Turki were being bought in order to create Byzantium. Free people were the article of commerce. The Eastern Empire needed the Kipchaks, it started to pay considerable amounts voluntarily. It did everything consciously; time and patience were on its side: the East was moving to Europe; its military and constructive abilities were evident. There are hundreds of witnesses. Take Thessaloniki, for instance, the recognized Turkic capital of Greece; it was founded before the Common Era, but archeologists marked that in the IV century culture started to change there. Everything was changing, even the temples. Church of St. George built under the Barbarian design is often mentioned. The dome made of bricks put together radially circle after circle, is striking. They could not build in that way in the Roman Empire, while in the East they could. Or take Church of Sergius and Bacchus raised in 527 in Constantinople it is an exact copy of the temple built in the settlement called Lecit in Azerbaijan, not far from Derbent. That was acknowledged by all experts. According to one version the temple in Lecit was built in memory of Attila. Or Hagia Sophia in Constantinople.
Another excellent Turkic work. Or Church of Saint Vitalius in Ravenna Those masterpieces were made by great masters, nobody argues that. For example, mosaics in Ravenna are astonishingly similar with paintings in DuraEuropos made according to Altaic canons. It is evident that that was a historical march of Federates or, more preciously, the Kipchaks that became citizens of Europe. Their culture bore fruits to their new motherland, which everybody valued according to merit. The West repeated the course of development of Kushania or Parthia with the difference that Europe was run not by someone belonging to a Turkic tsarist family but a simple European. That is all. There were no other differences. A gigantic pot was boiling up again; new culture was being melted in it. But this time another recipe was used. But still the main component was the same Monotheism. Finally Constantine managed to gain confidence of the Kipchaks. In order to win all their hearts in 324 he established Constantinople, the new capital; which he ordered to the Turki. The town was to be built according to the eastern canon so that the temples were shining in it in the name of Tengri. Jordan wrote: the town which could compete with Rome, i.e. with the West. Under Constantine the Eastern Empire was becoming really strong; it was turning into a prosperous country. Having the best army in the West, it dictated its terms to Egypt, Palestine, Syria and even Rome. And it was not enough for the Emperor who could not understand that the Kipchaks could leave him at any time and he would be face to face with his enemies. And in 325 Constantine gathered dependent bishops for a meeting in Nicea; today that meeting is known as the Nicene Council. The purpose was not concealed to establish their own Greek Church, not on the Turkic model. In this connection it is important to explain that the name Byzantium (the same as the Western Roman and Eastern Roman Empires) is conventional: it was introduced
later. In documents of those times the Roman Empire remained united; the population of Byzantine considered itself to be the descendants of the Romans calling their country the Empire of Romes and its capital the New Rome. It is commonly supposed that the birth of Byzantine coincides with establishing of the new capital of the Empire Constantinople by Constantine the Great in 324. But there are other viewpoints. Also speaking about Greek motives of Constantine's politics, non-Greek origin of the Emperor should be considered the same as the fact that he relied on the Hellenes in race for power. Such situation is not uncommon for history. Acceding to the throne, the ruler had to consider interests of the nation he was to run. For instance, that is how it was with the tsars from the family of Arshakids in Armenia and Caucasian Albania. Constantine, whose father was not a Greek but the native of lands laying along Danube, was rightly called the Greek Emperor. That is what the sly ruler was designing, that is for what he abased himself: curse and envy were covered by the Emperor's delight. In the new Greek Church he declared that Tengri and Christ were one and the same person. At that time the word Christianity obtained its modern meaning and became the name of religion; Christ entered the divine pantheon. But in terms of belief, before the Nicene Council Byzantium adhered to Altaic rules saying Tengri's son speaking with the Turki. And everybody understood it. However, to an extent that was due to language traditions: in Turkic the expression Heavenly God was pronounced as Tengri and Heavenly God's son as Tengri's son. That is why the worship of Jesus as the son, or Tengri's messenger, for the Greek Kipchaks was the continuation of Altaic traditions according to which God sent his sons to save the people. Christianity, according to Constantine's intentions, was to continue the traditions of Greece in which religion, as we
know it, humans had always been Gods (Zeus, Demeter, Hera, etc.). The Emperor relied on Hellenic culture close and intelligible to the Europeans. However, all other nation did the same after becoming acquainted with Altaic culture. The eternal Blue Sky was too high for them. Inability to adopt the eastern philosophy was peculiar for the Hellenes and the whole West; that is how paganism was shown in them. An item, material implementation is the object of belief for them; not an idea. That is the main difference between eastern and western cultures their attitude to the Idea. To the Word. The words by the Bishop Sinesius who got education in Alexandria are indicative. In the V century he said that Athens at that time were famous not for philosophical schools but for honey trading. Gibbon E. Ibis, part III, page 223, ref. 8. Constantine needed a human being to be God he needed a familiar personification of known ideals, and nothing else. But it is possible to unite the pagan and spiritual origins only having certain myths which had not been invented yet early in the Middle Ages. They needed time to create them. Christianity reminded of a newborn child that cannot live a single day without adults. Absence of mythology was the first difficulty the Greek Church faced. It also did not have any philosophy. And it had no ceremony. That made the task of the Church creators easier; they had a blank page where they could write philosophy, the history of Christianity at that they could do it at their discretion Any clothes were suitable for a newborn creature. Any words could warm and protect it. An assumption that was inconceivable in terms of common sense characterized the Greek Church: Christ entered its divine pantheon. A human being became God! It seems that is the moment when Christianity as the new religion was born. The religion called not by the name of Heavenly God but a
human being. Having equaled Jesus to Tengri, Byzantium hoped to obtain God's power. It appropriated prayers, ceremonies, temples of the Kipchaks their spiritual culture. The whole ceremonial system. What had been being accumulated in Altai for centuries was transferred to the Church in a flash It is fair to say that the Nicene Council understood Constantine not all at once. The Emperor's declaration shocked perhaps all the adherents of Monotheism; they were resented. But Constantine was adamant; he insisted on his decision by force and threats. He approved the Nicene Creed the formula of Christian teaching. However, it is still understood in different ways by followers of different religious schools; that is not an established postulate of belief. Arius, the Egyptian presbyter, the wise Copt who was the native of the Indian community was the first to protect Tengri. He said: one cannot make a human being equal to God since God is the spirit and a human being is flesh created by God; human beings are born and die at God's will. God is immortal. And besides, a son cannot be his own father Arius was self-reliant; his opinion was welcomed by bishops of the Armenian, Albanian, Syrian and other Churches. Nobody, of course, would deny Christ, but at the same time nobody would equalize him with God. A son is a son, God is God. Acts of the First Oecumenical Council in Nicea, of course, did not remain. The same goes with Arian manuscripts of those times that were destroyed in the West. The History of the First Oecumenical Council by Gelasius that we use now was put together one hundred yeas after those events. According to historians, it contains not facts but legends and myths relating to the council. Information of those events was obtained by works of Athanasius, Socrates, Eusebius Caesarean, Sozomen, Theodorit and Rufin. Philosophical disputes at the Nicene
Council concluded quickly. Foreseeing the inevitable defeat Constantine gave a command to aspirants of clerical titles and they proclaimed Arius and his adherents heretics. The formula suggested by the emperor was accepted without discussions. Disagreeing bishops did not change their opinion; they did not equalize Christ and God, for which they were called Monophysites. That is why in Eastern Churches there was one God Tengri; people prayed Him and built temples in His name. But true deeds are silent, and the Greek Church said a lot. Temporal power spoke for it, and it had the army. Those bishops that accepted Christ did not know how to explain the fold what had happened in Nicea. Church fathers themselves did not understand the basics of the Christian teaching proposed by Constantine. However, they did not make sense of the philosophy defended by Arius either. They did not have enough knowledge; those were undereducated people. Thus Athanasius the Great admitted that every time he tried to cognize the divinity of Logos, his hard and vain efforts faced invincible obstacles and that the more he pondered, the less he understood and the more he wrote the less he was able to express his thoughts. These are the words not of an ordinary Christian but of the main theorist of Greek Christianity; the first article of belief at the Nicene Council was written after him; in this article Christ was proclaimed God. That man was Arius's opponent; in fact he really despised him. And Constantine did not calm down; he was full of energy and after the Council he started to search for Christian relics in Palestine where nobody had ever heard about them; its inhabitants were either Jews or pagans and worshipped caves, springs and trees. Traces of the early Christianity had never been there. Nonetheless, the Emperor decided to Christianize Palestine. He was attracted by the town called Aelia Capitolina, former Jerusalem where they found the Holy Sepulcher all at once, although the Jews did not bury in sepulchers, as far as we know. Two thousand years ago
their burial places were called kokkim- the dead were put down into a niche made in a rock and then their bones were handled into a ceramic vessel and buried for the second time Findings appeared one by one. Constantine's mother, innkeeper's daughter, found the cross of which, in her opinion, Christ was crucified. She found it not having the slightest idea that on a cross, on a Tshaped balk, the Romans executed people. Political order was stronger than reality. Lies became the Christian truth. The Emperor himself appointed places to be worshipped. The brow of a rock was called Golgotha, and a cave in Bethlehem was proclaimed Christ's birthplace About fantastic findings and how Aelia Capitolina has become holy Jerusalem and motherland of Christianity one can read in the book Christian Antiquities by L. Beliaev. Not every novel is as interesting as this monograph. Facts contained there are striking due to evident historical forgery. To make their belief true in 381 the Greeks put together the versions of the New Testament having declared that they had found the writings of Christ's pupils. But for some reason those writings were in Greek. Since then, since the IV century, about a hundred texts of Gospels have been known. And they are all considered to be Christian. Some of them are called apocryphal and denied by the Church, others are approved. Those texts were based on sacred books of the Turki. One can find some explanations in literature referred to Apocrypha by the Church. At first the terms Apocrypha meant secret, cryptic and later it obtained another meaning: something evil, distorted, untrue. This explains a lot. The lot of Apocalypses denied by the Greek Church and not used in the New Testament is indicative. Sacred books that had been worshipped at first were neglected since they contradicted the official version of the New Testament. However, the Revelation also referred to antilego-mena and was not recognized up to the IX century. The fight was
so serious that just bits and pieces or names remains. The Apocalypse of Peter is another example it was held in respect in the East but not in Europe. That work was deemed to be destroyed, and researchers got it due to discovery of the ancient Coptic library in Nag Hammadi. The texts of the Apocalypse of Peter found among manuscripts of the IV century can give priceless information concerning the history of religion which was later called Christianity. But it will not give! The lot of this document is predictable: it disappeared together with other witnesses of Time. Unfortunately, nobody has ever been embarrassed by the fact that Christ spoke the Greek language. At that that was not the Greek language they had not spoke; that was Alexandrine dialect forgotten by them (that very language of Indian communities of Egypt). At that, playing the game suggested by Constantine, Christ should have spoken the Aramaic language; the teacher should have spoken this language talking to his pupils. And not Greek In this connection another detail is indicative; it is difficult to comment on it and it seems it should be accepted as it is. No comments! In the Gospel According to Mark it is written: and the last thing Jesus cried out on the cross was: Eloi, Eloi, Lama sabachthani (God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?) [Mark 15 34]. The word Eloi should be explained here. That is how the Turki used to address to Tengri; it is still used by people living in Khakassia, Tuva, Altai; it is translated as My God. The Shorcy call guardian angel with that word, and they call Tengri Aloi-Khan. What else can be said here? However, the question how could a Jew living in the Near East know the name of Heavenly God whom the Jews did not worship should be considered in another book. And why did not other Jews, congeners, know that word? A separate discussion is necessary here too. (It would be more correct to begin it with clarification why was evangelist Matthew buried in one of
Altaic monasteries). That is not a coincidence; that is lack of knowledge of the author of the Gospels who could simply not know how to address the Most High otherwise. We will return to this subject. More than once. The Christian belief created due to Constantine's ignorance was becoming more dangerous than a beast. That was seen when the Emperor appointed the head of the Church and approved the acts of the Nicene Council by his order; he established ceremonies, prayers and edited holy texts. The Greek Church became a political instrument, an office where servants in robes worked. Using the controlled Church the temporal power consecrated its will. Imposing it to other countries controlled by Byzantine. It is indicative that decisions of Oecumenical Councils came into effect only having been approved by the Emperors. Thus, the Emperor Constantine the Great approved decisions of the Nicene Council, Theodosius I of the Council of Constantinople of 381, Theodosius II of the council of Ephesus of 451, Justicianus I the Council of Constantinople of 553, Constantine Pogonatus the Council of Constantinople of 680 681 years and the Empress Irene decisions of the Nicene Council of 787. Can Church independence be in question? In order to gain a footing the Greek Christians were collapsing ancient temples and palaces of the Hellenes, they banished and killed the priests. One can ask: was anything Greek in Byzantium after those bashings of the IV century? It is dreadful even to think that for the sake of Christianity works of Aristotle, Plato, Herodotus and other great scientists were destroyed, the Alexandrian Library was buried with its rare manuscripts. The past was sacrificed to the new belief. That was another step of the Great Nations Migration.
68 / 342
Litareture Part I (main sources)

1.AbaiGaeserKhubun:TheEpic.Part1,2. UlanUde,19611964. 2.AdjiM.Europa'sAsia.M.,1998,English translation,M.,2004. 3.AkishevK.A.IssykBarrow:ArtoftheSachs ofKazakhstan.M.,1978. 4.[AleppoPaul]TheTraveloftheAntiochian EmperorMacariustoRussiaintheSecondHalf oftheXVIICenturyDescribedbyhisSon, ArchdeaconAleppoPaul.Issue13.M.,1896 1898. 5.AlievIgrar.EssaysonAtropateneHistory. Baku,1989. 6.ArtamonovM.I.TheTreasuresoftheSaks. TheTreasureofAmuDarya.AltaicBarrows M.,1973. 7.ArtamonovM.I.TheTreasuresofScythian BarrowsM.;Prague,1966. 8.BartoldV.V.TheMoslemWorld//Selected Works.Vol.VI.M.,1966. 9.BekkertM.TheWorldofMetal.M.,1980. 10.BeliaevL.A.ChristianAntiquities.SPb., 2000. 11.BerzinaS.Y.AncientIndiaandAfrica// AncientIndia.HistoricalandCultural Relations.M.,1982. 12.TheBible.Brussels,1983. 13.[Biruni]AbuReikhanBiruni.India.M., 1995. 14.BichurinN.Y.(Jakinf).Collectionof InformationabouttheNationswhichLivedin theMiddleAsiainAncientTimes.Vol.I.M.;L., 1950. 15.BokschaninA.G.ParthiaandRome.PartI II.M.,19601966. 16.BonghardLevinG.M.,GrantovskiyE.A. FromScythiatoIndia.AncientArians:Myths andHistory.SPb.,2001. 17.BonghardLevinG.M.,IlyinG.F.Indiain AncientTimes.SPb.,2001. 18.BonghardLevinG.M.,KarpiukS.G. BuddhisminAncientandEarlyChristian Literature//AncientIndia.Historicaland CulturalRelations.M.,1982. 19.[Buzand]TheHistoryofArmeniaby FavstosBuzand.Yerevan.,1953. 20.VerbitskiyV.I.AltaicForeigners.M.,1893.
Reprint.GornoAltaisk,1993. 21.VertoradovaV.V.DiscoveryofInscription withUnknownlettersonKaraTel//Buddhist MonumentsonKaraTelintheOldTermez.M., 1982. 22.VelinbakhovG.V.FlagsasaHistorical SourceandtheirPlaceintheSystemof HeraldicMonuments//Heraldry:Materials andResearches.L.,1983. 23.VelinbakhovG.V.TheCrossoftheTsar ConstantineinMedievalMilitaryHeraldryof Europe//ArtisticMonumentsandProblemsof EasternCulture.L.,1985. 24.VipperR.Y.AppearanceofChristian Literature.M.;L.,1946. 25.TheHistoryofArts.Vol.I.M.,1956. 26.GafurovB.G.2500thAnniversaryofthe IranianState//TheHistoryoftheIranian StateandCulture(2500thAnniversaryofthe IranianState).M.,1971. 27.GertsmanE.V.EminentPorphiriusandhis CollectionofAncientMusicalManuscripts. SPb.,1996. 28.Geseriada:TheStoryofGraciousGeser MergenKhan,theExtirpatorofTenEvilsin TenCountriesoftheWorld.M.;L.,1935. 29.GeyushevR.B.Christianityinthe CaucasianAlbania:AccordingtoArcheology andWrittenSources.Baku,1984. 30.GibbonE.TheHistoryoftheDeclineand FalloftheRomanEmpire.PartsIVII.SPb., 19972000. 31.GrantovskiyE.A.EarlyHistoryofIranian TribesinAsia.M.,1970. 32.[GrigorovichBarskiyV.G.]TheTraveltothe SacredPlacesoftheTravelerBasilGrigorovich BarskiyPlakiAlbovSPb.,1778. 33.GriaznevichP.A.DevelopmentofHistorical ConsciousnessoftheArabs(VIVIII centuries)//EssaysontheHistoryofArabic CultureoftheVXVCenturies.M.,1982. 34.DandamaevA.M.TheStateofAchemenids anditsInfluenceontheHistoryofAncient East//TheHistoryoftheIranianStateand Culture(2500thAnniversaryoftheIranian State).M.,1971. 35.DjafarovY.R.TheHunsandAzerbaijan. Baku.1985. 36.JonesA.H.M.DeathofAncientWorld.
RostovonDon.,1997. 37.DiringerD.TheAlphabet.M.,1963. 38.AncientTurkicDictionary.L.,1969. 39.DiakonovM.M.EssayontheHistoryof AncientIran.M.,1961. 40.[Eusebius]ChurchHistoryofEusebius Pamfilus.Vol.I.SPb.,1858. 41.ZeimalE.V.SinoKharoshtianCoins (DatingKhotanicBilingualCoins)//Countries andNationsoftheEast.IssueX.M.,1971. 42.ZelinskiyA.N.TheKushansandMahayana //CentralAsiainKushanEpoch.Vol.2.M., 1975. 43.TheHistoryofIran.M.,1977. 44.TheHistoryofKhakassia:FromAncient Timesupto1917.M.,1993. 45.[Kagankatvatsi]HistoryoftheAguansby MosesKagankatvatsi.SPb.,1861. 46.KiselevS.V.AncientHistoryofSouth Siberia.M.,1951. 47.KozlovP.K.MongoliaandAmdoandthe DeadTownofKharaKhoto.M.;Prague,1923. 48.CosambiD.CultureandCivilizationof AncientIndia.M.,1968. 49.KoshelenkoG.A.CultureofParthia.M., 1966. 50.KryvelevI.A.TheBible:Historicaland CriticalAnalysis.M.,1985. 51.KryvelevI.A.TheHistoryofReligions.Vol. I.M.,1975. 52.CultureofByzantium.IVFirstHalfofVII Centuries.M.,1984. 53.KyzlasovL.R.TotheUnknownSiberiafor MysteriousWritings.Abakan,1998. 54.KyzlasovL.R.AncientKhakassia.M.,1986. 55.LebedevA.P.TheEpochofPersecutions againstChristians.SPb.,1904. 56.LelekovL.A.TheTermAryainAncient IndianandAncientArmenianTraditions// AncientIndia.HistoricalandCultural Relations.M.,1982. 57.LesterR.C.Buddhism:TheRouteto Nirvana//ReligiousTraditionsoftheWorld. Vol.2.M.,1996. 58.MamedovaF.D.AbouttheChronological SystemofHistoryoftheAlbansbyMoses Kagankatvatsi//ByzantineAnnals.Vol.VI. M.,1953. 59.MarrN.TheBaptismoftheArmenians,the Georgians,theAbkhaziansandtheAlansby
SaintGregory:ArabicVersion.SPb.,1905. 60.MassonV.M.,SirianidiV.I.KaraKum:The DawnofCivilization.M.,1972. 61.MassonV.M.,TheCountryofThousand Towns.M.,1966. 62.Mahabharata/Translation,introduction andreferencesbyB.A.Smirnov.Vol.IX. Ashkhabad,19551972. 63.MedvedevE.M.TheRoleofGeographical FactorsinHistoricalContactsoftheIndian CivilizationwiththeOutsideWorld//Ancient India.HistoricalandCulturalRelations.M., 1982. 64.MythologicalDictionary.M.,1991. 65.MonheitA.L.,ArcheologyoftheWestern Europe.TheBronzeandIronAge.M.,1974. 66.MurzaevE.M.TurkicGeographicalNames. M.,1996. 67.MullerA.TheHistoryofIslam.Vol.1.SPb., 1895. 68.MiallL.CertainProblemsofMahayana Appearance//CentralAsiaintheKushan Epoch.Vol.2.M.,1975. 69.NationsoftheWorld:Historicaland EthnographicReferenceBook.M.,1988. 70.NeikhardtA.A.TheMysteryoftheHoly Cross.M.,1963. 71.Nizami.IskanderName.M.,1953. 72.OvermayerD.L.ReligionsofChina:The WorldasaLivingSystem//Religious TraditionsoftheWorld.Vol.2.,1996. 73.OkladnikovA.P.,ZaporozhskayaV.D. LenaWritings.M.;L.,1959. 74.PosnovM.E.TheHistoryoftheChristian Church:(BeforetheDivisionofChurches 1054)Brussels,1964.Reprint.:Brussels,1988. 75.PugachenkovaG.A.ArtsofBactriaofthe KushanEpoch.M.,1979. 76.PiankovI.V.FormationoftheStateof AchemenidsaccordingtoHistoricalSources// TheHistoryoftheIranianStateandCulture (2500thAnniversaryoftheIranianState).M., 1971. 77.RudenkoS.I.TheMostAncientArtistic CarpetsandClothsfromCertainBarrowsofthe MountainAltaiintheWorld.M.,1968. 78.RudenkoS.I.ArtsofAltaiandAsia.M., 1961. 79.RudenkoS.I.CultureoftheMountainAltai InhabitantsintheScythianTimes.M.;L.,
1953. 80.RudenkoS.I.CultureoftheCentralAltai InhabitantsintheScythianTimes.M.;L., 1960. 81.RudenkoS.I.CultureoftheHunsand NoinulianBarrows.M.;L.,1962. 82.SarianidiV.I.Afghanistan:Treasuresof NamelessTsars.M.,1983. 83.SarianidiV.I.BactriathroughtheMistof Centuries.M.,1984. 84.SarianidiV.I.TheTempleandNecropolisof TillTepeM.,1989. 85.SarianidiV.I.,KoshelenkoG.A.Coinsfrom ExcavationsofNecropolisintheTownofTill Tepe(NorthAfghanistan)//AncientIndia. HistoricalandCulturalRelations.M.,1982. 86.SventsitskayaI.S.SecretWritingsofFirst Christians.M.,1980. 87.SkrzhinskayaE.C.Introduction, translation,comments.//Jordan.JordanO. AbouttheOriginandDeedsoftheGeths. Getica.SPb.,1995. 88.StavinskiyB.Y.TheKushanBactria: ProblemsofHistoryandCulture.M.,1977. 89.StavinskiyB.Y.TotheSouthfromtheIron Gates.M.,1977. 90.[Tacitus]CorneliusTacitus.Annals.History //SelectedWorksin2Volumes.SPb.,1993. 91.TreverK.V.EssaysontheHistoryand CultureoftheCaucasianAlbania(IVcentury B.C.IVcenturyA.D.).M.;L.,1959. 92.TreverK.V.EssaysontheHistoryofCulture ofAncientArmenia(IIcenturyB.C.IV centuryA.D.).M.;L.,1953. 93.TiuliaevS.I.ArtsofIndia:IIIMillennium B.C.VIICenturyA.D.M.,1988. 94.Firduosi.Shahname.Vol.IV.M.,1957 1969. 95.FryeR.TheHeritageofIran.M.,1972. 96.KharaDavanE.ChingiskhanasaMilitary LeaderandhisHeritage.Elista,1991. 97.KhakasHeroicEpos:AyHuuchin. Novosibirsk,1997. 98.[Khorenatsi]MosesKhorenatsi.TheHistory ofArmenia.Yerevan.1990. 99.KhosroevA.L.FromtheHistoryofEarly ChristianityinEgypt:AccordingtoMaterialof theCopticLibraryfromNagHammadi.M., 1997. 100.Christianity.Encyclopedia.Vol.13.M.,
19931995. 101.TsibukidisD.I.AncientGreeceandEast. HellenisticProblemsoftheGreek Historiography(18501974).M.,1981. 102.TsybikovG.T.BuddhistPilgrimnear TibetanRelics.Prague,1919. 103.ShakarimKudaiberdyUly.FamilyTrees oftheTurki,Kazakhs,Kirghiz.Dynastiesof Khans.AlmaAta,1990. 104.StaermanE.M.AntiqueCultureCrisis.M., 1975.
Part II
to such thoughts. After all, he did not choose his parents. And his father was the native of the East, he belonged to the Alemanni, he came to Rome as a hireling and rose to the rank of a military leader. But their family tree cannot be understood without one important clarification: Alemanni is the name of the Turkic ulus (tribe); that ulus became famous in the Persian times. It is of Aryan origin! It appeared in the Near East long before the Common Era and inhabited one of the regions the most distant region from Altai which was later called with its name Germany. (In the Turkic language the names Germany and Alemannia are synonymous). It is important to emphasize that the Emperor astonished the Romans with his non-Roman behavior; his actions shocked the nobility, but they would always forgive him. Even when he did something inadmissible. For example, in order to revive the army he introduced tough reforms advantageous for the Barbarians and lower classes. In Rome such thing happened for the first time. And everybody endured it without complaint. However, he did not conceal his abomination for the Roman aristocracy; he could hardly bear its dull and insipid society. Contemporaries were struck due to piety and spirituality which determined deeds of that person and also his unusually good breeding. In Rome he passed for a messenger of another world. One day the deputation of the Romans asked to convene a council in order to settle one important theological dispute connected with Christianity; many people were surprised with the answer: That will not be right if I, a layman, tamper with such questions. Such questions are for clergymen who can meet as they wish. That was typical for a Turki but not for a power-hungry Roman. In Turkic society a man of the world could not tamper with the deeds of the clergy. Under no circumstances. The clergymen, their opinions, were a standard of justice and rectitude; they were the only ones who
Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky
Barbarians Of Wild Rome

Under Constantine, when the Greeks were burning antique manuscripts and destroying ancient temples in the heat of religious passions depriving themselves of the past, they did not know Heavenly God and did not pray Him in the Western Empire; up to 380 official Rome recognized only Jupiter, Juno, Mercury and its other Gods. Although freedom of conscience had been legalistically proclaimed there, other beliefs were not in favor and people were persecuted for dissent. Of course that was on purpose, that was Rome's policy it existed hating the Kipchaks and dreaming of revenge; it did not even think of a spiritual union with its offender. Offence was choking it. It saw the Eastern Empire menacingly rising and becoming its competitor; it saw the Mediterranean and the rest of the world getting renewed, and in return it was strengthening its army preparing for pending events. It wanted to stop the wheel of history. Under the Emperor Valentinianus the Roman army fully recovered after that unexpected and dreadful defeat of 312; it came alive, took a deep breath and became as strong as it had never been. That Emperor is a mysterious person. Who was he? How did he ascend to the throne? Not much is known. Almost all his contemporaries paid attention to his appearance which was not peculiar to a Roman: fair-haired, blue-eyed, with a sidelong and hard glance. He easily managed to entice hirelings from Byzantium to his army; he had no difficulty communicating with them. How? That is not clear. Maybe he knew the Turkic language, and maybe Turkic blood was in his veins. Everything is possible; facts give rise
72 / 342 Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky
determined what was right and what was wrong. The Emperor was interested only in the army and the state; he found himself a master there and gave no quarter to everybody. However, he made no important decisions without approval of the clergy Another Turkic tradition. In 374 the fair-haired ruler of Rome faced the most serious ordeal another wave of the Great Nations Migration came close to the Central Europe: Altaic scouts, about two dozens of riders, entered the Western Empire. They took the fancy of the lands of modern Hungary, Serbia and Austria and they called the horde there. Let us mention that those lands being almost uninhabited were deemed to be the eastern outpost of the Empire and were called Pannonia. Due to Western politicians the Turkic word horde obtained an everyday meaning large unorganized group of people. A crowd. Which is absolutely wrong. In reality a horde meant a military and administrative organization with its structure and order. Later it became the name of headquarters of a ruler or a military leader. An explanation is necessary here: the phrase Altaic scouts entered does not mean they were the first who entered. The Altaians knew the road there, which is confirmed by the family tree of the Emperor Valentinianus. It turns out there was a Nephritis Route which led from Altai to Europe; that is confirmed by archeological findings which cannot be called into question by serious researchers. In the IV century the scouts of the Great Nations Migration were in question the number of people leaving Altai increased, and agitated Romans began to talk of an invasion. Those days the West was living in agitation. Of course Rome could not stand a mass encroachment on its territories, although they had not been inhabited yet. But it was going to fight not for those wastelands but for its honor. Warlike Romans were indignant at obtrusiveness of the newcomers; they were shocked. They did not calm down even after the earthquake which happened
during the second year of Valentinianus's reign. The sea overflowed the shores throwing ships and boats on roofs of the houses that was the sign of misfortune. But it was disregarded, since they only wanted to win. However, a victorious war did not happen in 374: the Roman army was defeated in the first battle. And Roman troops were let go. The Turki who wanted peace did not annihilate the enemy. For them it was important to gain a foothold and show seriousness of their intentions. The lands occupied by nobody they considered to be their lands. That is why that was a just war for them. They said as follows: We need a war to achieve peace. That is the phrase from the Code of Honor of the Barbarians; it was uttered by all the Turkic military leaders. The next year another war took place and Rome got the victory in it. They chose the moment for their blow correctly and defeated the enemy. But the feast was spoiled by the embassy of the Kipchaks that came to Valentinianus's headquarters without any signs of respect and laughed at the winner. How? That is not known for certain. It seems Valentinianus was a real Turki he was too vulnerable and he understood certain expression without translation. The Emperor could not stand those jests; he shivered beside himself with anger, turned blue and died all at once And Altaic messengers were getting established on fertile lands lying along Danube. The name of the head of their horde is known but it was Europeanized and distorted, while the names of families are still pronounced in the Turkic way. Those were the families of Balts (axe, poleaxe in Turkic) and Amals (quiet, calm), which is witnessed by European chronicles where it is represented as the coming of a new nation the Goths. It is to be noticed that for the Khakasses, those bearers of Turkic antiquity, the word palty (baltu) is a part of the expression meaning intractable person, and
amal means diplomacy, which shows the figurativeness of the Turkic language and inevitable inconformity of terms in Turkic dialects that occurred later. To an extent, the same goes for the term Goth; it also obtained new meanings more than once. That name was explained by the fact that on the flag of the horde there was a lizard the patron of the family and the source of spirit. Of course, that was not a new nation; those were the Turki. Lizard's people, participants of the Great Nations Migration, adhered to Altaic traditions in legal proceedings, burial ceremonies, written language and, of course, in belief, which is witnessed by Procopius, Jordan and other great chroniclers of those times. Some researchers correctly mentioned that the ancestors of the Goths used the word goth in the form of Guten so as to denote themselves and emphasize their bravery and strength, i.e. to call themselves a horde. That expression is derived from the ancient Turkic kut ~ gut ~ goth (vitality, spirit) or from the more ancient godha ~ goth (lizard). One of the most ancient Turkic eposes Ay-Huuchin tells of a conflict of the Goths (lizard's nation) with their neighbors. Not only Altaic culture but also conflicts between the Turki are described there in detail, although they are described in the form of a myth. After one such sanguinary conflict the Goths left Altai for the West. For some time past the Goths have been regarded as Germanic tribes in the West, not going into details of family trees of the Germans themselves. That is a sort of tradition. In the meantime Ammianus Marcellinus (VI century), Zosimus (V early VI century) and Patricius Trajan (VII century) referred them to the Scythians. And Theophylactus Simocatta (VII century) described a Scythian whose native tribe were the Huns. It turns out early medieval authors did not divide the Scythians, Goths and Huns into different nations. Theophan the Confessor (VIII early IX century) reminded that the Huns were the Turki. And Agathias (V century) referred the Burgundians to the
Huns. Procopius (VI century) called the Burgundians the Germans Unusual unanimity of the ancient neglected by the descendants. Efforts of modern researchers to brighten this question led to confusion. As a result the Goths are referred to Germanic tribes and Slavic nations appeared while their Turkic origin was beyond dispute in the Middle Ages. For example, Bulgarians and Serbs (Montenegrins) were referred to the Turki (Huns) by the medieval authors; today they are called the Slavs. This confusion was made artificially, which was described by K. Inostrantsev in his work. Analyzing the history of the Huns he explains their disappearance from the historical scene: The name of the Huns disappeared, as it usually happens with Tatars (Turki. M.A.) where a horde getting power gives the name to the whole nation Such turnings of one nation into another are frequent there. Not being aware of that custom it is absolutely impossible to understand the history of those nations. Thus one has to agree with the fact that during 10 years a nation living on vast territories was wiped out and instead another unknown nation appeared. That valuable observation makes many oddities disappear those oddities that were deliberately included into the history of the Turki. In the national cookery of the Goths, and the same goes for other Turki, meat and milk dishes prevailed along with horse beef which was eaten avidly and boiled dough. They would also drink koumiss hopped mare's milk with pleasure. In case of lack of fodder they slaughtered cattle and meet was dried in the sunlight and smoked. During the campaigns they eat cheese balls and curds which were diluted in water. This poor meal, as E. Gibbon mentioned, kept those modest warriors not only strong but also sprightly for several days. Everything the Goths had was Turkic. Their society was divided into families of warriors, breeders and farmers that was a
rather complex society with its estates and families There are no reasons to speak about their wildness. They were being born different from the Europeans in another cultural area. They were not the same as them. And, as against the Romans and Greeks, they eat food using not their hands but forks and knives. Arrogance with which the Europeans describe the way of life of the Turki is rather a witness of their lack of knowledge of the eastern culture and natural conditions of the steppe the native land of the newcomers. Another way of life is impossible there without tilt carts, yurts and towers, without spoons and forks and obligatory neatness. That was an essential condition of survival. Water, firewood, implements were to be taken and carried somehow and kept carefully since there was nothing to use instead. The steppe was sparing in resources but lavish in destitution, hunger and epidemics. It accepts only strong people. Climate in the steppe is very rigorous, contrasting and unpredictable. The weather can change five times a day. Is not that the reason why the steppe area was the last area inhabited by people. Even Arctic Regions are compliant and lavish In the West they write about the Turki with disgust calling them dirty animals, but that would be great if someone explains why the Romans remained pagans? Why did they loose all the battles? Was not culture of the barbarians higher than that of the civilized Romans? However, how can western scientists assess wildness of one nation and civilization of the other? August 9th, 378 was not an exception for Rome. The army of the Empire, with what was left of its strength, decided to give and examination to the Turkic cavalry on the banks of Danube for another time, and again it overleapt itself. After that lost battle of Adrianople the Empire was deprived of its army, and it could be taken without a hand's turn. But that was done not by the barbarians who, as it turned out, did not
need Rome, but by the Byzantine co-regent Theodosius I. He understood: having won the war, the West lost in terms of geopolitics. They had to save the day. In that decisive battle the army of the Empire was represented by the troops of Valens, the Emperor in the East. But for some reason they were not joined by western troops; to an extent that was due to the Turkic cavalry that was acting consistently In Rome that defeat was called manslaughter, the end of the world and regarded as a collapse of Mediterranean political culture. That was right. That was when the Roman Empire fell. But we will go into details a little later. By 380 Theodosius, having become the Roman Emperor, passed a bill condemning paganism through the Senate, and later another one concerning the unity of the Christian belief in the territory of the former Roman Empire. That made the Emperor a practical ruler of Byzantium and Rome. Establishing Christianity he became the master of the neighboring country with a stroke of the pen. However, having the army and the Church at his disposal, that was not a difficult task, especially since the rival was nothing at that moment. The former Rome did not exist; it was the prisoner of its contradictions having fallen into clutches of the Christians. 388 is the official date of Rome's converting to Christianity. The news of submission to the Greeks and the Greek Church took the Eternal City unawares, it was exerting itself in vain but success is never blamed. Byzantium carried all before one; it was acting steadily. Let those be the Greeks the Romans decided. Of two evils they chose the least. The Emperor Theodosius conducted his policy as a subtle diplomat. In 382 he invited another horde to the Empire and granted rich estates to it provided that the farmers' children were to serve in his army. Thus he continued the discreditable practices of Constantine concerning coordination of the Great Nations Migrations or, more simply,
he subdued it. He was playing dexterously. And circumstances redounded advantage to him in everything. His estates turned out to be an excellent invention suiting everybody. They attracted the Turki since they were small states where every khan was his own master. There they spoke the Turkic language, followed Turkic traditions, feasts, in a word, they were free and independent. There people obeyed neither the Empire, nor DeshtI-Kipchak. Freedom attracted and besotted freedom-loving Altaic people better than ripe wine. New families rushed to the Western Europe, the number of the Turki there was rapidly increasing. However, the Latins went berserk having learnt the news concerning estates, especially after Roman landowners were made obliged to give one third of their fields to the coming Kipchaks, and forest areas were to be divided in half Politicians skillfully set people on to fight having blasphemously called that action Hospitality. In the Emperor's order that word was used. The order issued early in the V century, after Theodosius's death, was the continuation of his policy. But, of course, such system was not new, it had been applied earlier when the Great Nations Migration was gathering pace. For example, Marcus Aurelius (161 180) in 171 delivered new settlers to the Roman farmers. As we know, the history of many dukedoms and principalities started with those barbarian estates. In the Middle Ages there were hundreds of them. Pocket countries of knights were a page of the Turkic history which Theodosius started to write. This history was kept in the remotest refuge of conservatism provincial towns and settlements of the West. And of course knightly romanticism that eclipsed the Turkic genealogy there has become part of literature and arts as an individual phenomenon Knights and knighthood also appeared due to the Great Nations Migration.
Khans or, more precisely, owners of estates were called gentiles aliens. They had barbarian names and formed special regiments for the cavalry. It is also known that they all belonged to one family. Relations, origin and roots were top of priorities there; strangers had nothing to do there and they were not accepted. Everybody spoke one language there, used the same words and gestures, which is described in numerous tales of chivalry. That was the caste living under its Turkic! laws and rules. The Empire did not bother them. A horde is a horde. With regard to the word gentiles opinions of experts differ, but in one thing they agree: the word is derived from barbarians of the fifth century who were the soldiers serving the Roman Empire at first, and later they conquered the Empire and were proud of their foreign gentility. There are many theories concerning the word gentiles but nobody has ever connected it with those to whom it belonged with the Turki. With participants of the Great Nations Migration. That was wrong However those connections have not been welcomed in the West for some time past. And in the ancient Turkic language there was the word kent (ken) or gent (gen) meaning fortress, castle and the word il nation. Thus it meant nation living in a fortress, but that is not a correct explanation, that is an untranslatable pun meaning not just a nation but people being able to fight for their own hand. Slashing fellows. Their life, like a fortress, was inaccessible for others. In their name one can hear restraint, strength, pride and valor all at the same time. In a word, people fortresses. To an extent this explanation is confirmed by names of European towns that appeared at that time (Ghent, Genoa, Geneva) and Kent county (England) and a dozen of others which history is connected with the nations migration. At first those were that barbarian estates. And another thing is
76 / 342
indicative the gentiles kept belief in Tengri, they followed Altaic religious traditions, for which Christians called them pagans. As we know, Europe called all the dissentients pagans. Later, with the passing of the years, the image of an alien was transformed and a new image was created according to the Turkic pattern. That was not the image of an alien. After all, generations were changing. The word gentiles was transformed into gentleman with a literary meaning noble man. It also has Altaic roots in the Turkic language men means me, personality. Later such titled as marquis, baron and other appeared also having an Altaic root aristocracy gradation was the same as in Altai. The Europeans treated khans that became gentlemen carefully, as though they were rare transplants in a garden. They were let put down roots and entrench themselves. And give harvest. Time was the best ally of the West. Of course, Hospitality was more suitable for the Kipchaks; it afforded them different opportunities in their new motherland. They were peaceful by nature, but they could fight for their own hand. In Rome and Constantinople people were aware of it and did not contradict new settlers. The Europeans hoped for time which was to make obstinate newcomers native sooner or later. Because everything is passing and changing, and the newcomers were very fond of beautiful women Bridges of love were inevitable. What did the settlers of 382 look like? Witnesses of the Europeans are full of hidden jealousy and open disgust, which is clear. But if not being emotional, writings of Eunapius describe the Turkic clergy heading the horde with icons and a cross. They wore long black clothes and rode horses solemnly and with deliberation. After them monks and nuns were coming followed by others warriors, nobility and common people in carts. That was not a wild crowd, as
barbarians are represented, but riders, people with household belongings leaving for new lands. They were not preparing for a feast; there was no splendor in that ceremony, that is for certain. By the way, from Eunapius's notes it is seen that he himself was a pagan and did not know the meaning of religious relics which were to become part of Christianity later. His emotions made his ignorance evident, which does not surprise: at that time official Rome had just accepted Christianity. The spirit of the people living in the Empire remained pagan and its morals was two-faced. It was looking at the world crossing its eyes because of fear; the world seemed to be the world of deceit and weakness. They just put on their long black clothes and their slyness gained confidence. The barbarians became aware of respect of the Romans to that title, that is why they were not slack at using at. The Romans were so blind that they believed the barbarians, - Eunapius wrote in despair. He did not even understand that the newcomers wore not fancy dresses; they attracted Western politicians not by their clothes, they granted them estates not for their slyness. That was perhaps national clothes of certain Turki. Again Rome had not a gaudy lot; it was screaming of its weakness and immense fear at the top of its voice Like a helpless old man it condemned youth. From the first day the Emperor Theodosius understood the sentiments of the Romans, which was not difficult, but he knew that only those whose spirit was stronger could give belief to others. That is why, inviting the Turki and their clergy the Emperor counted for their help in strengthening Christianity, i.e. the new religion, among Roman pagans, which also meant strengthening of power of its leader the Greek Church. Those were real plans of Byzantine that was becoming the political and religious leader of the West. Hospitality was necessary in order to attract the Turkic clergy. Especially since it was paid by the Romans and their lands.
The policy of Byzantium of those times considered the interests of the Kipchaks to the last detail. And those simpleminded people answered with peacefulness, which was possibly explained by another fact: they were searching for changes too. Changes in themselves! That is why they willingly stepped into the new life allowing to invite and deceive them. Why? This can be seen in the following declaration: I wish to erase the name Romans and to turn the Roman Empire into the Gothic (Turkic) Empire But experience teaches me that our uncontrolled barbarism is incompatible with laws, and without laws a state cannot exist. That is why I am trying to revive the glory of Rome and multiply it due to might of the Goths (Turki). Let the descendants connect revival of Rome, and not destruction of it, with my name. Those words were said in 410 by the gentleman Athaulf. It seems they contain everything for which those days were notable. One could not have said more precisely. The phrase written by the historian Orosius in the V century after a pious, sedate and serious inhabitant of Narbonne. They met in Palestine where they had come to meet Saint Jerome. It turns out barbarians were thinking about revival of Rome. Athaulf was right. Certain Turkic customs looked wildish there and became obsolete and turned people into slaves of unnecessary traditions. After all, there were different living conditions in Europe. The khan understood that customs should not weigh upon the new society and be fetters for it Napoleon was absolutely right when he said later: Customs sentence us to a lot of stupidities, but the biggest stupidity is to be their slaves. Only in estates, like at liberty, life released barbarians from fetters of moribund traditions. It allowed establishing new ones. And that also explains a lot of what was happening at that time However, they renewed not themselves but the West that
was turning into their new motherland. The future required mutual influence, mutual changes and concessions that was the life of the Turki and Latins of the IV century. That was akin to a sexual act when new Europe was conceived; not Roman, as it had formerly been, but European Europe. Of course it did not come to denying ancestors, their way of life and beginning everything from a blank page. But life is a ship which crew in every new port acts under the laws of that port. And the more the sailing of the Kipchaks lasted, the farther were the Altaic shores And the past with them Volumes of researches containing a lot of details and particulars but lacking objectiveness are dedicated to barbarians that destroyed Rome. Describing the strength of the West by force of habit, the authors forgot that by the end of the IV century that was not Rome of the Emperor Augustus. The Western Empire did not even have its army and was the country where a new Christian! culture was being established; people expected a lot from it. The Turki were reviving the glory of Rome defeated by them. They!.. The works dedicated to sources of knighthood show that gentlemen received guests sitting on carpets putting their legs under themselves. They slept in tents. They wore moustaches. They eat horse beef and drank koumiss. They had horse amusements, which showed their fiery temper. Malefactors were executed by tying them to a horse's tail and putting it into gallop. The most noble knights were buried in barrows together with their steeds and choked slaves. In decoration of their weapons one could read their own knightly ornaments reminding of Altaic patterns. They were exactly the same. Is not this information enough for an ethnographer? After all, first European kings and their retinues are the descendants of the knights. The Turkic past of secular and
religious rulers was seen in their written language they wrote with Altaic runes, from left to right. Later they learnt European rules Documents are kept in museums of Italy, France, Spain. That is not a secret. Providing a great many specific historical peculiarities, it seems European authors, not being aware of Altai, did not call the Turki the Turki and invented new names even for khans: Birnart was called Bernard, Arnaut was called Arnold However, keeping censorship introduced by the medieval Church in mind, one should not be surprised at it. Although signs of knightly culture had not formerly existed in the Roman Europe. Trifles and details are important for a researcher here. Even the fact that early in the Middle Ages a horse substituted an ox in the western agriculture; or that flocks of sheep and herds of horses were pastured in the fields of estates; or that millet, oats and rye were sown there And those were the animals and agricultural plants traditional for the Turki and new for the West. How did they appear? Elasticity of the Great Nations Migration is striking: everything began as if on a sudden. Adhering to Hospitality two cultures of East and West were living together amicably in Europe. Military conflicts happened but they did not determine the new life. By the way, peacefulness of the Turki was also marked in Asia. They never broke the peace if they saw that a settlement lying on their way was surrounded by a wall or fence, i.e. it had an owner. For example, they did nothing to Khoresm and other towns of the Central Asia, on which was based a false opinion that they were not able to win fortresses. But that was wrong. The clergy did not approve of an unjust war; it maintained order in society and in politics. A war was deemed to be unjust if it was waged against nations not inflicting damage on the Turki Altaic people had their own code of honor of which all the warriors
were aware; the West learnt of that code from the work by Saint Augustine called The City of God. Settlers of the V century were notable for their desire to serve Rome. For its sake certain settlers changed their national clothes and took Latin names. And they did so voluntarily. For instance, that is what Theoderich, the head of the horde of the Goths, did having become the lord of the Romans in the V century. Having got power in the Roman Empire, he, according to Jordan, took off the clothes of his tribe and put on new vestments as the ruler of the Goths and Romans, which was a Turkic tradition. That is what their rulers did obtaining power in India, Persia, Armenia. Two conditions were to be met and, in a sense, a person was changed. Peaceful march of the gentlemen on Rome is evident. There, for instance, laws had not been giving an incentive to marriages between the Turki and the Romans, and then mixed marriages became normal. The Latins were eagerly giving in marriage their best daughters. Everything Turkic was in fashion in Rome; even clothes which were warmer and nicer. Patricians were fond of woolen suits, trousers, bloomers, vestments, kneehigh boots, which was mentioned perhaps by all the historians. By the way, from the Turki the West became aware of dress coats and camisoles; it turns out they are also of Altaic origin, which was proven by findings of archeologists, in particular of the professor S.I. Rudenko. Before the coming of barbarians, as we know, only togas were in fashion in Rome pieces of cloths draped around the body. They did not wear underpants and did not sew clothes there. They simply could not Everything was mixed up in the West; the Latin and the barbarous were close. To tell the truth, now they were fighting against the new fashion, and then admiring it. At times that was absurd. Thus in 397 people were sentenced to banishment for life and confiscation of property for wearing trousers,
and in 416 even the slaves were prohibited to wear fur and leather clothes of barbarians. Later prohibitions were cancelled. Such changes were explained by new political conditions; it is the same as weather in spring it is notable for impermanence even in nature The Turki were invited to the Emperor's retinue and to positions of importance. How could that happen with savages? The owner of one estate, gentleman Arbogast, whose name meant Red throat in the Turkic language became the teacher of soldiers of the Roman army, its military leader. That roaring ruffian felt right at home at court he was acting freely, and when they tried to remove him, the Emperor heard from him the following: My power has nothing to do with your smile or puckered brows. In a couple of days the Emperor was found choked in his bed. One contemporary of those events wrote: The title of senator which in ancient times seemed to be top of all honors, turned into something miserable due to those fairhaired barbarians. That was for certain. It could not have happened otherwise: The strongest survived; it was imposing the rules of new life. Healthy blood was inflowing into the decrepit body of Rome. The West was recovering. Its vaunted patricians were not able to compete with the Kipchaks in military and public arts; none of its plebeians was that skilful in agriculture, cattle ranching, building protected towns and beautiful temples. That was the mixture of cultures or, more precisely, nurturance of a new culture. Newcomers were not afraid of dirty work; they washed their hands after it. The Romans, being effeminate and weak, lost in everything, even in love; all they had to do is hate the barbarians. And nothing else. Desertion which started after the defeat of 378 was increasing. Young Latins were afraid of service and thus went into
hiding; they mutilated themselves so as to avoid the call-up, although secretion of recruits was subject to death penalty. Nothing could be done, and acceptance of Christianity did not bring any martial spirit to the army. Mass evasion from military reservations became common; the Latins did not feel alright among the Turki which formed the core of the army. They were not physically able to learn the lesson of military training. Salvianus, the presbyter of Massilia (Marseilles) left a description of those years full of horror. Towns that did not accept the Turki were unprotected even when enemies were near; nobody stirred a finger to defend themselves from death. Desperate cowards were living there It is no wonder; behavior of the Romans was traditionally imperial, but they all wanted new life. Bygone power and glory depraved them. By the V century the dominance of the Turki in the West was absolute. The Empire was protected by the army that could be called the Roman army just theoretically. Even the military treasury (fiscus) was called fiscus barbaricus (in Latin barbarian means alien) That made it possible for Saint Jerome to declare that the Romans were the weakest nation in the world since they were dependant on how barbarians would fight for them. Having called themselves Christians the Europeans did not become them. A hood does not make one a monk, - they used to say in Altai in such cases. Because the West was living full of hatred to their nearest those nearest that fed and protected it. That was its real tragedy which in several centuries was revealed in the colonial policy. Colonialism could not be born out of nothing; it is the sequel of evil. The East was winning but in its own way. Altai and its traditions hindered it; they were like stones on the settlers' shoulders, they were that uncontrolled barbarism wistfully described by the gentleman Athaulf. Those were the traditions (adats) that did not allow Arbogast to ascend to the throne in
Rome, although he had power he was the head of the army. According to barbarian laws he could not become the Emperor, i.e. the tsar since he did not belong to the tsarist family. He could choke anyone, he could become the Emperor under the Roman laws but he did not dare change traditions of his ancestors; he was afraid of God. He let a Roman ascend to the throne and served him voluntarily. It was not the same with Theodoric, another possible Roman Emperor. As distinct from Arbogast, he belonged to a tsarist family, that is why he easily managed to get power. He put on Roman clothes and took a Roman name. And that was it. The tradition was established by the rulers of the dynasty of Achemenids in Persia and the Sun Dynasty in India, which is confirmed by findings of archeologists from the Middle East where those dynasties had been reigning long before the Common Era. They wore bloomers and over them they had foreign clothes. The Europeans quickly found that sore spot of the Kipchaks which could tie better that any rope. Their nobility, faith to their wards, laws and families were being used by the West in its interests. The rulers of Rome and Byzantine brought the barbarians nearer without fear, entrusted their security to them and listened to their advices. They did not trench upon power; they denied it themselves. Was that good or bad? That question is not to be discussed, but adherence to adats was leading the Turki to a political deadlock in the western states conquered by them. The East was loosing its face even when it was winning. And that was the fate. Their fate. The Turki did not have power for a very long time and another difference between the nations of East and West. The Europeans took decorum for weakness and after that for cowardice. Having grown bolder the Europeans started troubles. They, the Christians, did not love their nearest those speaking the Turkic language. The Emperor's orders had no force, the same as blandishment. Caesar's descendants were
oppressed by envy. Not willing to do military service and work for the state, they mutilated themselves, and the Turki protectors and workers! became the object of humiliation. The Roman nobility even demanded to deport the newcomers from the Empire or turn them into slaves. Rome was notable for madness; that was a good form to abuse a barbarian. On coins they minted the Emperor's figure stepping on the throat of a defeated man with the body of a snake. That stepped over the bonds of hospitality; that was pretence. In the V century everybody understood: the Kipchaks are an integral part of Europe, and Europe itself was the motherland even for the youth. The motion of the wheel of History could not be changed either by envy, or by malice. They had to reckon with reality. Those were difficult times; people were surrounded by meanness. The settlers were starving and freezing. And the Romans made their fortune on their troubles: in ten years they changed food for gold and children whom they took for slavery. Hopeless newcomers did not disdain to eat meat of killed dogs, but they did nothing to the Romans. And they did ask them for help, which was also regarded as weakness. After the Emperor Theodosius's death his sons, upon demand of the Roman nobility, tried to abolish common gifts to the army, i.e. the estates. But they failed, and the first generation of Latin Turki was born. Thousands of them. No one allowed to turn them into slaves or outcasts since their fathers were not the timid type. And the trouble was hurting as it was maturing, it was like an abscess; it stole up imperceptibly in 408, on the 25th of December the biggest Turkic feast the day of Tengri. The Romans proceeded to executions of wives and children of the Kipchaks that were in the army then. Edward Gibbon described those events as follows: On the same day, at the same time, as though on a signal, towns of Italia were blemished by similar detestable murders and
robberies, at that families and property of the barbarians were being annihilated. After that the newcomers, having been driven to despair by dungeon which could put out of patience the most humble and gentle people, rebelled. The country was set on fire. The Greeks that were afraid of the newcomers even more than the Romans, were acting wiser. After the defeat near Adrianople in 378 they gathered the Turkic youth on squares of towns having promised handsome gifts in lands and money and killed credulous young men. That was the last straw. A civil war began; it was headed by the gentleman Alaricus who was not fond of long talks; they besieged Rome. Those who did not understand the words understood sticks. That was when the citizens bethought themselves, senators and the elite apologized to the Turki and paid them in gold to make them quit the siege The next year it all happened again. In 410 the Kipchaks besieged Rome for the third time. By that time they did not believe its lies, the city was conquered and the warriors did not restrain their temper. That was for the first time ever when the enemy was in the streets of the Eternal City. Enmity was likely to flood the new western society that had just been born; slaughter was inevitable, but they remembered the wise Roman who knew how to pacify the parties. The idea came to his mind due to the Turkic word katalyk (ally). Catholic doctrine of the Church, or Catholicism, appeared. And that man's name was Damasus, he was the first Christian bishop of Rome. He called the bishops' cathedra Apostolic See. That was amazing. Damasus, the same as the Emperor Constantine, was a politician and not a clergyman. He also took the route of creation but made it not to Palestine; the bishop was trying to prove that Rome was the bulwark of belief emphasizing the Epistle of Paul the
Apostle to the Romans. There, in the Roman catacombs, Damasus was searching for and found ancient monuments remaining after the sectaries Jews. He found memorable inscriptions that were supposed to mark the tombs of Christian martyrs. Due to his efforts the History of Christianity became more ancient although Rome had never been Christian before. The true dating of burial places is absolutely different. But Christian Rome the capital of Catholicism was growing from underground, as western historians describe those days. Confrontation of Rome and Constantinople began from findings of Damasus; that confrontation was to determine European politics during the future centuries. Capitals of the West, as it turned out, regarded distribution of belief in different ways. Thus Christianity, not having been fully formed, became a political instrument and settled down to a course of an inevitable split of the Church. That course was destined. It should de mentioned that, accepting the office as an elder, Damasus was learning the rules of belief from the Turki personally communicating with them, through ambassadors and through correspondence. Near the bishop there were great people that were later called Doctors of the Church, its founders. Basil, Gregorios Nazianzenos, Jerome, Ambrosius - it is unlikely that these names tell a lot to readers inexperienced in history. The same as the name of the bishop Augustine. And they added a page to the Turkic history. Their own page. An inimitable and imperishable one. The Christian history refers Basil and Gregory to the teachers of the Eastern Church, their secular names have been forgotten, however, it is known, that they were brought up in the Turkic area, possibly, in Derbent. That was the only place where one could get higher theological education. That is witnessed not even by their biographies, but by knowledge of the basics of belief that they were preaching. That was the religion which roots were not connected with former beliefs
of Greece or Rome. Many researchers paid their attention to it. Only the Caucasus with its saint town Derbent or Egypt with its Indian communities at the very least could bring them up. It was impossible to get extensive knowledge anywhere else. It is not known whether they were Christians in the modern sense of this term, but they were aware of the philosophy of Monotheism. They shared knowledge not only with the Roman bishop Damasus. They exerted influence on Jerome, the Kipchak of Danube, who became the nearest counselor of the bishop, the second person in the Roman Church, having accepted Christianity. He was notable for spacious mind; he edited and translated books from the Turkic language into Latin a hard work for a pagan country that Rome was since it did not want to part from paganism. But Jerome was successfully doing his work. The Holy Writ, known as the Vulgate, is the beginning of the Christian literature. As a matter of fact, in the West the Christian Bible began with it. Jerome was doing that work for twenty years under Damasus's order. In Greece there was no such book; key points of Christianity were highlighted there in a different way. The Vulgate (literally meaning common, peoples) was not the translation of Altaic books. That was something more. It explained to common people, i.e. to the Romans, the Holy Writ of Heavenly God in the language clear for them. It was enlightening them, the same as some time before that Turkic books were enlightening nations of India, Iran, Armenia, Egypt In this connection the following detail is interesting: the Latin conception of the essence of God was different from that in Greece; in 1545, at the Council of Trent, the Church canonized it as the only one in Christianity. That event was preceded by discussions in the course of which the conception of the essence of the dispute was changed at least ten times. It is known that
there were 10 editions of Jerome's translations. After which in about 12 centuries! the Council of Trent canonized the text of translation as the only Church translation. However, what wonder, if Jerome himself was among those that were fighting for freedom of research for the sake of the Church, i.e. interpretation of Christian postulates for the sake of politics. They ascribed invention of Glagolitic alphabet, i.e. of the Church written language, to Jerome. That is possible. At any rate, in the library of Vatican on an ancient fresco there is his image with an open book written with Glagolitic characters. That was the new Church alphabet which later became the base for the Latin alphabet and Greek written language. At the same time variants of the Glagolitic alphabet appeared in Egypt and Byzantium, which confirms that the Turkic written language or, more precisely, its calligraphy was changing wittingly. It was being given the European shape; and the changes were controlled from the spiritual center. It seems the center was in Derbent where the Patriarchal See of all Christian Churches was located. To tell the truth, in several centuries the Pope Innocent IV in his letter of 1248 unexpectedly declared the opposite according to him those were the Slavs who invented the Glagolitic alphabet. Which was evidently a strained argument since in the IV century nobody knew the word Slavs, there was no such nation; it appeared in five hundred years Innocent neglected the history of the IV century perpetuated in the Pope's library in the fresco depicting Saint Jerome. Nothing leaves without a trace, especially the Great Culture. And whatever the Popes say, eastern roots of the culture which was being established in the West by teachers and Holy Fathers of the Church are evident in everything. Their deeds cannot be concealed. In this connection the biography of Saint Augustine is interesting; that was the
man who would not accept the Christian dogmas for a long time. He remained the adherent to Monotheism. His soul was full of the philosophy of Gnosticism. He was preaching the teaching of One God in Rome. The Christian writings seemed childish and rough to Augustine; the Greek perturbed him since they were ordering not convincing. I am sure that those who are teaching but not commanding are to believe, - he used to say. And in his words there was the truth. After hesitation in 387 he received the Christian baptism, but it took that great philosopher several years to become a Christian. And that was due to Ambrosius, the saint Kipchak, who argued the opponent into the necessity to revive and not destroy the glory of Rome. In the new Christian Church, the same as in the new army, the Turki were successfully finding themselves there. They had no rivals. The Latins with their imperial souls were behind in everything. The bishop Ambrosius was living under the Turkic traditions and did not conceal that, for instance, he thought that the Emperor was not entitled to subdue the Church. The Emperor is not over the Church but in the Church, - he used to say citing the tsar Kanishka almost letter for letter. The bishop was serving in Milan. Under the influence of frantic Ambrosius (as his contemporaries used to call him) the Emperor moved his residence there in 381. The town in the north became the center of spiritual science; Altaic books were translated there, paper from the East was brought there. The Turkic speech was highly respected, since there were Kipchak quarters in the town. However, for Milan that turned out to be the reason of troubles more than once. That is where were rushing the compatriots of the Turki the enemies of the Roman Empire willing to punish their congeners for their betrayal of the white belief of Altai, as they used to say. Attila's campaign is the best confirmation.
The Huns headed by Attila entered Milan (Mediolan) in the middle of the V century and broke it to pieces; in less than one hundred years the city was conquered by another Turkic ulus the Burgundians, until in thirty years the Kipchaks represented by the Langobards conquered not only Milan but also the most of the territory of Italy. That is when the enmity between the South and the North of Italy has begun. As it was fairly mentioned, permanent fight of the tribes of the infinite barbarian world which was steadily approaching both parts of the Empire allowed the latter to use barbarian forces struggling against the barbarians. In the fight of the Turki between each other Rome was on the winning side; it was rising. Unfortunately for the East, that eternal civil strife led the West to the political Olympus. And the more intense the fighting was, the deeper were getting the roots of the idea of Catholicism (the union) expressed by Damasus. Those were different sides of the same coin. The union with Rome attracted certain Turki more than the war with their tribesmen. Hence is the rise of Catholicism of the early Middle Ages. No, in the West barbarians did not look like poor relations nestling in a foreign home: they knew that those whose spirit and body were strong were the masters. In 404 they deprived Rome of the right for the capital having declared Ravenna the main city of the country. They built it in keeping with the best traditions of the eastern architecture of which the East was unaware. In the architectonics of Ravenna there were artistic views connected with barbarian culture having nothing in common with the Byzantine architecture, - as it is correctly written in one scientific research. The author just stated the fact explaining why Ravenna played a special part in the history of Italy, why it was deemed to be the center of the governmental power up to the middle of the VIII century.
Of course, in architectonics the Turki followed their cherished traditions since they did not have any other ones. It is not by accident that the famous San Vitale church, one of the most ancient in Italy, reminds of the temple in the settlement Lekit near Derbent built in the V century. Domes of the temples (they had not existed in Europe before!), mausoleums decorated with blue mosaic, baptistery where Roman pagans were baptized were the peculiarities of Ravenna. There was another baptistery in Ravenna for the followers of the white belief, i.e. not Christians but Arians. It is striking that the Great Nations Migrations gave the West even architectural innovations with which Gothic architecture began (the word Goth) style of art dominating in the medieval Europe The mausoleum of the khan Theodoric was perhaps the most striking building; it repeated the dome of an eastern yurt. Later pointed tents appeared; they delighted the contemporaries that saw the miracle of Ravenna Much has been written on this point. Unfortunately the authors failed to find the sources of the Gothic and new Roman architecture. They were tracking around as though they were blind; they mentioned facts but they saw nothing. For instance, they mentioned that in the Eastern Empire (Thessaloniki or Constantinople) there are buildings in the style of the early Gothic architecture. And that is a nudge. Because it is known that, according to the Emperor Constantine's order, Turkic craftsmen were the builders there; they also left their architectural trace in the Northern Italy and Iran. To tell the truth, there were squat buildings there with crude shapes not pointed into the sky. But still they existed. New temple architecture, with its temples and steeples, pointed to the East like a ray of setting sun. One of the most ancient temples of the West is Santa Maria Maggiore. It is interesting since it was not the same as
Greek and Roman temples. That was a new temple with different architecture and different construction decisions closer to Parthian and Kushan ones. Appearance of the temple was the same as that of other temples built in the Caucasian Albania in mountain settlements of the North Azerbaijan. In Armenia And that perplexes researchers and gives rise to new hypotheses. But speaking about cultic buildings of Rome or Constantinople nobody compares them with more ancient temples of the East, which is wrong. Take, for instance, another Roman temple Santa Pudenziana also built at the end of the IV century; it is notable for its rare mosaic. Here, in the center of the panel, on a throne, according to Church art critics, is sitting Christ surrounded by apostles and in the clouds above him there are winged figures of an angel, lion, bull and eagle which the Church identifies with four evangelists. There is a cross over Christ's head But what is really depicted there? Can the subject be understood without theologians? It turns out it can. If one remembers that at that time Christ was being depicted as a lamb (his face appeared in 691), it becomes clear that Christ could not be depicted on the panel of the IV century. And that was the resemblance of Heavenly God, Tengri. Eastern art of those times is notable for similar images. If one remembers that the history of the Latin cross began in the VI century, it becomes clear that such cross could not have been depicted there; there should have been an equilateral cross. And it is likely that there had been an equilateral cross there before restoration. If one remembers that the art of Altai, Kushan khanate and Turkic Iran was notable for winged angels, lions, bulls, eagles, the subject of the panel in the Roman temple Santa Pudenziana becomes quite clear That is the East. Pure East. After all, those were the Turki who built those ancient temples; the spirit of Altai lived in them. The image of God in which they see
Christ today, his appearance and clothes, are worth being discussed separately. Eastern traces are also seen here Comparisons might seem wearisome, but people in the West did not know a nimbus before the coming of the Turki. A nimbus shining around the head (the symbol of sanctity) is one of the most ancient symbols of Altai it meant the vital force, the wisdom. That is the ancient Turkic word, yanimba surround by the sign of the light, or spotlight; it was an instruction to icon painters And bloomers, vestment, and a beard separated in twain of the person depicted in Santa Pudenziana can also be commented they are of the eastern type. In 411 the Roman army was headed by Constantius, the Kipchak from Danube lands; unfortunately we do not know his former name the same as details of his family tree. As a military leader that valiant Turki became famous in Gaul, but that is just an episode of his biography. The main thing is that he gained over a new horde the Burgundians and allowed them to settle on the lands of modern France. That was a farsighted solution of a military leader. At that time the origin of the Burgundians could not be called into question, which is confirmed by Gibbon when he describes the peculiarities of their society: The difference between the civil and church administrative systems was the most notable peculiarity of ancient customs of the Burgundians. Their king or general was called hendinos (from the Turkic khan M.A.) and their high priest was called Sinistus. The high priest was a sacred person, he was appointed for life, but king's power was unsteady. If results of any war allowed accusing the king of being not brave enough or making mistakes, he was deposed immediately. That is a typical Turkic diarchy; in the Roman Europe there was nothing of that kind. Soon there appeared estates which were called Burgundy. At that time Constantius was conducting the policy in Gaul using those Altaic settlers In the same
way Spanish Catalonia and Aragon appeared due to his efforts; those were large estates where the Turkic language was spoken. Barbarians were moving to Europe in a broad front. They were moving unavoidably, like the morning after the night. Their were the best. They official recognition was coming. More than once historians tried to explain the family tree of the Catalans deriving it at first from the Goths and then from the Arabs. However, the Gothic version seems to be more convincing; it connects origin of the Catalans with their national culture, way of life, language but it distracts due to uncertainty of origin of the Goths themselves. Even in the XI century the Catalans kept on living making isolated quarters in towns, such quarters were called kala (fortress). Gibbon and other authors point to that. In 418 due to a large number of estates in the south of modern France Toulouse was proclaimed a Turkic town the second capital of the West. That was another new town in Europe; it consisted of five quarters (kala) And on February 8th, 421 the West solemnly vested Constantine with authorities of the Emperor. Another barbarian had risen over Rome.
Rich Harvest of Altai

By the beginning of the V century the Great Nations Migration devoured the continent; the West was avidly eating fruits of the East. The ancient world was loosing everywhere; pagan doctrines were collapsing and Europe was entering a new epoch the epoch of the Middle Ages. Those complicated times are now interpreted in different ways, and a very important detail is usually forgotten northern lands referred to as inhospitable lands by Roman historians in the I century, in the V century obtained their owners. They were inhabited! And that meant that the number of people living in Europe had risen sharply;
vast territories lying north of Rome and Byzantium were inhabited. That was the remaining European world which area was noticeably larger than that of those two countries. That was a determinant event but still it was neglected. But when one looks more closely, the Roman Empire, from the point of view of a geographer, was just a strip of land on the shore of the Mediterranean Sea. It did not cover territories lying further on the continent. That was really strange hundreds of thousands of new settlers whole countries originated at that time. That was a new breed Altaic people; it had strict anthropological signs. Its morals differed from that of the Europeans. Europe obtained its modern demographic outlines. Every second its inhabitant was the Turki!.. And it is not customary to mention it now?! That fast growth of population is connected either with favorable conditions for reproduction in the European North, or with coming of settlers from Scandinavia. But are not such explanations too primitive? Do they not simplify the events to a great extent? Nevertheless they are being printed in the books as the established truth. But could that have happened really? In order to double the population they needed at least to double agricultural productivity, otherwise they could not have fed, clothed and saved people. They needed to build twice as many towns and settlements, expand fields and pastures. And did people in cold Scandinavia from which numerous hordes of settlers were supposed to come have that? No, not any Scandinavian saga contains favorable conditions for reproduction that were found there on a sudden. Quite the opposite, they tell about difficulties of the severe life. Archeologists havent found traces of wellbeing or, more precisely, manna, either It means there should be another reason. And in Altai favorable conditions for reproductions were discovered. Those
conditions gave rise to the Great Nations Migration moving of population to the south, to the west and to the north, which, in its turn, was marked on a geographical map that is the reflection of reality of those times. New towns, countries and nations appeared on it. It is known that the high point of the Great Nations Migration coincides with the V century the years of Attila's reign. Those times were characterized by the Roman dignitary Romulus: No one of those that ever reigned has done as many great deeds as Attila, and in such a short time. His rule covers islands in the Ocean. And not only all the Scythians, but he also made the Romans pay levy. No nation can resist his military force. Here it is information for a geographer. Here is the canvas for his geographical map. The dignitary's words can be left without comments. They express the scale of the event called the Great Nations Migration. Indeed, that was the event determinant for the whole planet. Having recognized Attila's power, the world accepted the Turkic culture! It fell into line with it And that culture was appearing even in Rome represented by barbarians invited there. However, those events can be regarded in a different way. It is known that the Romans and the Greeks divided their neighbors not according to ethnic factors but otherwise. All the people living to the east were called Scythians; to the north Celts and Gauls. The same as the Russian some time ago called the Germans all the Europeans. In Europe speaking about nations they meant population of this or that region; hence are numerous European nations. Herodotus, Strabon, Ptolemy, Tacitus and other ancient and medieval authors meant only what they understood when they used the word nation. Ethnic signs were not associated with that term at that time. Maybe because they did know about them. N.M. Karamzin gives a significant
example of how, basing on the same sources witnesses of Strabon, Ephoros, Plutarch, Ptolemy and others historians come to exactly opposite conclusions concerning origin of the Scythians and Celts. The Greeks, due to their ignorance, called Celts and Scythians many nations which were not cognate, - the great Russian historian mentioned on this point. In this connection a conclusion of one of researchers is very precise: Due to contempt with which the Romans and the Greeks treated barbarian dialects they were not able to get information from reliable sources, and everything said on this subject by their best authors is either unclear or dubious. That is a true statement. That is how delusions concerning nations were born. Due to contempt! In modern science the terms nation and population have absolutely different meanings. In the East it was not the same; there existed another conception of geography, nations, themselves, which is witnessed by books by medieval authors. It was not in accordance with the Greek deep ignorance: the East was dealing with life in its own way. And it described it more precisely. Scythia was called Desht-I-Kipchak emphasizing the ethnic factor as the most important one. By the V century perhaps half of Eurasia consisted of Turkic lands. However they were not called a state; they were not controlled due to their size, and thus they were called a country. A huge country. It took a rider eight months to cross it from east to west and six months from north to south. The Turki divided their motherland into chaganats, i.e. provinces, where they chose a chagan the ruler. And in urgent cases, for instance, during a war, the eldest person, i.e. the head of a family, was the chagan, but only for the time people needed him. Elections were accompanied by a complex diplomatic procedure; thousands of people were involved. The clergy also took part in it. The great khan, or the tsar, was the chagan with whom the head of the clergy
apa tarkhan stood. In that chagan temporal power and spiritual power of the steppe country were connected. But once the ruler moved, another chagan became tsar. Unfortunately, the past of Desht-IKipchak is hidden by a great many mysteries created by generations of scientists wearing church clothes. They introduce the keynote of medieval policy; they were its judges and executors. But facts, facts Facts remained in spite of all prohibitions; that is unobliterated heritage. One should always remember the truth. And one should always be able to defend it. It does not vanish. Take, for instance, beautiful pieces of jewelry found by archeologists in barrows of England, France, Scandinavia, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ukraine, Germany, Hungary, Bulgaria. They can satisfy anybody. They are shown in museums and at exhibitions. And it is always forgotten that those jewelry items were created by wild nomads, that they are the fruits of their culture That is an evident fact, is it not? And it also gives information concerning the area of the Turkic culture. Indelible signs of Time! Not lost, just forgotten. They, the fragments of a mosaic panel, gather the past together and unite what was broken. As a matter of fact, historical geography performs analysis and reconstruction of the past. Science where liberties are impossible. Of course, information of the past is concealed not only in the depth of barrows. The Turkic culture was living under the flag of belief in Heavenly God; a cross the sign of Heavens was shining over it. And that is too much to leave without a trace In 1799 in Hungary they found Attila's treasures a unique finding of the early Middle Ages. Golden equilateral crosses were found among other items. The same crosses were found in Altai with a circle on the center. Those were heavenly crosses where a circle was the symbol of Origin from which, like from the sun, for rays of God's grace dispersed. To the four corners of the
earth. In equal parts. Such crosses are found everywhere from Baikal to the Alps, perhaps in every barrow. But it was prohibited to write about them. They cannot even me mentioned. The same signs of Heaven appeared over Buddhist pagodas, Armenian temples; they are the symbol of the religion of the Kipchaks and their coreligionists. Not to mix things up But the West was shamefully keeping silent. And it was making others keep silent. The culture of Altai was not mentioned; it was being concealed but they failed to destroy it Ancient Turki, being in trouble or in pain, attracted attention of the Most High drawing an equilateral cross on their foreheads or crowns of their heads. That tradition was controlled by clergymen; later it appeared in Christianity where after communion a person gets God's sign, i.e. a cross on a forehead. Clergymen draw it with holy water. It seems early in the Middle Ages an equilateral cross appeared on headdresses on skull-caps, sheepskin hats, coifs and tarbooshes. Looking on them from above Heaven could see than sign. The Turki had been decorating horse drapery with crosses from of old. And that was not a tribute to fashion. According to ancient legends a horse connected human world with the Sky. That is why horses were buried together with the departed. The most ancient found cross is more than two and a half thousand years old; it was made of bronze, not of iron. Presence of crosses and images thereof marked the coming of the Turki to the Caucasus and acceptance of belief in Heavenly God there. The Azerbaijaninan scientists R.B. Geyushev made a considerable contribution to studying of that cultural massif. He was dealing with monuments with images of riders, crosses. Sometimes there are clergymen near warriors Of course the scientist found not monuments but facts witnessing of the real and not invented Caucasian Albania and its Turkic culture established there.
On the images it is seen that the form of a Turkic flag was the same with stripes and crosses. It is known due to similar archeological monuments of Siberia, Kazakhstan, Sakha (Yakutia), Iceland, Norway, Denmark it is the same. There is the same flag on stelae in Hornhusen in Saxony. Those images are one and a half thousand years old and even more Is not that food for thought? And poison for the crafty? Information is collected and accumulated by trifles and separate signs. And it is known enough about the Turki; traces of their ancient towns, temples, channels and roads remained. Barrows, stelae, stone statues and other monuments allow definition of outlines on a map emphasizing cultural areas and the boundaries of a mysterious country, like shadows in the sun, appear as if on a sudden. Practically any reliable information is useful for a geographer, since culture is connected with a nation and with territory. One can invent anything about a nation, but territory cannot be invented. That is why findings are not silent witnesses; they are united by similarities in ornaments, production technologies and use. An experienced scientist can see unity or, more precisely, the sign of culture is seen even in a trifle. Everywhere there is geographical information which one should be able to read It was mentioned that peoples intellect is shown by trifles. The same goes for a nation. In this respect it is pertinent to ask: does not striking similarity of runic monuments and barrows in Yelling (Denmark), barrows of sea-kings in the Old Uppsala (Sweden), the barrow of Hilderik in Tours (France), barrows in Ketsendorf Lower Saxony (Germany) witness anything? They are the same as in Kazakhstan, Khakassia, Altai, Dagestan upper reaches of Nile. Even a lay person can see the unity of
culture here. In England, in Sutton Hoo, in the barrows were found items being practically the same as Altaic ones the same animal style. Where is that similarity from? Articles and books have been written, but still there is no answer. Church censorship! Medieval churchmen, having once created a secret, would like it to be eternal. This is the knowledge inconvenient for the West. They are hidden by ignorance of nations. But it cannot last for a long time; a lie is not eternal. For instance, in Germany, in the basin of Rhine, they found burials of the V VIII centuries and called them relics of the barrow ceremony. They meant those were the pagans buried with horses. Even golden crosses did not change the opinion of Saxons and who, it seems, don not even know their great ancestors The plain truth. Relics of barrow ceremony (as German historians said) turned out to be tombs of medieval gentlemen, their cemetery; those were not the pagans but bearers of the white belief that had brought the image of Heavenly God to Europe. In Rome they were called Arians and Aryans. Searching for the ancestors the Germans sent expeditions to Tibet while they were buried so near. In this connection the burial place of the first king of the Franks Hilderik (Kilderik) the founder of the dynasty of Merovings is especially interesting. The true Turki, may he rest in peace. In 481 the king found peace in a barrow, certainly with his steed and choked slaves. Everything was in strict accordance with Turkic ceremonies. The burial place is directed to the East to Altai, according to the ceremony. In 1653 the tomb was found by accident by a bricklayer who was preparing the place for a new foundation of the church. Before that the burial place of the founder of Catholic dynasty of Merovings had allegedly not been known, which is strange in itself. Although the great chronicler of France Gregory of Tours paid much attention to burial places of the nobility. His silence becomes clear if one knows who the great
chronicler was and what his work meant. His History of the Franks is the main political source of the history of the Frankish state; and the author was the bishop of Tours in Gaul. Could a churchman tell about pagan roots of the father of the baptizer of the Franks? Of course he could not. And after that it comes as no surprise that treasures found in that barrow golden embroidery, silk cloths, weapons, ornamentals, pieces of jewelry which had been kept in the National Library in Paris were stolen. Several plain items remained of the collection. Even the golden ring that was on the finger of the first king of Franks is lost. However its image and gypsum copy remained. And that was enough to make the blank page in the Turkic history go away. On the print there is a clear inscription showing that the name of king has a Latin stem consisting of two words kilde (came) and erik (power). Kilderik is a traditional Turkic name As a matter of fact, those forgotten trifles allow understanding how Europe was being inhabited and the Altaians were becoming Europeans. That was a cultural exchange, a historical action which is practically unstudied. And was that by accident that before the coming of the Turki there existed another burial ceremony there? The dead were burnt there. Even the changing of the most conservative ceremony witnesses of the coming of another culture there. Without adequate consideration remain runic monuments of the early Middle Ages; in the West there are plenty of them from Scandinavia to Greece and Spain. Everywhere. These issues seem to be beyond dispute: a written language is a written language; like any language, it belongs to its nation. To tell the truth, those written monuments were studied in a rather strange manner in isolation from the language in which the text was written. Separately. And every translator had a translation suitable just for a funny story. What can be discussed if they did not
know from what language they were translating?! But they invented dialects and ancient nations that had disappeared on a sudden. Thus the history of Europe was becoming strikingly rich in absurdities. That is also seen in toponymy. For example, the name Etzel Alps appeared under Attila; his headquarters were located there, near Innsbruck. In the ancient Turkic language ali meant severe, which related to the mountainside, but also meant winner. And were not those mountains called in honor of Attila (Etzel in German)?.. And the name Balkans is also from the Turki; its literally meaning is treed mountains. Danube was called Ister by the Romans, and the Turki called it Donuby or briefly Donay big river with banks of snow or in the hills, that is what it meant in Turkic. The name Danuby reflects the ancient Turkic tradition to give rivers the image of a man or a woman. The name of the river in Altai Biya reminds of that custom: from the Turkic word biy master. And Katun, mistress. The first part of the name don, (dan, dun) deserves special attention. It is commonly supposed that the word is derived from the Iranian word don (river). However, that is wrong. The names of mountains and rivers that include the word don were widespread in territories where the Turki had been living from ancient times. For instance, Don-Terek in Tuva, Donhotan in the South Altai, Akdongal in Kazakhstan. And the river Syr-Darya in the II century B.C. was known as Tanais, i.e. Don. In Iran the name appeared together with the Turki. Toponymy is a part of geography. Sometimes it is not in direct accordance with geography itself It turns out that was not by accident that Byzantium and the Western Empire were paying levy to the Desht-IKipchak for about two centuries since it was changing the names of their lakes, rivers and mountains at its discretion. And thus European maps can be considered in another way. The origin of the word England is interesting; it turns out it also was uttered by a Kipchak that finished
Anglo-Saxon campaigns of the V VI centuries. The translation is the land obtained. In the times of the Romans, as we know, the island was called Albion. The prefix eng (with nasal pronunciation) in the words of the ancient Turkic language meant spoil. One had to take a deep breath and utter eenn-g with dignity; that was the sound of victory! That was perfectly described by George of Tours. He reports that during the campaign in Albion in the V century the Saxons were headed by Odoacer, the future king of Italy. And his origin is known from other Roman sources. His father, the Hun with the name Edico was Attila's ambassador in Constantinople in 448. It is possible to go into details; there are many opportunities for that. In ancient times the central part of the Roman Empire, i.e. Apennines, was called Hesperia, but acceptance of Christianity and establishment of papacy entailed changing of the toponym. Is it necessary to explain why? The answer is in first letters - apa means father, holy father in Turkic and ana means mother, motherland. And the name Italy appeared a little later, and also from the Turki; it is connected with the last Emperor of Rome Augustukus the son of Attila's confessor deposed by another Kipchak Odoacer. The very same person. Ytala in Turkic means the one denying. In 476 people of Rome denied diadem and other symbols of the Emperor's power having called them decoration of the throne and the palace, and sent them to Constantinople as unnecessary These are forgotten pages of history. And it turns out that the last Roman Emperor was a Turki. Of course the word Italy was known to some people before. But the Turki gave a new sense to it. Here we are dealing with socalled peoples etymology widespread in toponimy. As E.M. Murzaev mentioned it appeared because of necessity to understand an unknown name basing on phonetic similarity with the word of their native language.
The name Italy was connected with Odoacer who denied (ytala-) the symbols of the Emperor's dignity sacred for the Roman Empire. At that time the name Italy superseded other names the State of Romans, Gesperia, the Western Empire. All these things have happened Perhaps one third of geographical names of medieval Europe have Turkic roots. In this connection Germany (Allemande) and its past is interesting. According to the official history the toponym appeared in peoples lexicon in about the first century. The famous Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus in his work called About the Origin of the Germans and Location of Germany called it a new word. That is possible. Tacitus wrote: The word Germany is a new one and it has not been used for a long time since those who were the first to cross Rhine and banish the Gauls (here and below bold provided M.A.) today known as Tungras were called the Germans at that time. Thus the name of the tribe has gradually become the basic name and now it relates to the whole nation; at first everyone called it by the name of the winners out of fear and later, after the name has become established, it started to call itself the Germans. Complex conclusions being inconsistent with the rest of the text. It stands to reason it could not have been written by Tacitus. The work of a scientist makes a very strange impression when one paragraph denies another if, of course, they are read attentively. Thus lands lying to the north of the Roman Empire Tacitus called Gaul and not Germany and the nation was called the Gauls and not the Germans. How did the Gauls become the Germans? It is not clear. That is another culture, another nation. For instance, in the chapter about the Helvetians and Boji the scientist says: both tribes are the Gauls. But other tribes mentioned in the text did not differ in their way of life: they waged wars being dismounted, with bludgeons (wooden stakes), they had no written language, they wore skirts and they were nomadic breeders.
Procopius the Caesarean, the Byzantine author of the VI century, wrote the same about the aboriginals of Europe: not only they have never rode horses, but they had no idea what a horse was. And in the VI century Agathius witnessed of the Gauls as follows: they never use horses, except for a few, they worship several trees and rivers, hills, gorges and sacrifice horses and bulls to them. Everything seems to be clear. But Tacitus's text about the Germans really perplexes. On one page he describes their wildness and squalor: they have neither defence weapons, neither horses nor roofs over their heads; grass is their food, fur is their clothes, land is their couch. On another page it is the opposite they have horses, iron, runic written language and belief in Heavenly God On what page is there the truth? If the whole Germany had been really like that, with horses and iron, it could have possibly defeated Rome long before Tacitus was born. But that did not happen since it was inhabited by people with a primitive way of life, which is witnessed by archeological findings. And the renown of even ten tacituses will not eclipse the truth. It seems churchmen ascribed to the scientist what he has never written That is another tradition of the western science. What wonder if even the Bible was corrected and supplemented many a time? Those contradictions of Tacitus which common sense is not able to confirm are analyzed in detail by E. Gibbon who comes to the following conclusion: German tribes were changing their names that distinguished them and embarrassing astonished people of the Roman Empire. To tell the truth, mentioning existence of an unusual tradition Gibbon does not explain where there are the sources of that custom that seemed so strange to Europeans. Categoricalness is possible here That is for certain that Europe heard the Turkic speech in the times of Tacitus like a
voice in a many-voiced chorus of nations of the Roman Empire. Alman (Alaman) chaganat certainly was not in question. That was too early. In the I century Rome was at the meridian of its glory; it moved the northern boundary of the Empire to Rhine and built several fortifications there. That was an epoch that glorified not one Emperor. But history does not tell us at least of one war between the Romans and the Germans, although there is no doubt that several serious conflicts took place. Rome was not interested in lands over Rhine; those were inhospitable lands as Tacitus himself described them. It seems that strengthening the western boundary the Empire was preparing to fend the Great Nations Migration. It was aware of it. That is witnessed by the fact that under Marcus Aurelius, i.e. in 171, certain non-Romans were allowed to settle on Roman lands as they wished. Why? And who were those riders? One cannot call the coming of Altaians to Europe spontaneous. It was growing gradually, year by year. Only in the III century the toponym Alman appeared when the Great Nations Migration reached the Central Europe and a new chaganat of DeshtI-Kipchak appeared. It was called Alman Remote. (The Turki still call remote hamlets and settlements almanchi). That is when Rome became aware of the Germans and German cavalry. To wage a war riding a horse is a sort of art which was peculiar only to the Turki. Wild nations of Europe, including the Romans, could not have had their own cavalries. That is for certain, the same as the fact that Tacitus could not have heard the new word Germany with the sense it obtained in two years. In the Roman army the first mounted squadron consisting of men-at-arms was formed by the Emperor Gallienus in about 264 268. Those elite troops were very expensive; one horse cost as much as a decent estate Thus the Great Nations Migration was making progressive changes in military art of the West.
It is evident that the tradition to attract barbarian riders to serve in the Roman army appeared before Gallienus. Octavian, the future Augustus (63 B.C. 14 A.D.) substituted his Spanish bodyguards with a German squadron. And Trajan (98 117) formed a new guard consisting of steppe riders. Cavalry requires special attention. The Turki tought their children to ride a horse at first, and after that to walk In order to understand what a horse meant there, one fact is enough: in the Turkic language there are no foreign words relating to a horse. Kon (in the Russian language the word horse is pronounced as kon) meant astride The Turki were attracted by Rhine not due to Roman boundaries and guards but due to iron deposits. That is what the scouts of the horde were looking for. They called those lands Tering, which is translated as something plentiful. Allemande started from iron. Iron is the reason of appearance of German hordes. Rich iron deposits still glorify those lands. And the Gauls did not know iron, as a Benedictine wrote in a denouncement to the Pope; having met the Kipchaks they were astonishingly looking at the people excelling them bodily and spiritually, they were surprised with their clothes, arms and spirit. That was the meeting of people of different cultures and different epochs; it could not have finished by concluding an alliance. Anything, but not an alliance. An alliance can be concluded by equal parties; in this case there were no reasons to speak about equality. That is why the Gauls went to the west of Rhine having let the Turki have their lands. They belonged to another category of nations Germans and Allemanns are the Avars, Barsils, Bulgarians, Burgundians, Goths, Gepidae, Saks, Saxons, Huns, Langobards, Utigurs, Kortigurs dozens of nations if, of course, one believes in church science. But their ethnic essence is clarified by a single line of the Byzantine text of 572:
the Huns whom we usually call the Turki. And everything is put in its right place. And that is not the only line solving the Germanic problem created by the West itself. The fact that confusion was created artificially is confirmed by another phrase of a historian of the XIX century: Ancient writers that regarded the Goths as a separate nation and not as branches of one great race invented strange migrations and a special system of language terms for them but thus they only perplexed themselves and others. It means scientists have guessed about strange church ethnography. The Germans spoke the Turkic language, were fond of ironmongery, waged wars riding horses, drank koumiss, wore trousers not skirts. These facts of their way of life are known from their folk epos. The same as that their guardian spirit was an Altaic dragon; up to the XII century it was drawn on the flags of the Germans, even those that served in the Roman army It turns out the dispute of ethnic belonging of the Germans is meaningless. And even paragraphs added to the work by Tacitus do not help. Many people simply do not know that the Turki were living according to the rule an ulus (family) that obtained power gave the horde (alliance of families) its name. Sometimes a horde took the name of the leading khan. And sometimes a nickname was given, if there were reasons to give it. Names appeared and disappeared, but the German nation did not disappear with it; it took another name. Forgetting about that custom, historians fail to interpret the witness of the Greek Ptolemy about the Huns; he wrote that between Basterns and Roksolans there are the Huns. The Roman Tacitus (died in about 117) one of the most accurate observers never mentioned the Huns. Ptolemy (died in about 160) mentioned them without peculiarities. It means early in the II century the Huns were known only in the Eastern Europe.
That is an eloquent fact. It means that during forty years after Tacitus's death the Huns, i.e. the Germans appeared in the world arena. To tell the truth, their appearance was simple. They were almost imperceptible among other tribes. But something made Ptolemy mark them. The Turki settled on uninhabited lands and their settling in Europe was peaceful; no wars were waged. That is the witness of Ptolemy. In any case, the name of the Huns has become well-known only by the IV century. Its customs and activities did not change either. The Germans still respected a horse; their leader turned to horses for predictions. And used the same steppe tactics waging wars they retreated falsely, then turned round and defeated the enemy. In case of an attack, as it is peculiar for the Turki, they were shouting Hooray, which in their language meant Beat, Smite and was taken for frightening growling by their enemies. Only the Germans, - Tacitus wrote not knowing about Altaic traditions, - turn to horses for predictions. They were watching them neighing and spitting for a long time. And they did not trust any other omen better than this. That striking ceremony remained with the Turki for centuries. In more than thousand years after Tacitus another European, Rubruk, who arrived to the Turki, astonishingly wrote about a maid whom her mistress sent to talk to a horse and get an answer. In the XX century the Kumyks had and expression: to go to the stable for an advice. On May 9th the Germans, according to their tradition, gathered all the white mares in herds and sanctified them considering them to be Gods' mediators. Every month Barbarians came out to meet the young moon and only under the full moon they started their most important actions another obligatory custom of Altai There were a lot of European features in the life of the
Germans, which is surprising. Another Germanic nation, Gepids or Gepanta, appeared among them not by accident. An ancient legend tells how a horde was crossing a pond and one family was slow its ship was the last to arrive because of disasters in a word gepids means lazy. Here we have an untranslatable pun: in the Turkic language gepi anta means dry there. In the European chronicles it is written: Langobars and Avars detached from the Gepids. But with the Avars it was different; their history was analyzed by E. Gibbon. The horde of the Avars ran away from Altai to Europe in the VI century; the Great Khan sent a pursuit which was unsuccessful and the Avars escaped to the Caucasus, to the fortress Anji, after which they tried to find their way to Constantinople, but they failed and came to the Alps. The rise of the Avars happened in the times of the khan Boyan who was imitating Attila in everything; he even lived in one of his palaces. And before him that palace and a part of territories the king of Gepids, Arderik, made the center of the new state. In other words, the estate was getting a new owner together with a new name. The Avars established their domination from the foothills of the Alps to the shores of the Euxinic Pont, - mentioned Gibbon. The power was got by that horde, and another new nation appeared on the historical arena of Europe. Theophylact Simocatta from Byzantine described it in the VII century. The Avars, today known as Bavarians, had been speaking the Turkic language up to the XVI century. And some of them, according to eyewitnesses, still remember that they are the Turki Another example from the history of Germanic nations. The sons of one khan had the names Utigur and Kutrigur. After his father's death they decided to split up and called their new hordes Utigurs and Kutrigurs. The former used to shave their
napes and the latter their heads. And that was the only difference between two nations. By all appearances the ancestor of the horde belonged to the Uigirs that lived in the Southern Altai and followed the traditions of haircutting Ethnography is a peaceful science, but it confirmed the old truth: not a weathercock drives the wind but quite the opposite. And thus it allows disagreeing with the absurd by which churchmen surrounded the coming of the Turki to Europe. However, in the Middle Ages there were scientists that would speak the truth about the origin of the Goths, Gepids, Vandals and other nations. Thus Theophan the Confessor (760 818) wrote: the only differences of those nations are their names; they speak one and the same language. He also reported of the belief in Heavenly God of the Germans. The way they used to call him Donar, Tor resembled of the word Tengri. Later other names Khodai, Vatan appeared. That was according to Turkic traditions; each chaganat called Tengri in a slightly different manner. That is still peculiar perhaps to all the Turkic nations. The Germans were leading their lives like Desht-I-Kipchak in everything; at first they did not build temples since they considered the outworld under the canopy of Eternal Blue Sky to be the temple of Heavenly God. And that canopy was really felt only in the steppe, in the morning and in the evening, when the feeling of protection is born in souls after a prayer. That is a very strong feeling. Also one could see cross-light among the clouds in the sky in the afternoon; such light reminded of a cross Natural observations were forming the culture of the Turkic nation and its symbols. They, the Germans, were building the same towns as other steppe inhabitants since they could not do otherwise. One of them Calais means fortress, town, strengthened place in Turkic. But another striking thing in Germany is that modern Germans that are shamefully calling their ancestors pagans, turned out to be the only
ones in the world who, due to inborn contumacy, have kept the name Desht-IKipchak in toponymy. One should agree that in their Deutsch there is an echo of the distant Turkic original, if, of course, the word is read letter by letter. For a real Turki no word sounded softer than Desht. It meant native lands, hearth, plentitude but also foreign lands and stony desert. Altogether. The word, like a coin, had two different sides: one for a patriot, the other for a betrayer. The word tash has already been mentioned in this book. In the ancient Turkic language it means stone but also external side, face, boil over, overflow the banks. It is possible that the toponym Desht (Deutsch) was a pitchfork of the Great Nations Migration when the Kipchaks, having united certain tribes, settled on vast territories from Baikal to Danube. In folk etymology the expression has obtained its usual form: tashtuk kipchak ~ tashti kipchak ~ dashti kipchak. In Germany where power was passing from one ulus to another, only the first part of the name remained. The word obtained a new sense and it meant a brotherly alliance of the hordes. hence is the name Deuten, - marked one historian, - that were called Teutons, which meant allies, by the Romans. In any case, the toponym Deutsch still means the place where those hordes live in Europe Germany. In Germany Altaic traces are everywhere; they are seen but the blind do not see them. Cologne basin, flooded areas. Elba union of nations (literally means tie the nations). Aachen stream, flow. Rivers and streams in Holland and Switzerland are still called with the forgotten word aha. Another example: dams are built in marshlands, as far as we know. Dam in Turkic means dike, wall, hence are Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Potsdam Such things cannot be invented. There are serious books by German authors on the Turkic toponymy but, unfortunately, they are only for experts while they contain hundreds of
examples. It goes without saying that toponymy resembles of a barrow which is seen from afar, but nobody can look inside it. Geographical names keep information about Desht-I-Kipchak, its boundaries and position in the medieval world; they throw light on the history of the Englishmen, Burgundians, Bavarians, Saxons, Flemings, Varangians, Danes, Catalans and other nations of Europe. In this connection the origin of the word Germany is interesting. For the Romans it was a new word that has been used not for a long time, while the Turki were using it as far back as in the times of Achemenids. As Marcianus wrote, that was the name of the territory where younger athelings of the tsarist family of Bars reigned. Inhabitants of those lands were called: Germans, Kermans, Karmans. The Persian Germany lay to the north-east of Persepolis, one of the capitals of Persia, and was the barrier for unfriendly neighbors. It is possible the toponym has its origin here, being derived form the ancient Turkic ker- (block, close). That name remained in Iran where there is a region called Kerman. If that is true, one can assume that this toponym explains, for instance, the Kirghiz and their countries that were protecting Altai in the east (it related to the ancestors of the Khakassies) and in the west (to the modern Kirghiz). The churchmen were skillfully besmirching the Middle Ages and covering its windows with heavy curtains through which rays of light would never find their way. It is difficult to imagine, but it is even more difficult not to mention. The knowledge of the past was gathered gradually, little by little, taking pages from ancient books. That was started by monks; and later monasteries opened their universities that continued their activities, as the Church decided. Distortion of the past has become a tradition since then. More than two hundred universities of Europe are controlled by the
Jesuits. The light of the truth is transformed into the darkness of ignorance Sometimes not intentionally. The Kipchaks are depicted as tall Asians with a fierce look. That is how it is accepted in the West. That is not true. Although, there were such people in the numerous nation. The contemporaries of the Great Nations Migration marked tough blue eyes, fair hair, tall bodies of the newcomers. Those qualities were emphasized both in the West and in the East. For example, the Chinese traveler of the VII century Chiuantsan named blue eyes and fair hair of the Turki as their distinguishing features. In India, Iran and North Africa their appearance was estimated in the same way. Europe, of course, could not be an exception It just could not. It is described even better in Sin Tan-Shu where it is said about Altai inhabitants that they are tall, with red hair, sanguine faces and blue eyes. Black hair was a bad sign. Taipinhuanyutzi tells practically the same: Their inhabitants are tall, with red hair and green eyes. Those with black hair are called unhappy. The Arabian geographer of the VIII century Ibn al-Mucaffa and the Persian geographer Gardizi marked red hair and white skin of Altai inhabitants. Only the ecclesiastic Europe draws the world with its dark colors. Among the Altaians there were Mongoloids, which is confirmed by archeology. But examining the barrows of Altai the professor S.I. Rudenko marked domination of the ashes of people of the European type. And the academician M.M. Gerasimov reconstructed the look of the departed by their skulls. For instance, his Hun from Kenkol has the face of a modern Ukrainian, German, Dutch It is possible that the Emperor Valentinianus with a hard and sidelong glance looked like him. The Turki called such eyes lyncean. There are many facts concerning the appearance of the Kipchaks. They had high cheekbones, they were red and fair-haired
and blue-eyed, as the Byzantium ambassador Prisc that marked Attila's red beard saw them in the V century. And today such faces are common in Khakassia, for example. And we can also remember what a Roman said of fair-haired barbarians that had suddenly come to Rome Of course the appearance of the nation was changing due to mixed marriages with the passing of the years, but hundreds of years cannot change the appearance of the ancestors. Genetic code does not change; centuries cannot do that, let alone the politicians. That was proven by the outstanding Kazakh scientist O. Ismagulov in 1977 in his book Ethnic Gene Geography of Kazakhstan. His work was destroying stereotypes. Unfortunately that information explosion happened in the times of Soviet science; the book was forbidden, the author was taken off the job, but several copies remained. Similar researches were being conducted in the Ukraine and in Russia, but they were put on the shelves of archives being unknown. Activists of the Soviet party considered them to be too racist And the genotypes of the Altaians, Kazakhs, Catalans, Bavarians, Englishmen are really identical. Human biology persuades of genetic similarity of the Khakasses and Altaians with the Englishmen whose ancestors were the Turki, but not with the Scotch or the Welshmen. Having analyzed blood types, scientists came to the conclusion of genetic similarity of nations of Eurasia whose ancestors had to deal with the Great Nations Migration as Fate willed. They are blood brothers that have forgotten themselves and their relatives. That is the conclusion of the biological science, so popular in England. Thus O. Ismagulov came to the conclusion that the ancient population of Kazakhstan originated from a distinguishable pronounced European type without any Mongoloid additions. At that during the first stage of research there was found a close genetic connection of the
Kazakhs with Altaians. At that time the scientists simply did not know about other nations. In other words it was incontrovertibly proven that the stories of Iranian speaking nations that were allegedly living in the ancient Altai and Desht-I-Kipchak are nothing but the myth. And, to be more precise, we should call the Iranians Turkic speaking nation, but not vice versa. Certain Iranians started to speak the Turkic language before the Common Era; and they still keep on speaking that way Politicians only change nations' names and memories, but not languages and customs, let alone the genes. It turns out relation of East and West were destroyed by the Church? Its politicians made brothers forget each other It means the commandment which prescribes not to forswear does not relate to everybody? And the unity of the language of Desht-I-Kipchak has also been forgotten, although earlier documents of the Burgundians and Langobards were written with Turkic characters; they are exhibited in museums of France and Italy as showpieces of the Middle Ages, they were included in books on history, thousands of people saw them. And nobody was surprised. And by the way, in medieval chronicles the Germans were also called Tengrys, Tangrys, Tungrys. Does not this name tell anything about them? Even if we add that those nations, according to chroniclers, were dashing riders? One can reason upon Time and ancient German or English languages and peculiarities of their phonetics, but without a turcklogist it is impossible to obtain a result. That was proven in the XX century by the academician V.M. Zhirmunskiy who was dealing with the problems of German and Turkic linguistics. Studying epos of different nations from Altai to Europe he mentioned common things in its plots and images. The scientist came to the road that led directly to Altai but did not take to it because of censorship!
His unique works are practically unknown to general public. However, the first one was William Thomsen from Denmark; in the XIX century he opened the Turki to the West and caused a tumult in world science. The secret was likely to be out. And again censorship served its purpose In Russia Thomsen's works were not published (only one article got into print); everybody was afraid. Those words were denying the Slavs or, more precisely, put them to their historical place. The Danish researcher William Louis Thomsen (1842 1927) deciphered runic inscriptions in 1893 and ascertained their Turkic origin. An outstanding linguist, in 1909 he became the head of the Danish Royal Scientific Society. His report to the Danish Royal Scientific Society of December 1893 was translated into Russian. The translation was made by the Russian colleague of Thomsen who was also dealing with decipherment of Orkhon and Yenisei inscriptions found in Altai. His name is Frederick William Radlov (1837 1918). Being a German by birth, he had been living in Russia since 1858 under the name of Basil. Radlov is one of the originators of comparative and historical learning of Turkic languages. Decipherment of Turkic inscriptions is described in detail in: Adji M. Europa's Asia. Shakespeare was right: heretics are not those burning in the fire but those making a fire. The latest Turkic papers found in Germany are the documents of Fuggers, counts from Augsburg, which is close to Munich, they are dated back to 1553 1555; the text of 1515 is set forth there it was skillfully copied by the count's agent. It is possible that was somebody's last phrase uttered in Turkic. And the latest book about the language of the Huns of that epoch is the work by the Hungarian scientist Telegdi; it was published in 1598 and caused a scandal in ecclesiastic science which by that time was dominating in Europe. Due to Thomsen the scandal was
98 / 342
repeated in the XIX century; an unexpected thing happened: the scientist read the runic text in the Turkic language, and the world learnt that ancient Hungarian or German runes are nothing else but Altaic written language It is unlikely that that was a discovery; that was rather a recollection. Before the inquisition the West was aware that the Huns spoke the Turkic language. In church basements there are libraries in that Hun language. That is why there exists a gap in chronological monolith between ancient Turkic inscriptions and Sekel runes ascending to the VIII century that appeared for the first time only by the beginning of the XVI century. The inquisition made people forget a lot. In Europe since the XIII century the Turkic books were translated only into Latin, and the originals were burnt or hidden. The past of the continent, its memories were burning in fires. Pages of history were absurdly disappearing; some of them have gone for good. Liturgical and secular books had the same lot But manuscripts dont burn! For instance, the German Death of Alphart and Song of Roland were different some time ago since their plots were taken from ancient Turkic poems the similarity is striking! Even in trifles. That was mentioned by the academician Zhirmunskiy. It turns out, famous fairy tales about the Pussy in Boots, scarlet flower, Kolobok, Swans Brothers existed in Altai before the Great Nations Migration. It is striking, is it not? Studying the German epos, Zhirmunskiy marked a special role of a horse. That was the hero's assistant and adviser. The motive can be seen in ancient Altaic fairy tales, Iranian Shahnama and old French and German ballads. It is the same. It turns out western knights were simply copying Turkic heroes?.. Thus deeds of famous Roland are exactly the same as those of the Altaic hero Ulan-Khongora. They are twins. They just have different names. The same as lifetime.
It should be mentioned that researchers marked that striking similarity more than once. Long ago a guess has been given that a considerable part of the Iranian folk epos and the epic cycle connected with Rustam belongs to the Saks (natives of Altai M.A.), - writes M Frye. Due to discovery of the Sogdian origin of the most legends about Rustam being a part of Shahnama by Firdousi in the Eastern Europe becomes very probable. And he continues: It is known that those were the Parthians that gave the Iranian epos the form in which it was written in the times of Sasanids and remained till the times of Firdousi. . Zhirmunskiy saw it in a different light; he retraced the way the motives of legends find their origin in Altaic fairy tales and are spread in Shahnama and later in ancient French and German epos. That is what his unique work is valuable for. Brotherhood, captures and checking of horses, love for arms, hero's departure to defend boundaries, female images and people-swans reveal a striking similarity of European and Turkic fairy tales. Russian fairy tales are not in question here since they appeared in the XVIII century as a translation of Turkic ones; we can remember Tsar Saltan and hero Ruslan. Tsar Saltan was taken from a fairy tale Khan with Twelve Wives, but, to tell the truth, Pushkin was not so patient as to retell the whole fairy tale he took just a fragment. Kolobok, Tower-Chamber, Goldfish kutun these are all the gifts of Altai. The story of Pussy in Boots came to Europe from an Altaic fairy tale about a FoxMatchmaker; the same words, the same deeds. The scarlet flower was called Akchechek a white flower in Altai; this is the only difference. Cinderella had a prototype in the East, in Kushan khanate; instead of a pixie there was Bibi-Senshabi, the patroness of family happiness. And it turns out Tsarevna the Frog also used to speak only the Turkic language in the past As we can see, changes in western fairy tales were insignificant. Just a little. Fairy tales were rewritten according to the traditions of European literature. Their
99 / 342
new authors cannot be accused of plagiarism; they adhered to ancient plots known to them since their childhood and traditions of their nations. And they were absolutely right trying to improve the text, make it modern, more comprehensible and brighter. It is very difficult to make a fairy tale, and it is even more difficult to make it live forever. It might take centuries to do so. The example of The Thousand and One Nights is indicative; at first these fairy tales were written in the Turkic language. The Arabs became aware of them in the X century and translated then into Arabic, but the Turkic original remained in the library of Baghdad. In the East people were aware of it Once one Arab decided to write his own The Thousand and One Nights. He died of attenuation; he managed to write about two hundred fairy tales which nobody has ever read, - they were too boring and they were not original. Thankfully literary pearls will not die. They are living in another setting. In order to understand it better, the same as the Great Nations Migration, let us retell one such fairy tale. A very ancient one it is called Father's Advice. A father, sending his son to remote lands, was teaching him: when you drink water in foreign lands behave as it is accepted there. And he explained: in the country of the blind you should live with your eyes closed. In the lands of the lame, walk with a limp. And there is another thing to remember: ride a lean horse and eat stringy meat. Later, after the campaign, the son asked why he had to act like that. It turns out real Turki would close their eyes and walk with a limp in a foreign country so as not to give rise to discontent and envy. They knew that a good horse would never be let grow fat and thus they would choose a lean horse the best one. And they would eat stringy meat because it remains in a stomach for a longer time and one does not feel hunger. Did not the Kipchaks follow these father's advices when they came to Europe? That was their rule to become a frog among
the frogs In Germany E. Taube (she went to Altai for fairy tales) published several books. But who is aware of them? The researcher pointed to a big number of plots of German fairy tales related with those of Altai. For example, the fairy tale The Old Man Ends Dends (Magic Ring in Russia) is met in fairly tales of practically all the European nations with Altaic roots, it coincides with the fairy tale Faithful Animals by Grimm brothers, that one can possibly assume they had the same source, - writes Ericha Taube and thus represents herself as a scrupulous researcher. She mentioned what cannot be disregarded. Iron Hans, Tom Thumb, Brother and Sister they all had relatives in Altai, those relatives who, together with the Great Nations Migration, gave Europe a cap of darkness, seven-league boots and other fairy items. First verses, first ballads, first poems and fairy tales appeared in the West after the Great Nations Migration. That was mentioned perhaps by all conscientious researchers, which, to tell the truth, was not followed by any comments. It is possible scientists simply did not know that there was a time when an overflowing human river was carrying from Altai everything it could take It seems unbelievable, but neither the Greeks nor the Latins were able to rhyme before the coming of the barbarians. In the West there were no poets! Modern poetry with rhymes is an Altaic invention. Poets were born there. The Song of Nibelungs is connected with the Kipchaks; nibelungs was the name of the warriors on whose blazon there was a dragon (in the ancient Turkic language niv means hero and lung means dragon). A striking similarity to which not much attention is paid although the plot is connected with the Huns, Burgundians, Goths, Attila. This song is interesting even not because of its plot but for other reasons. By the XII century the meaning of careless actions of the heroes was not clear to the readers that had long since turned
away from their Turkic roots and become Europeans. They were leading another life with another culture; that is why an ancient text with unheard-of heroic and even dreadful behavior of heroes seemed to be beyond common sense. But misunderstanding, strange as it may seem, was only raising nibelungs in the Eropeans' eyes and made them national heroes since they saw their absolute past in the nibelungs. Unfortunately among the scientists it is not accepted to connect the absolute past of the West with Altai. The reason is ideology. In the meantime not only behavior but also names of heroes of German and Scandinavian epos point to the Turki. It is enough to turn to actual events in which they took part. For example, the warrioress Brunghilda, the famous queen of Austrasia, Attila's great-granddaughter, was born in 534. She was executed by the ruler of the Franks, Khlotar II; she was tied to a wild horse's tail. Brunghilda, or more precisely Burunkildi, was khan Atanaghild's (another Turkic name) daughter, his first child. Her name means the first to come or the earliest to come. Brunghilda's sister was born in seven years and was called Galsvinta (Kalsevinit more precisely) remain, be glad. Names can tell a lot about the alternation of horror and villainy peculiar for that epoch. Brunghilda's father headed the Catholics against Arians Visigoths, in 554 he killed Agil, the Arian ruler, and took his throne. The Turkic name of the killed leader meant precious As we can see, the Turki were fighting against the Turki calling themselves Catholics and Arians, which made it easier for them to kill each other. When in the XIII century the world learnt about the gothic written language that had transformed Turkic Glagolitic alphabet into German characters, nobody wondered who needed that reform and for what purposes. They kept silent. They kept silent in order to declare later that the Germans gave poetry and rhymes to the world.
And why them? The Middle East and India knew poetry and rhymes before the Common Era, i.e. before the Germans appeared in Europe. By the way, the word rune which is now translated as mystery by the Europeans, in the ancient Turkic language meant cut sign urun. Cut on a stone or a tree. They also had another word with the same sense bukkat (mystery, hidden essence). Those inscriptions left by the Great Nations Migration are met in Europe from Scandinavia to Spain. History conceals so many unexplained whys They are everywhere.
About Catholicism, without Latin

Early in the Middle Ages in Europe there were two countries with established political systems Desht-I-Kipchak and the Eastern Empire (Byzantium). All the reset were vassals. Of course such division is very conventional; theses countries are classified as equal with great reserve. Byzantium had to pay levy to Desht-I-Kipchak, about a half of its inhabitants were the Turki that were on firm ground in its military, public and spiritual life. Nonetheless in the IV century those two countries were the causes of many events; they were dictating terms in politics and determining the balance of forces on the Eurasian continent. Thus it had been happening since 312 when Rome was defeated and its Emperor Maxencius died that is when the Eastern Empire became the leader. That was the fateful year. It drew a line to the ancient epoch and together with it to the reign of the Roman Emperors that were tyrannizing the ancient world. Everything was changing; not Rome had the last word in western politics that was Constantinople that had not existed yet in 312 and that was to appear as an alternative to antiquity. Desht-I-Kipchak and Byzantium had no conflicts between each other; however they were not allies either. As a matter of fact, there was nothing to divide, but frictions took
101 / 342
place more than once, which was explained by only one thing: both countries were run by the Turki that were willing to become Europeans. Some of them on East's side, others on West's side but they all had the same goal: estates and access to them. Or, more precisely, establishment in Europe where climate was softer and more favorable than in severe Asian steppes. They wanted to become Europeans and behaved as it was accepted in Europe. This very important peculiarity of those times should be comprehended and accepted as another feature of the Great Nations Migration. And after that the unexpected should be revealed: in the IV V centuries not the Greeks were waging wars but the Greek Turki. Showing their worth in civil discords that were perturbing Byzantium, they were fighting with each other for living space in the West. They were conquering the place in the sun in the arising country their new motherland for themselves, their families and their hordes. That explains Constantinople's attention to the Middle East and growth of Greek settlements there; people in those settlements were speaking the Turkic language. For Byzantium it was important to accept and settle new people and secure them to themselves. It was ready to agree with any conditions. The Great Nations Migration sort of entered its final phase the continent was conquered, and the waves of human river, not finding another application, proceeded to formation of a new empire Byzantium Waves were kind of extinguishing each other. Or, vice versa, intensifying? At first sight it seemed that two geopolitical partners (Desht-I-Kipchak and Byzantium) were dividing the place of collapsed Rome but, taking a closer look, the situation was not like that the scale of events was larger. Not realizing that Byzantium is a mixture of the Hellenic and the Turkic, certain events of those times are not likely to be understood. The East's influence on the West was strong there, which is marked by all experts in the field of Byzantine
culture. At that the Turkic contribution was not less than the Greek if not more considerable since the Armenians, Syrians, Albanians, Copts and other nations that were parts of Byzantium as its subjects became the allies of the Turki. Byzantium acting in the name of the West bade defiance to the country of the Greeks although the latter were in power. In its ethnic massif the Hellenes were a minority and were in isolation. Their position in the Greek state left much to be desired, although the rod really was in their hands. However, the Emperor was powerless; in the IV century his actions were of ostentatious and ritual character. Power means army, state and, finally, religion. Those things the Greeks did not have. Desht-I-Kipchak, on the contrary, in the IV V centuries did not have any problems connected with power. The sky was on its side. It was an ethnic monolith, the center of cultural traditions. There, in the town of Derbent, there was the Patriarchal See where they accepted a new way of life for millions of people that had denied paganism. If one takes a bird's-eye view on that epoch one can assert: in the West there was the revival of nations of the former Roman Empire, and such revival was controlled by the Turki. Vices of the ancient Rome could not disappear by themselves without their substitution for something else certain cultural values, for instance. The Turki were attracting the Europeans by their belief in Heavenly God and their culture. Of course such division of labor was not suitable for the West. Once they felt they had a chance, the Greeks convened the Nicene Council in 325 and declared about their Christianity or, more precisely, about their new religion, having thus become the second ideological center. They themselves assumed for the role of a shepherd That was a claim for the division of Europe. A big war was likely to occur in the nearest future.
He sees everything. The fate of Byzantium could be decided by any incautious step, any word uttered out of place. The Greeks understood that and thus they were sending their preachers to the Near East, Egypt and Minor Asia far from Europe. For them it was important to find the roots of Greek Christianity not in Turkic regions, create another philosophical base and enrich them with myths. It required time and forces. And caution, which was the most important thing. Christian preachers were followed by soldiers; the Byzantine army was expanding not spiritual but political borders in the Near East turning neighboring countries into colonies. The Greeks lived for the future and worked for it since the present of those that were to pay levy was dependent and sorrowful. Their desire to become the masters of their fate is understood; but there was no chance to avoid secret diplomacy, double play and double standards. Or the policy of intrigues for which Byzantium was notable from its birth. The Emperor Constantine, that first Christian Emperor, did not take the mask of duplicity off his face even when he went to sleep. Weakness of his spirit was revealed in the most unexpected way. That founder of Christianity was the first to repent in it when he understood he had taken the way that would lead his country to a dead-end. After the Nicene Council and the expedition to the Near East that followed the Emperor understood that he had made an irretrievable step. He understood the consequences of his step in confrontation with God! That happened due to his sister, a pious woman that opened his brother's eyes with respect to God's nature; she acquainted him with Gnosticism. The change of the Emperor's conscience stroke experienced people how was it possible to find the relics of the early Christianity in the Near East and deny them? Not everyone could dare do that. But that deceit really changed Constantine. He was born again having understood the simple truth known to any Turki: God cannot be deceived.
At first that adherent of Christianity exiled the priest Arius, ordered to burn his works and threatened to execute anyone who would mention the name of the evildoer, and in a little while he rejected his words. Events were happening contrary to the verdict. Arius was set free; he was to be solemnly returned to the Church not because he repented and denied his views concerning Christ's nature. No. Constantine himself changed his viewpoint!.. He recognized that he had made a mistake. The founder of the new religion turned into its destroyer. For the rest of his life the Christian Emperor, as he is called in encyclopedias, was fighting with Christianity; he failed to found peace his sin tortured him On his deathbed Constantine finally decided to take baptism. But he wanted to accept the Turkic belief! In 337 he was baptized according to the western ceremony! He took Tengri's cross from the priest. And he died having found piece. No doubt, that was the triumph of Altaic spiritual culture. It seemed to be a miracle. Constantinople was seldom remembering about Christ; the Turki there understood that their belief was stronger. The Emperor's deathbed baptism strengthened that thought in peoples consciousness. However, the worst thing for Byzantium was not even the abuse of the official religion by the Emperor himself but the fact that society was split in terms of religion. That was an unanticipated result. In the country two groups were in confrontation Arians, i.e. the followers of the priest Arius, who wanted a union with Desht-I-Kipchak, and Christians who wanted to create their own independent empire in order to lead their spiritual life, which meant to conduct their policy. However it is possible that not a spiritual confrontation but disorders in society bothered Constantine; the Emperor was not able to struggle with them. Greek rulers were
notable for diffidence; they tried to remain themselves like actors having a bad director. They understood that new belief was helpless; it did no wonders. Maybe because the number of Christians was rapidly reducing: in Constantinople there were several dozens of them the court and people around them. And nobody else. And by 378 in Constantinople adherents of Constantine's belief had almost disappeared; there were several among the court circle That is the fact confirmed by history. Having turned their backs to Christianity, people were no longer recognizing the Christian Emperor's power. Chaos was coming. Even children and grandchildren would not speak kindly about Constantine. Rulers were feeling the ground slipping away from under their feet. The country was likely to become a chaganat of Desht-I-Kipchak. Or to fall. Power was hanged by a thread. The Greeks needed to act immediately in order to overcome the crisis and retain their throne. But they managed to do nothing; and the throne was taken by the Turki. The new Emperor Gratianus, Valentinianus's (that fair-haired Roman) son, quickly found the way to salvation. He was weaving a plot in which nets Europe was caught; the West managed to save its face. It is possible the decision was suggested by the bishop Ambrosius whose influence at court had become significant since then. In order to split the unity of the Greek Turki, Gratianus appointed the military leader Theodosius Augustus (his coregent). In other words, on January 19th, 379 he divided the throne between himself and the head of the army. At that he did it voluntarily. And enthusiastically. One would think, what was changing? Everything. If we remember who served in the army of Byzantium and what language was spoken in the army, many things become
clear about this unexpected decision of the Emperor. That was a perfect stroke of policy that solved many problems. One order destroyed the unity of the opposition. A war started, but not a war against the throne but for the right to be closer to the throne. Thus the Emperor was not threatened any longer. The military leader Theodosius drew the Kipchaks like a magnet; that was a legendary personality, but historians have not said much about him. His role in the history of the West is more important than he has been assigned although he has been called the Great. His father, the famous Theodosius the Elder, the head of cavalry in the West, saved the Empire having put down revolt in Africa but was undeservingly accused and executed. His son, a reckless rider and squabbler was consumed with the desire to avenge his father. And he attracted other fine fellows for whom actions and not their results were important They were the Turki after all! It is interesting that the victory in Africa was gained due to his excellent battle tactics. As E. Gibbon mentioned, enemies were perplexed by his retreats which he would always accomplish in due time and in the prescribed manner. Here the famous false retreat is in question; it often helped the Kipchaks win the victory. Because of such tactics and bravery the troops of Theodosius the Elder being about three and a half thousand people in number defeated the army consisting of twenty thousand warriors. The question of Theodosius's roots and motives of his actions are irrelevant. He was the Kipchak! This is the only word. And he behaved like a real Turki unpredictably: following his feelings and emotions he often regretted of what he had done. But when it was too late. That was a wise and inconsistent politician. He would promise something and forget his promises all at once. Indeed, they were known by their actions. Neither in Asia, neither in Africa nor in Europe the Turki were changing themselves;
their familiar behavior was known everywhere. In military arts, in everyday life and in ability to hold a feast they were the same; they did it from their hearts, with jesters and singing. They did not like to stay calm but they were able to listen to silence. They would always find something to do. Not a nation but a flow pulling trees up by the roots, sweeping rocks away and enjoying their outrage. According to Gratianus's and his counselors' intentions, Theodosius, that fairhaired man with a hawknose being an exemplary rider was to act to the benefit of the Western Empire where there was no religious strife that had enervated Constantinople. It was to be controlled by it. There, in the third country, they had certainly heard a lot about Greek and Turkic belief, but officially they were continuing religious traditions of Ancient Rome. To tell the truth, the previous Emperor, Valentinianus I, was considered to be a Christian by some people, which is doubtful; it is not likely he was a Christian. He could not have been a Christian and he showed tolerance In a word, in the West Byzantium inhabitants started to search for the future for their country. Using his relatives and people around him Theodosius I was establishing Christianity in Latin society. His edict of 380 speaks for itself, and people that surrounded the Roman bishop all at once just confirm what was said. Those were the Turki! The Roman bishop Damasius supported his policy due to his relations with pagan aristocracy. That aristocracy wanted to revive the Empire and helped the Emperor overcome intolerance shown by other members of the clergy. That is why Rome remained pagan to a great extent. And at the same time it was entire! The idea of revival of the Empire united society and rallied it around the new Emperor. Theodosius himself became a Christian by chance. He was baptized during a severe disease, after everything had been used but nothing helped, and life was not to come to an end. Having returned from the other world, he received Christ and his saving
grace. Maybe that was the first human being in the world that really accepted Christ. He received Christ not under an order, like the rest, but listening to his soul That is a different thing. That is when the history of religion in Europe obtained an adherent and signs of life. A Turki gave it the right to live. It sounds strange, but that is what was happening. And nothing else! Without support of the state religion would have never become established. The Romans had not known Christianity formerly, and the Greeks were powerless in its spreading even in their own country. They did not believe and nobody believed them. Rome became a spark in front of which a fire of dry moss was being laid. Theodosius and his people came to belief by themselves. And since they were really devoted to it they put their heart into establishing of the term Christianity. And they succeeded! The pagan Rome did not know theological disputes that were widespread in Eastern Churches after the Emperor Constantine's death. He led another life he was living in hope. He was a clean slate. That is why Theodosius, who had become a Christian the day before, turned his strength to the whole Western Empire and its purity after deciding to establish the Church and himself there. He needed a foundation for his History. Formally the Roman Church was turning into a Greek branch from 380; it obeyed to Constantinople that had established the Roman bishop's throne and his episcopate. But in reality it was not like that: in Rome the last thing to think about was the Greek belief and, it is obvious, people did not want it to rise again. Of course, the word Christianity was being used there and that is perhaps the only thing that connected the Roman Church with the Greek one. One common word used by people. In the edict of 380 Theodosius said: We want all nations controlled by our mercy and moderation to follow the religion which is currently practiced by the pontiff Damasus.
Followers of the new Church were allowed to accept the name of Catholic Christians. The modern text of the edict is more eloquent not because theologians ascribed to the Emperor words and terms of which he could not have been aware (they appeared later) but because it is seen from the document that Theodosius did not go into theological details (believe as Damasus says), he introduced his own concept of an alliance (Catholicism) with the Turki and that in his terminology the word heavenly was the synonym of the word divine. And the most important thing he had the decisive word it solution of church problems (the Emperor's heavenly wisdom), which has all at one become a dogma of the Christian religion. Theodosius was a politician; he needed the Church as an instrument of politics. He was interested not in the Turkic spiritual institute but in that of Europe, which meant Christian. The same as in Byzantium. In 381 Theodosius ventured upon a new bold step: he ordered to transfer all the temples in the country to Catholic bishops. And what is more, he declared autonomy of Church independently of Constantinople. Thus he threw the first stone into the Patriarchal See of Derbent which coordinated religious life in the West. That was his condition of the saving of Christianity. Bishops did not support the Emperor's plans in everything feeling a new turn of political intrigues with far-reaching consequences. But they were not able to refuse him. However in that silent disagreement Theodosius saw a threat to his plans and at the same moment concluded an agreement with the Kipchaks. In return for military service in the Empire he gave them the right to settle in its territories between Danube and the Balkans. And what is more, he started to incline them to Christianity being aware of their tradition if belief in Heavenly God. And barbarians were voluntarily
being baptized recognizing it as a condition of their serving to Theodosius. They were changing their belief as easily as their names and clothes for estates. There were no other ways there. But they cannot be condemned for betrayal: ceremonies of the new and old belief were practically the same. Catholic Christianity began from nothing but, as a matter of fact, it was taking everything from Altai. Few of the new Latin Turki managed to understand what changed after they had become Romans and Christians. Everything in their lives remained the same. Everything was Turkic The Great Nations Migration is the spring of Europe. Its gardens were efflorescing at that time. Due to the Emperor's wisdom barbarians came to the Roman army (the Emperor's support); it was growing stronger day after day. Together with the army the Roman Church was growing stronger; people saw its strength. That was the secret of the politician Theodosius who was able to win the most difficult games. He never wilted. His belief made him stronger As the historians Eunapius and Zosimus mentioned, the Emperor made the Romans accept the belief that was odious for them by the strong arm. They resisted but did not dare contradict. That was a hard time for them. And those that proclaimed themselves Christians had a good chance; they were coming to the front in the state, new ways to high society were opened to them That is how skillfully Theodosius continued the Great Nations Migration in the Western Europe. He was establishing a new society. And himself in it. That society can be called neither Roman nor Turkic. It was Christian; it was Catholic. It was different from that of Byzantium. Theodosius was bringing his compatriots nearer giving them key posts and offices. That was the politics of the reviving Empire. Politics not of the Romans but of the
Turki that were becoming Europeans. They were introducing their culture Monotheism. The Turkic word catalyk and the concept being its background were closer to the newcomers who did not go into discussion of the Catholic concept but agreed with it all at once. That was their concept. It was making new native lands for them in a country favorable from the point of view of climate. Of course those new Europeans were notable not only for their spirit but also for their appearance they had beards or moustaches, they had fair hair and blue eyes, they were squat men with high cheekbones and short legs. Their faces are well recognizable on remaining portraits and embossed profiles. By the way, in this connection family trees of Roman bishops are interesting; perhaps every second of them is a Turki, native of the East, which was witnessed by his face and confirmed by a tamga. Steppe heraldry is peculiar; it is very hard to deny it. It is conservative and independent A person was born and died with a tamga. When there appeared blazons in the European meaning, emblems of the Popes Innocent III, Urban IV, Clement IV, John XXI, Nicholas III, John XXII, Pius II, Gregory XIII and others were decorated with Turkic symbols. Dragons, equilateral crosses, Altaic lotuses (in Europe they were called lilies) and other recognizable features of the East. Even double triangles the sign of changing of belief. And that is not everything that speaks of the past of Catholic bonzes. Presence of Altaic heraldry is not denied by Christian historians, but they do not explain it; according to them it appeared in the Middle Ages and its origin is unknown. Is that right? Early in the Middle Ages every Turkic family had a tamga the sigh of a family which was handed down. A blazon is a European tamga; it contains the same information which is written in a different way considering new cultural traditions A novelty was not a novelty; alas, its origin is well-known. Tamgas and monograms on different silver, stony and other items are
being found from Siberia to Europe, the same as in Greece and ancient Near East, i.e. on the route of the Turki from Altai to the West. For the I IV centuries such signs, writes R. Frye, - served as personal (family) and tribal symbols, the same as famous Turkic and Mongolian tamgas. Every tsar or ruler in the South Russia had a special monogram and the same goes for the Kushans. As we can see, origin of blazons and tamgas is known in the West to those who are interested in it. Connection with the Kushans was not accidental. The catalogue of papal blazons begins with the blazon on the seals of Innocent III, i.e. from the XIII century, from the Inquisition. That is indicative. At that time they started to destroy everything relating to the Turki in the West; they had a reason. Thus a tamga was destroyed. And more than that, Roman inquisitors changed even the garments of the Popes, but, to tell the truth, there were no considerable changes they just needed to name them in a different way. Nonetheless differences with the fashion of former clothes were marked. Thus a cap looking like a stack (ayur) that in the Middle Ages was a peculiarity of Popes and Altaic kamas was changed a little and called tiara (from Turkic ti ary - clarify constantly); at that it had the same cross on its top and was of the same shape. A tiara was still put on solemn occasions, and in everyday life they wore velvet hats marginated with fur (borik). The copies of those that the Turkic nobility used to wear. But the Catholics had another name for it manro. On Popes' feet there were not Roman sandals but Turkic ones embroidered with gold. On their bodies there were slaves' capes called chekrek kapa; they reminded of times when the Pope was called in the Turkic way the servant of the servants of God But the most noticeable and distinctive feature in the Pope's garments was a white woolen ribbon on his neck. One its end descended to the Pope's chest and the other was put over his shoulder behind his
back. That was the sign of diversity and holiness. Pallium. Equilateral Altaic crosses made of black materials were hung on it. Pallium (omophorion in Greece) is an accessory of the highest Christian clergy, but formerly it was called otherwise the same as Altaic clergymen called it; they had been wearing a similar long ribbon an orarion from of old. The word orarion (literally or ary) is translated as tie and clarify. Putting on an orarion, a clergyman put its ends down and reading a prayer tied them up around him thus showing his spiritual purity and holiness. Both Latin and Greek clergymen have not changed its Turkic name That is what, according to the Bible, God did (I belted myself) turning to Cyrus, his anointed when he sent him to bring the belief in Heavenly God to the East of the sun and to the West [Is 45 6]. Another indicative fact in the Latin history of the Turki is that, as it has been already mentioned, Theodosius chose not Rome but Milan to be the center of spiritual life; Milan was the town of Kipchaks (Langobards); he moved his residence there. After Milan there was Ravenna and its Pope's region. There, among the Turki, the heart of the new religion was beating Is not that the sign of life that was beginning then? In the foundation of the Catholic Church there was the most wholesome and powerful thing Desht-I-Kipchak had. It other words the basics of belief in Heavenly God, Gnosticism. In order to connect it with cultural traditions of the West so that one thing completed the other. That is the explanation of the presence of the Doctors of the Church invited from Desht-I-Kipchak under the bishop Damasus as well as translation of Turkic service books transformed into the Vulgate and introduction of barbarous traditions and ceremonies. Everything is evident, everything is near. A branch of Christianity without myths and prejudices of the Greek belief was
being born. It was planned by the Emperor Theodosius. Of course it was growing slowly, like a tree on a cliff. For a long time it was living inside itself it was getting strong and getting power. Finally in 495 the Roman bishop Gelasius was proclaimed the Vicar of Christ. They called him, following the Copts, in a Turkic way apa, papa (holy father). The title is Altaic; it came to Europe through Alexandria. At the turn of the II III centuries that was the name of Indian communes, i.e. adherents of Monotheism, in Egypt. Inscriptions on Coptic icons retained that ancient word. It also referred to the saint and monks that lived out of this world. Apa (aba, baba, papa) in the ancient Turkic language, as we know, meant not only father but also holy father, spiritual father. The word was a part of titles of counselors: say, kul apa (literary means the father of the servant of God) or kul apa urunu (literary means the flag of the father of the servant of God). Although official nomenclature used in Catholic church law would not use the word papa (Pope), it has been used in church documents starting from the early Middle Ages as a generally accepted title of the bishop of Rome. It only remains to guess what that unofficial title meant for those who had it, if in 1073 the Pope Gregory VII declared that the right to be called papa (Pope) belongs only to the bishop of Rome. One of the most important undertakings of the first Pope was the Decree of Accepted and not Accepted Church Books (Decretum Gelasinum de libris recipiendis et not recipiendis) which denied Greek myths that discredited Christianity. Thus apocryphal literature, i.e. denied literature, appeared. It included, for instance, The Travel of the Apostle Peter, Gospel according to Andrew, books about Christ's childhood and others. It should be mentioned that part of them was plagiarism from Turkic service books completed by awkward authors. In other words, the Roman Church was committed to purity of the theory of
Christianity and exclusion of pagan traditions from it. That step was notable for impudent boldness; after all, confessionally Rome was to obey Constantinople. The Greek Patriarch was not able to change anything that was the Pope's will. And also the will of Heavens. For that decision the clergy of Altai that had recognized the idea of Catholicism granted the Pope a ring with a cross and fish, the same as the head of Altaic clergy had. The ring is still handed down to every new Pope; that is the sign of power in the Roman Church. The sign of Catholicism of the alliance! That is perhaps the most ancient and precious relic of Vatican but its history has been kept secret for some time. Similar rings with the same symbols were found by archeologists on the route of the Great Nations Migration. For instance, the chalcedony ring with the image of a fish was found during the excavations in Margian in the Central Asia. The founding is dated back to the beginning of the Common Era and is referred to the period of the Parthian empire. The Pope Gregory the Great had the honor to raise Catholic Christianity and make it the religion of Europe. Not a Turki, but a Roman. He was born in 540, in a senator's family, got education of a lawyer and took up a post of a prefect (ruler) of Rome; after his father's death he inherited a lot of money. However, the young man did not take it but gave in to the monastery of Monte-Cassino. People considered him to be of unsound mind. But that was not the point. That was a brilliant stroke of policy which in its consequences was comparable with Theodosius's undertaking and even possibly left it behind It should be mentioned that monasteries (and traditions of monkhood) is a special melody of spiritual music; the Latins failed to hear it since it was too high for them. Those spiritual institutes came to the West together with the Great Nations Migration; for the Turkic the word abbot meant close to the father (abata) There is another long story here; it began before the common era in
Altai and was continued in the Middle East and in India and later in the North Africa and in the West. Contrary to a widespread aberration first monasteries were not established by the Church. And what is more, the founder of the western monkhood Pachomius the Great (died in 348) was not a Christian. It is known that first monks the same as Pachomius himself did not know the Greek language and did not know the ropes of theology. And when Athanasius the Alexandrian, that notorious head of the Church in the fight against Arianism wanted to appoint Pachomius bishop, the latter simply went into hiding. The founder of monkhood in the Western Europe John Cassian (360 435), the main theorist of monkery, taught: Here is an ancient aphorism of our fathers a monk should avoid women and bishops (bold provided M.A.) in different ways. A monastery in Altai was a sort of overspiritual institute; it obeyed nobody except for God and its own conscience. There the Turki were growing the seeds of new knowledge, there, far away from temporal vanity, their monks were cognizing the depth of the Divine Teaching. That is where ideas, traditions, books were born in ancient times. The monks, those celestials, were interested in nothing temporal Spiritual counselors for the rulers were chosen from among them. Early in the Middle Ages European monasteries did not obey the Church either; they were leading an independent life having their own influence with establishing Christian traditions. Appearance of monastic orders in the West was nothing else but final submission of monasteries to the Pope or, more precisely, submission of freedom of thought to a man of mould, although he was called the Vicar of Christ. In Europe one of the first monasteries was opened in 381 by the bishop Ambrosius, the frantic Kipchak that was serving in Milan. His monastery was famous. As a matter of fact, that center of spirituality made Milan a unique sacred place. There was the cradle of the theory of Catholicism and its
famous monkhood. Rome had not seen anything of that kind. It had not had the slightest idea of that. Monasteries frightened the Latins; monkery seemed foreign and fearful to them. That is why the Church had not been recognizing monasteries for a long time; they existed separately. According to Altaic traditions monastic vows were taken only by the children of Kipchaks those who were appointed to be servants of God by their parents before they were born. That was the rule. The core of the Catholic Church was strengthening due to the newcomers. Although, of course, the way to a monastery was opened even for native Europeans, they avoided it for a long time. In 451 monasteries were recognized by the Church; they were discussed in Rome and Constantinople as eastern exoticism. After all, very few managed to understand their designation. They remained eastern exoticism. For the Latins and the Greeks that was another whim of the Turki. And nothing more. However, having become Christian, the monasteries made a poor show, especially in Byzantium; they were desperately living in misery and no spiritual searching was in question there. A powerful spiritual institute was starving. There was no place for it in religion since its time had not come yet. Europe was forcedly baptizing the pagans using its army; it was trying to inculcate a taste for belief in them. They did not need the monasteries at that time. Monasteries of Desht-I-Kipchak were leading a different life; monks were hermits there, they devoted themselves to prayers and perception of the truth. But again according to the traditions of the white belief not all the monks in Altai were searching for the Divine Truth. There were so-called serving monks those who were teaching people that would come to a monastery and leave for foreign lands to preach there they had no spiritual searching. Earning their bread and performing occasional service, they were solving pressing tasks of monastic
everyday life. Philosophers could be counted on the fingers of one hand; they were highly estimated. They were the gold of the nation, its independent mind Hence was harmony that was peculiar to the white belief, its striking entirety witnessed by the fact that service and spiritual searching were near and they were enriching each other. In Altaic monasteries they were forging that very core which made religion resilient and strong. From there, from that brain trust, they controlled the harmony of ceremonies, accuracy of traditions and prepared service books in a word, they taught to believe in Heavenly God The same was happening in the West then. But at that time for Catholicism. Theodosius, raising Milan, knew with what religion began and where its roots were in the knowledge, in pure good knowledge; the spirit is born in it. Is it not interesting that the Catholics having accepted the statute of Altaic monkery followed it. The deed was executed by the monk Benedict. He started from a simple thing from the children of the new Romans; they were brought up according to traditions of Catholic Christianity. Milan and the abbey were visited by very important Turki rulers of estates, statesmen, for instance, Tottila khan who became king of Italy. People considered it an honor to send a son or daughter there. In 530 Benedict declared about the monastic order, for which he himself was called Benedict of Nursia; later he was consecrated a saint of the Catholic Church because of his great contribution to the new spiritual culture of the West. To tell the truth today it is hard to say with certainty whether there were such monastic orders in Altai. Who knows Maybe that is a European undertaking, it is rather in accordance with traditions of the West that was trying to centralize spiritual life and made it dependent upon a personality the Pope or the Emperor. In the East freedom was estimated;
it was made a cornerstone of all undertakings. Altaic monks were not likely to agree with an order, i.e. with an organization controlled not by God but by a human being Strictly speaking that was not the order that made the Benedictines famous in the Middle Ages. It was lacking in organization and conspiracy. But that was Benedict who suggested the idea of turning a community of monks into a school of service of God and a sort of military detachment acting under a statute in strict discipline. Of course abbacies and orders in the West could be created only by those who were aware of them and respective traditions. But even they, those chosen from among the chosen, did not feel the whole power of that monastic support that later strengthened the levers of power of the Christian Church. The Pope Pelagius II was a visionary here; he was a Turki by birth and in his spirit. He belonged to a noble family of a gentleman and ran the Church without the consent of Constantinople. Pelagius is the most precious pearl for the Christians and the most pernicious poison for the Turki. The rise of Christianity and decline of Desht-I-Kipchak started from him. Of course that was not what he was dreaming of; but his conversations with Gregory yielded fruit for which the new Europe was awaiting. Following the Pope's advice the prefect of Rome the second person in the country! gave all his money to the monks and became a deacon denying goodies of high life. After the Pope Pelagius' death in 590 he, the monk, was elected the new Pope. Having accepted the papal tiara Gregory established strict order in the Roman Church. He appointed provisors and increased proceeds from lands, in a word, gave the Church full independence from the national treasury. Those days ideology was supplemented by freedom and laws. At that moment the Roman Church finally turned into political power. It was a sort of state within a
state. Wide fields were open before it. The Western Europe that after Attila belonged to no one and did not take part in world politics was attracting the Pope. His plans were connected with it. That was a member of the political game. And it does not matter it was the weakest one. But it had a goal unification of Europe. The power doomed to success appeared on the scene. It had all the best things the antique world had accumulated: patient consistency and strict legality. Apart from it were Turkic spirit and diligence. Here it is, the mixture of cultures; it is seen clearly that is what had happened there. The Pope Gregory paid more attention not to politics but to monasteries; he regarded them as his support which was to help him subordinate Europe and the whole world. In order to strengthen the authority of the Church he used the Benedictines, their statute and the principle of unhesitating obedience. He counted not on the theological theory, not on military arts but on training of soldiers that were to win not gathering together into regiments. And not in the sound of marching drums. Words were turned into arms there. They were training the agents of influence. Those were the soldiers of the new type; they were taught to produce ideas in consciousness of their rivals so as to make them destroy themselves and what had been created by them. For this purpose they elaborated the methods which are still being improved. These are stainless arms of the West. The Roman Christians had an opportunity to try their strength. By that time certain estates of the Western Empire which had become stronger turned into mini-states boasting due to their trifling armies and alleged independence. Principalities were at fierce enmity. Their enmity attracted the Pope Gregory; he understood that people tired of trifling battles and wars would listen to his monks it was just necessary to find proper
words. After all, those were the Turki that cannot be at enmity for a long time. They are not patient enough. And the Pope proceeded to preparation of the invasion of its soldiers. A new type of conquest by God's word was being born. Even the ingenious vanquishers of nations could not have dreamt of anything of the kind. It had never happened before. Nobody in the world had those dreadful weapons but the Popes who were very peaceful in appearance. The Pope Gregory sent a legate (messenger) to the king of Spain; he entered into a dialogue with incursive Brunhilde the ruler of Austrasia (modern France, part of Switzerland, Germany, Austria). He was attacking being aware that their enmity was the enmity of the Turki sinking into common domestic altercations. The son of king of Spain, an Arian, wished to marry Brunhilde's daughter that had entered Catholicism. That was the reason of an altercation of two reigning courts. In Toledo the beautiful bride suffered humiliation and bloody beating which were caused by her would-be mother-in-law; she was thrown in a pond naked but she did not change her belief. She only became a martyr. The fianc who was later called a saint of the Roman Church acquiesced; he entered Catholicism and got married regardless of what his parents wished. And thus he had become the bitterest enemy of his father who executed the young man in a citadel That was an intrigue worth to be described by Shakespeare. But Spain finally became Catholic very soon, through the brother of the executed who, according to a Turkic tradition, got the widow The number of monks in Spain increased under the Catholic ruler. The Pope kept an eye on the whole Western Europe. Like a tiger he always noticed a victim a little earlier than a victim noticed him. Monks informed him of all the conflicts and incidents. The Pope was aware of everything, but top of his interests were the northern neighbors of Italy the Langobards. Who are the Langobards? The
Germans that inhabited the basin of the river Po; they laid siege to Rome more than once, in a word, they were a Turkic horde. Much is known about them. They came from Altai under Attila's flags. Among the papers that occasionally remained in European archives there are documents of the Langobards written with Turkic runes in the Turkic language. Where have all other witnesses gone? And the Langobards themselves? That is an utmost secrecy of the European history. Among the documents that remained there are, for instance, Cremona's Acts containing the results of a certain enumeration of the Langobards; one can judge about their names according to those lists. Having become Catholics people took Roman names and kept their Turkic ones. And the main thing they emphasized that they were living under the laws of the Langobards. Not of the Church. Their names were double like their life. In the Acts, for instance, there is the name Petrus Oprandi. The first word is translated from Latin; the second from the ancient Turkic language: oprandi means cast-off clothing. Langobard in the West is derived from the words long beard or fighting axe with a long handle (lange barthen). These are forced arguments As it was mentioned long ago, the readiness to obey the authorities turns the most doubtful hypothesis into an indisputable dogma, which really happened. And as a matter of fact the name is based on two ancient Turkic words: lung (dragoan) and bars (bars means panther) in Russian. Because the Langobards were headed by khans from tsarist families of the Nagas (Gragon) and Panthers; their signs were on the flags of the horde. The Langobards were fond of falconry; they brought droves of horses to the fields of the Venetian province, which was described by Paul Deacon. And they never let Italian bishops participate in their legislative meetings Is it not food for thought? The mystery of the Langobards
ceases to be a mystery when one becomes aware of the deeds of the Pope Gregory the Great and the Roman Church. That was perhaps the first trophy of the Catholics; their loot in the ideological war. They swallowed the horde and it did not mention them. This event is worth discussing. In 592, having made peace with the Langobards, Gregory proclaimed the Roman Church the Turkic Church and called himself its senior priest. There was a little known episode in the history of Christianity that was a real trick. The Pope learnt the Turkic language (he did not know Greek), for which he was called Dvoeslov (in Russian language it means he knew two languages). A war began and tubes were silent in it. And horses were not taken from the stables. The Pope himself came to the Langobards with a staff in his hands he was wearing a slave's cape and bowed down. On the staff an equilateral cross of Altai was shining, which was mentioned by everybody all at once. Standing on his knees the Pope called himself the servant of God's servants, i.e. their servant. He asked for a refuge and help. And that was it. He knew to whom he was turning to the khan Agilulf whose wife, beautiful Teodolina, was a Catholic. Their family had had difficulties concerning a heir for a long time, and Christian baptism performed on the Pope's advice helped the woman make away with her problems. The newborn son, of course, was to be brought up according to the ceremonies of the Catholic belief. The arrival of the Pope Gregory, as though occasionally, coincided with the baptism of the infant. After that Benedictines started to make their way to the Langobards; they appeared in temples near the relics. Because the Pope Gregory kept on saying that he was the bishop not of the Romans but of the Langobards. Credulous Turki that were accustomed to see their enemies armed and riding horses wanted to hear nothing else but these words. Thinking that the victory in the war with the Romans was on their side and being glad at it, they were being baptized
for the second time and thus entered Catholicism (alliance!). Like a retaliatory step. If only that was true One of those relics an iron crown of the Langobards with Tengri's cross is now kept in the sacristy of the cathedral in Monza. Early in the Middle Ages crowns were often donated to churches where they were hung over the altar. This crown, as it is asserted, is the copy of the crown the khan's wife Teodolina ordered his husband in the VI century after their son was born. And that crown in its turn was the copy of the crown of Visigothic khans. If that it right, the Turkic tradition, as we can see, is distinctly traced back over a period of several centuries. The crown of Langobards ordered by Teodolina was used in 775 for the coronation of Charles the Great, the founder of France. At that time the word king (derived from Charles) appeared in its modern sense. And at any rate it is incorrect to use the term queen speaking about Teodolina and the term king in relation to Gothic khans. It is important to emphasize that later similar crowns were found under unknown circumstances near Kazan, and later they mysteriously disappeared. In the same manner the Pope Gregory conquered the Englishmen; they had not been speaking the Turkic language either at that time. He did not go to them himself; he sent Benedictines headed by Augustine who later became the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Pope ordered to establish ecclesiastic life there but to do it tactfully showing respect for the customs of the local Turki without any signs of violence. There the khan's wife also became an ally of the Catholics That is another story. In the ideological war the Catholics were winning not by force but by their words, attention and care. The Anglican Church that was theologically connected with Rome, its future rival, was raising on the basis of the ideas of Catholicism. Speaking about peace and amity the Benedictines were inclining the Turki to Christianity, i.e. to recognition of the Pope's power. To formal recognition, but it did
not matter. At any rate that was not a denial thereof. The Church managed to find the best words, the most proper and intimate; an appeal for harmony and fraternity could be heard in them. Its pretty speeches were endless; they intoxicated like wine. Amidst the general enmity that covered the estates of the gentlemen the words about peace were especially attractive. Everything was considered to the last detail. The name order was also suitable for the monks; in Turkic it means given from above. They meant: Brothers, we came to you from God. The Turki always treated their friends and brothers warmly. That time it was the same. The servant of God's servants (Servus servorum Dei) was turning into the Greatest of God's servants with the help of the monks, which has a different sense. Medieval Latin allowed finding and explaining the meanings of certain words and expressions of the Pope Having created monastic orders, the Roman Church got fanciful soldiers, quiet conquerors of Europe; they would seldom kill but rather infected with poison. And they would never raise their voices. Gates of towns and doors of homes opened before them by themselves. Catchers of peoples souls, they were really skilful at catching Nowhere, not in any Church there was anything of the kind; monks played a different part there The rise of Christianity was quietly occurring in the West. Like the light after an eclipse. New sun was shining in the darkness. Catholics were inventively remaking the ceremonies of the Kipchaks. For instance, ritual singing after being changed a little was called Gregorian in honor of the Pope Gregory who introduced it into Christian ceremonies. Is that a Turkic tradition Turkic? That is not the question to be discussed. In the I century the tsar Kanishka was familiarizing the East with it, and before him that was done by his predecessors. Christians took the methods of
recording music crooks (in Turkic kiork means image, figure) which were later transformed into notes. Prayer chants acathistes, heirmoses, kontakions were the language of the Kipchak religion; Catholics added European notes to them, in other words they modernized them. And they got what they wanted. They were similar but not the same Europe was taking what was due to it. The European Kipchaks were being easily vanquished under church singing. They were vanquished without battles and attacks. By the words. The number of Christians was increasing. However, that was not the main thing. Catholicism was demonstrating itself with dignity. Civil discords were over; peace came to the Western Europe that recognized the power of the Roman Church. The Pope Gregory was subduing people completely; that was the wisest man of the epoch for whom vast minds were working. In his retinue there were Egyptians, Kipchaks, the Romans themselves; they were doing a very difficult and important work they were establishing peace and creating belief that was gathering nations together into one Christian family around Rome. The power of Catholicism initially lay in intellect, in knowledge, in the ability to talk, promise and give hope. That is the Emperor Theodosius's merit; from the first days he gave the West what was missing in the Greek Church the idea of an unwarlike war. So far this is the most perfect way to conquer the world. Through an alliance. Through Catholicism! Connections between yesterday and today in the Roman Church were not interrupted, which is also in accordance with Altaic traditions. They are perfectly aware of the whole history there; to tell the truth they never talk about it as a whole. They know, for instance, that the bishop Dionysius Exiguus, the Turkic abbot, wrote Apostolic Canons the statute according to which the Roman Church lives, collectio Dionysiana. They also know that he made a calendar for the Catholics, that very calendar according to
which we have the XXI century now; it was introduced in 532, during the papacy of Boniface II, another pure Kipchak by birth and in his thoughts. The second name of Dionysius Exiguus is translated from Latin as small, which shows the meaning of the nickname; but that is not exactly correct. If one turns to the Turkic language the secret of the name is disclosed in its entirety. The literary translation is to get smaller (the ending -us appeared later). The second version of the name Exiguus in the ancient Turkic language means become much (considerably) smaller. In this word one can read the history of man and belief. Helping the Catholics the Turki were accomplishing an obedient feat. They sacrificed themselves and their knowledge to the Catholic Church understanding the word Catholic as an ally. In Europe under the Pope Gregory time was being measured from the day of Rome foundation. The Turki changed that too. In that calendar there was one interesting detail showing the authors' knowledge of eastern traditions. Time in it was counted not according to Altaic traditions, i.e. not from the birth of Christ, as people think today, but from the day of the incarnation of sanctity in him. These are not the same things. The incarnation happens before a child is eight years old (the north Buddhists, for instance, search for a would-be Buddha among the children). In the northern Buddhism spiritual hierarchs are considered to be incarnations of mythological bodhisattvas. These are the creatures aspiring to clarification after deciding to be Buddha, i.e. a man reaching the highest form of spiritual development. Another Kipchak the historian Jordan was also working for the sake of the Catholic conception; in 551 he wrote a book called Gethica where he described the nations of new Europe unfortunately much in that book was written to please the Church. But that human weakness made the author
shine. Those were the peculiarities of those times: the Kipchaks discovered Christ and their Christianity discovered power over nations; that is why distortions are the sign of that epoch. Everything depended upon sincerity and endeavor. For instance, the Langobards, having become Italians, despised the Romans in their souls. Their Code of Laws of 643 is indicative: the text reports that they still considered the native Romans to be their slaves. And nevertheless they recognized Christianity, entered Catholicism, recognized the Roman Civil Law but being in accordance with the Turkic adats. They were like that. That was the inconceivable collision of the Middle Ages collision of cultures since pride cannot hide, the great Bacon said. And it was not hiding. The Turkic spirit existed; it was standing up for Catholicism.
Second-Rate Religion for the Masses

Success of the Roman Church, the same as moonlight, gave no warmth and taught nothing the rest of the Christians. The institute of religion was developing only in the Western Europe. The Greek Church dominating in the Christian world was rather dominating mechanically after the nudge given by Constantine. It existed not suspecting that sorrow is born by pleasures. Byzantium was attracted by imperial cares; it was dreaming of Christianization of Iran and the whole Near East in order to gain a foothold there. Some of its targets were realized. Being addicted to colonization it did not mention when its sword became blunt and reins of political power started slipping. Fat fingers weaken soon Rome overmastered the Western Europe, Iran was successfully countering threats of Byzantium and the Greeks had no forces to influence these undesirable events. Being addicted to everyday cares they were becoming exhausted. Weakness of the Christian leader of the world was seen in everything.
The trouble was that once they started the colonization of the Near East it did not estimate the consequences. Like a fly in honey. It plunged into politics with its eyes shut. Attaining its aims it obtained no results. Failing to understand the essence of religion and subtlety of its impact, Byzantium treated the intellectuals incredulously and brought up no vast minds. Educated monks were tortured; they were living in poverty and starving, sometimes they were destroyed physically if the Church saw rivals in them. Even the calendar according to which the day of the Easter, the main Christian holiday, was determined the Greek Church failed to grasp due to its ignorance and passed it to the Egyptian Church, its scientists that had been famous for their deep knowledge from of old. In the XVII century the Antiochian Patriarch Macarius, dealing with the history of Byzantium, mentioned that Greek rulers tortured the patriarchs, bishops and the whole ecclesiastic world together with righteous men and saint ascetics even worse than idolaters did. It is possible that there, in Alexandria, the Byzantines wanted to have a scientific center controlled by them their own Derbent. Or Milan. Maybe they had other plans but Byzantium was not thinking of its own school its leaders cared for their wombs in the first place. They did not have time for intellectual searching. It is strange maybe ignorance is connected with the fact that Byzantium rulers were not of royal origin? Everything has its reasons which sometimes are really unexpected. Thus abovementioned Macarius, telling about Greek rulers that they gave the believers in hands of the enemies of belief emphasized their origin: donkey drivers and ship caulkers, etc. not belonging to royal houses and royal families What could common people know? What could they give their country? They could only live for today. But the fact remains the division of the Church into Roman and Greek ones was commenced by Theodosius I since he was
the first who understood: the division was inevitable because every country understood the term Christianity in its own way and had its own conception of belief and ideology in order to see itself (its nation) the first among the others. That is an important detail it offers a clue to explanation of a lot of things in the history of nations. It is the reason of the division of Christianity into national Churches, which has always been hidden by theological disagreements. Not by general disagreements but by particular ones connected with the words and meaning of the teaching about Christ. Knowing that son of Man could not be immaculate politicians found reasons for disputes, in which they succeeded. It has always been and it will always be like that. That is why today there are dozens of Christian Churches, hundreds of sects; all of them are governed by the Bible but they read it in their own different ways. Human factor is determinant in search for the truth; peoples' wishes are the most important. God is one for everybody but people worshipping him are different. The idea of his own Church which occurred to the Emperor Theodosius's mind after his return to Rome was certainly secretly being cherished in the Near East. It could not have been otherwise since it had become a colony of the Greek Christians. As a matter of fact the history of the Western Empire dependent on the Eastern Empire was repeating. Offended Egyptians that became dependent upon their coreligionists were possibly thinking of freedom And that is not just a guess. Appearance of Islam another branch of Monotheism! in the VII century makes such assumption possible. Islam could not appear occasionally out of nothing. In the Near East people were not pagans or boors. And the new religion was not new; in Europe it was called Egyptian heresy, a Christian sect, at first.
It turns out Islam had the same political prehistory as Catholicism. It is a branch of Altaic spiritual culture which appeared in a Christian colony. The only difference was that in the Near East everything was happening in a different way as compared with Rome since a belief had existed there before colonizers came not Christianity but Arianism or Monophysitism which Byzantium wished to subdue. With the Greeks coming the people of Nile, of course, did not reconcile themselves with loss of liberty; they knew Monotheism. And if mythological framework peculiar to any religion is discarded it turns out the Egyptians, by the example of the Romans, developed the theory of Monotheism up to a new level the level of their own teaching, i.e. Islam? That is quite natural and even obligatory for the political situation they were in. Let us remember the word with which Islam began; it is the first thing Mohammed heard: Read. He answered: I cannot read. All-merciful Allah repeated: Read And one can read, as we know, only what has been written. And the Great Allah knew that better than us! That is why he said Read the first word of Islam In the beginning of the Great Nations Migration the East of the Mediterranean region became imbued with the teaching of Heavenly God and His pure Church as the Egyptians would say about the Turkic belief and its books. Christ was not recognized as god there; his divinity was denied together with the Emperor Constantine, because of which a conflict with Greek Christians, whose impact in Byzantium had become stronger especially after innovations of Theodosius I, occurred. By the 397 Christians took the altar of Constantinople in their hands: at that time at the Emperor's will John Chrysostom was elected Patriarch; a native of Siberia, he was different from the Greeks due to his education and sincerity of his belief. His literary works are recognized as Christian classics; they strike with their deep knowledge of the
teaching of Heavenly God and worship ceremonies so that one might think of certain relations between the author and Altai and the rest Turkic world. John Chrysostom was an example of intelligence and conscience. Of course such a sensitive person could not live in society of degenerating Christians. The archbishop was expelled for rectitude of his behavior. Arrivistes from Constantinople were not stopped by his sanctity and merits. They were aggravated by high dignity of the alien and even his noble origin. Byzantium did not need his knowledge, the same as him himself. Constantinople, dominating in the Mediterranean region, was proving its truth. And it failed to understand that one can give in to force and be conquered by wisdom. Thus it was loosing after winning certain battles. In fact military victories weakened Constantinople and made other nations deny Christianity. In Byzantine colonies the image of a Christian Greek was becoming illfavored. That was the personification of conceit peculiar to colonizers. Such disaffection remained for centuries. Thus the Patriarch Macarius (by the way, a fellow countryman of John Chrysostom) mentioned that because of vices and evils of the Greeks which are seen in them always and everywhere, we fail to find somebody having a liking for them. And naming their crimes against belief he said: If their tsars acted like that in ancient times, one should not be surprised because of their dirty acts everywhere they and their bishops are. In the ideological field of the Eastern Mediterranean region a crisis was maturing starting from the IV century, i.e. from the times of Constantine's reign. That generous field was empty. It was waiting for a plowman and young crops. Those people that accepted Monotheism and were objecting to Greek Christianity called it second-rate religion for the masses Something new was to appear there. And the Greeks were continuously making their pressure stronger. In 391 they burnt the Alexandrian Library with priceless antique manuscripts but they failed to beat
the opponents down. They failed to prove their domination over the Egyptians, which was skillfully used by the Coptic Church; its intelligence and spirituality were stronger than those of Byzantium. That step is the first step to Islam to the religion of freedom. It is indicative that the library was burnt on the initiative of a secret rival of John Chrysostom the Patriarch Theophilus. Egyptians could manage to get back their own for military defeats only in theological disputes; they had no other weapons. They had only their minds conquering nations and giving the keys to the world. And the Copts proceeded to loosening the ship of Christianity which was floating stumblingly. A tight tangle of political passions was tied up with its knots corresponding to painful points of Eurasia. One point was in Christianity Rome versus Constantinople. The second was close to Christianity Constantinople versus Arian Alexandria. Epicenters of future convulsions were maturing there. And everywhere it was to the disfavor of the Greeks; their positions seemed assailable. If Rome and Alexandria had managed to unite their intellectual efforts Byzantium would have lost its greatness by the V century. It would have been wiped off the face of the earth. But the trouble did not bring them together; politicians were too busy with themselves and their goals. Strong forces were marshaled and they were acting separately. Because they were fighting not for purity of belief but for upto-the-minute goals for the right to arrogate the monopoly for the Divine Truth. Later Catholics and Moslems will unite to fight against Byzantium; it will take centuries for them to maturate for such an alliance. And then, in the IV century, having tasted the gifts of the Great Nations Migration, three regions of the former Roman Empire were dreaming of possessing the Turkic spiritual tradition so as to subdue others by force. They wanted to command, for which they needed Christianity. Politicians regarded it only as a means of power.
To be the leader is the peculiar feature of the West; people there loved to determine fates of others. Desht-I-Kipchak did not take part in those events because the one to whom levy is paid is the master who does not claim for the office of a salesman in his own shop. However, its presence in geopolitics was felt in everything: it was the reason of the changes that began in the world. The moving of part of the Turki to Rome, Byzantium and the Near East could not have no impact on the events. After all, people were leaving: young, strong, alert with hope and goal seeking and together with them experience and knowledge were leaving to be used in foreign lands the enemy was hammering the arms against the Turki using their own metal That was the grievous reality of the medieval epoch; it was being established slowly. But surely. From the IV century the Great Nations Migration was to the detriment of Altai. Byzantium was bothered because of consolidation of the Catholic Rome. And easily in the V century the philosopher Sinesius, the would-be bishop of Ptolemiada, presented the Emperor a report called Oratio de regno (Speech of Reign) where he described horrors for the country which army consists of barbarians in full. He suggested an idea of the national militia and attraction of troops of all the Byzantine nations into it. That was the beginning of the Christian revival. And also that was the beginning of an attack on barbarians with their unchristian religion. Speech of Reign is sometimes called About the Imperial Power. In that document Sinesius wrote: In the first instance foreigners should be removed from all the superior positions and deprived of senatorial titles since the things which in ancient times had been honorable for the Romans are now a shame because of then The emperor should take them away from the army like a heap of whet from which we separate chaff and everything that does harm to good seeds when they are growing.
A blow on the reputation of the Greek Turki was being prepared on the quiet. The Emperor Arcadius accepted the idea of the Church but he understood it in a different way: he organized the slaughter of barbarians, as they called that event that roused Byzantium. It took place in Constantinople and in its scenario it repeated what had taken place in Rome more than once. More simply, the Greeks were making the Turki fight with each other as they could and later they executed dozens and hundreds of them for breaching the law. The answer was a revolt blind and frantic; the attempt of the revolution failed the revolted could not conquer Constantinople in July, 400. Civil convulsions in colonies began. One of the Arian churches where gathered barbarians with their families in search for a shelter was burnt by amok citizens together with all the people inside it, - wrote an eyewitness of those events. Much blood was shed at that time, which entailed practically nothing. The religion was not established! As against the Catholics, the Greeks were searching for exasperation in society. In actions of the Hellenes there was no Roman gentleness and diplomacy. It was important for them to accuse barbarians of Arianism in order to supplement ethnic hatred that had been existed in Byzantium from the first day of arrival of the Turki there with religious aversion. The enemies of Monotheism were gathering together under the flags of the Greek Christianity; they were not hiding. The confrontation was growing. They needed just a spark. And it flashed in 428. Nestorius from Germanicia became the archbishop of Constantinople he was not a person of Greek roots. His unusual oratorical skill introduced itself to notice all at once that person, a newcomer in Constantinople, promised the Emperor the keys to Heavens. And not only that. Make me the master of the heretics, - he declared, - and I will make you the master of the Persians. But whom he
meant by heretics nobody knew. Nestorius's promise conceals another page of the secret history of Christianity. Those called Nestorians appeared earlier than Nestorius and even Christ. Those were the Hanifs, i.e. first keepers of Monotheism in the Middle East. Their history began from Persia of Achemenids and was progressing in Syria and later in Byzantium. It is indicative that adherents of Monotheism were not persecuted by Iranian rulers up to 342 until Byzantium starter to interfere in internal affairs of Iran and Armenia. The behavior of the Greeks was awkward and rough. The dynasty of Arshakids suffered because of them; Armenia collapsed and its lands became part of Iran under the name of Persarmenia. Longstanding wars with Iran were exhausting Byzantium to the same extent as religious dissension with Rome or Alexandria. Is it necessary to explain how glad the Emperor was when Nestorius promised him power over the Persians. It seems the Emperor counted on that suggesting Nestorius who was not a Christian to the position of the head of the Christian Church. He knew that adherents of Monotheism constituted a majority in the Iranian area, and Nestorius, the native of that area, could have possibly delivered his promises. As we can see politics was top of priorities here too. That was not suitable for Iranian Nestorians in 499 they held their council and finally broke off with the Greeks, although they retained the name of Christians. Why? Nobody can explain that. Nestorius knew what the Greeks wanted to hear from him but he did not start a civil war; he was striving for peace. That was patched-up peace but it made no difference. He wanted to make people interested in disputes in which he was skilful; he appealed to change swords for words. And to use the words whilst fighting. But theological paths turned out to be too slippery and narrow. The Christians had neither a generally accepted philosophy nor a teaching; discords were felt
even in well-known texts. The Christians did not understand each other, which was revealed during those disputes. For example, what was Christ's mother to be called? Was she to be called Christ's mother or God's mother? From the point of view of the Christians that was an important question. There could not have been the mother of God since Mary was a human being and God could not have been born by a human being. And who was that? Nestorius avoided certainty in his answers using arguments that hardly made him evade heresy but agitated the heated crowd. Many things were forgiven to him in hope to obtain numerous allies the Turki living in Iran. But something was born in contradictions; at least the Greeks were thinking of their own theory of religion. In their actions a new step was being designed; but again they counted on a losing card But who knows? The Egyptians famous for backstage dimplomacy could have given them a nudge for that step. In a word, in 431 on the initiative of the Byzantine Emperor the Church Council of Ephesus was convened in order to accept the postulates of Christianity, i.e. its confessional base the source of the highest truth. However it turned out that they were going to discuss not the theory but what Greek or Egyptian the belief was to be? That question was hidden by politicians behind theological verbiage. At the Council Rome was playing a part of the third rejoicing; any outcome was advantageous for it. It did not temper with anything; in silence it was watching politicians in robes fighting for power in the Mediterranean region. The Pope understood that Byzantium was claiming its rights for the heritage of the Roman Empire. The Catholics did not impede; the Western Europe to which nobody laid claim except for them was enough. However the division of the Mediterranean region was understood by
each confronting party in its own way. Egyptians wanted to win theological debates so as, having become the religious leader, to colonize Byzantium. Everything is according to the will of Heavens, - they used to say Their rivals had an opposite viewpoint. The dispute was growing warm; the parties poured oil on flames long before the Council. The reason for the dispute was found in words of the archbishop of Constantinople, Nestorius, who suggested calling the mother of God - Christ's mother. There was common sense in his suggestion. He, Nestorius, being a believer, was a man from the East; he was searching for the way to God accomplishing a feat of humility. His trouble consisted in another thing: he was kept on a leash of temporal power which controlled the Greek Church. It was the first to betray the Patriarch seeing weakness of his position at the Council. Powers that be were not really interested in theology; it was important for them to raise their Church and Byzantium together with it. How? It did not matter. The town of Ephesus was chosen for the Council by Theodosius II, the grandson of Theodosius the Great another Turki devoted to Christianity. The town was connected with the mother of God with the years of her earthly life. Why? Nobody can answer; the Hellenes were fond of miracles they invented and believed by themselves. It seems they wanted to be chosen by God to become the nation with which the mother of God spent her last years. That is why it was important for them to hold the Council in Ephesus and nowhere else they wanted to celebrate victory there. Egyptian bishops had a different position they knew the traditions of the Altaic belief and of the worship of Umai; thus they wanted to bring her image into Christianity presenting her as the mother of God, which to a great extent was a copy of innovations of the Emperor Constantine. In the pantheon of Christianity, in their opinion, Umai was to be the second after God the Father. Not Christ but she the Mother. That was an original idea but how were they to
present it to the rest? The idea of Trinity was being born In Altaic culture Umai is the feminine; she was not a goddess or Tengri's wife. Through Umai Tengri showed his divine mercy: he sent people harvests, wellbeing and prosperity. That is why the Turki depicted her with a child in her hands, i.e. with a gift of Heavenly God. Over a child a nimbus was shining with His sign an equilateral cross. Images of Umai were often found by archeologists on Altaic monuments. Legends have been told about her from of old. That is an important part of the Turkic culture. In the divine pantheon of Altai Tengri is One God and there are also other representations of him: Ulgen, Erlic, Umai, etc. Not gods but incarnations or, more precisely, hypostases of One Heavenly God. The world, including the Earth with all its inhabitants, is His part. There are 99 images of Tengri each of which has the name Khodai, Alla, God, Gospodi (from the Turkic Gozbodi recovery of sight) and others. There is the hundredth name, but the chosen are the only ones who know it The idea of God is an eastern philosophy; it has been evolving for two and a half thousand years libraries are dedicated to it. The image of the Turkic relic was very suitable for the dispute mother of God mother of Christ and, according to Egyptians, it was the secret core of the starting Council. It seemed they were discussing meaninglessness, being aware of eternity of God, but they were debating about Christ and his place in religion. Because if Umai was to be introduced into the Christian pantheon, the son was to be removed to the third place and Byzantine ideology was to loose everything. Its shake conception of God man was to collapse and be replaced. Egyptians were well prepared starting the theological dispute which was later called Nestorianic By the way, it has not been settled yet; to tell the truth in literature this important theological dialogue was simplified
to a great extent the same as the discussion of Arianism. The Greek viewpoint is dominating. The Turkic element of the dispute has been removed. And will somebody be in the right in a dispute in which the Truth is not being born? In a dispute with yourself? Egyptians were taken to Ephesus by the Alexandrian bishop Cyril. One should not try to show wisdom but believe, - he used to say. The Roman bishop who wanted to weaken Constantinople took his side since he understood that the revision of the church teaching was the revision of politics. Power belongs to those to whom belongs God, was heard in Ephesus and echoed after each speech. But there were no spiritual disputes; deep knowledge of Cyril was estimated all at once. His passionate speech made the Byzantium clergy confused. For the orator two phrases were enough to overwhelm Nestorius whose impetuosity turned out to be a shot in the eye. At first Cyril called it frivolity to say that the one who stays with the Father for the centuries is to be born to begin the existence. And after that he added that the act of natures connection was to be presented not like at first a man was born by a Virgin having been joined by flesh in the womb and after that the Word appeared but as follows: the Word having been joined by flesh in the womb accepted flesh with which it was born Nobody had anything to object. Everybody kept silence in surprise hearing that. As a matter of fact he was speaking of the same things as his opponent Nestorius; the difference was in imperceptible hints and complicated terminology. Thus the Christian philosophy was being born words covered by complicated patterns were peculiar for it at that time. One cannot search for the meaning here. The main thing is not to object but just to believe. The controversial question was settled at the Council the very same day: nobody made a speech better than Cyril. Conceited bishops went to repose
themselves and to understand and give meaning to the last phrase of the Council which was even more complicated: two natures divine and human are connected in Christ inseparably but independently of each other. How could that be? If two natures are connected in the third one it means the third nature consists of two ones. Or not? The word connection means two components And besides, a birth is the origin! Or that is wrong too? Many questions were asked at the Council. For example nobody knew what to do with the Birth of Christ Christmas? A great Christian feast that was celebrated on January 6th? Only losing to Egyptians the Greeks started feeling bad. Their religion was in question, i.e. their politics, and thus they had no time for making pretty speeches. Everybody showed true colors. An altercation began. Mutual offences turned into an open fight; soldiers had to be involved they were pulling fighting bishops apart as though they were street lads. Troubles moved to Constantinople; the fire of the rebellion appeared in the Arian garrison of the capital. And at that time Theodosius decided to be done with the source of distemper. Even if Nestorius is right, - he declared. He was the one who stirred up the people which cannot be calmed down. At wise court there should not be a man who created peoples mood dangerous for the throne. The Byzantine clergy that was secretly annoyed with the fact that an educated foreigner appeared among them enthusiastically approved of the Emperor's decision. Nestorius, a man of honor, was forced to deny his patriarchate and after his voluntary denial he was sent into a monastery and later exiled; he died not being able to survive humiliation, hunger and physical torments he suffered due to the Greeks. God chastened the Patriarch, the Byzantines used to say. But was that a punishment? Christian postulates were being established by blood. Documents contain no witnesses of a fraternal agreement described
by western historians. Certain pious truths appeared and disappeared on cold lips of politicians. Decisions of Oecumenical Councils should be called political and up-tothe-minute. They were not for the future. Egyptians won the spiritual dispute but they did not obtain the Mediterranean region. And, moreover, there was no place in Christianity for them. Knowing the taste of victory they started to prepare a new fight in order to exploit theological success. It seems Derbent allowed them to grasp the idea of the Trinity, of three faces of Heavenly God. This new knowledge strengthened the positions of the Egyptians. One in three faces, - the Turki used to say about Tengri meaning absolutely different things as compared with modern Christians. In Altai they knew three states of Him: contemplating God, protecting God and chastening God. One in three faces that is right. Because there is one Sky over each and every human being God is really one and the same for everyone, for every person He is different. That is why he bestows people according to different measures but he gives exactly what one deserves. People behave in different ways. Egyptians, simplifying the depth of the philosophical image, decided to introduce the Trinity into Christianity in order to continue the dispute about the nature of Christ. In 449 they convened a new Council of Ephesus which has become history as Predatory Council, but it failed. There was no elegance of thought. Accusations of being heretics sounded roughly and were just a cause to remove the Byzantium chief priest Flavian. Demanding to condemn him, Egyptians had no reliable accusations and seeing that their words meant nothing they turned to the temporality for help. The crowed forced an entry into the hall and started to remedy the condition. For alleged humiliation of Christ the Patriarch of Alexandria, under the shelter of the temporality, bombarded his colleague from Constantinople with abuse, gave him slaps, beat him with his fists and trampled him. It is known for certain, - writes
Gibbon, that on the third day his victim drew its last breath because of wounds and beating that had happened in Ephesus. New discussion showed not only hot temper of the bishops. Church servants did not notice when they became marionettes of the politicians. How can one explain that the clergymen signed a blank sheet of papyrus where another postulate of the Christian belief was to appear? Those objecting were beaten again. And finally the decision of the Second Council of Ephesus suitable for Egyptians appeared. To tell the truth, it was abolished quickly: the Emperor joined the theological dispute; he dotted the i's in the dialogue of theologians. But that is another story. At Oecumenical Councils politicians were always solving their tasks; they had no other goals. After all, that is what they had to do. Only in 451 the Christians accepted the Trinity but not the one the Turki had had and not the one that has become theirs later. At first there were only two elements, on which Byzantium insisted; that happened at the Council of Chalcedon where they put an end to Christological disputes. Constantinople understood: the Christians of Egypt, Syria and Palestine argued not about Christ but about freedom from Christ. Their disputes led to decay of the Byzantine Empire since church dissent is always hidden separatism. Theological disputes were the policy of the colonized Near East, which allowed the Emperor Marcianus to close the Council: No one, regardless of their titles and positions, is no longer entitled to start public disputes concerning belief. The weakness of his spirit could be heard in the strength of his voice But they obeyed him without complaint. And they began just to believe. Thus the confrontation between Constantinople and Alexandria ceased; nobody except for Rome set about theological searching in the theory of Christianity, however the Catholics did not flaunt their
searching; they were quietly creating their Church. It was suitable for them that Egypt had left the political scene. They knew that on the banks of Nile and Euphrates a new religion Islam was being discussed; that religion was to substitute the Greek Christianity. Mohammed had not been born yet, but the idea he was to bear was being born After the Council of Chalcedon theological disputes had gone for good; the Church was deriving the whole history of Europe from Greek roots the same as the whole history of religion, perhaps each and every word and each and every ceremony. Christianity became the truth, the symbol of infallibility At least in their own eyes. However there remained some matters being out of sight of the Christians; they are beyond the scope of religion. For instance, what language was spoken at the church councils? And is that by chance that perhaps all the known early documents of the Church were written in the ancient Greek language? They, those documents, could not have existed in reality, even theoretically, since nobody knew that language. They did not use it! The Greeks knew Latin the language of the Roman Empire; it was the native language for them for at least five of six centuries. Constantine and the whole official Constantinople spoke Latin. Thus it was till the VI century. However, there is an opinion that early documents of Christianity had been written in Aramaic and later translated into Greek. But here we have nothing to agree with too. That is a superficial statement. E. Gibbon mentioned on this point: Regardless of praises caused by eloquence and sagacity of Constantine, it is hard to believe that the Roman general whose religion gave rise to doubts was enlightened by education or inspiration. He was not able to discuss the metaphysical question or a religious dogma in the Greek language (bold provided M.A.). The personality of Constantine, his origin and upbringing require
serious attention. And the first question that arises is whether he was an educated person at all. After all, he was a child of sin of a woman from a tavern Nobody has ever seen hypothetic Aramaic texts. That is another myth that has been living for centuries. But science knows another thing for certain: at that time the Greek language was spoken in two or three towns of the Mediterranean region. And nowhere else. And even more that was a certain dialect in which, it is very likely, the number of Egyptians words exceeded the number of Greek ones. The means of communication, i.e. the language of the early Christians, is an important question primarily not for religion but for comprehension of culture of that time. Indeed, how did the Egyptians understand the Greeks and the Syrians understand the Romans? Alexandrian dialect of the Greek language that was allegedly spoken did not have much in common with the Greek language. And the language of the New Testament differed even from the Alexandrian dialect But what language did they speak?! That is also witnessed by manuscripts from Nag Hammadi. That is why the contents of books from the library of the IV century remains unclear. Not knowing the Turkic language that dominated in the Indian communities of Egypt they are not likely to be read accurately. If the Greeks did not know the Greek language, how were the bishops arguing? There are answers but they are hidden like mines in the fields during a war. The miners themselves, i.e. the Christians that were perplexing history in order to conceal the Turkic origin of their religion tripped those mines. And from other sources it is known that in the V century, i.e. during the Council of Chalcedon, in Byzantium official Latin was being replaced by the GraecoBarbarian language (the name has been used since the VI century). The initiative belonged to the Emperor Justinian.
The replacement of the Greek Latin with the Graeco-Barbarian language was difficult, which was described by E. Gibbon in his famous work Should it be explained who was meant under barbarians? As Gibbon wrote, the Emperor Justinian executed his Institutes, his Code and his Digest in the language he regarded as the common and public language of the Roman government used in Constantinople, in the Senate, in eastern camps and in courts. But, paying a tribute to traditions, in the interests of his nationals Justinian issued his Novellae in two languages (GraecoBarbarian language and Latin). That quiet upheaval was over by the middle of the VIII century. It is also indicative that Justinian belonged to an ignoble barbarian family that lived in a wild and uncultivated country which was at first called Dardania, later Dacia and finally it was given the name of Bulgaria. That great person of the early Middle Ages remains one of the mysterious figures of the history of Byzantium. Late in the Middle Ages when the Turkic past of Bulgaria was crossed out from its history there appeared a legend about alleged Slavic origin of Justinian By the way, Justinian was made the Emperor by his uncle who had left the village earlier, courageously struggled in the Empire and became the Emperor Justin. It is also known that his mother had a Turkic name Bilgena, which literary meant wise mother, and his father's name was Suvata source, father of water. Comment is needless here. In the Middle Ages in the Greek language there were thousands of Turkic words; they were called foreign. From the time, - writes Gibbon, - barbarians appeared in the Empire and in the capital, they, of course, distorted both the exterior shape and the interior substance of the national language; they had to put together a big encyclopedia so as to explain a great many words. That is how, it turns out, the classic Greek language was developing; the language which children of nobility were later taught in Russia. That was not the language of Homer.
124 / 342
There was the lexical assimilation of foreign words or, more simply, Turkic words were openly being distorted in order to give speech the Greek sounding. Those alleged foreign words were called Turkish, French, ancient German or Protobulgarian. People did so not being aware that all those foreign words had one Altaic root; it was being changed in different countries considering speech habits of the local population where the same lexical assimilation was happening. As a matter of fact dialects of the Turkic language were being created in Europe, those dialects being less and less like the original But that is the confluence of cultures. The same absurdity took place in Russia where in 1589 they changed the Turkic language into Russian or, more precisely, into Slavic for the divine services. For the Moscow Church they put together a Church Slavic Dictionary basing on the Protobulgarian language in which perhaps each word had a Turkic root and all the rest were sort of lexically addimilated Slavic (Russian) dialect of the Turkic language appeared that was its name the Slavic dialect it is to be discussed hereafter. And now let us return to the question: what language was spoken at the Nicene Council, Council of Ephesus and other church councils? How did the bishops understand one another? It is hard to agree that Egyptians, Syrians, Armenians, Greeks, Latins, Turki learnt the ancient Greek language which was known to nobody in the world. But they disputed, swore and accused each other? How? Latin is not in question. It was not used; that poor and inflexible natural language is not able to give equivalent expression as compared with sacred words defining the secrets of the Christian belief. The Church withdrew Latin from use calling it pagan in the times of Constantine. It withdrew it early in the IV century replacing it with the new language of divine
service, which was mentioned in the history of the Church. It turns out the Christians had the language of communication but they stopped to remember it. But concealment is not a denial. It is known for certain that by the VIII century certain local Churches of the Near East started to use local languages instead of the divine language for divine services. Albanian, Syrian, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic were sanctified; this historical fact is also reflected in the Christian encyclopedia Why did that necessity arise? It is explained by the fact that the clergy decided: both in the West and in the East they use an obsolete language for divine services the language unknown to most believers and thus they started to change it An explanation suitable for an infant. What was the reason to change the language of belief in a number of Eastern countries? And all at once? And why did not the innovation touch, for instance, the Catholic Church, where the obsolete language was still respected and clear to everyone? And, by the way, the Greeks themselves used it too. The most important thing is neglected here. Islam came to the Near East it was expanding its boundaries at the expense of the Christian world. The language of that religion was not Arabic, as it is common to think now, but the same as the Christians had the language of Monotheism. The Islamic world was living with it till appearance of a scientific work by Abu Mansur ibn al-Azhar alAzhari (891 - 981). His Book of Corrections was the beginning of the Arabic language, i.e. the language of Islam. Koran had already existed. It was almost three hundred years old! That is a reliable fact. The ancient Koran was written with Cufic writing since Arabic written language had not existed in the times of the Prophet. Scientists connect Cufic writings with the written language of Arshakids that glorified the Middle East and Turkic culture established there. As a matter of fact that was the cursive writings of Altai but performed
according to the traditions of the Iranian calligraphy. Should one be surprised that East and West were reading prayers in the same language in Turkic? In the language of Monotheism. At that time that was the only language in which they turned to Heavenly God Here it is, the most important detail that is being neglected now. The encyclopedia mentioned it describing the abolishment of the obsolete language of divine services but not specifying what language was in question. The Christians abandoned the Turkic language easily as against the Moslems who had difficulty renouncing the language of Allah. The reason was the takeover and the rise to power of Abbasid dynasty, secretly controlled by the Manicheans, in Caliphate. That corrupt power in the face of the caliph Osman (he forced back the Imam Ali!) was accused of destroying the old Korans more than once. Much noise was about the burning of the roll of Koran muskhaf belonging to a former slave Abdallah ibn Masud; the misdeed happened in 1007 when civil commotion broke out in Kerbala and moved to other regions of Caliphate Islam as a religion appeared in Arabia not without assistance of scientists of the School of Alexandria and Nestorians, which is witnessed by Archeology. So-called Yemenite inscriptions of the IV century contain prayers and gratitude to Heavenly God, the lord of the Sky. At that time the culture that had come with the Great Nations Migration was proving itself there. In the Country of Monotheism the way for a new religion was being paved carefully and for a long time. The words of Allah that were made the basis of the new belief were disclosed to the world by Mohammed in the VII century; they are set forth in Koran, which is known to every educated person. However not every Moslem, let alone all the rest, knows that appearance of the right belief was preceded by the struggle of ideas which had been happening from the first day of coming of
Monotheism to the western world. And it reached its climax during the Byzantine colonization of the East. Today it is not customary to say so, but early Islam was different. It was different primarily in its ceremonies since in many things it repeated the eastern Christianity. They both followed the Altaic traditions; Monotheism made them related. Services, prayers were the same only details were different. For instance the Christians of Caliphate (in order to be noticed in the street) were obliged to sew a yellow triangle on their clothes and ride a horse as women did it sitting sideward; that was the caliph's order. Later there appeared special clothes for the Moslems and became the mark of distinction in Caliphate Clothes are another page of the history of Islam in Caliphate. It seems there are many similar examples in the medieval history if one does not forget that the Catholics and Moslems had been the soldiers of one army for centuries: together they confronted Byzantium. Their alliance had the symbol an equilateral cross; it decorated the flags, walls of mosques and temples, pages of the Bible and Koran. At least in 1024 Moslems celebrated the feast of the Holy Cross; the national celebration was opened by the caliph himself. And early Moslems also had icons In a word, many things in Islam and its surrounding was not the same as today. It could not have been otherwise. Because in 615 Mohammed sent his people to Abyssinia to the Abyssinian Church; he turned to the Christians of the North Africa calling them coreligionists. The Prophet asked the Abyssinians and Copts to help the faithful become pious and take certain cares of the Moslems on his shoulders. And those cares were connected with the written language, as it is written in Hadithes where the role of a Coptic writer was emphasized Secular scientists are perfectly aware of that period of history; they know that in establishment of the culture called Arabic different nations were taking part, primarily those were the Turki dominating not only in the Near East directly or indirectly they
participated in all the important events of the medieval world. There is a fair question: why do we know that little of the early Islam? Who wanted this knowledge to disappear and the role of the Turki in the history of the East to be concealed? The answer is: politics. Political interests made the Moslems that had been colonized by the West for centuries rewrite their whole history in the XIX century to make it what it is now The way that was happening is described by the outstanding Danish researcher of the East Dietlef Nilsson. It turns out, Manicheans and Europeans deliberately implemented the thought of depravity of their ancestors into consciousness of the Arabs. Hence is a weird term jahiliya, i.e. something that is to be forgotten. Or not know as paganism. Those were Abbasids who made first attempts to efface the memory of the Moslems of their Islamic past. If it had not been for western colonizers they would have never succeeded early Moslems respected their ancestors and praised their heroic deeds, which is witnessed by literature and ancient epos. Even in Koran, in the 105th sura called Elephant, one can read about what the infidels do with peoples memory. They leave it like a field with eaten seeds. It is striking that the legend about jahiliya was used with a mercenary motive by Europeans so as to dig archeological values out and take them away from Altai. Thus famous collections of westerns museums were being supplemented Was it by chance that the English archeologist O. Layard in the XIX century invented a series of legends and tales for forgetful and narrow-minded Arabs in order to get two figures a winged bull and a winged lion two most precious relics of the past. The symbols of the crown. Captures of idols always turned into a national holiday As we can see, the change of the language leads to the change of consciousness and memory with the lapse of time As early as in the VIII century under the Abbasids, in order to divide two religions,
Christians of the Near East, who were sick and tired of riding a horse like women did, changed the language of divine services calling Turkic an obsolete language. They started to use local languages that were sanctified altogether in the VIII century. That was a political decision that had nothing to do with belief. First changes were approved at the Council in Trullo in 691; they started a longterm affair there aberration from Heavenly God. They decided to alter the attributes and ceremonies. Aniconism which was the peculiarity of the zenith of the Middle Ages, is perhaps the most important stage of those changes. In order to become stronger Moslems chose a different long and thorny way; they started to create the language of Islam supplementing the Turkic language with words and phrases of nomadic Bedouins from Mohammed's motherland. As a matter of fact that was the peculiarity of the work by al-Halil written late in the VIII century under order of Abbasids and later of the book by ibn Duraya (837 933). These and other works are known to scientists Arabists because the Arabic language began from them. Only in the X century those attempts became successful to an extent. And the Turkic language turned into an obsolete language both for Christians and Moslems. Politicians of East and West simply denied it as they did not need it. Those that knew the language were physically destroyed. And that was no news. In Khoresm, for instance, even before that the military leader of Caliphate, Kuteiba ibn Muslim al-Bahili, after the town was conquered in 712 ordered to kill the people that knew the Khoresmian written language (version of the ancient Turkic written language). At the same time they destroyed those that knew their legends and taught sciences. He also killed Khoresmian writers and clergymen and burnt their books and rolls; Khoresm inhabitants remained illiterate and relied on their memory in what they needed, - writes Abu Reihan Biruni. This is
the way they were fighting for domination of Cufic writing. Much is known about the language of Altai. In the West it had been being established since the IV century with the new Christians. That is seen from runic monuments. It was studied by those who wanted to grasp the sacrament of belief in God. They read prayers in it; it was called divine the same as in the Northern India, Iran, Near East, North Africa and even Byzantium. That was the language of the Great Nations Migration! In whatever light we view it. At any rate, the prayer glorifying Heavenly God the Europeans were reading in Turkic from 312 because nobody except for the Turki had known that prayer. Here it is, barbarian magnificence in its entirety Their service books written in the obsolete language have not disappeared. Some of them are kept, for instance in the archives of Armenia, in Hermitage, in museums and church libraries as relics of the Christian belief. Its forgotten relics? The dispute about the language is still of consequence. A Turcologist simply needs to read them. And that is all. The same happened with Moslem books. Ancient Korans remained, but the Arabists cannot read them. Words are clear but not the text sent by the Most High Terrifying symbolics, is it not? It turns out modern Koran is not what was given by Allah?! Is it?.. Here they are, the fruits of colonialism. Let us remind again: the early Middle Ages on the continent was the time of Altai. The first calendar in the world appeared; in it time was counted from the new Christians, from 301. Byzantium and Italy, Egypt and Ethiopia used to live according to that calendar. That event meant coming and establishing of the Turkic culture in the West; the core of that culture was religion As we can see, everything is clear not only with examples of the runic written
language which appeared in Europe in the IV century, but also in the story about the calendar. Everything has a logical explanation. Copts and Abyssinians retained such calendar till the XVII century, i.e. till their colonization by the Europeans. Certain historians connect the beginning of the new era the era of martyrs with the date of the Emperor Diocletian's accession to the throne in 284. But since the liberal spirit of religious tolerance had been peculiar to the reign of that great monarch during 18 years, undetermined era of martyrs should be counted in a strange way. The year 301, what date is it? That is the date of making an alliance between the Turki and Armenians. Which resulted in creation of the Armenian Church on the Turkic model. That means the beginning of the new era in the history of humankind when religion changed paganism. That is what that event inaugurated! And perhaps the most interesting thing is that that Christian calendar is the copy of the Altaic one; the only difference was that the Turki counted it not from the first Christians but from the day of creation of the world. Their calendar is still used by the Russian Church with its late feasts, which makes Europeans perplexed. The similarity is full twelve months, division for weeks (according to the cycles of the Moon), twelveyear cycles with animals and plants symbolizing each year. Particular worship of a thirty-three-year period when, according to an Altaic legend, time sort of begins anew: stars of the Solar System complete the cycle of motion around the Sun and the Universe returns in its initial position. In this case material proofs are more convincing than words: we are referring to cajraks found by archeologists in the territory of modern Kirghizia, Kazakhstan, Altai. Cajraks are flat pebbles with equilateral crosses and epitaphs traditional for the Turki. Inscriptions on cajraks contain dates according to the Turkic calendar animal cycle, names of the departed and their parents.
Among the epitaphs there are texts addressed to the Armenians and Syrians. This witnesses of presence of Armenian and Syrian clergy Nestorians there. Late in the Middle Ages, before Russian colonizers came, Altai remained the spiritual center where preachers of many nations of East and West aspired to find their way in search of wisdom. According to a legend death is easy in Altai because Altai remained Eden, or Heaven of the Earth, in the consciousness of believers. The Julian calendar introduced in the Roman Empire, i.e. before the Turki, had a different structure: in it there are ten months and four-year cycles according to which Olympic Games were held. That is a different means of time marking. The Christians chose the best the Turkic way. But in the new calendar they used the names of old Roman months which can make one smile. The twelfth, i.e. the last month of a year was called December tenth (december or decem means ten in latin). November from novem ninth, October from octo eighth, September from septem seventh. A strange count, is it not? When the eleventh is called the ninth. But that is what happened in Christianity where the new and the old were close to each other. Failures to comply with common sense are sometimes clear, but one had never been analyzing them. It is possible they occurred due to ignorance, which again proves that History can be distorted but it cannot be remade. The past always appears where it is not expected. In 448 the Greek Turki were planning attempt upon the life of Attila; they sent a killer with an embassy of a noble grandee Maximin. That was an open challenge. But Attila became aware of the prepared attempt and met the embassy not paying any attention to them: What you wish is to happen to you, - said he instead of the greeting not getting off a horse. And on the
same day he forgave the poisoner. A purse with gold for the killer, recognition of the villain were evident. But Attila treated the poisoner with contempt. He turned his indignation to a more noble culprit, - writes Gibbon. His ambassadors came to the Byzantine Emperor with the question whether he recognized the purse they showed him. The ambassadors told Attila's words: Theodosius is the son of a noble and honorable father; Attila is also of a noble origin. But Theodosius humiliated the dignity of his ancestors agreeing to pay levy and relegated himself to a position of a vassal. That is why he should respect the man being higher than him but not conspire against his ruler like a contemptible slave. And that was it. That was the Turkic character. His humiliating words could have killed any khan, but for a European they were just concussion of the air. Another culture! Another meaning of words See details about Attila in: Adji M. Europa's Asia. What was that, bravado or the sign of Destiny? According to Turkic traditions he was in the right And there are thousands of similar examples when children of Altai became easy meat for new Europeans. They knew weak and strong points of their congeners; they knew about the tradition to forgive. Hence from the code of conduct! is a striking conclusion: Attila and his nation were either to perish or to be born again; the new culture was not for them. They were strangers to it. They had another morals and rules of life they were vulnerable: they would never lie, hide and shoot in the back. Christianity united people of different cultures and different characters; Turkic family traditions, on the contrary, divided people and prohibited to accept aliens in their society, which led to confrontation. New Europe was at the back of the pack and they those who started the Great Nations Migration, gave the leadership themselves when they allowed the Greeks to press Monotheism letting their people leave for foreign countries and taking money for them
as though they were slaves. Attila and his predecessors were strong only in the battlefield. In life they were different. Yes, they could fight for their own hand, they could retort but they were not able to change the situation even gaining victory over everybody. The Turki with their magnanimity were doomed they themselves were only ones who estimated their honesty and decency Theodosius II who had Turkic blood, of course did not survive the most shameful event in his life; soon he fell off horse and died. However, that was Theodosius who started the war between West and East. The war of extermination! The gathering of the united army of Europe in the Cataluan Fields against Attila was logical; it was the result of politics of those times. Barbarians themselves were incurring trouble by their behavior. They were too peaceful and straightforward. Their nobility was their weakness! And Byzantines, it should be mentioned, were skillful in exacerbating tensions. They felt themselves the masters of the West; the victory at the Council of Chalcedon turned their heads. Because those to whom God belonged had power But that was not the most terrifying thing. The white belief of the Turki lost its leadership; Christianity declared the barbarians castaways of Europe. That is what the beginning of their end was. When they started to fight against each other. From the middle of the V century Byzantium stopped paying levy and did not regard Desht-I-Kipchak as their master; they were too busy with creativity there: they were inventing the saints and strengthening positions of their religion. That was the Byzantine contribution. The pagan God of winemaking, Dionysus, was made a Christian Saint Dionysius. Demetrius became Saint Demetrius. The Goddess of arts MinervaPallas Saint Palladia, the pagan sun god Helios Saint Elias and so on and so forth.
For the idols they were inventing life stories. Each innovation led away from Monotheism and turned Christianity into belief of the second rate for the masses. Connecting matter and spirit the Geeks got their dualism something in between paganism and religion; after that they moved on. The idea of church leadership made them appropriate Turkic traditions. For instance, in 457 the Emperor Leo I was crowned by the Patriarch, which was new for the West and traditional for the East. Coronation and chrism was called apishik by barbarians. That is a ceremony which came together with the Great Nations Migration to the culture of the Northern India and later to the European culture. The ceremony of coronation was used by the Turki from Arian times and was called abhisheka. It goes without saying that in Byzantium coronation was introduced by the Turki. Leo I that was crowned had been a butler of a mighty military leader Aspar a Turki who had absolute power. Aspar could have put a diadem on his head if he had accepted the Nicene Creed and become a Christian. But he believed in Tengri and suggested his butler for the Emperor. Aspar planned to run the Empire through Leo, for which he intended to introduce the ceremony of coronation. In his eyes coronations could legitimize the procedure of delegation of power to a person of humble birth. But everything happened as it was to happen. Of course, having gained a foothold, Leo executed Aspar and his sons using the horde of Isabars which he drew nearer to him Here they are, the fruits of gullibility! The V century also gave Christians a cross. The Greeks took the Turkic symbol of the Sky adji and depicted a ship (lamb) on it presenting it as the symbol of Christianity. But such self-willed actions gave rise to protests. And remembering the phrase by the apostle Barnabas: In the character T you have a cross (T-shaped balk on which they
executed in the Roman Empire) they fastened the Turkic adji over it. And that was it. They had an eight-pointed cross, the sign of Byzantine belief, which expressed the meaning of Christianity connection of God and Christ However the sign of the cross remained Turkic: Christians cross themselves with an equilateral cross. Catholics did everything in a different way. They lengthened one side of an equilateral cross expressing the meaning of Catholicism the alliance. That beam pointed to the road of openness which led to a cross, i.e. to the sign of God. The Latin cross appeared by the VI century, and after the Council of Trullo of 691 the figure of Christ was crucified on it the legend obtained flesh and a seeable image. The division of crosses into Greek and Latin ones foreboded a split. And new geopolitics. Moslems also had adji and the same icons. They remained in Islam until now, nor everywhere, of course. Adherents of the old belief are called Namiriyah; their communities can be found in Turkey, Syria and other regions of the Near East. And that is another proof that religions had the same Altaic root. It is indicative that even in the XX century (1932) Vatican was speaking about Mohammed as of the restorer of the old belief of Patriarchs and Gospels of Jesus Christ. The theory of Islam allowed asserting that. The Turki used to say: Who cannot bite a stone kisses it. A reasonable thought. The same as a cross cannot be Greek or Latin It belongs to Heaven.
However his humiliation from the first days of appearance of the Roman Church meant nothing. The country was solving secret problems; from the IV century under the will of the Emperor Theodosius I it was getting ready for domination. Catholics knew how to get what they wanted in church affairs and in politics; heirs of the great Rome had wide experience of power. The policy of humility to the benefit, of course, was not understood in the same way by everybody but all the people accepted it. It split the Church and the Roman Senate: some senators were for an alliance with the Byzantine court and obedience to it; others, on the contrary, were for revival of independent Rome. Love of liberty and humility were competing in the Western Empire since it remained a Byzantine colony only in theory and as a matter of fact it remained a dangerous barbarous country. The Christian religion was being established there but it did not determine anything. Rome hated the Greeks not expressing its feelings. It understood that civil discords in Desht-I-Kipchak will be long they were to last for centuries. They would weaken Byzantium since they led to a new division of Europe. But Constantinople also understood the trends of reality; it knew the main thing nobody threatened it at that time. But at the same time nobody supported it Attila's death and alignment of political forces in Europe were for the benefit only of those who were planning to create an empire being not weaker than the Great Roman Empire. And there were two countries of this kind Byzantium and the future Italy. In both countries generators of ideas were the Turki that had become Europeans. Their plans were jeopardized by those who were obstinately unwilling to deny Monotheism, i.e. also the Turki. That was a collision originated by the Great Nations Migration. Troubles that broke out in Syria and Egypt could have moved the wheel of the Christian history in a different way, and, feeling that, the Byzantine Emperor Zeno
About Catholicism Again, this time with Latin

Of course ostentatious humility of the Roman Empire served as a front for it; the Roman bishop did feel strong enough to compete head-to-head with the Byzantine Patriarch he treated the elder with respect.
issued the Edict of Religion in 482. The decree of unity was directed to dealing with religious disputes in the Byzantine Empire and, as usual, prohibited any disputes relating to the dogmas of belief. Intending to reconcile the Christians of the West the Emperor hoped to strengthen Byzantium and prohibit the Catholic doctrine with which the Greeks were displeased. Since those to whom God belonged had power that motto expressed the meaning of the edict. However it all happened in a different way. The Romans, having seen through game of the Byzantines, made a stand against the Emperor's decree. And what is more, calling the Byzantine Patriarch Acacius an atheist, they excommunicated him. That was like an explosion, like a thunderbolt; Christianity had not seen anything of the kind. That was a stroke in the heart and it was stronger than fistic disputes with Egyptians. Byzantium teetered but it held its ground. In return it excommunicated the bishop of Rome and anathematized him, which was, as a matter of fact, what he wanted. That split the schism was for the benefit of Rome. Any discord gave Catholics a chance to make independent decisions, which was skillfully implemented by the Pope Gelasius I. The Roman by birth, a cunning person for whom there were no obstacles on the way to his goal. That was the person of whom in Altai they used to say: he would make a cow moo for his benefit. A man of single purpose. Gelasius proclaimed himself the Vicar of Christ on the Earth. No less than that. It seems at that time the name Pope has become the name of the bishop of Rome. He became the father of the fold; the head of the Christians of the Western Europe. Following the Catholic doctrine, the Pope suggested an alliance to all the nations that would accept his views on religion and life, which meant they would be in his political orbit. Not religious fantasies, as it was in Byzantium, but enlightenment was made by the Pope top of priorities of the church policy: he himself was studying the Turkic theology
and adjusting it with conditions of the Christian Europe. That was an outstanding politician, scientist, writer, passionate orator; he intended to create a comely face not only for the Western Church but also for the whole Christianity He knew that the beauty of a priest was in words. Theoretical knowledge allowed Gelasius to write a tractate that became the interlink between Christianity and the religious teaching of the Turki. The conception of the Pope's (who was the pontiff) role in society appeared; it was developed and turned into a postulate. That was another European remaking of Altaic ideas; in other words that was one of the cornerstones in the foundation of the Church. The Pope's tractate was based on The City of God tractate by Saint Augustine, the Doctor of the Church who was enlightening the Romans in the IV century preaching the belief in Heavenly God. That was an encyclopedist, an expert of the white belief In 387 Augustine embraced Christianity due to the bishop Ambrosius, another Turki. The Church history does not conceal that only gnosis a rational teaching was the suitable form of religion for his philosophical mind. He was the first who understood: Monotheism in Europe would not Remain as it had been in Altai since one could not enter the same river twice. It was impossible to impose a foreign culture and foreign history on nations: new belief was to accept something from local traditions and after that it could become common both for the newcomers and native Europeans. Actual conditions under which the great deed was committed (the decision to be baptized. M.A.) are invested with an air of mystery, - writes I.M. Greve. In his early works Augustine does not say directly about that. In his late memoirs called Confessions it is given a color of miraculous divine intervention When Augustine was in a state of uncertainty so as what belief to choose, he heard a tender angelic voice singing common words: Take and read. Augustine felt God's boding with his heart Of course that is the late interpretation of the events, it was mythologized, in which
church historians are sure. But here another thing comes under notice the order Read!. Through that Read! other prophets later came to the true belief. For example, Mohammed. What makes it possible for us to call Augustine's work Turkic? The tractate itself The ancient used to say: if musk leaks from a bag of musk the smell remains. That is what happened here. The original Augustine's text was destroyed, the original language is called unknown but the smell remained. There is the text itself! It describes the foundations of society of Altai and DeshtI-Kipchak. In other words relations between two powers temporal and spiritual were described. Other nations were living with another social system, another belief. The Turki were the only ones who had a social system of that kind. That was their peculiarity noticed in ancient times, i.e. before the Europeans, by the Chinese, Indians, Persians And how did Saint Augustine and the Pope Gelasius know what they had not been able to know? About the peculiarities of life in Altai? And even more about the details of life there? The Turki called their motherland the City of God, which was mentioned in works by ancient authors: Shambala is their work; it expresses that meaning. One should be thinking seriously here. It is known, after all, that on the blazon of the Altaic state there was a double eagle, which is confirmed by findings of archeologists and cave painting That very eagle which flew to Byzantium and later to Russia. But this of course is not the main thing; the contents of the great work by Augustine is the most important! The author steadily explained the thought that over earthly kingdoms there is a pure kingdom given by God which unites humankind. And finally it is to enter everlasting peace of Heavenly kingdom and fully God. But these are the words about Eternal Blue Sky Tengri! The teaching was set forth
in Altai before the Common Era. With it people came to India and Persia. As researchers mark, the image of one beneficent, omniscient, just Divine Sky still remains with Turkic nations. That is a fact not in dispute. It goes without saying that Augustine heard about Altai, the motherland of his ancestors, since he was the native of Indian communities of Egypt or, more precisely, of the Kushan khanate which by the IV century managed to settle from the headwaters of Nile on the banks of the North Africa to the Atlantic His mother became a Christian accidentally after her husband's tragic death; hence, it seems, is the son's inclination to that religion. Here another untold story is concealed: otherwise how could the native of the town of Tagast of the North Africa become aware of the secrets of Altaic divine services? And preach them in Rome?! As a matter of fact, that teaching was retold by the Pope Gelasius. At that in his retelling he was astonishingly honest, which is witnessed by another source of which the Pope was unaware. Christians did not know that the social system of the Turki described in the tractate called The City of God interested the Chinese long before the Pope Gelasius. The thought of two branches of power in Altai is set forth in The Book of the Ruler of Shan Region where many details are interesting. Altai, it turns out, was notable for strict rules: temporal power there had no rights at spiritual assemblies. The most powerful khan was powerless; he had no right to interfere in affairs of the clergy and he was no more than a listener. He could not open his mouth and utter a word. As a matter of fact that was written word-for-word by Saint Augustine when he saw pagan Rome weltered in vice. In his tractate he regarded life as a struggle of the light and the dark, divine and demonic, i.e. like Altaic theologians called Gnostics in Europe used to write about it. That was their philosophy which the Buddhists accepted Discussing violence they asserted: one should rather believe teachers than rulers,
together with which they recognized the necessity of violence. The Pope Gelasius also appealed for that. Alas, there was nothing new in his words. The essence of gold is it does not need words Having rewritten the sacred books of the Turki, Christians did not destroy their contents which moved to Catholicism together with the Turki. In new sacred books there was experience that had been accumulated in Altai in the course of centuries! Those were not just words; they contained the life of the nation which gave the world amazing consequences due to its Great Migration. The rewriting of sacred books was the stage of information transfer; there is nothing reprehensible here that is the development or assimilation of cultures. That is what the Jews were doing while writing the Bible; in the Book of Isaiah they paid tribute to Altai, its blacksmiths and their white belief. Exactly the same was happening in the I century in the Near East and in India when the Turkic spiritual practice was being developed in the northern branch of Buddhism. And the Buddhists understood: Heavenly God is the highest goal of cognition in Altai. He is simple and full being the perfect truth, the ideal of good and beauty, truth and justice. He is the judge. The Turkic nation was living with that belief Its belief could not disappear together with books. Even with the Turki themselves. The Moslems cognizing Koran paid attention to the Hanifs that opened them the true belief and mysteries of Monotheism. The idea of God is eternal as God himself. Hence was Eternal Blue Sky of the Turki. The Church forgot about that burying the spiritual heritage of Altai in oblivion. The Christians could not begin their religion with a blank page. That could never have happened!.. Augustine, of course, was the Great Christian writer, the author of two hundred thirty two books. Although common sense suggest that a human being is not able to do it (it is impossible to publish eight
books a year during thirty years on end). But was he always the author?! It is impossible to invent what had existed before you the basics of belief. They are being created by generations and polished by centuries. Ceremonies, traditions, philosophy, wisdom come to a nation not on a sudden. However belief can be described and taught, which was done by Augustine. That was the sanctity of his educating feat: Take and read!. He was not inventing anything. He was retelling what he had read. And that was it Of course he did not use the Jewish Bible His thoughts were continued by the Pope Gelasius during another epoch. The theory of two powers temporal and spiritual! in relation to Christianity was for the first time set forth by Gelasius in his message to the Byzantine Emperor Anastasius where he cautiously explained the Turkic dualism: Glorious Emperor, there are two institutions running the world: the first is the sacred authority of high hierarchs and the second is regal power. The burden borne by the clergy is heavier; they are accountable to justice of Heaven for deeds of the kings having power over people. Quotation: Gergey E. The History of Papacy. P. 49. In spiritual life, the Pope proceeded, the Emperor obeys the clergy; in temporal affairs it is the opposite And from where did this appear in the West? In Byzantium the Patriarch obeyed the Emperor from the day of creation of the Church; the Pope obeyed the Byzantine Patriarch. There, in Europe, was a different social system; that was the copy of the Roman Empire system. Gelasius suggested what had never existed in Europe. But that was perfectly organized in Desht-I-Kipchak. And it worked in India, Iran, Egypt, Abyssinia (Ethiopia, Sudan). In other words, he suggested the West Altaic diarchy. That was the social and political result of the Great Nations Migration, to which the historical science has not paid the slightest attention.
Having called himself the Vicar of Christ on the Earth wise Gelasius made another excellent step of his policy that later granted the papacy full authority. He declared that Christ, the true rex et pontifex (king and highest clergyman) divided power between kings and bishops. Consequently the Vicar of Christ on the Earth is entitled to hold court over every Christian country, over every Church. There was one step to make to subdue temporal power. That is what later happened in the East. It was simple and genial. He, the Pope, approved and banished dependent rulers (kings) since he was king of kings. An excellent European innovation in the theory of power was not changed in Europe till the XI century, i.e. till the official split of Christianity into eastern and western branches. It stood out in western politics; the most important events started with it, the Church provoked wars, palace coups, secret conspiracies and murders in order to implement it. There are hundreds and hundreds of examples. The whole medieval life, as far as we know, was establishing absolute power of the Pope; that was the peculiarity of the epoch full of pungent smoke of the inquisition. Delicate smell of incense was also present there. And there was another undertaking introduced into Christianity by the Pope Gelasius; it was not part of the Turkic ceremony although it resulted from it. Having the freedom of action which, like a seal, was formed in the words papa a nemine iudicatur (nobody is entitled to hold court over the Pope) he started to make lists of prohibited books which the Christians were not allowed to read. In other words, he limited cognition. That was an open intrusion of the Church into peoples minds, into their world outlook. And at the same time it was a concealed demonstration of its weakness. Why was censorship necessary? Certainly not just to shield the Catholics from Geek myths. It was important to be
proclaimed the authors of certain innovations. In order to impose their will and truth on nations. In order to model suitable people After all, speaking about those times one should never forget that a good half of the population of Europe consisted of the Turki who had been brought up on absolute confidence with clergymen. They were the first listeners of the Pope. His passionate listeners. The clergy, beginning from Gelasius, started to be afraid of Altai, religion and themselves. One should have many noble qualities in order to be teaching to control the world; and such qualities were absent. On the contrary, the truth was becoming dangerous. In order to conceal the sources of belief the Church turned itself into a censor! However, regardless of what people wanted, God gave Europe what He gave the new spiritual culture. And the Pope, censorship or inquisition were not able to conceal that. That is impossible. Even if they behead somebody or burn someone in the fire history cannot be altered. Of course, the laws of the Catholic Church became established in the West not all at once. There was a wearisome struggle for power: in different times there were different Popes and different temporal rulers. The strong Byzantine Emperor relegated the role of the Pope to the role of an official who was called on the carpet; if the Emperor was weak the Pope was dominating. For instance, starting with Agapius I the Popes after they were elected would send gavel to the Emperor (such custom was introduced), but the Pope Nicholas I did not recognize the Byzantine power at all. Generations of Christians were changing like night and day, water was wearing away a stone, but one thing remained the same the West saw the pledge of victories in Catholicism and was living for its sake. Unfortunately, it was not always living honestly. Especially when together with the Greeks it was putting together the text of the Bible the foundation on which Christianity is
based. That was the cryptic moment of history, perhaps the most unexpected one It is commonly supposed that the Bible is the book of books, which is not correct. It consists of about eighty works by different authors; it is the compilation of works by anonyms. Its text is diversified and the time of its putting together lasted for centuries. It is hard to talk about the unity of the Bible; it is not what it is assumed to call the unity. The base of the compilation (perhaps the most suitable word) were divine and philosophical books of the Turki edited by the Church. At different times they were supplemented by works of other authors, Greek, Latin, Egyptian, Jewish in particular. The text was revised several times subject to political changes. The Bible after all is the compilation in which there is no integrity: every reader is free to understand its fragments in his own way, which is probably natural. Hence are individual understandings of the trueness of religion; hence are thousands of Christian Churches and religious sects. All of them base their teaching on the Bible. And all of them do so in their own way! For the Catholics, for example, the Bible began with the Vulgate, i.e. with Turkic books retold by Jerome. And the Greeks did not have that educating book, but instead they had dozens of Gospels, memoirs about Christ written in the IV century where, it should be mentioned, for some reason Altaic plots were used. Those borrowings are seen in the Old Testament in order to write which the Holy Scripture of the Jews was allegedly taken, which was slyness. Because in the Bible of the Jews those texts are absent. The Church does not conceal that editing of sacred books was performed more than once. It is seen on the example of the Vulgate which they started to edit perhaps while Jerome himself was alive. Thus, for instance, Gibbon mentioned that ancient Latin arrangements are essentially different from the modern Vulgate which was verified in 550 with the best manuscripts by the clergyman Rustic.
Life has always been moving on, the same as religion. For example, the Book of the Prophet Baruch is absent in Jewish Scriptures. Its text was known only in Greek and, according to church historians, many deny its authenticity. Here one should add Ecclesiasticus, or Wisdom of Jesus, Son of Sirach, three Maccabaean Books, the Wisdom of Solomon there is no point in searching for them in Jewish Scriptures. They were included only into the Greek text from which the Bible was translated into other languages The list of books and insets added by the Greeks to the Christian Old Testament and absent in the Jewish Bible is rather long. And what is more, the Greeks supplemented canonical books of the Jewish Bible with the following fragments: in the Book of Esther the place not marked with the number of verses in the Greek and Slavic Bible; the prayer of Manasseh at the end of the 2nd Books of the Chronicles; the Song of the Three Children in the Book of Daniel (13th chapter); the tale of Susanna (ibid, chapter 13) and the story of Vil and the Dragon (ibid, chapter 14) One can continue with the list. All these books and fragments are absent in the Jewish Bible; they were written in Greek and they were inserted into the Christian Bible at different times. Who is their author? It is not known. It is evident those were Turkic books translated into the GraecoBarbarian language; they were being copied by Jews, Buddhists, Christians and Moslems who were making the foundations of their religions. This is the way the Bible was being put together. In order to understand the technology of its creation let us take the Wisdom of Solomon from the Christian Old Testament. This has never been part of the Jewish Scriptures. The philosophy of this Book is full of Gnosticism, which allowed the researchers of the Bible to ascribe its authorship to a man of the eastern belief.
136 / 342
Of which one? There are different opinions on this point And the text itself points to the motherland of the author of the tractate, at least to its geographical positions. The description of heavenly bodings tells about snow and ice [Wis 16 22]. As something customary melting of snow and ice in the sun is described [Wis 16 27] together with winter thin ice carried by windstorm [Wis 5 14]. These acts of nature are not specific for Alexandria or Palestine but common for Altai where they were part of poetics As a matter of fact the same went for the motherland of the Aryans Aryil described in chapters dedicated to India and Iran. A geographical constant! It is invariable. Theologians turned their attention to it. Yes, it can be neglected, it can be translated into any languages, ascribed to any nation, but that will not make it snowing in Egypt And Africa will not be covered with frost. The same as north constellations will never appear in the sky Everything is by the will of Heaven. Another detail about the ceremonies. In the Wisdom of Solomon it is said: while praying turn to East [Wis 16 28], another Turkic tradition not known to the Jews before the captivity. They learnt it from the tsar Cyrus, the same as other ceremonies described in the Wisdom of Solomon. For example, justice of Heaven, temples and altars. The creation of the world. The Flood And iron armor? Helmets, shields did the Jews have them? This is not pointless information; it is contained in the sacred text. The Wisdom of Solomon gives rise to too many questions. In the Jewish language the name of the hero is pronounced as Shelomo (without n), which means peaceful. One would think, what questions can arise? Shelom is also a Jewish greeting peace attend you. But that ancient expression had been in Altai. They still address people there with the word salaam and birds returning in spring are greeted with the words elem-salaam! That is a spiritual greeting; it referred to an
assistant of Heavenly God, a sage, prophet and servant That is why the city is called Jerusalem or, more precisely, Jerusalaim! The word had a very deep sense an entire world reflected, for instance, in the Khakas epos. But this is not the end Solomon, as far as we know, built the temple using a worm eating rocks brought to him by a vulture from the Garden of Eden But in Khakas legends there is a serpent eating white building stones And there is another legend about the serpent tsar the owner of the magic stone arbys. Licking the stone one learns the language of animals and birds These plots were used in the Wisdom of Solomon. If one knows where Eden is one understands the text in a different way. And not only the text! The family tree of Solomon is also worth studying. The appearance of David, his father, was unusual for a Jew; in Talmud it is written that he had red hair and in the book Zohar it is said that his eyes were the color of rainbow. From the Book of Isaiah we know that the region where David lived was called Ariil [Is 29 1]. Of course the Bible analysts identify it with Jerusalem, but that is a rough historical strain. Under King David Ariil was translated as the country of the noble or the country of Arians. From the Turkic aryg il. And it was referred to Altai, which is witnessed by the title of David King No. Indeed God cannot be deceived even by those wearing church garments; the title king related only to the rulers of the Altaic dynasty. And, finally, the philosophy of Wisdom of Solomon. Its author has Tukic views on Heavenly God from Whom he had got his soul. And being good I entered a pure body [Wis 8 19]. Here, the same as in other fragments of the text, Altaic conception of eternity of soul and its degeneration cannot be neglected. That is the teaching with which Buddhism was imbued; it was certainly present in Gnosticism. The tsar Kaniska in the I century was preaching this teaching to the world. And the world accepted it
In the Altaic epos the same philosophy was developed in the peoples language. Of course the Christians themselves were writing the Book of Wisdom; they had changed something before they called it their book or, more precisely, Jewish book that was the matter of their conscience. However they had the source from which they were copying; it cannot be denied. As a matter of fact, the whole Bible confirms that. For instance, Ezra Apocalypse is also absent in the Jewish language and it also contains impenetrable mysteries. The Bible analysts believe it was not written by Ezra, a Jewish clergyman, himself, but by some of his followers and much later. Who was Ezra? The first scribe in the world. He was dealing with Turkic cases at the Persian court where in the V century he obtained a charter allowing him to subdue the Jews to the Law of Moses recognized by Cyrus as the law for the Jews. Ezra read them the Law The situation in which the Law was proclaimed testifies that that was the Law not known to the people [Nehem 8 9]. The participation of the Turki meant that Achemenids proposed the law for their Jewish nationals The tsar Cyrus had already died by that time. The Jews, as we know, returned from the captivity in 538 B.C., i.e. in the VI century. In Ezra Apocalypse it is described how and where the Jews were obtaining sacred books on their return from the captivity [3 Ez 14]. The plot described almost copies the plot contained in Indian books describing the obtaining of Prajnaparamita by the Indians [3 Ez 14 46 48]. In Ezra Apocalypse the explanation of the word Pharisees is concealed. It does not have a Greek root. Pharisees are oral exegetes of the Torah, learners of wisdom not being clergymen. Free servants of the Law. The same as the scribes, they were getting knowledge at the Persian court, in Persia, hence is the name Pharisees (phars ~ pharis), i.e. those who know Farsi.
It only remains to add that Ezra was one of the first who became aware of the Turkic culture and religion. With his name they connected the appearance of Aramaic written language which was the transformation (version) of Altaic writings And first Jewish books. But that is witnessed by the text of the Christian Bible. Here it is pertinent to note that in Hebrew, Yiddish and Ladin (dialects of the Jewish language) there must be a great many ancient Turkic words and phrases. At least Torah in Turkic means Law. Talmud means Mouthed, i.e. oral wisdom (from tyl). Moses and Maidar are one and the same person? Judging by their actions, they are. And if that is right, another page of the Jewish history becomes clear. We understand why after the beating and exile from Israel the Jews found shelter among the Turki their coreligionists, kindred spirits. They became free citizens there. It turns out spiritual treasures of Altai have not been lost in Europe? It looks like the truth, since Catholicism found support primarily among the European Turki it expanded its geography among them; people saw Altaic roots. They felt them in their souls. If the new belief was full of Jewish, Hellenic, Egyptian or another ideology, in which theologians are trying to convince us, could it have found a response in Turkic souls? Never. Because peoples traditions are not changed together with the place of living. That was the greatest paradox being top of the Great Nations Migration: the Pope had no other chances for the future except for conquering of Turkic souls with the spirit of the Turki themselves. That is why he turned to spiritual treasures of Altai. Nothing else would do! On the other hand, the aspiration for peace with their neighbors was pushing the new Europeans to the Pope, to Catholicism. That was their way to the future. In order to weld principalities (former estates of the gentlemen) one power was necessary. The Turki of the West needed the Pope not less than he needed them. They were creating the Pope themselves, according to Altaic
138 / 342
patterns, and they gave him their spiritual treasures. And he was strengthening in his glorious role as a result of his well-considered policy. Of course, not a specific person was in question, that was all about the Pope as a political figure, the guarantee of power and peace in the region. Not the Emperor and not King. The flock was taking pains for the benefit of papacy giving itself to the Pope That was the apotheosis of the Great Nations Migration in Europe. New Catholics were moving away from Altai and were desperately fighting with their steppe congeners since they were protecting interests of new countries and not the old Turkic world. Foreign interests which became their own. That is internal history Thus, imperceptibly and even naturally, a new policy was being formed in Europe the natives were fighting against each other. That is the essence of the West, its dissimilarity. And its integrity at the same time. Of course not all the descendants of the newcomers from Altai agreed to eat frogs and oysters; some of them still preferred horse beef and mutton. Those people saw: the new Europe is taking the people away from their roots, the sources of belief and their ancestors, at last. It was hard for them to put up with that injustice when what was Turkic was called Christian. But what could they suggest instead? To leave for Altai?.. No. Only protesting. Strengthening Christianity the Pope was weakening the belief in God. For a politician there was nothing else to do. The struggle of the Western and Eastern Church, that was taking place then, gave him a nudge. That was an irreversible process akin to falling into an abyss. The Pope and the Patriarch, furiously disputing who of them was more saint, who was touching the sky with his cap, were creating the institute of power under the arches of the temples, which they did not connect with spiritual affairs. Dependent officials, the bureaucracy in black gowns were called the voice of the Church, the symbol of spirit.
And the opponents of the Christians were certainly protesting. Serious problems of the early Catholicism are witnessed by appearance of independent Gallic and Toulouse Churches. How did they appear? What belief did they bring to people?.. Western society after the coming of the Turki was full of repentance, grief and sorrow. The split in the Roman Church did not happen by itself; it was the result of those human passions of which the Western Europe was full. The medieval Church reminded of a nursing mother being greedy for food: it wanted to taste everything. Catholicism, being Turkic in its spirit, was becoming European (pagan!) in its deeds when it started to sell the titles of bishops and even the Pope. When it gave absolution for money The confrontation of two world outlooks, the Eastern and Western ones, in multilingual society of the West was inevitable; it was seen everywhere being the reason of discontent. The reason witnessing of aberration from belief, from worshipping Heavenly God. The Church was being turned into the richest subject of the state; it was rolling in money while people tortured by despotism of the authorities were leading a beggarly life. Was it not the time when Christians started to change God's commandments? For instance, three Turkic commandments dedicated to God were supplemented with the fourth one concerning Saturday. The commandment Blessed are the poor by spirit (i.e. at the dictation of their spirit, due to their beliefs being able to stay poor for the sake of service of God) was substituted in the Bible by the pointless statement Blessed are the poor in spirit? This oddity was mentioned and in the commentaries to the Bible; it is written there that the commandment relates to people knowing the penury of their spiritual life, humble, despised by the world, denying running for worldly goods That is another sense; it is too far from the original.
Forgetting that poverty was his wealth, the Pope was slowly turning into a predator of life out of protector of people. The institute of religion was becoming heavier with worldly goods. Falsification and deceit of those times were the results of satisfied thoughts of the clergy Of course, in the West there lived not those Kipchaks which were led by Attila; their Arian spirit fell and grew dim in the congestion of towns, but something remained. Blood of the ancestors did not let conscience fall asleep. Certain people had a subtle sense of belief. That is right, of belief! Because religion, i.e. the set of ceremonies, people can change as many times as they wish while they are born and they die with belief which, the same as parents, cannot be changed. As against the Byzantines, Catholics accepted the Bible with stipulations. Because, according to some of them, Biblical God was an evil origin leading people up the path; he was different, he was not entirely spiritual (their words!) Heavenly God. It is striking, the truth was in their judging; Christian bishops called it heresy but they failed to prove what they said, which was another evidence of strength of the heretics. That is right, in the Christian Bible characters turned out not to be entirely spiritual. Not Altaic. Christ came from Greek myths, which was for the first time stated by the Bogomils who were irritated by free writings of the Greek Church. They had their own strict conception of God and Christ. Who were the Bogomils? It is not clear; there are no reliable evidences concerning them. It is just known that they were the followers of the dualistic belief. More simply it means those were the people with the Turkic world outlook, but their belief was Christian. They were the Christians. The people of the West who had ideology. They were not the barbarians. Their views on Christ were full of Altaic ideas those that had not died in peoples souls. They, like their ancestors, believed that Heavenly God sent not a god but His son to save the people.
In Bogomilism there were many branches. According to one of their theories the mixture of good and evil had happened before the visible world appeared since there was a good God, the creator of the invisible world, and an evil God, the creator of the sensible world. All this to a great extent reminded of Ulgen (the head of the kingdom of good spirits) and Erlic (the master of the kingdom of the dead, demiurge), the same as creation of the first man, giving soul to him, the fall of man, the serpent, the flood they all came from the Altaic mythology. Even the throwing of Erlic and his servants from the sky to the Earth and to the underworld from there. And the legend about the Savior the messenger of the Sky existed, it turns out, from the times of the Arians. It said that when the Earth is weltered in vice and forgets God, He will send his messenger To every nation will be sent its prophet. In the XIX century that was described in detail by the archpriest V.V. Verbitskiy who had been carrying out missionary work in Altai during 37 years. Another missionary, S. Landyshev, also narrated that; he was stunned because of similarity of Altaic and Christian myths. The Bogomils thought that Jesus (Son - Word) was a human being, although everything connected with fleshliness in him was seeming, not existing in reality. Even his death. One can also read it in Altaic legends. Sending the Savior to the Earth, Heavenly God tells him: Let Erlic kill you, you will not feel pain or fear: I will come and you will come alive again. In the world outlook of the Turki there was the conception about the end of the world and justice of Heaven. God's messenger was to reclaim people from sin and incline them to worship of God by his preaching And after that God will come down from Heaven , the dead will be resurrected by his will, the sinful earth will perish in the fire together with Erclic himself and the sinners, and under it pure earth being like white clay will remain. God will make a new earth of it. And those faithful to God will stay with him and will live in His dwellings The plot is strikingly similar with that of Christianity. The only difference is that the Turki called their hero Maidar. Not Christ. And
140 / 342
he lived during the Arian epoch when the Jews were cognizing their Torah. The similarity of Maidar and Moses is not in question here; it is a different talking point. Their religious society was formed by the X century in the Balkans. At least, the books of the Bogomils which survived were written there. But that does not witness of geography of the creed and its history since the communities of the Bogomils were met in Europe, in the Near East earlier (V century) and were known as Arians. They united people disappointed in the Christian Church. Those whose souls needed the white belief but on the Christian (i.e. European!) basis. Those people did not perceive Christianity because of its not entirely spiritual form. But they did not deny it! Their protest broke out in the V century when the Jerusalem presbyter, the Greek Hisichius called Heavenly God Father-God. That was grievous liberty having no analogues. An improvement which seems insignificant at first sight, and the fathers of the Church introduced new words into the canon: Father God ubo David. Because, according to a legend, Jesus Christ belonged to the family of King David. All the Christians were to say the words about the Father-God after each liturgy. Three times a day That was perhaps the best way to humiliate the belief of the Turki: in their understanding Eternal Blue Sky which sent the Savior and earthly King David were not equitable. Like a mountain and a fleck of dust. The Catholics were jointly protesting; they did not accept the innovations which were being introduced into Christianity. But in the heat of confrontation they were rejecting old traditions taken by the Church. That is why the Bogomils did not recognize the saving grace of icons, the cross and baptism. They denied church sacraments and together with them the dominating Church itself That was a valley braid coming from the river of the creed and flowing to nonentity bearing thousands of people in its waters.
It has not become a separate river although the Bogomils were praying in the open air, like the ancient Turki, avoided temples calling them Satan's palaces, uttered words in which the shining of Altaic tops was reflecting. But their words had no former spirit; Heavenly God was eclipsed by Christ. Too many things were forgotten; too important concessions to the new life were made. That is why even true words of the Bogomils were of no force and remained nothing more than words. The same as their behavior in society which they divided to their friends and enemies the initiated and the uninitiated. A masked ball where instead of masks words were gleaming, although their belief was sincere and pure. And one cannot deny that; they were really searching for the truth. They were trying the best they could. With their eyes tied and their ears shut. The Church of the Bogomils certainly failed to press Christianity; it lacked knowledge, wisdom and time. New religion cannot be created on an empty space; centuries and generations of philosophers are necessary. Of course this conclusion related to all the Christians who in the IV century obtained a new creed the philosophical system which cannot happen on a sudden. In the West the purity of belief in God was defended by the ancestors of the French, Italians, Germans, Spanish, Swiss who were called Khazars (Gazari) then but they were also masked words and the masked ball of life. Nothing else. They did not have their own philosophy, which means they did not have their own face. They were a branch of Christianity, not a religion However, such estimation might be remote from the truth; in it there is only the visible part of an iceberg since those people were keeping their philosophy in secret; they were concealing it. And that is why their teaching seemed to be a branch of Christianity. But they were united by the protest and their name heretics (Bogomils, Cathars, Albigenses). Because Christian bishops had only one name herecy for their teaching. That word has become history for
141 / 342
centuries, although very few knew its meaning. And the masks concealed Altaic names and traditions. In this sense the name Cathar, for instance, is indicative. It is commonly supposed that it is derived from the Greek cathar (pure) and Khazar is a wrong pronunciation of that word. But is that right? It is known that the Cathars only repeated the barbarian assertion that the Chruch took the wrong turning the next day after the Edict of Milan (313) when it became a state institution. That is an entire volume of unwritten history. Not recognizing the Greek belief could they take a Greek name? Never. And there is another thing: the Cathars spoke their own language which is covered by mystery in the West being called the mythical language oc In their aspiration to be separated from the Church weltered in vice, heretics showed rare firmness. One of the most important concerns of the Cathar Church connected with wringing up their clergymen was strengthening of their firmness in belief, writes J. Madoule, French theologian. Perhaps all of them preferred cloistered dreadful death Considering these words the name Cathars Khazars is understood differently, is it not? It consists of two ancient Turkic words: cath- (become firm) and ary- (purify [from sins]). It contained an appeal to the barbarians that officially accepted Catholicism to remain the Turki deep in their mind and keep the white belief of Heavenly God. The reason of discrepant estimation of the heretics lay, of course, not in the bishops, but rather in the actions of the protesters themselves. The French Cathars, for instance, prayed not to Altai but to Iran having taken for the basis of their Church the teaching Mani, its philosophy, with which they were trying to reconcile Christianity with the idea of Monotheism.
Pure Manichaeism was not suitable for Europe, and they saw it but they did not want to be barbarians the followers of their belief. Why did the Cathars turn away from the belief of their Altaic ancestors? For political reasons. Manichaeism was suitable for them because in included Christ into the pantheon; not that Christ the Christians had, but the real one. In their views on Christ to a great extent they retained Altaic tradition thinking that the messenger did not make satisfaction for peoples sins but only presented the teaching of finding salvation. Nevertheless the Cathars, the same as the Bogomils, regardless of their furious struggle with the Church, adopted a lot from Christianity and did not reject the Gospels. Their views were a strange mixture of beliefs. Christ for the Cathars was neither the son of God, the second figure of the Trinity, nor a human being, - continues J. Madoule. That was an angel sent from the sky to show the people their way to salvation. His passions are not real but seeming. And he mentions with astonishment that the Cathars, denying God of the Old Testament, respected prophets which in certain cases speak not about revengeful God of Israel, but of Good God being entirely spiritual. Without any suspicions that historian marked what modern historians are trying not to mention. In the Old Testament there are sacred texts obviously being not of Jewish origin. They were emphasized by the Cathars who had secret knowledge in which only the chosen the perfect were initiated. That was not by chance that the authors of the books of the Cathars in which the teaching was set forth have been lost for the most part. And the same goes for the deep belief of the Cathars that the Catholic Church managed to distort the clearest and the most evident concepts of the true teaching of Heavenly God. Even here the European Turki remained Europeans; they were searching for themselves between Altai and the Atlantic.
142 / 342
Suffice it to say that Monseguire an ancient estate was the spiritual center of the Cathars. Or that in Turkic regions of Italy, France, Spain there were Cathar churches uniting hundreds and thousands of parishioners. They were making sense of the spiritual culture which possessed Europe Catholicism and criticizing it hard. That was a difficult search of ideas which was not always successful. From here, from the West, pilgrims were leaving for Altai; the contact with the barbarian world existed, it is obvious; it is known from the documents of that epoch. In particular from geographic maps (the Catalan map is again in question here) on which monasteries of Altai are stated and one of them stands out the monastery near Issyk Kul where the body of St. Matthew, the apostle and evangelist, is kept. How was it taken there? And why? And the most astonishing thing is that even the hearth of their ancestors was seen to the European Turki through the shaded glasses of Christianity. It turns out they were not barbarians the people of Monotheism any longer; their belief was gradually leaving them? The Church was annihilating and killing heretics using all available means. Gallows, axes, words. For instance, they were allowed to live in country-like idyll where memory fades away and it seems that life is to change for the better. By itself. They took hope and fear for their wings but they were not able to fly. Because they were confronting not the Church, not their ideological rival, but the state machine created by the Pope. That machine driven by the most silent army by monks which undertook the hardships of an ideological war. Against that silent armada heretics with their white Church were helpless and wingless. Preaching the pure belief the protesting Christians were not moving to God by the road lying in Altai. They were searching for avoiding routs and failed to find
them since they do not exist. God is one, which is the essence of Monotheism. Nothing can be added to Him. And nothing can be removed. The Albigenses in France, Italy and Germany were openly struggling for the return to the white belief in Heavenly God; they called Christianity devil's force and denied it. In the XII century they created their Church but what did it change? The state allowed them to lead a lonesome life in rural communities; they used to preach there and people called them good people. And that was all. Apart from a moral example (which is valuable in itself) they could give society nothing else. And they have not given. During the XI XII centuries heresy became widespread: in 1010 the Cathars appeared in Ajan, in 1022 in Orleans, in about 1030 in Lombardy. From there heresy moved to Germany; in 1126 it was met in the Trier region, in 1146 in Cologne. But its main territory was the south of France Languedoc. At the end of the XII century Albi became the main bulwark of the Cathars in the South France; hence is the other name the Albigenses. It is striking that in this case Altaic traditions again were like fetters on the heretics' legs. In Altai people were fighting not for belief; they were born and died with God there. The authority of the clergy was unshakable there; it was being strengthened by personal examples. But such tranquil way of life was not suitable in Europe where the religion had become a political means and the Church its instrument. When there is no moral perfection of the clergymen it is impossible to look for the truth among them; any, even the loudest protest would turn into silence. Even mass self-immolations resorted by heretics were not enough to make the Pope notice them and change The happiness of victory comes to a man when his deeds glorify his name. But there were no deeds! The heretics were not allowed to do anything. They were living as though by themselves. Heresy was not moving over the boundaries of rural communities.
The Pope, parlaying on the Turkic card, was running the western world. At all times he had more friends than enemies. The Church, possessing peoples souls, left the opponents as much freedom as it considered necessary. For some time (i.e. till the XIII century before Baty-khan came to Europe) it was patiently watching heretics letting them shrivel up by themselves. The Pope was working without breaks. Even swimming in luxury of his palaces he was working. Understanding that the masses cannot be conquered by ideas, he Christianized Turkic feasts in order to subdue noisy folk celebrations. For instance, the feast of the Epiphany (Korachun) the 25th of December, he called Christmas (the Nativity of Christ). He did so not all at once but in several centuries after the infant was born. Before they used to celebrate that day on the 6th of January, which is still kept by calendars of eastern Chrurches they still celebrate Christmas on January, 6th. Korachun (from the Turkic kora-) means let it fade away; the exclamation related to the darkness and accompanied the fist from which solstice began. Or the day of the Epiphany. That day the most sacred dreams came true. Hence another custom accompanying the feast koliads (carols). The word (kolad) is translated as pray for an omen or, earthly, pray for gifts. That was a ritual accompanied by a decorated tree, roundelays, gifts, plenty of food The Council of Trullo of 691 (by 62nd rule) prohibited the Christians to connect the 25th of December with Father-God and ordered to accept the son in it. Displacement and oblivion of the feast began; the feast that had been celebrated in Altai from of old. Alas, heretics were loosing their trump cards one after another. Each their loss strengthened Catholicism. As though on purpose. In the V and even in the X century perhaps all the Catholics knew the Turkic
language since prayers of the Christian Church were read in it. That was the native language for many people in the Central and Western Europe, but it was called low Latin or the Vulgate. That was the mixture of Turkic and non-Turkic words. The same as in Byzantium, where coming of the Turki gave Graeco-Barbarian language, in the Roman Empire appeared the Vulgate, or low Latin. The name came from the Turkic bulga- (to mix) a shining example of changes of life in medieval Italy. The language reflected the essence of the dialect which Italy, the former Roman Empire, started to speak. Hence is the second name of the language low. That is why in low Latin standards of classic grammar were violated to a great extent, as modern philologists mark. In this view it is clear why many documents of medieval Italy were written in the Vulgate. For instance, in Monte-Cassino abbey, where early in the VI century Benedict the Nursian founded his monastery on the Turkic model. There in the VIII century was the center of Latin and barbarous enlightenment. And, of course, as it had happened in the history of the Turki, they themselves produced a new artificial language which was used for recording their chronicles for divine services. Although their native language, according to Paul Deacon, was a living language early in the IX century. Low Latin was a link of the chain started with Sanskrit in India, Pehlevi in Iran and, finally, Graeco-Barbarian language of Byzantine. In the Middle Ages the word Latin had only one meaning the speech, the language of the Catholics. That is what perplexes now. Classic Roman Latin is different; it is based on the language of the aboriginals from Lazio region to which Turkic words are added It has its own long history in which heretics were also loosing. In the south of France the Turkic language was called low Latin or the language of Provence; it was widely used.
But it is wrong to call it Altaic; that was a European dialect of the Turkic language. In this connection observations of famous Michelle Montaigne, hereditary Gascon, are interesting. He lived in the XVI century and learnt his native language in a village where he was sent by has father. Montaigne became famed for his philosophical works in which he chanted man and the grandeur of a historical fact. His book Experiments was given a hostile reception by the Church. And there were reasons for that. Here is a quotation (low Latin is in question): The Latin is native for me; I understand it better than French, but for forty years I have not used it at all as a spoken language and I do not write in it at all; but still during strong and sudden tumults I had two or three times in my life, especially when I saw my father, who had been absolutely healthy before, falling into my arms fainting away, first words coming from the depths of my memory were in Latin. Nature comes out by itself regardless of a long-term habit. This phrase is very profound. It shows how difficult it was for certain French to become French, how hard it was for them to forget their native language The European Turkic were like lions humbling themselves with captivity, but once they felt the smell of their motherland, depths of memory were open And low Latin came out. Like the lava thrown up by a suddenly awaken volcano. It is likely that the language was the reason of discords among the Catholics. Otherwise how can one explain that in the French language the spelling of words and pronunciation thereof are absolutely different? Why cannot the modern French understand the ancient French language? It is alien for them Could this have happened by itself? Starting from the VII century the Church was introducing the Roman Latin in order to pass over the heretics no one would be able to read their books written in Turkic, i.e. doubt the trueness of Christian
ones. The Pope managed to do a lot; the aberration from low Latin is the result of a hidden policy of the Church. Because late in the Middle Ages people were not mentioning the Turkic language any longer. But it existed. The language today known as the oc dialect in France. Books and articles have been written of that mysterious dialect, but none of them says where it came from and where it disappeared. Censorship! Church censorship has been editing the Christian science for centuries; even those areas which had nothing to do with the Church. As a result the word Turki was no longer used However, its smell remained. Oc dialect is the recognized language of troubadours (poets and singers); speakers of Spain, France and North Italy used it. The traditions of oc dialect are ancient; first European poetic works were written in it, which is recognized by science. From this dialect Provence, Lombardic, Venetian, Genoese, Catalan and other dialects of the West began. One would think, a dialect, poets competitions what can they say? A lot. In the Roman Empire there were no rhymed verses that is the fact. In Altai there were difficult competitions of poets and singers (they were called ashugs, which meant lovers in Turkic.). Lyrics of the troubadours remind of lyrics of ashugs to a great extent. Only few could strike their rivals with a word, like with an arrow, to smite a flying rhyme. In the Turkic language oc meant arrow. A very precise word for lambent and striking verses of troubadours. Apart from a poetic metaphor there is a direct translation of the word oc. In the countries where dialects of the old Provence language (old Catalan is a kindred language) were spoken, yes was pronounced as oc as against the North France where it sounded like oyl. Hence is Occitania (Languedoc) the country of the language oc and the North France the
country of the language oyl. It is striking that in the ancient Turkic language the expression oc also was of an affirmative character. And the Chuvash whose language retained a lot of archaisms in the last century used the same word oc in answering questions. That is not exactly yes, it is rather really, indeed. In a short word, like in a drop f water, the character of the nation is reflected the nation that was searching for its own face in everything. By the way, the ancient name of the South France Occitania which is considered to be ancient Provencal, is actually a Turkic word: oc-sitan ~ oc-stan the country of the [language] oc. After it is it still striking that in modern Turkic languages another ancient form of an affirmative answer remained ya[h] (alright, good, yes) which is very close to the German ja. And the word troubadour is also derived from a Turkic root, although today it is connected with the French word trobar (trobar versify). Alright. But how did it get into the French language and to France? Just with verses of the troubadours. In the Ancient Turkic Dictionary there is an expression tori-bar it means not just to create, versify but to do so in action, easily, for instance, wandering or rambling. When one's soul is singing and it is impossible to keep silent. Rambling singer, rambling poet this is the translation of the word which appeared in the South France together with ashugs. In Turkic settlements that melody of the soul longing for freedom could be heard everywhere. In Trobar arts there were many styles; in Europe one of them was called Trobar clus, closed poetry. That is the highest arts, sophisticated poetry for the most subtle connoisseur of words. Arnaut Daniel from Riberack was very skillful in it; he was very popular from 1180 till 1210. The poet, being a real Turki, astonished his listeners with rare and difficult rhymes; his poems were catchy riddles everybody found their answers in them.
Duality is peculiar to the troubadours in general. It is not by chance that researchers of that epoch mentioned that their love poems express absolutely not what we are supposed to hear in them. That is not an observation that is the truth. Certain Turkic poems cannot be translated into other languages. Perhaps every line there contains untranslatable pun. In any case entirely worldly thoughts of famous gay learning (gai saber) there concealed other deep images and symbols. The same is witnessed by an ancient Turkic expression sorrowful prophecy, sorrowful story qujgu sab which is concordant with old Provincial gai saber. Hence is the Knight of the Rueful Countenance! That is peculiar to the Turki which even at the funerals of their rulers used to hide their sorrow and grief behind weird dancing and singing. The Great Dante, respecting that genius of poetry, in his Divine Comedy inserted eight verses in the oc dialect into Song 26 of Limbo. Petrarch also remembered Arnaut in his Triumphs. Are not these historical documents?.. Arnaut in Turkic means guardian, warder. This name has not been forgotten by the people who, of course, know nothing about the poet now. They were made to forget it. In Europe this name is now pronounced as Arnold. The word trobar is not French; it existed in the Graeco-Barbarian language. But there, and later in Russian, it was pronounced as tropar prayer rhythms. They were read by a preacher accompanied by a musical instrument. In Germany (in the Holy Roman Empire) rambling poets and musicians were called minnesingers (from the ancient Turkic mingi merriment, joy, djangir sound, ring). And they used to hold the same competitions as the ashugs of Desht-IKipchak, Central Asia, Transcaucasia or troubadours of South France, Italy, Spain. These are the signs of one culture; they are like berries from one bunch. Of course minnesinger who lived in
146 / 342
the North preferred other melodies as compared with ashugs or troubadours, but their performances were accompanied by jugglers and rambling musicians (akyns) another tradition of Altai. Everything is evident here. It just happened so that historians have been neglecting it for a long time. And they have not been comparing. And historians of the XIX century, considering that cultural phenomenon, wrote: Music we know now, with its endless affection, amazing elasticity, expressiveness and color is of barbarous origin. Very few really understood their true words. Of course it was of barbarous origin The history of modern Europe is to be read, like a book, from the beginning from the estates of gentlemen that appeared in inhabited territories of the Roman Empire in the IV century. For some reason the Roman authorities declared Toulouse the barbarous kingdom in the IV century. There in five and even in ten centuries the spirit of Altai was alive the spirit of freedom; it came here on Attila's flags ashugs that were called troubadours were praising it. The French of the Turkic origin respected freedom. Look at the portrait of Carl the Great, the founder of France. He had a Turkic name Charlemagne, which means call for glory. And Carl the Brave, the rebellious knight of Burgundy, had the name Temir. Lancelot, the knight, had the name Telegi Whose names are these? At last, there is a science called onomatology! The science about names. Not accepting Christianity, Bogomils, Cathars, Albigenses used to read Lords Prayer. But the Turki were against them with the same stubbornness. Wearing clothes of Catholic bishops and monks they used to read the Turkic prayer called Lord Father too. That is how they lived. The Church taking possession of Altaic culture made it faceless, household, European and very beautiful like minstrels and knights.
147 / 342
Literature Part II (main sources)

1.AgathiusMirineyskiy.AboutJustinian's Reign.M.,1996. 2.AdjiM.Europa'sAsia.M.,1998,English translation,M.,2004. 3.[AleppoPaul]TheTraveloftheAntiochian EmperorMacariustoRussiaintheSecondHalf oftheXVIICenturyDescribedbyhisSon, ArchdeaconAleppoPaul.Issue13.M.,1896 1898. 4.AshmarinN.I.ChuvashLanguage Dictionary.Vol.12.Cheboksary,1994. 5.BartoldV.V.TwelveLecturesontheHistory ofTurkishNationsoftheCentralAsia// CollectedWorks.Vol.V.M.,1965. 6.[BartoldV.V.]TheBookofmyGrandfather Korkut:OguzHeroicEpos.Baku,1999. 7.BartoldV.V.TheMoslemWorld//Selected Works.Vol.VI.M.,1966. 8.BadwellG.TheHistoryoftheChurch.M., 1996. 9.BelikovD.ChristianityoftheGoths.Issue1. Kazan,1887. 10.BeliaevL.A.ChristianAntiquities.SPb., 2000. 11.Beowulf.TheElderEdda.TheSongof Nibelungs.M.,1975. 12.TheBible.Brussels,1983. 13.[Buzand]TheHistoryofArmeniaby FavstosBuzand.Yerevan.,1953. 14.ButanaevV.Y.KhakasRussianHistorical andEthnographicalDictionary.Abakan,1999. 15.VeinsteinO.L.WestEuropeanMedieval Historiography.M.;L.,1964. 16.VeberE.RunicArts.SPb.,2002. 17.VerbitskiyV.I.AltaicForeigners.M.,1893. Reprint.GornoAltaisk,1993. 18.ViolledeDucE.E.LifeandEntertainment intheMiddleAges.SPb.,1999. 19.VipperR.Y.AppearanceofChristian Literature.M.;L.,1946. 20.GerasimovM.M.ReconstructionofaFace byaSkull.M.,1955. 21.GeyushevR.B.Christianityinthe CaucasianAlbania:AccordingtoArcheology andWrittenSources.Baku,1984. 22.GibbonE.TheHistoryoftheDeclineand FalloftheRomanEmpire.PartsIVII.SPb.,
19972000. 23.GolenischevKutuzovI.N.MedievalLatin LiteratureofItaly.Sretensk.2000. 24.GautierJ.V.IronAgeintheEastern Europe.M.;L.,1930. 25.GrantM.TheFalloftheRomanEmpire. M.,1998. 26.GrantM.RomanEmperors.M.,1998. 27.[GrigorovichBarskiyV.G.]TheTraveltothe SacredPlacesoftheTravelerBasilGrigorovich BarskiyPlakiAlbovSPb.,1778. 28.GriaznevichP.A.DevelopmentofHistorical ConsciousnessoftheArabs(VIVIII centuries)//EssaysontheHistoryofArabic CultureoftheVXVCenturies.M.,1982. 29.GuberA.A.,KolpinskiyY.D.Artsofthe WesternandCentralEuropeintheEpochof NationsMigrationandAppearanceof BarbarousKingdoms//GeneralHistoryof Arts.Vol.II.Book1.M.,1986. 30.GurevichA.Y.EddaandSaga.M.,1979. 31.GuyonvarchCJ.,LeruF.TheCeltic Civilization.SPb.,;M.,2001. 32.DanteAlighieri.DivineComedy.M.,1986. 33.DarkevichV.P.WorksofWesternArtsinthe EasternEurope.(XXIVcenturies).M.,1966. 34.DarkevichV.P.ArtMetaloftheEast(VIII XIIIcenturies).M.,1976. 35.DashkovS.B.TheEmperorsofByzantium. M.,1997. 36.JonesA.H.M.DeathofAncientWorld. RostovonDon.,1997. 37.DiringerD.TheAlphabet.M.,1963. 38.DoblehofferE.SignsandMiracles:Stories abouthowForgottenWritingsandLanguages weredeciphered.M.,1953. 39.AncientTurkicDictionary.L.,1969. 40.[Eusebius]ChurchHistoryofEusebius Pamfilus.Vol.I.SPb.,1858. 41.ZhirmunskiyV.M.TheHistoryofthe GermanLanguage.M.,1965. 42.ZhirmunskiyV.M.FolkHeroicEpos. ComparativeandHistoricalEssays.M.;L., 1962. 43.ZhirmunskiyV.M.TheStoryofAlpamysh andtheHeroicFairyTale.M.,1960. 44.ZadvorniyV.TheHistoryofthePopes.Vol. III.M.,1995. 45.ZadneprovskiyY.A.AbouttheEthnic BelongingoftheMonumentsofNomadsof
SemirechyeoftheUsunPeriodintheIIcentury B.A.VcenturyA.D.//CountriesandNations oftheEast.IssueX.M.,1971. 46.ZasetskayaI.P.CultureoftheNomadsof SouthernRussianSteppesintheHunEpoch (endoftheIVVcenturies).SPb.,1994. 47.InostrantsevK.A.HunnuandHuns.L., 1926. 48.Jordan.AbouttheOriginandDeedsofthe Geths.Getica.SPb.,1995. 49.IsmagulovO.EthnicGeneGeographyof Kazakhstan.AlmaAta,1977. 50.TheHistoryofChina.M.,1998. 51.[Kagankatvatsi]HistoryoftheAguansby MosesKagankatvatsi.SPb.,1861. 52.CardiniF.TheHistoryofMedieval Knighthood.Sretensk,2000. 53.[Carpini]JohndePlanoCarpini.The HistoryoftheMongals.SPb.,1911. 54.KernsE.BytheRoadsofChristianity. HistoryoftheChurch.M.,1992. 55.KinM.Knighthood.M.,2000. 56.KlimovichL.I.TheBookaboutKoran,its OriginandMythology.M.,1988. 57.TheBookoftheRulerofShanRegion.M., 1993. 58.KovalskiyY.V.PopesandPapacy.M.,1991. 59.Koran/TranslationbyI.Y.Krachkovskiy. M.,1963. 60.KryvelevI.A.TheBible:Historicaland CriticalAnalysis.M.,1985. 61.KryvelevI.A.TheHistoryofReligions.Vol. I.M.,1975. 62.CultureofByzantium.IVFirstHalfofVII Centuries.M.,1984. 63.[Landyshev]StephanLandyshev. CosmologyandTheogonyofAltaicPagans. Kazan,1886. 64.LebedevA.P.TheEpochofPersecutionof theChristians.SPb.,1904. 65.LebedevD.19yearsCycleofAnatoly Laodicean(fromthehistoryofancientEaster cycles)//ByzantiumAnnals.Vol.XVIII.SPb., 1913. 66.MadolG.,AlbigeneDramaandtheFatesof France.M.,2000. 67.[Marcellinus]AmmianusMarcellinus. History.Issue13.Kiev,19061908. 68.IIInternationalSymposiumonArmenian Arts.Yerevan,1978.
69.IIInternationalSymposiumonGeorgian Arts.Tbilisi,1978. 70.IVInternationalSymposiumonGeorgian Arts.Tbilisi,1983. 71.MelnikovaE.A.SwordandLyre:Anglo SaxonSocietyinHistoryandEpos.M.,1987. 72.MetsA.MoslemRenaissance.M.,1996. 73.TheMythologicalDictionary.M.,1991. 74.MontaigneM.Experiments.BooksIIII. M.,19791980. 75.MurzaevE.M.TurkicGeographicalNames. M.,1996. 76.MullerA.TheHistoryofIslam.Vol.1.SPb., 1895. 77.TheNationsoftheWorld:Historicaland EthnographicReferenceBook.M.,1988. 78.NeikhardtA.A.TheMysteryoftheHoly Cross.M.,1963. 79.OsokinN.TheHistoryoftheAlbigensesand theirTime.M.,2000. 80.TheSongofRoland.M.;L.,1964. 81.PolevoyV.M.TheArtsofByzantium// GeneralHistoryofArts.Vol.II.Book1.M., 1960. 82.PolevoyV.M.TheArtsofGreece:Ancient World.TheMiddleAges.NewTime.M.,1984. 83.[Polo]MarcoPolo.TheBook.M.,1955. 84.PosnovM.E.TheHistoryoftheChristian Church:(BeforetheDivisionofChurches 1054)Brussels,1964.Reprint.:Brussels,1988. 85.Prisk.RomanEmbassytoAttila.SPb., 1842. 86.[Procopius]ProcopiusfromCaesarea.The WarwiththeGoths.M.,1996. 87.[Rubruk]WilliamdeRubruk.TheTraveling toEasternCountries.SPb.,1911. 88.SventsitskayaI.S.SecretWritingsofFirst Christians.M.,1980. 89.[Simokkata]FeofilactSimokkata.History. M.,1996. 90.[Syrian]EphraimtheSyrian.Aboutthe DaysofChristmasCelebration.Aboutthe FoundationoftheFirstChurchesin Jerusalem//TextsandResearcheson ArmenianandGeorgianPhilology.SPb.,1900. 91.SmirnovS.PhilologicalNotesabouttheOld TestamentLanguagesintheirComparisonwith ClassicLanguagesReadingtheLetterofPaulto theEphesians.M.,1873. 92.MedievalLatinNovelsXIII.L.,1989.
93.TanzagitheFatherofAltaians:Altaic FairyTales.M.,1987. 94.[TaubeE.]FairyTalesandLegendsofthe AltaicTuvins:CollectedbyEricTaube.M., 1994. 95.[Tacitus]CorneliusTacitus.Annals.History //SelectedWorksin2Volumes.SPb.,1993. 96.TisengausenV.G.CollectionofMaterials RelatingtotheHistoryoftheGoldenHorde: ExtractsfromArabicWorks.Vol.I.SPb.,1884. 97.TisengausenV.G.CollectionofMaterials RelatingtotheHistoryoftheGoldenHorde. ExtractsfromArabicWorks.Vol.II.M.;L., 1959. 98.ThomsenW.DecipheredOrchonandYenisei Inscriptions/TranslatedbyV.Radlov// NotesoftheEasternDepartmentofRussian ArcheologicalAssociation.Vol.VIII.IssueIII IV.1894. 99.TreverK.V.EssaysonHistoryandCulture oftheCaucasianAlbania(IVcenturyB.C.VII centuryA.D.).M.;L.,1959. 100.TreverK.V.EssaysonHistoryandCulture ofAncientArmenia(IIcenturyB.C.IV centuryA.D.).M.;L.,1953. 101.UseinovM.TheHistoryofArchitectureof Azerbaijan.M.,1963. 102.UspenskiyF.I.TheHistoryofthe ByzantineEmpireoftheVIIXCenturies.M., 1999. 103.UspenskiyF.I.ChurchandPolitical ActivityofthePopeGregoryI.Kazan,1901. 104.FisbeinM.ReligiousTraditionsof Judaism//ReligiousTraditionsoftheWorld. Vol.1.M.,1996. 105.KhakasHeroicEpos:AiHuuchin// FolkloreMonumentsoftheNationsofSiberia andtheFarEast.Vol.16.Novosibirsk,1997. 106.[Khorenatsi]MosesKhorenatsi.The HistoryofArmenia.Yerevan.1990. 107.KhosroevA.L.FromtheHistoryofEarly ChristianityinEgypt:AccordingtoMaterialof theCopticLibraryfromNagHammadi.M., 1997. 108.AnthologyofLatinTextsofMedieval Authors.M.,1956. 109.Christianity.Encyclopedia.Vol.13.M., 19931995. 110.ChichurovI.S.ByzantineHistorical Works:Theophan'sChronography,
Nicephorus'sBreviary.M.,1980. 111.ChubinashviliG.N.Researchesonthe ArmenianArchitecture.Tbilisi,1967. 112.ShebutinA.TheCuficKoranofSaint PetersburgPublicLibrary//Notesofthe EasternDepartmentoftheEmperor'sRussian ArcheologicalSociety.Issue14.Vol.VI.SPb., 1982. 113.StaermanE.M.AntiqueCultureCrisis.M., 1975. 114.TheEpochoftheCrusades.SPb.,1999. 115.JacobsonA.L.Regularitiesinthe DevelopmentofMedievalArchitecture.L.,1985.
Part III
Under the Sign of the Cross and Crescent
Arian Europe
Certain descendants of the Kipchaks protested against Catholicism in a different way they moved to the North with their families, far from the Roman Empire, over Rhine. Their spirit of freedom had been living there from the times of Attila, which is witnessed by historical monuments of that epoch and the campaign of Attila himself in 435. In the European North he founded new khanates. Those monuments remained in a rather good state; they are different. And they are not silent at all, as it is common to think now; those are barrows and stones with runic writings which can be read. And besides, that is not forgotten but at the same time not properly read folk epos. And of course the people the bearers of traditions or genetic and anthropological material which it is impossible to fake. It is in Lithuania, Poland, Czechia, Germany, Austria, Denmark, Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg, Sweden, Norway, Iceland In a word, in nations that surrendered to Rome and accepted Catholicism not all at once. For them, for these countries, late in the Middle Ages a wearisome war was waged; Rome managed to knock out the spirit of freedom with difficulty. From the IV century its own culture and policy was being formed there since they started to confess another European religion there another branch of Monotheism. Not Christian. Scientists called it Arianism; it is a unique sign of the medieval epoch it was a rival of Catholicism and Greek Orthodoxy. Its vivid trace is Protestantism which still determines the life of millions of people. And it is the result of the Great Nations Migration, another fruit of the Turkic culture given to Europe by the East.
Today the Europeans do not know Arianism; they have forgotten it and call it paganism. In that not well-known word even experts see the heresy of the Egyptian priest Arius, which is absolutely wrong. The Northern Europe, its old belief, had nothing to do with Egypt, with Arius; it was too far from Christian passions that were taking place in Constantinople, Alexandria and Rome starting from the IV century. That was a region free from the spirit of the Greek belief, an independent territory which had only certain outward signs of similarity with the religion of the Near East They had the same source! Here, in the European North, from the times of the Great Nations Migration people were aware of and retained the Altaic teaching of Heavenly God but with a different, not Christian framing. They, those arising traditions, were interlaced into the canvas of the new European culture which was getting the right to live north from Rhine and Danube. That was being done by the Germans not by order of Constantinople or Rome. They were doing it by themselves. At their own discretion. Original culture of the Central and North Europe was being formed. New culture. European, but different one. Hence are Arians, Aryans that is what the Christian clergy called the Germans, barbarians, i.e. the natives of Altai who settled in Europe and, of course, did not accept the Greek belief alien to them in everything. They did not recognize the supremacy of Byzantium in politics either. Of course, the Christians could not consider the Arians their coreligionists. On the contrary, they regarded them as the enemies. Rivals. Competitors. Confusion which was purposely created around Arianism in church and historical literature comes under notice. Two independent phenomena of spiritual life not connected with each other are represented as one and the same. The teaching is connected with the priest Arius forgetting that that teaching had existed long before Arius was born at least five centuries before it happened. It was being developed in communities of Transcaucasia, Near and
151 / 342
Middle East and resulted in the creation of the Armenian, Albanian, Coptic and other Churches which called themselves Monophysite and non- Chalcedonian in the IV century. While in Europe the subject of Arianism is absolutely different; it is connected with non-recognition of Christ as God, which means with non-recognition of the Vicar of Christ, i.e. the Pope. The problem of Arianism became important here because of the fight for ideological hegemony of the Church among barbarous nations (the Turki called the Goths, Vandals, Langobard, Franks, etc.) with which that teaching carried weight up to the IX X centuries. That is what was happening in reality. Two feuding centers North and South appeared; they were speaking one and the same language but confessed different spiritual cultures. Hence, of course, another division into nations. It seems here it is necessary to emphasize the fact that the name Arians, or Aryans appeared not in Europe and even not in the Middle East. It was known in Tibet, in Persia, India long before the Common Era; the name related to the newcomers from Altai. In Tibet, for instance, there is a region called Arius where those very newcomers settled two and a half thousand years ago. And in Iran there is a region which modern name is concordant with the word Germany (Kerman, German) where from of old, from the times of Persia of Achemenids, the Turki have been living. In the Bible that remote eastern country called Ariil is also mentioned. In Tuva, for instance, there is a famous royal barrow Arjan of the VII VIII centuries B.C.; it contains about 70 burial frames with horses skeletons, arms and other items. This is perhaps the most ancient trace of the culture connected with the Arians. Such connection is confirmed by the name of the barrow. The name arjan had a literal meaning heather, juniper used for fumigation and purification from evil spirits; it is concordant with the Turkic aryg (saint, pure, noble). Hence is the word Arian.
European and Asian Arians had the same totemic signs; they are likely to be the copies of each other these are adji (equilateral iron cross) and mandala (ark, reliquary). That is the only way it could have been there; these are the signs of Altai which, according to a legend, referred to the keepers of the Universe, the preachers of Monotheism. Of course, European Arianism, in defiance of needless insistence of modern theologians, had nothing to do with Christianity since it (its traditions!) had been living before the Common Era, i.e. long before the Emperor Constantine approved of the Christian religion. Arius himself, from whom Arianism is derived, was the native of Indian communities of Egypt; hence his Altaic knowledge. And non-Egyptian name! It had not been met on the banks of Nile before the coming of the Turki as against Tibet, India and Kushan khanate. It was used by those called Hanifs or Nestorians. It is a foolish thing to deny Arianism as an independent teaching. And it is even more stupid not to see the traces of the East in it but to see the conspiracy of certain antichristian forces. What heresy and conspiracies can be in question if the Greek belief was nothing in the times of Arius? There was no need to fight with it; it was weaker than a squeaker. And it is beyond dispute that the Arians, and not only them, were the rivals and competitors of the Christians. The Arians (the same as Moslems later) defended the purity of Monotheism; there was nobody except for the Most High above them. The Priscillians, the followers of the teaching which was getting stronger in Spain and other southern countries, are an example. It was a sort of composition of provisions of Manichaeism, Gnosticism and local beliefs. And their teaching was directed primarily against the Christians, but the interests of the Iranian policy in Europe are found in it. That was its Trojan horse. The Christians failed to rebut it in terms of ideology; they did not have enough knowledge. Theological dispute was settled
152 / 342
by the secular arm in 384; the Priscillians were accused of magic and preaching immorality, which was punished by a death sentence. That was their truth. The Arians were living with it. Firmness in belief, spiritual purity gave their culture and themselves a unique singularity. Ulphilas (311 383), one of the founders of that belief in Europe, its patriarch, had immense authority. At least it is known that he accomplished the same spiritual feat as his contemporaries, Saint Jerome, Augustine and other doctors of the Catholic Church. They were learning and growing in one cultural area. Ulphilas gave the Arians his own Vulgate, i.e. unchristian Bible. It is evident that that was, and the same went for the Catholics, the translation of a Turkic service book with different comments. There, for instance, was no book called Kings where feats of arms Biblical characters are described; it seems those feats were known to the Goths from other sources This incomplete text later became the basis of the Arian teaching which was strengthening in the north of Europe. Catholicism and Arianism, by all appearances, were born at one time; they were growing like twins. They were fed from the same hands with the same food That northern Bible has gone for good the same as Arianism; the inquisition decided their fate, but certain fragments and Skeirihs comments to that Bible remained that is a very strange document. It is mentioned in the book Christianity of the Goths which saw the light more than a hundred years ago. Who was the author of those comments it is not clear; and the author of the book paid attention to abundance of words and expressions not peculiar to the Gothic translation [of the Bible]. Here is an impenetrable mystery It seems, the same as in Persia, Byzantium and Armenia, in the Northern Europe there was the language of those initiated into the mysteries of religion rulers and clergymen used to speak it and there was the language for the masses. Hence is striking discrepancy between
153 / 342 Under the Sign of the Cross and Crescent
Skeirihs and the text of the Bible; hence is fierce fight for destruction of Arianism in the north of Europe: some khans were inclined to Catholicism, others, as Gibbon mentioned, were urgently burning those who denied to worship God of their ancestors together with their tents and families. As a matter of fact that was all about the text which clarified the teaching of Heavenly God, which is seen in the title if it is translated from the ancient Turkic language. By the way, the beginning of the second Gothic prayer Our Father was pronounced as Atta Unsar. The word atta meant at first the head of family and later the head of tribe and was the root for a modern German expression Adel, nobility. If gemination which appeared with a later tradition is discarded, we see a Turkic word ata (father). With that ancient word the prayer of the Germans and the roots of the German language started. It also contained the source of European Arianism which will be later scornfully called paganism. It turns out, in a small ata, like in a magic mirror, the intimate history of the Germans is reflected. Another thing is also strange; late in the IV century, as we know, intense competition concerning elaboration of the European ceremony of divine services was taking place between Catholicism and Arianism. At that time the bishop Ambrosius wrote first Christian rhymed hymns which were later introduced into the tradition of the Catholic Church. Those hymns were read with singing accent; they appeared, according to the chronicles, in order to compete with the Arians in the trueness of the ceremony. Historians have different opinions about whether Ambrosius was the originator of European poetry. They also name Prudentius who, it seems, was elder, although they lived during the same epoch. His verses are presented as an example of antique poetry but with new heroes that joyfully shake the dust of the old world off their feet A strange conception, is it not?
If there was no antique poetry, were there its old heroes?.. Let alone hermits praised by the author of Peristephanon they are not lone persons but a host which fights, perishes in order to rise again victoriously. As a matter of fact, that book praises the Great Nations Migration with which the Western Europe was in contact at that time. It is interesting, is it not? Although to compete is not the most precise word since that was all about the accordance with divine services of the Arians and the Turki of Altai. By the way, from those hymns, as it was marked by the experts, European poetry began! Those were the first rhymed lines that the Latins heard However, this might be wrong. Time retained other examples of the Turkic poetry; certain lines are more than two thousand years old they were cut in runes on stones of Altai. Immortal epitaphs. For example these outstanding lines were put together not by a beginner:
God created the world of hollows and the world of tops, To make the heavenly dome always turn there, To make the stars fly there, The night changes the day there without fail there. God made the sky the color of turquoise, Threw the nephrites of stars in the sky, He threaded the Libra constellation, And the night changes the day there without fail. The Runner of Destiny galloped over the world He stroke fire and was burning The grass world: it became hot, smoky, scarlet And the flame is still flaring. It is possible that early in the Middle Ages the Europeans heard the following verses: God's benevolence they say it is a gem, God's benevolence there is nothing more precious. But more precious than sapphires is my God you, the powerful hero. But more precious than rubies is my powerful hero my God
Church establishment, should we forget that the Emperor Valens (364 378) who had been reigning before Theodosius I came to Rome, was a strong Arian? The traditions of Altai were not alien to him, according to his biographers. And what is more, Valens exiled the adherents of the Greek belief, whom he could not stand, from Rome That is the true Roman history without faking. And it seems it should be mentioned in this connection that the Catholics under Theodosius and Arians under Ulphilas performed the ceremony of consecration into belief (baptism) the same way in a baptistery by putting into holy water three times. Both of them repeated ary-alkyn which they were taught in Derbent. Only under the Pope Gregory the Great the Catholics altered that Altaic ceremony, of which the Pope notified Leander, the Bishop of Seville, in 591. His letter remained. It is possible to say that Gregory was the last Pope of the Roman world; he made Catholicism rich declaring the slogan which ran permission and fastening with which, as a matter of fact, the deviation from the former social values and appropriation of new, i.e. Turkic ones, began. That was performed during the epoch of Carl the Great. The Pope Gregory, by the way, wrote his proclamations in low Latin; he really knew the Turkic language well. His sobriquet Dvoeslov (in Russian it literally means that he knew two languages) speaks for itself. History has plenty of surprises. Carl the Great (742 814) from the dynasty of Charolings, who is considered to be the founder of France and the one who united medieval Europe, is a Turki according to his family tree and his tamga he belonged to the family of Balts. His real name is Charlamag (Charlemagne), which is translated as call for the glory. A very popular name. In order to conceal the historical truth, the Europeans deliberately made the names of many historical characters sound in a Latin way, so that the events loose their coloring. Let us remember that the name of the famous knight Carl the Brave was Temiraire. There are many similar examples. Double names
The verses have not faded away; they still have their beauty after centuries they have just been forgotten. Speaking about the times of the Catholic
were common in Europe; one of them sounded in the Turkic language But that is another evident trace of the Great Nations Migration. Thus the name of the father of Carl the Great was Pippinus Brevis. Or, more precisely, Pippin Der Kurze, which in Turkic means Pippin that became important and respectable. The name appeared in 572 when he, the mayor, became king What has Brevis to do with it (the name means short)? Hence, by the way, are princeelectors who by the XIII century had been creating their board in the Holy Roman Empire. Reformers of the truth were acting rudely; they changed a couple of characters in the name and respectable turned into short, brave into bald, divine into devil and so forth. Thus, for instance, the father of William the Conqueror, Robert Magnificent or Divine became Robert the Devil (Diable), although his name came from Dev Heavenly God, which is mentioned in an ancient saga. The Turkic culture was coming to European towns through different gates. It was coming from the south and from the north. And it was being established Later, after the Northern Europe was conquered by the Catholics, the words Arians and Arianism were given the meaning that was too far from their original one by theologians and politicians: at that time the dead were being turned into the living and the living into the dead. Which can be explained; the colonization of the East was beginning and the Turkic trance in the history of Europe was being destroyed. The Western Church became the master of life; it did not need any rivals. And declaring the inquisition it started the campaign against Monotheism. Modern history was being written by them by the winners; in their lips ancient words were obtaining new sense. And the world was turning upside down. The Turki did not find the place for the Turki in those
writings; brothers did not see each other. In the religious frenzy of Europe people were distinguished not according to relations but according to religions. That was akin to an epidemic. At that time appeared nomads, pagan Tatars behind whom, according to the Catholics, there was nothing but savagery and debauch. What religion is in question here? What beneficence? What Monotheism? Blood brothers became enemies just because they were looking at the world differently However, angels in the sky were recording what was being done by small men in robes. They will not avoid the justice of Heaven they, the winners who knew that Arianism was not heresy, not paganism but the white belief of Altai to which picture were added certain features of the ceremony which had existed with the northern Europeans (Celts) before the coming of the Turki. It was a religion to the same extent as Judaism, Christianity, Islam or Manichaeism. The boundary between the Arian and Christian Europe was certainly felt; it divided the continent into two different worlds: one of them was living and natural and the other invented and ceremonious. Black and white. If one looked from the north, the south seemed dark, and if one looked from the south, the north was obscure. The Arians accused the Christians of worshipping three gods and aberration from Monotheism; the latter defended themselves as they could; in defending themselves they turned to theological abstractedness which were being composed by diligent warriors of Christ. Belief and its purity was the distinguishing feature of the North Europe as compared with South Europe. These spiritual contradictions resulted in everlasting fight, that deadly enmity of the Germans and their neighbors which was not interrupted in the Middle Ages and later. That is the history of the king Chlodwig and the family of Merovingis; that is the history of the Principality of Geneva; these are dozens of other histories with which medieval Europe is sodden like with blood: by force or by cunning
the Turki imposed their belief and their truth to other Turki. And that is perhaps the most striking thing in their secret history. In that contradiction the position of the Arians was more honest. They were not physically destroying the Catholics; on the contrary, in all their towns and countries they let them confess Christianity without restraint. The Catholics were acting in a different way; conscience of their supremacy which, it is possible, had its roots in their Roman imperial past, weighed upon them, and they did not trouble themselves disputing inevitable in a religious war. They forced their way counting on arms, not on words. The enmity reached its climax under Carl the Great who was aggravated because of independence of the Arians: by the Pope's will he started that legendary campaign against the citadel of Arianism in the North Europe and gave Arianism if not the deathly than a baneful wound. People in robes that are correcting history are aware that since 336 Arianism as a religion was dominating on the continent. The Emperor Constantine, the founder of the Christian Church, repented his errors and granted all the rights not to Christianity but to Arianism which was a belief distant from politics. Constantine's children gave Arianism the dominating position in the teaching of the Church that was being formed then. These facts are set forth in the Christian encyclopedia. Mentioning them we do not open something new. We only repeat what we know. If it had not been for Theodosius I, a great politician for the sake of the Catholic doctrine or, more precisely, in order to strengthen Turkic hordes in the West he disobeyed Constantine's decision it is not likely that today anybody knew about Christ at all. With Christianity it could be the same as with Priscillianism. So many tragedies and sorrows could be avoided. However, they have not avoided them
When frictions were taking place in Christianity, certain Latin Turki, putting on a belt of happiness and not willing to confront with the clergy, were changing favorable South for comfortless North; they left for it with their families so as to retain freedom. There, to the northern lands, they took their knowledge and skills, for instance, to raise horses, turn up the soil, which the aborigines certainly could not do. The same as they did not know iron metallurgy, ironmongery, brick building. Arian Europe was rising slowly. It had no potential and the experience of power which existed in the countries of the former Roman Empire, the same as it had not similar population. Its climate was different. But nonetheless. It had natural resources which the Christians the Byzantines and the Romans did not have. That changed political milestones dramatically; the northern world was becoming attractive. Iron deposits in Norrland and the Turki being able to smelt it by the IX century were forming the political face of Scandinavia which became the leader of Arianism. When the Altaians appeared there at first, a union of the nations had been established there. They were called the Goths. And apart from that participants of that union were called Vikings, Normans (in Russia Varangians); in the history of the world they were mentioned for the first time in 839, when the embassy of the northerners came to Constantinople. Those were not the beginners in politics; not savages covered in furs. Their reputation horrified the Greeks and simultaneously it attracted them. Of course, those were the enemies of the Catholic Rome conquering its colonies in the north of Europe one after another and the Pope was not even objecting. Alignment of forces was in favor of the northerners. The Prologue of Heimskringla, the book containing sagas of the Normans, is indicative. According to the Scandinavians, that is a sort of encyclopedia of the North Europe describing legendary times up to the last quarter of the XII century. The time of the
Vikings, according to the saga, began after the ruler Freyr was buried in a barrow in Upssala- that was the first barrow in Scandinavia. Before that was the century of burning when the dead were burnt. And after Dan the Proud, sea-king of the Dane, ordered to raise a barrow and bury himself in it in battle armor together with his horse and the whole harness and other goods, a lot of his descendants started to do the same, and the century of barrows began in Denmark while the Swedes and the Norwegians still had the century of burning. Let us add something to what was said: the burial ceremony is perhaps the most conservative one; it is changed only after coming of a new spiritual culture. From the time when barrows appeared, presence of Altai in Scandinavia became clear. Barrows, horses, stone stelaes and other signs of Altai could not appear there by themselves. Another thing is also indicative; it is clear from The Song of Nibelungs appearance of the title chagan is in question. Chagan, chegni This title, as far as we know, was borne only by Turkic rulers. It could not appear in Scandinavia by accident either. Haakon became a proper name. The Greeks, trying to be closer to the Romans, offered advantageous economic projects to them, namely trading for which they organized the route from the Varangians to the Greeks New political union was being planned; it was revealed not all at once. In Scandinavian sagas, in these unique poetic chronicles, much was said about the Normans and their life at that time: the kings of northern seas, discoverers of lands. A courageous nation. Rulers used to ride horses there; they had different clothes compared with the masses high hats bordered with fox-fur, boots making their owner look eminent. Trousers. Short caftan But this is the national clothes of the Turki; they were the only ones who used to wear it! Indeed, other members of Norman society had different clothes and walked on their feet; they were afraid of horses. They were prohibited to ride, which is witnessed by
a saga about the knight Orvar-Odd; he was the first Scandinavian who took horse late in the V century. And that was not a success. And Norman rulers, on the contrary, setting sail, took horses on board; they were not able to make a step without them In sagas a great many interesting details emerge; unfortunately ethnographers have not mentioned them yet. Astonishing details Indeed, how did steppe animals horses appear in woody Scandinavia in the V century? And the rulers khans? It is clear that the history of Persia, Caucasus and other regions where Turkic tsarist families were invited to reign repeated here. It is possible that the same happened there in the North. Unfortunately, certain details are not clear; much has not been read. Some facts confirm this hypothesis; their number is great. The sagas open the past only to attentive people; one should just be able to read them to read them according to Altaic rules. Otherwise one would never understand that the word saga is Turkic; it is a very ancient word savga (tell the story, narrate). For instance, the saga about Wieland describes the life of a skilful blacksmith the Turkic way of life. A great deal of ethnographic details and trifles emerge and it was impossible to invent them even the connection of Wieland with Genghis Khan: both of them made a bowl for wine of their enemies' skulls. An ancient Altaic custom of which only the chosen were aware. And in the saga about Siegur (Siegfried) there are signs of Turkic symbolics; details concerning the heroes Nibelungs are especially interesting Page after page of the saga describe the way of life in which the Turki were dominating. Wise Altaians used to say in such cases: an attentive person hears from afar. And they were absolutely right. A great many Kipchacks settled in Norrland. Otherwise how could stone stelaes, the same as in Altai, appear there? Archeologists determined: stones or, more
precisely, drawings and ornaments on them are identical on the banks of the Abakan river and in Scandinavia. They are the messages, parting words to a stranger. If you go to the left you will meet this or that, if you go to the right you will meet this or that. Left right milestones: north south. Altaic patterns (periapts) and dragons decorated the ships of the Normans. Signs of their new culture are well recognizable in the European North. For example, the Altaians, ancient Germans and Scandinavians had absolutely the same written language. They understood each other without a translator. Why? Later their language was called ancient Danish, which means nothing. Researchers recognize that at that time differences between the languages of Scandinavian nations were not comprehended. This recognition is worth much. It makes one want to ask: why are there so many Eastern dragons on the jewelry of the Northerners?... There silent Altaic symbols are everywhere; nobody understands their language. But they exist! They have not been invented. If one remembers that the Normans professed Monotheism, the same as Altaians, dragons and other ancient symbols recede into the background. Scandinavians called their highest God Donar, Dangyr, Tor. And these are the ways the Turki addressed to Tengri; they have not been forgotten yet, for instance, by the Chuvash, Khakasses and other nations keepers of Altaic antiquities. That is how they pronounce the name of the Most High. Monotheism in ancient Scandinavia is a historical reality; it appeared on a sudden together with coming rulers. That is an undisputable fact! And it is indicative that the northern religion was evolving according to the same pattern as everywhere from Altai to Atlantic: the Turkic base to which certain peculiarities of local beliefs were added. The sagas show how themes from local legends were interlaced into the biography of religion.
There existed an entire program; its result is evident it caused the disputes in the scientific area. How did Monotheism appear in the outskirts of Europe? How could a religious teaching evolve there far from civilized Rome and Constantinople? A puzzle? Far from that. Serious scientists have always agreed on one thing: Scandinavian sagas reflect real historical events It is a different matter how they should be interpreted. For instance, a Danish historian A. Malle connected the appearance of the Normans and their religion with the Roman Empire; according to him, from there after victorious wars of Pompeius a tribe of the Goths left the banks of the Maeotis lake (Sea of Azov) for Scandinavia intending to create in that refuge of freedom a religion and nation which was to become the weapon of its immortal yearning for avenge sometime. This is of course an interesting thought. But it is absolutely groundless. It was easily confuted by E. Gibbon who fairly doubted that any tribe could have been the abode of Gods. It happens only in myths. Nevertheless Malle's viewpoint gained acceptance. However, if one complies with elementary logic, a contradiction is evident: a religion could be preached by a person being familiar with that religion; and in that case it was all about Monotheism of which people were unaware in the Roman Empire in the times of Pompeius. The sagas open one page of the past after another showing that even the consonance of the name of Tengri in Altai and Donar of ancient Germans was not accidental. And not because Turkic nations pronounce Tengri's name in their own way Tengeri, Tegri, Ter, Tura, Deer, Tigir. The European Turki also could pronounce this name as they wished. Such conclusion is possible but it does not give much. Another thing is more important here not the words consonance but the image of Tengri and Donar. It was the same for Altaians and Germans. The image! And the worship ceremony. And that is not a
coincidence. That is the unity of culture based on Monotheism. Even if everything else is discarded (horses, iron, clothes, customs, written language), the unity is evident It is possible to debate about rulers, their clothes, and even about the written language, but any dispute is empty: the aborigines of the European North during the Great Nations Migration deviated from paganism. They cognized Heavenly God. This is the fact that simply should be accepted. Later the name Donar-Tor was replaced by Odin (Woden, Wotan) who was also called North Mohammed there was so much in common between the belief of the Germans and Moslems. It comes as no surprise; those were the branches of one tree: Monotheism prevailed in the East and in the North of Europe. Heavenly God reigned there. Of course not all the Scandinavians accepted the belief in Heavenly God; some of them showed praiseworthy conservatism, which is well seen in the sagas of Heimskringla. In the legend about Leib Ericsson who in the X century set sail to the west on a ship called Big Dragon, it is said that he brought the first priest to Greenland Not everybody treated his deed the same. It is indicative that in the north of Europe the institute of priesthood like Roman papacy has never existed. Belief expanded spontaneously. And that was the weakness of Arianism and, if one takes a closer look, also of the white belief of Altai and Islam. In religion organization they have been always loosing to the Catholics who created an excellent institute of power which was strong, aggressive and tenacious. As a matter of fact it was the decisive factor of the victories of medieval West over its ideological rivals. The Scandinavian religion is a phenomenon of culture and time which has been undeservingly forgotten in Europe; it was also a unity of two spiritual traditions of East and West. Thus, in consent, an alternative to Christianity (both Greek and Catholic) was being granted the right to life which northern nations had not had before That is an absolutely incognizeable process
the birth of a new culture. Everything seems to be clear in it while it is not so. Perhaps one thing is indisputable apart from the Greek belief in the West there was another counterbalance to Catholicism which had not been thoroughly investigated. Papal censorship was an obstacle! Censorship, indeed. Because The Saga of Englings says from where Odin came from Asia, from the country lying east of Don (Tanais). He was not god; he was the messenger of Heavenly God. i.e. a prophet teaching the northerners the skills they have known since then. Odin, like a naga in India, had the ability of reincarnation: his body was lying as though he was asleep or he was dead while at that time he was a bird or an animal, a fish or a snake and in a flash he reached faraway countries where he had something to do As we know, Altaic kamas were the only ones who had these higher skills, which is witnessed by folk epos. In the North Odin introduced the laws that the Turki had. Because he came from the country which lay south from the Great Sweden, it was called the Land of the Turki as it is written in the saga And from that line, by the way, the history of Russia begins. The enmity between the North and the South had its reasons. The Germans' antagonism against the Catholics was reasonable; they had a different worldview and wanted to lead a different life. Everyone saw its sun in the sky There are many facts confirming that; late in the XX century those facts called for a famous traveler, Thor Heyerdahl from Norway, to search for the motherland of the ancestors of Scandinavians. His expeditions to Azerbaijan and to Don were just a part of his way to cultural treasures of Altai. Not knowing much about the Great Nations Migration, he adjusted the routes of expeditions by intuition, not basing on his knowledge; that is why he failed to reach his desired goal his native Altaic hearth. But the direction chosen by him was correct the Turkic world. Heyerdahl declared: Scandinavia has foreign roots. But he failed to prove that; he
just did not have enough time. Its foreignness is primarily witnessed by Iggdrasil, the symbol without which it is impossible to understand the culture of northerners. That is a gigantic ash tree being the frame of the universe. The tree of life. In the consciousness of the Arians Iggdrasil determined the vertical projection of existence; different worlds came together in it (the earth, the sky, the underground world) giving an indication of not only the entirety, but also of the extent of the beauty. The standard of existence. Nine different worlds were united in the Scandinavian Iggdrasil: by its roots was lying the dragon Nidhegg and the snakes, middle leaves were being nibbled by the deer headed by Eikturmir and on top of the tree there was a wise vulture with a molted hawk Vedrfelnir. The roots of the tree of life were nourished by liquid from Mimir source from which the destiny of every human being begins. The evergreen tree emitted sacred honey, as though it was amber pitch; gifts and skills were hidden in its grains (hence is honey of poetry!). Pages of sagas are dedicated to the vivifying tree which, apart from everything else, gave the Northern Europe Odin Heavenly God: the sagas of Elder Edda and Younger Edda are convincing and categorical. Through the cognition of the tree of life one can understand how the Most High entered the world of the North In the tree of life the Scandinavians saw the image of an equilateral cross; it was the sign of preChristian culture, which is witnessed by state flags. And artistic ornaments, of course. However, the same is witnessed by drawings on the famous runic stone of the Men Island (England). There, on a former Norman colony, - in written form in runes! thoughts about the tree of life were imprinted It is striking it was the same as in Altai. Even in details. Only its heroes were called in their own different way by Altaians. Some time ago the culture of the East
was incogitable without the tree of life. And it was the same in the West. This is perhaps the brightest and the most distinctive detail (after belief, of course); it allows speaking about the unity of humankind culture and its indivisibility into East and West. Since nobody can tell or show where the former ends and the latter begins. After the Great Nations Migration the world changed it became entire: it accepted Tengri's religion, i.e. Monotheism. And painted it in its colors tinctures of belief are inimitable in every region. The same as nations there. Arianism may be little-known in Europe today. But it existed And what if that religion has not perished? What if the traditions of Arians were continued by the Protestants? Their descendants? That is right to some extent. Protestantism is a spiritual world which went into the shade of Christianity. Strict and entire, with its past and future. Those are not dissented Catholics, as they are called; they have their own significant past which the Catholics had not have. In the Middle Ages the North of Europe had a slightly broad face. Pure like Altaic Sky. And although it was blackened, it has not been lost. No. The Arians, tangling in the thinnest nets of papal politics, became Catholics, which happened late in the Middle Ages in different countries it happened in different ways. They were forced to deny the belief of their ancestors and recognize Christ and together with him the power of the Pope. That is what was happening But in the new papal family peace lasted not for long. Another culture could not simply die in cold Roman vaults; it was to express itself. And it expressed. And for that reason it remained. The Northern Catholics found strength and performed the Reformation of the Western Church shaking it down to rock bottom. The heresy of the Bogomils, Cathars, Albigenses was continued in the
north, in England; there it attained success perhaps for the first time. And that was due to William Ockham (1285 1349) and John Wycliffe (1320 1384), great theologians, philosophers and humanists of the Middle Ages. They were among the first Christians who managed, in terms of science, to express what was secretly born in souls of generations of the European Turki the trueness of the white belief. Their thoughts were notable for ultimate clarity and attractiveness. Temporal affairs of each and every human being, including the monarch and the Pope, should be the means of service of God according to the spirit and the letter of the Holy Scripture. They suggested this thought, which made the Rome go berserk. Their creativity was more than rural dreams of the ancestors with whom it was unnecessary to struggle; it had an impact on Jan Hus, Luther and other adherents of the spiritual purity in the West. Apart from the fires of the Inquisition the Church failed to propose anything in return; and the fires meant nothing and could not change a single thing The reformation became inevitable because of heretics. In a word, they attained recognition of views of their pastors. Their own, not papal ones! That was a successful step to the freedom of belief. But the way was over only by the XVI century. No doubt, a protest would have sooner or later united the northern Turki who at that time remembered the roots of the former culture, which has not happened. The Roman clergy turned out to be stronger and more elusive. So the Protestants did not express their ethnic relation and became a branch of Catholicism, although that is not exactly as it is. The project was born not in the depths of the Western Church, as western theologians assert; it was the protest of the people. The reformation revealed it; it made the secret out. But for a little while. The reformation opened the circuit of authorities which impeded a hypocrite to think in his own way and a slave to say what he thinks. From this minute the Popes,
Church fathers and councils stopped playing a part of supreme and infallible judges of the whole world and every Christian learnt not to recognize any other law except for the Holy Scripture and no other interpreters of the Holy Scripture except for their own conscience, wrote E. Gibbon. The reformation was a breakthrough to a new cultural niche Or the return to the old one? With the Protestants spiritual traditions of Altai returned to the north of Europe. When all the i's in the Reformation were dotted everything was suitable for everyone. The Pope got political power in the West and the Protestants obtained their white belief which, to tell the truth, was slightly changed. What was that? A bargain? Slyness? That is possible. But they brought peace and harmony to the West. The Calvinists and the Lutherans the core of the Protestants retained Christ in their divine pantheon, but they were allowed to restore ceremonies and communities which had existed before Christianity was accepted. They remained Christians having actually become Arians again. Or, more precisely, almost Arians. The Protestants deny mediators between God and men, i.e. the Papal Church and its clergy. Like the ancient Turki, actions are made the corner-stone of the believers' conduct. They abolished worship of sacred relics regarding it as paganism. They denied monkhood which is incompatible with the Church according to Altaic rules In a word, they continued the traditions of Arianism not flaunting them Is it not a mutually beneficial bargain? Becoming the Catholics they did not accept the Latin alphabet, as the Catholics were to do, but stubbornly kept on making a stand for Gothic writing which the Patriarch Wulfila left them. That script became the national script; experienced people found the unique image of German runes in it. And, in secrecy, they were proud of their unexpected discovery. The Pope with his omnipresent monks was powerless here: he could do everything, even lull peoples
memory, but he could not deprive them of their ancestors, which means he could not inculcate his understanding of rectitude and the beauty in them. Some time ago Arianism gathered part of the Germans into a nation (Normans) but later it divided them. The Germans have been different since then. The Swedes, Norwegians, Finns are the nations of one ethnic group; in the XI century they accepted Catholicism, in the XVI century they accepted Protestantism and split into small communities. Protestantism did not remind them of Odin and the tree of life. About the spirit of their ancestor, finally. The sagas were living by themselves and the people were living separately The disruption of cultures had an echo in The Saga about Olav, Triuggvi's Son. There is an episode there when Odin, having become a one-eyed old man, offered the hero to eat a piece of horse beef and thus remember the past. Catholics, as we know, prohibited the parishioners to eat horse beef and drink koumiss calling this food the essence of paganism Recollections of the past were disadvantageous for the Pope who used to divide and rule. The Protestant clergy had similar views. The cult of a horse peculiar to the Germans has gone for good together with Arianism. Although The Saga of Kind Hakon described joyful feasts for which they slaughtered cattle, even horses. Those were glorious days, the saga says. People certainly still feel the former ancestral unity and fail to explain it although the reasons are evident they are in the forgotten past of which the whole Scandinavian art reminds; it keeps the spirit of that time. For instance, so-called skaldic verses are significant; they are almost sacred, they are close to the poetry of troubadours that is the same style! The same mystery! The verses are simply to be read in order to remember the past. But how is that to be done? Nobody can translate into modern language and understand that ancient lines from that lost
Time Who knows, maybe the name of a Finnish town Turku which was previously called Abo (Abai) conceals the key to the mysteries of Christianity? Toponymy is a capacious science; several historical discoveries started from it. This name seems to be too strange for the North But, the same as skaldic verses, it has a deep double and hidden sense. Genetic misunderstanding is peculiar to Belgium and the Belgians, who are also Arians conquered by the Catholics in the past. There are two nations in this country the Flemish and the Walloons; neither time nor Catholicism made them relatives. The ancestors of the Flemish the Turki, Attila's warriors, came from Altai in the IV V centuries; their national clothes, customs, feasts, crafts and implements, decorations with sheared fox-fur, cookery in which garlic plays an important part, baths everything is Altaic. Especially patterns and ornaments still noticeable in Flemish villages on roots of houses an apex is obligatory. The Church made the Flemish forget their native language by about the XV century. Now they do not speak the Turkic language but they remember separate words and phrases; they remember they once had a native language. And that Flemish language could lead to a revolution in Turcology while it is now an abeyant relic to which they inoculate foreign roots. And it turns out that the Arian history of Denmark and Holland was also written in Turkic runes on the stones, according to Altaic rules. Catholicism became established there late in the Middle Ages. The great inquisitor Dominic in the XIII century was astonished by similarity of faraway Denmark with pagan Cumans, i.e. with the Turki of Desht-I-Kipchak and demanded to baptize one more time that dreadful country that had denied Catholicism But the Sun will return to the Danish Sky one day. What wonder when the sagas tell that that nation came from Don and was called the Dans. One should pay attention to the fact
that by the XIV century runes in Europe were fully replaced by Latin graphics and became the lot of European provinces. They were being in use in agricultural regions for a long time. In the XVI century runes were turned into the subject of interest of intellectuals of Scandinavia and later Germany who remembered after the Reformation about their Gothic Bible written with runes. By the second half of the XIX century ancient German runes obtained nationality; the scientists were discussing, for example, ancient English, Sekel and other written sign systems which were allegedly peculiar to those countries early in the Middle Ages. Here the book Runic Arts by E. Weber is rather indicative; in it even Altaic runes (Orkhon Yenisei) were mentioned they are elder than any other European monument. The author did not see the history of runes farther from Europe and did not try to see it Unfortunately, the German conception, the same as any other national conception, became determinant in studying runes in the West. Using this uncomplicated method politicians deepened the history of their countries and gave it national singularity. And they entrenched upon the Truth. For them, for the politicians, the epitaph on a burial place (Sparlosa-stepen) of the IX century was written: The one who spoils these signs will be a castaway weltered in vice known to everyone. Some time ago the Scandinavians knew that spoiling the runes makes harm to the departed, but later they forgot it. The same as they forgot other Altaic rules. They turned the glory of their ancestors into their own dishonor. The Dutch and the Flemish remember their relation and certain things from the past, but they cannot explain its roots. They have forgotten about Attila, about Arianism and about themselves. They do not eat horse beef and drink koumiss there. They regard the barrows as barbaric wildness But they still have much in common with what their ancestors had; for instance, famous kermises for which guests from all over the neighborhood gather together. What is that? In the Flemish language it means fair. Bur the fair which essence is expressed by the
Turkic word kerme a fair with bazaar, wrestlers and poets competitions, jugglers and jesters, horse races and masquerades. The fair where trade is not the main thing In a word, a folk feast. The Flemish had another feast, the most important one during a year; it fell within the middle of winter and was called Yol. The day when the darkness started to diminish after Christianization it was called Christmas and the etymology of the word yol which remained in Germanic languages was proclaimed unknown. Forgotten! But that is not right. The exact name of the feast is Yol Tengri, which in Turkic means God of Destiny. The feast of a fir tree; they decorated it, reeled around it and gave presents to each other The fir tree shows the road to the Sky; this tree is still esteemed in Altai. Also in full view of everybody there is the emblem of Holland a tulip. And not many people know that it is a steppe flower which is the first to effloresce there. How did it appear in the European North? Maybe a tulip (Turkic khan's flower) reminds the Dutch of something remote? A nation is an orphan without the past. The symbol, the same as motherland, is not invented or chosen; people are born with it it is the divine chime which only native congeners hear. All the rest is empty before it People, forgetting of their ancestors, sometimes start unnecessary disputes, for instance, about Ruses and other alleged nations. Ignorance takes too far away. But should the disputes be started not considering what was deemed to be Rus in Scandinavia? And Rus was the name of the coast near Stockholm. The Normans also used this word to call their colonies opposite the Baltic; they did so by force of an old Turkic habit of giving old names to new acquisitions. In Desht-IKipchak that was taking place everywhere geographical names were repeated rather often since they were a clich to characterize this or that region. White Rus, Kievan Rus and other Ruses became the citadels of Arianism in the north-east of Europe, vassals
of the Normans that were establishing a new European culture competing with Christianity, which it is customary to discuss now. V.N. Tatischev was the first and, it seems, the last one who said that. His Gordoriki and Khuni are the land between the Lake Ladoga and Peipus, or Chudskoe Lake, where the main town was Aldenburg (Altynbur?). The first Russian history did not conceal those toponyms; they were being discussed the same as peculiarities of the culture being their background. However later historiographers were freer in their undertakings Toponyms, these important details of the past, turned out to be ignored. And it turns out the Russians had been living in Altai before the Turki came to Europe, which is written in the book Collection of Turkic Dialects by a medieval scientist Mahmud Kasgar, the recognized expert of the Turkic world. Ruses were called the oarsmen, i.e. those living with an oar people engaged in this hard trading. At that this word is ethnic, emphasized Mahmud Kasgar. In this word or, more precisely, in the phenomenon being its background, there is an interesting correlation: in the eyes of the rest of the Turki the Normans turned into the Ruses since they were living with an oar and thus differed from their tribesmen. Yes, they took horses on board and rode them overland. So what?.. In a barrow the departed were put not with a horse but with a boat called the horse of water! This can be read in The Saga of Englings where barrows of Tun, Gokstad and the most famous one in Oseberg are mentioned. Those barrows of the IX century witness a lot Later the word Rus was given a different sense, distanced from Scandinavia and connected with a certain nation. However, the toponym Gardariki, or Gardy met in sagas of the X XI centuries relates to Black Rus, to its capital Kholmgrad which was later called Novgorod. Those that are called the Swedes today were called the Russians at that time and dominated there. Take The Saga about Olav, Triuggvi's Son it has the answers to all the questions concerning the
early history of Russia. Olav calls himself Ali; he was a descendant of Norwegian sea-kings brought up by Valdamar in Gardariki that very Valdamar known in Russia as the Grand Duke Vladimir Red Sun, the baptizer of Russia. The Saga about Olav is full of details of the Turkic way of life which have been ascribed to the Slavs, it mentions kanly (blood feud) and contains other adats. There, in sagas, it is said even about how and to whom the throne was reposed, how the genealogy of the rulers was formed, how they were sacrificed in order to guarantee prosperity of the people These are all true Altaic traditions. In Altai king was the bearer of the sacred origin. In the autumn of 865 English Russia was born; Arianism and Catholicism also collided in it. And again they did not become relative. The campaign of the Normans in England was a challenge to Rome. Since according to the rule established in the Empire, the lands westward of Rhine were deemed to belong to Rome; the Pope's power was recognized there all at once the Catholics had been reigning supreme there from the times of Brunhilde. The Scandinavians started a war by their impudent invasion; it was important for them to prove their presence on the continent, which meant in geopolitics. Their army quietly landed on hazy islands; it was headed by two brothers, two sons of glorious Ragnar known as Leather Trousers. And the first thing the brothers did in England was getting horses. Icelandic Saga about Ragnar Leather Trousers, an unedited chronicle, is about them Of course a religious war began. Not land was to be divided then. It is even possible that the Englishmen invited the Normans; this assumption is not occasional. A series of events allow asserting so. In England where aristocracy accepted Catholicism in 597 existed an
interest to Arianism; the Normans felt it delicately. The former religion of the Englishmen can be described by chapels that stand there now. The ceremony in them is different from that of the Churches, i.e. the Catholic Church; it is similar with what Norman Arians had. And the Turki of Altai. For centuries people in England have been going to Churches and Chapels. To the former in the morning and to the latter in the Evening. There are two altars there; people worship them this is the peculiarity of reticent Englishmen. Adhesion to the traditions retained the belief of their ancestors for the Englishmen (the Scots and the Welsh have nothing to do with it). The Anglican Church appeared when the Reformation began; that institute united to origins Catholic and Arian That is the essence of the Anglican Church. The Arians gave way to the Catholics there and retreated into their shadow. Since they did not have church organization papacy; they were not adjusting their politics, their communities were living by themselves and acting as they wished. And they were always loosing That is what Monotheism is. One community was to have one professional priest. And that was all. A pastor watching adherence to the ceremonies and parishioners morals. There were many differences between Catholic North and South. The clergy there was unaware of dazzling splendor which was almost obligatory for papal abodes; modesty and tranquil life of Altai took place there. The Protestants of England retained them. Rich Catholic cathedrals near low-key temples On the Isles everyone reads his own Bible in his own way that is the rule of the Anglican Church. Not everybody recognize there the mediator between themselves and Heavenly God not trusting the seal of confession and absolution to men of mould. Is this not classical conservatism?! Insular life could not have failed to affect the conduct of the Englishmen; for a long while the country was living in space of two worlds Catholic and Arian feeling
pressure of the former or of the latter. The family trees of first kings confirm that; they were the relatives of Scandinavian rulers. And they were also sacrificed in case of misfortune Everything was like in Altai, which is described in The Saga of Englings. For instance, in 1066 after the Norman invasion the Pope made the English aristocracy speak the Frankish language which remained the official state language for almost three hundred years. And the masses, regardless of the Pope's will, spoke their former language. This might be when the hatred of the Englishmen to the French began. And it becomes clear why the English Crown was among the first in Europe to altercate with papacy. Henry I and Henry II were not against religion but against the Pope whom they paid impost. On a sudden the Englishmen were displeased with the foreigners sent by the Pope; they owned the farms of the country and their income was higher than that of the English Crown. This circumstance is very important for an historian. The coming of the Normans to England made the Turki there stronger: the Anglo-Saxons were joined by a horde from Scandinavia. The Turki had temporal power and they started to protest against the Pope's colonization of the islands. England still keeps the spirit of that past. Take, for instance, the barrows found in Sutton Hoo, Suffolk Altaic traces are in every item there. However it is not customary to compare the findings with Altaic items in England. Although the famous animal style was peculiar to Altaic culture which was traveling all over the world together with the Great Nations Migration and the Turki. Its trace can be seen even in the medieval English Parliament. Aristocrats were sitting on bags with fleece. Those were not just bags with fleece but attributes of power in the old England. It should not seem offensive, but the aristocratic title baron came from the Turkic baran (transliteration of the Russian word meaning sheep) that humble animal was the measure of wealth. If one had more than lots of sheep (ten thousand) he was called bay
or baryn (one who owns everything); he belonged to the nobility and was allowed to sit close to the khan on a bag with fleece. They the barons with bags of fleece were the first vassals of the king, his subjects. It is indicative that they used to sit not in a row but in a circle during the sessions of Parliament. The same as in Altai. Baron also means master in Turkic. And intricate English money is also the trace of that forgotten past. Nothing has disappeared. Their shilling is derived from sheleg (not current coin in Turkic); it consists of the same twelve small or current coins. Pence is from peneg the monetary unit which the Turki called sytyr or sytyrlig and equaled twenty shelegs. Conservative Englishmen retained everything; they are proud of their ancient traditions. Thank goodness! The similarity of the Turkic manat and English money is another important detail; both these words mean money. This is a subject for an endless discussion When did the first money appear? Where? Why did they mint the image of the king the Lord's Anointed on one side of the coins and an equilateral cross on the other? Or another symbol of the sky? Maybe the shape of the silver penny of Offa should remove all doubts? On the coin the most ancient in England! there are Turkic runes. That is what, it turns out, the written language of the Englishmen was in the VIII century; those were their coins. Ancient money the exhibits of the British Museum in London is present in historical reference books and albums but for some reason they have always been considered in a wrong way And the golden coin weighting 72 grains of barley was called mark and cost 9 shelegs (sheliags) That is a known fact too. There are traces of Arianism in Iceland, Greenland; they were diligently missed by science. Runic monuments have not been adequately investigated while they are the proofs of the boundaries of the Great
Nations Migration. The boundaries of the Turkic world. However there are other sources of information confirming the geography of medieval Europe. For example, the ethnic history of Iceland is known from the Landnamabok. That is the saga about how in the IX century 400 settlers were forming first hamlets (pronounced as hutor in Russian, the word is derived from the Turkic otar!) on the banks of nonfreezing north rivers; the names of those hamlets remained. The core of the settlers was formed by Norman rulers and slaves the Celts and Britons. It is likely that the name Iceland was invented by somebody from among the rulers. Such conclusion can be made because of ice- in Turkic it means get warmer in other words Warm Land. Why not? The version of Ice Land is not convincing for Iceland: there are many ice lands in the Arctic Ocean and only one warm. There, near the town of Akureyri, green grass and flowers grow the year round. The island was found in the IX century by the Normans; it stroke them because of its warm climate everlasting summer near the Polar Circle. This is strange, is it not? Hence is its warm name. The name of the Icelanders is pronounced as Icelandigar. Tengri's Dangyr's presence is seen with the naked eye. People of Altaic belief! And the state flag of Iceland. Is it not a marvel? The flag on which there is a heavenly cross and two stripes. Here is the flag tug under which Attila used to wage a war, under which the Normans headed by Turkic commanders used to fight, the same as ancient Altaians and troops of Genghis Khan This is fantastic and everyone can see it. Everything is so near Which other words are necessary in order to recognize reality as reality? Maybe the fact that on the national emblem of Iceland there is a dragon (lung), eagle (kushan) and bull (oguz) the symbols of the reigning dynasty of the Turki? Or maybe the fact that the honorary
dish for noble guests of north Icelanders is a sheep's head? Or that they, not dreading the prohibition of the Church, used to drink and still drink koumiss and ayran, used to eat and still eat kyzy, used to tend and still tend sheep, used to full and still full felt, used to breed and still breed horses, used to enjoy and still enjoy horse beef? And maybe it should be added that in the Icelandic language there are sonorous Turkic expressions Akkur-eiri, for instance? Or that family trees there are similar to those of Altai with the division into tukhums and adding fathers' names to sons' names instead of a surname? For example, Ericsson; son ending here means posterity in the ancient Turkic language No, any example fades away in the light of a tug. Tug is the place where Turkic spirit lives; it has been lost everywhere except for Iceland And it also remained in Denmark! Even in America (Minnesota) medical Icelandic monuments were found. To tell the truth, they were declared a forgery more than once; those findings were too unexpected. But sooner or later the facts are to be analyzed in order to learn about the country called Winland discovered by Leif Eiriksson in 1000. That is what the aforementioned saga asserts. Leif was the son of Eirikr Raudi, the famous Norman. Together with him to the west sailed a man named Turok, not very god-looking person with a freckled face, round forehead and short legs. He perfectly knew the language of the Germans (in other words, he spoke fluent Turkic), was fond of handicraft and well-grounded in sciences. In America that Turok found wild vine (the Normans had never heard of it) and called the new country Winland. It is clear that more attentive and, which is important, quiet study of Scandinavian names is necessary. Many Turkic names are read in them. Or combinations of names and words which were possibly nicknames. The name Eric relates to them; in the ancient Turkic language it means power. The name (its versions) was widespread among the
Germans; later Catholics equaled its meaning to the word king (rik, riga). Although it is directly connected with another ancient Turkic word aryg from which noble Arians are derived. It is not improbable that Eric is the European sounding of the word Arian. It was deliberately distorted the same as, for instance, the name Arnaut which was turned into Arnold. Or Ali into Olav. Or Balamir into Vladimir That is the method of historical reconstruction common for the Catholics. Winland lay south-west from Greenland; it is marked on an ancient map where the Atlantic Ocean is called Tengyr. On the margin of that map there is the text about the stages of the travel written in runes. For a long time the map was being kept in Hungary; it is unique since it was made on paper the composition of which was known only in the Central Asia (in Samarkand). After that the map was taken to Vatican but in Hungary there is its copy. Destiny was throwing the Turki willing to escape from tenacious paws of the Christian Church and retain Monotheism all over the world. The even discovered America long before Columbus the only thing they needed was not to know the Pope. Freedom of spirit was more than life them Leaving for the world of Arianism they were followed by the monks which were their shadow and at the same time ears and eyes of the Pope. They expanded geography of the Christian empire taking it beyond the boundaries of Byzantium and Rome; because of them the interest area of the Church was growing it was invading new lands and enslaving new nations. The Pope was getting information from everywhere; this information was analyzed and used in adjustment of politics. Thus a new distinctive shape of the West colonialism was being formed. Late in the Middle Ages the Pope was conducting the policy not of ideological expansion. More than that. The Church was becoming the first international institute of power. Not religion. It obtained a new feature which was unnatural for it control over society. Economics, politics, courts
everything was controlled by it. The stages of that historical phenomenon were for the first time set forth in the work called Church History of the Angels by a monk from the monastery Yarou; his chronology starts from the VIII century. At that time monasteries of England and other countries of the north became the bulwark of Catholicism; from there they delivered poison for secret poisonings and daggers for an underhand blow. Lies were flowing there covering the Thames, lakes of Holland and backwaters of Denmark with ooze The struggle with Arianism was very sophisticated. Monks used to murder, poison, slander. And they were serving the Church. At the same time. There was only one thing they had no time for telling the truth; that was the condition under which religion is turned into politics. The early history of north countries take, for instance, England has not been studied yet. That is because of prohibitions of the Church that was making its own history. Violation of commandments did not embarrass it Love thy neighbor, thou shalt not bear false witness these are not only Christian testaments. The Arians also had them That is what Rome was violating falsifying history and God's commandments. Due to politicians in robes good and evil were interlaced; now it is hard to distinguish them. But the history of England is a special case; here near dim fantasies of a monk there are books by Edward Gibbon, seven weighty volumes written in the XVIII century. That is a great work by a great Englishman, Jesuit historian by education and an honest Christian Protestant by spirit. Nobody has described the Middle Ages more accurately. Describing details not peculiar to the western science, Gibbon angered the Church that wished to conceal them, for which he forfeited. The past of Great Britain is so familiar to the most uneducated of my readers and so dark for the scientists themselves, - acknowledged Gibbon with sadness. Nothing has changed since then. In Altai people used to say in such cases: The
one with no enemies is inglorious. The Turki have always had the enemies The Turki themselves.
Bulgarian Slavdom
Unfortunately traditions of distorting history are ancient; they started in the IV century from the fall of the Roman Empire and were demonstrated in a great many things, which was sometimes unexpected. The Greeks, for instance, accepting the federates, took a double eagle and a winged panther as the symbols of Byzantium but they did not become closer to the East. On the contrary, they grew to hate it even more. That is the lot of a slave who has not gained freedom but was granted it. Becoming the master and even a tyrant he hates the past in a special way and distorts it on occasions. In order to get higher Slaves always pay with disdain for good. At first the Greek slander was whispering and than it started shouting. But what was it shouting about? Byzantine economics depended upon the Silk Route which lay on the lands of Desht-I-Kipchak: the riches of the East were being taken to Constantinople by the Turki. And later the Turki became dangerous enemies. In the VIII century another trade route from the Varangians to the Greeks was designed; it was also controlled by the Turki. But it also did not change the behavior of the Greeks; they were still conducting the policy of slander. They were not able to forget the impost which their great-grandfather used to pay And maybe that was the reason of their desire to besmirch everything connected with the past? But those representing themselves as the masters and their history as classic and antique failed to understand that in the consciousness of slaves only slaveholders exist. Free people do not know this image. In this way Byzantium was uncovering itself, its moods and character; it did not know that there were no bad nations but there were bad people In the history of Byzantium
there was perhaps only one period when its relations with the Turki were fair. It did not last for long. However, fairness is hardly in question here; that was all about politics which can never be fair. The Isaurian dynasty came to the Byzantine throne on March 25th, 717. It was exalted by the army. That was the point of no return; the Empire was hanging on a thread, the innumerable army of the Moslems was approaching the walls of the capital the Byzantine army was not able to stand against it. There was no army, really. Something similar to a miracle was to be made in order to save Byzantium. That was the result of politics. Exorbitant imperial ambitions led Byzantine to a collapse; it lost the Middle East and North Africa where a new state Caliphate was rising. Western colonialism gave rise to Islam which became the enemy of the Greek Christianity. Adherents of Islam were successfully pressing up the Byzantines; that was the first victory of a national liberation movement in the Middle Ages. Millions of yesterday's slaves, calling themselves Moslems, were living under the blue flag of Islam. For them the Greek domination was over while the Byzantine policy was not. New Byzantine Emperor Leo III Isaurian was born in Syria, in the town called Germanicia; Turkic blood was in his veins although it was not of regal origin. That was felt in his policy: the ruler was standing on the tips of toes, doing everything on one's chinstrap and living to become famous for his deeds and feats. Not taking the crown off his head he showed the Byzantines what courage was. Such policy was above the Greeks' strength. But that was what the interests of the country required. Having just become the Emperor, Leo Isaurian took part in a raid beyond the walls of the surrounded capital. With a saber in his hands he headed the troops of avenge which filled the rival with consternation. But not that
was the main thing in victory but new weapons that became history as wildfire. Before the astonished Moslems the Emperor set the sea on fire. And it was burning. The fire wiped out the Arab fleet standing in the bay of Constantinople ready for tomorrow assault. That was a miracle, a real miracle which saved Byzantium. The miracle brought from the Caucasus; it was made of oil from Baku It seems not only silk was being brought to Europe on the Silk Route. Isaurians began with the victories. With famous victories. And they were helped by the army of Bulgarian Turki which came from the banks of Danube; that was the first meeting of the Emperor Leo with faraway tribesmen. Bulgarians killed thirty two thousand Moslems under the walls of Constantinople They decided the fate of Byzantium and the Turki in it The name of the native town of the Emperor is directly connected with the Germans; his real name Conon speaks for itself and the nickname of the Emperor's son only complements what was said: Isaurians were called cavallians and horse amateurs; from one generation to another they used to breed horses. For their love for riding they were called so. Fearlessness and unbridled vehemence showed that Isaurians were the Turki. Leo Isaurian was ably arranging the affairs of state; innovations were decided coolly and introduced with assuredness. He returned the world to the first days of his reign when he repulsed his rivals' attacks on a horse under the walls of the capita; the army became stronger and it started to act. After that they established trading; in a word the golden time began, as historians said. Under Leo Isaurian Byzantium breathed freely for the first time. Among his innovations were Law Codes in which courts and laws were being approved; that was like it had been in Desht-IKipchak before. We have made earthly justice the mediator with the sky top of priorities; it is sharper than any sword in fight with the enemies. With these words the court in Byzantium started; the Turki also
used these words to start their courts from ancient times they believed in justice only of Heavenly court. State reorganization was necessary; the country wallowed in intrigues and was morally corrupted. Such reorganization is indicative due to the fact that in the Western Europe Turkic Law Codes were really successful whole nations and principalities were living according to them. The Europeans, accepting the Turkic orders, comprehended new shapes of morals, ethics and conduct unknown to them they were leaving the traditions of pagan Rome which had not disappeared in Constantinople before the new Emperor's coming. Social reorganization of Byzantium was in question; the rise of the law and court. One can safely say that Leo Isaurian was making a revolution; he expanded the horizons of the Empire so that the country could see the future. The Byzantine dynasty was notable for an open interest to the Turkic world, to chaganats of Desht-I-Kipchak Khazaria and Great Bulgaria. That was the base of its policy. The new Emperor, free from the inferiority complex, transferred the center of gravity of his diplomacy from the lost Middle East to the north-east of Europe, to the Turki, which was unexpected. Speaking fluent Graeco-Barbarian he succeeded in great affairs: the Byzantines were regarded as natives there; they made friends and became relatives with them. A political union was being planned; none of its prospects were clear to anybody. Even to the Emperor himself. For the sake of such union, according to a Turkic tradition, Leo Isaurian married his son to the daughter of the Khazar chagan her name was Chichak (Flower); after the Greek baptism she took the name Irene and became the world history with it. That was a woman with temper and delicate sense of right and wrong; her dignity was being enviously discussed in salons of the nobility. People loved and hated her; she herself gave rise to hatred. That was an insidious woman; with
her Greek Christianity came to Desht-IKipchak; at first it was a stream washing the feet of the nobility. But soon there appeared rumors of acceptance of the Judaic belief by the chagan. The Turki of the Great Steppe were not famous for deep knowledge; for them the European religion was the continuation of their belief in Tengri: the words Christian and Jew were synonyms. Nevertheless everyone noticed the betrayal of belief of the chagan's daughter And they forgave her. The Turkic world was leading the life of tolerance not understanding that in the hands of colonizers religion is weapons. Very powerful weapons which defeated not all at once. It slowly exhausted the soul of the nation making it powerless and dependent. Rock fall in the mountains starts from the first rock, - as the saying goes; and the rock thrown by Irene was not the first one. In the Eastern Empire from 449 there existed the Christian eparchy called Scythian; to tell the truth it had no weigh or influence it was created by the Greeks just in case, for their settlements. So that was the case; pointers of political scales were moving: Byzantium's interest to Desht-I-Kipchak was increasing enormously. If formerly it had been of military character (the Geeks could not do without mercenaries), under Isaurians Khazaria and Great Bulgaria became trading partners for Byzantium and, more than that, their support in the struggle with the Catholics and Moslems. That was one of the key points in the relationship of two countries. The change of political guiding lines in the European East and the beginning of expansion of the Greek Church into the Turkic world was in question. The Byzantines were ready for any concessions wishing to implement their plans. They, the masters of Europe, could not do otherwise; in their inventory was religion, which gave them the model of conduct adjusted as far back as in the times of Constantine. Christianization allowed finding the way to Desht-I-Kipchak without a war and corrupting it from the inside Before ending there their missionaries the Greeks included
those lands into the Antiochian eparchy of the Greek Church. All in vain. Sermons did not interest the steppe inhabitants; the Christians kept meeting with failures over and over again. In the hands of the Byzantines there was a lot of money and not much immaculate wisdom; they failed to buy adherents of the Greek belief for words and for gold: they did not incline the Turki of Don, Itil, Caucasus to Christianity and called them Hanifs. Let us say again that the word meant not atheist but rather a recalcitrant who has never thought of changing his belief in his life. In a word, a barbarian piously believing in Heavenly God. Not an Arian, not a European he was living according to Altaic traditions. The Eternal Blue Sky covered his world with a canopy; in that world Tengri reigned. There is an opinion that the consonance of the words hanif and caliph is not occasional. That is possible. At least in certain Arabic countries caliph meant the title of a ruler who had higher temporal and spiritual power. In the Ottoman Empire that title belonged only to clergymen (in Turkey it existed up to 1924 the revision of Islam there). Another thing is also indicative here. The first caliphs preachers of Islam and founders of Caliphate were the descendants of Arshakids, which was reflected in the contradiction between the dynasties of Omeyads and Abbasids in the Arab Caliphate. That fight had its history connected with pre-Islamic Middle East; at that time the word hanif (i.e. monotheist) made a noise in the world. In caliphate under Omeyads hanifs were treated with reverence those were the people that gave the Middle East belief in the Most High, which was marked in Koran (translation by Krachkovskiy) [3 60, 89 etc.]. However under Abbasids everything changed. In Arabic countries the word became mocking; it was turned into a nickname something like an atheist, heretic, handicapped. That was probably connected with that internal and external fight which was beginning to tear the Islamic world apart: Manicheans and Jews secretly got there; they
were the first ones who started to reform Islam, rewrite Koran and change its philosophy That was an epoch of the fight. Its result is the split of Caliphate and humiliation of the hanifs. Enemies of Islam were not stopped by the fact that the Prophet also reckoned himself among the hanifs and only developed their teaching in his sermons. For instance in Koran issued in Kazan in the XIX century on page 47 in the note to 89th ayat of the 3rd sura it is written: Hanif now means the same as Moslem, i.e. an Islamite. That was the answer of the Turkic world to the new Arabic interpretation of the word hanif. It should be mentioned that Byzantine policy in the North-Eastern Europe was based on personal friendship, consent, dynastic marriages, hospitality, in a word on humanity and not on monks and monasteries with their total espionage as it was in Rome. The Byzantine Emperor was getting information from the palaces of chagans It is interesting, Isaurians, as a rule, used to marry barbarian women and the grandson of Leo III had the name Khazar. Leo Isaurian and his son Constantine V brought a lot of Kipchak into the culture of Byzantium and at the same time they themselves were devotedly fighting with the Turkic world. That was him, Leo Isaurian, who ordered to mutilate the icons with Tengri's image in reply to the reproach of their barbarous origin and because the Moslems had the same icons in their ceremonies. For the same barbaric and Islamic reason he launched a blow on the monasteries of Byzantium. And at the same time the Emperor was trying hard to take the best from Islam and the Turkic world, for which contemporaries accused him of feeling with the Moslems and the Turki. It is possible that that was also a policy not clear to contemporaries Son yielded to his father in nothing. Wishing to do away with the Greek intrigues in the capital he left not the ghost of a chance to his opponents. All he required was compliance with laws. And the rancorous
Greek elite being deprived of power started to depict the Turkic Emperor as a panther born from a winged serpent and write fables about him which were getting more and more dreadful. The Emperor answered in a pure Turkic way: carried out more magnificent feasts to tease the Greeks. For evil he answered with evil. But were those fables really fables?.. A panther and winged serpent concealed a lot, which was known to the enlightened. It is possible in this way the enemies wanted to humiliate Isaurians emphasizing that they were barbarians not of regal blood? Or, on the contrary, Isaurians themselves ascribed foreign totems, i.e. family signs of Achemenids, Arshakids, Altaic rulers to themselves? These questions are too difficult to answer them now. But the pulse of the epoch is felt in their statement. A panther and dragon were the totems of the sea-kings of Scandinavia, consequently the route from the Varangians to the Greeks could not have failed to appear; its creation was destined by the rise to power of the Turki in Constantinople. The union between Byzantium and Scandinavia was a matter of the nearest future. The Greeks called his reign public beating of the men of family; he would pardon nobody, indeed. Conspirators were blinded, their noses were cut off; at that he often did that himself. Executions and punishments he performed perhaps more often than prayers, sometimes two or three a day. Is it cruel? Of course. But was there another way to control the capital that was putrefied?.. The one that had not believe either in God or in devil long since? And there was another new thing peculiar for the court debauches. Even ancient Rome did not know that abundance of pleasures of the body. Sweet sacrifices to the demons of passion lightened the palace every night A Turkic face was seen here too in the fickleness of actions; his mood was changing as the weather in spring. But he did only what he wanted: Isaurians were
destroying themselves and undermining their prestige by their behavior. They were desperately fighting for power with each other not yielding an inch. In their hankering after power sons would conspire against their fathers; they were blinded and their tongues were wrested There was everything if, of course, one believes in what has been written. Private life of the rulers that used to astound the world has always been described contradictorily. Slander, as we know, is inclined to exaggerations. However, someway or other, those were Isaurians that laid the road from Byzantium to the north. With the coming of the Byzantines European steppes were flaring like a huge fire; incomprehension covered Desht-IKipchak, treacheries were choking it. The Byzantines were dividing and ruling; a smile never left their faces what they had failed to do in the Middle East they were doing in the Great Steppe. That was a massive ideological invasion. Its first attack that started by Isaurians was a reconnaissance; after it the Greeks proceeded to a real siege. Why is an ideological invasion so dangerous? Because it cannot be fast and invisible; like leprosy it lasts for years and decades, for a lifetime, affecting one body after another. The enemy is not defined; he may wear a mask of a friend and be the best adviser. He may stand near. His weapons are words turning into rumors, gossips, slander, enmity. And gold which clears the way for rumors, gossips, slander and enmity. The Greeks were trying the best they could as if they had the best motives. With good intentions by which colonizers used to explain all their undertakings Real Christianization of Desht-IKipchak was started from the children; they were invited to study in Constantinople, which was in accordance with a Turkic tradition to send children to other families for upbringing there. Great Bulgaria succeeded here; Simeon, its envoy, was granted special distinctions by the Byzantines; he was being brought up like a future ruler in the Emperor's palace with all the signs of
attention. Christian worldview was inculcated in the youth as a matter of course. Or, more precisely, he was deprived of the Turkic one. Ethnic belonging of the Danube Bulgares (not to mix up with Bulgarians) is not worth discussing here. Those were the Turki believing in Tengri. Their way of life, appearance, and names were Kipchak, which is not denied by serious historians. For instance, E. Gibbon connects their past with the Volga Bulgares. That is generally right but such assertion was rather dictated by a toponymic similarity of the terms than by their common ethnic contents The ethnography of the Eastern Europe of western historians is complex and confusing. Sometimes it is impossible to understand who is who since the number of tribes and nations taking part in the event is too great. Those nations would appear out of nowhere and disappear to nowhere. But opening Gethica by Jordan it is not hard to see: under the Bulgares he meant the Turki that settled on the coast of the Black Sea after they had come from the East. The ethnicons Goths, Huns, Scythians, Bulgares, Turki were not different early in the Middle Ages; that was one and the same nation. This is witnessed again by a phrase from a Byzantine document of 572: At the time the Huns whom we usually call the Turki. The names of the leaders of Bulgares are even more expressive in our opinion. For example, Kubrat khan and his sons Barbayan, Kotrag and Asparukh. Or such family names of the Bulgarian horde as Kurigur, Ermi, Kuver, Katsagar, Dulo Etymology speaks for itself here; it is evidently Turkic. Having become the chagan of Great Bulgaria that apprentice sort of forgot everything. More than once he troubled his teachers with military campaigns, destruction (it was not shameful for the Kipchaks to get military salvage). Simeon managed to get away with everything; everything inexcusable was forgiven to him. As though on purpose
And he was planning to conquer Byzantium; he found allies among the Moslems and was on the edge of laying siege to Constantinople. One more step and Bulgaria would have reached greatness. During a personal meeting with the Byzantine Emperor the young chagan dictated the articles of the peace. They listened to him and asked him quietly: Are You a Christian? If you are than abstain from spilling blood of your coreligionists And is it not the craving for wealth that has made You deny the benefits of the world? If that is the case put up Your sword, give Your hand and I will satisfy Your desires in full. And the winner chagan stopped short; he was not feeling himself a warrior or ruler any longer. He was feeling himself a secret subject of Byzantium; his soul turned out to have been sold long ago the seeds of the foreign belief were in it and those seeds started to grow. They promised to fasten the reconciliation with family ties. Thus for a handful of gold and a couple of sweet words the Greeks saddled Bulgaria, the neighbor of Byzantium. Instead of a former chagan of Desht-I-Kipchak spreading from the Caucasus to the Balkans soon remained only a patch modern Bulgaria which borders with itself; but that was a Christian country. To tell the truth while Simeon was alive and after his death Bulgares appealed to arms more than once; oppressive union with Byzantium weighed upon them but the way was ready: having learnt everything about the Bulgares, Byzantines found way into their life and were easily playing the master of their souls. And, of course, it all started earlier, in 852, when the power in the country was taken by a khan Bogoris (Bogur), Simoen's father. He was a Turki, of course. How did he ascend to the throne? That is a shady story; that family had nothing to do with the reigning dynasty. Behind his back were the Greeks that knew that golden arrows always hit the target they did not spare gold. In the heat of the race for power Bogoris (today known as Prince Boris) at the instigation of the Greeks performed a reform of Bulgarian society
giving equal rights to all his subjects. He denied the estate division. Slaves and free men were made equal There is not a better way to destroy a country. Liberty, equality and fraternity are always a tragedy which only gives an illusion of liberty, equality and fraternity. It can never happen in real life. Altai was teaching: a nation will be ruined if the rich and the poor become equal. The Greeks used Bogoris to hit the nation in its heart. Democratization of the Turkic chaganat deprived it of its national face. That was the only way for the Greeks to find way into a foreign country when everyone was equal and powerless to the same extent It turns out that peoples traditions keep society healthy. Or kill it. Division into estates was the protection for the nation. Bulgares replied to the Greek reforms with a rebellion, but Bogoris was ready; he found support among those who had formerly had no rights at all and for whom those reforms were advantageous. Among yesterday's slaves and plebs. And the rebellion died out. But the nation turned away from its ruler that had taken the side of farmhands; proud Bulgares were crushed by injustice collapsing on them Their life took new rails. The former nobility was the first that felt lack of comfort in the country; failing to understand the language and actions of Bulgarians it was standing against their wild morals. Thereat the ruler beheaded the aristocracy: males of fifty two noble families disappeared during one night. And Bogoris had no more competitors; he became the master and tyrant. The traitor used the slaves in his treason, and he managed to get away with it. That was not even a revolution paid by the Greeks but the invasion of the country using ideological weapons words. And bribery of course. Fyodor Ivanovich Uspenskiy, Russian academician, qualified expert in medieval history, accurately described those events as
a revolution as a result of which a Christian principality was formed from a Turkic khanate. Everything that was happening is expressed in one succinct phrase: acceptance of Christianity and the revolution that followed was a deadly blow to Bulgarian rights and institutions. By the books written by Uspenskiy one can judge about the collapse of chaganat, titles of the Bulgarian nobility and its family trees! The titles voila, zhupan, tarkhan, batagur give an idea of the principles of a retinue dominating in medieval Bulgaria, - the academician wrote. In terms of the Turkic language his principles of a retinue meant horde A common horde of which Desht-I-Kipchak consisted in reality. Also by the books one can judge about the appearance of Bulgares. They had special haircuts, which was in accordance with the rules of life of a horde. Some had to grow long hair and plait it; others, on the contrary, had to shave their heads, as the custom of his horde required. In a word, established traditions were being changed. They were being changed not thinking about the consequences: everyone was reduced to the same level. That is what distinguished that time! In Europe Turkic nationhood and belief were being destroyed; Christian Slavic, Christian Roman and other principalities were being created. That was the sign of the epoch preceding the Renaissance. Official science is perfectly aware of Turkic roots not only of the Bulgarian Slavs. Perhaps every Slavic book mentions the relations of the Bulgares with the Serbs, Bosnians, Bohemians, Moravians, Czechs, Poles, Ukrainians and other Slavic nations which had not existed before Bogoris. The Turki, their hordes became raw materials for the Slavs production; they were being nipped off Desht-I-Kipchak in pieces. To be more precise we should say that Jordan, Latin historian of the VI century, was among the first who started to use the word Slavs; it was derived from the word slave in the West it was used with that meaning. That is why the Byzantines called
the subjects of Bogoris with that word; his court, i.e. administrative personnel, consisted of yesterday's slaves the Wends taken from the bottom of society and the Turki from among the farmhands that had sold themselves, Slave, as it is customary to think, was derived from the Latin word sclavinus. Marc Bloc, analyzing this term in his Apologia of History, marked that it was established only by the end of the first millennium at slaves markets where the prisoners (the Wends) were sort of example of full enslavement which had become absolutely customary for the slaves of the western origin. In Bulgaria the Greek Church was bringing up the examples of full enslavement. The Wends is a nation that had been living in the Central Europe from of old, which was described by Tacitus and other antique authors. They all marked that they were the nomads and breeders leading their life according to primitive laws; they used to sew their clothes of furs and live in dugouts and huts. In a word, they were humble pagans. Richard Pipes, the professor of Harvard University that was engaged researching their history in the XX century writes: From that insufficient knowledge we have about the Eastern Slavs it is seen that they were organized into tribal communities a Patriarch ruled and he had plenipotentiary power over his tribesmen and their property. There is nothing more evidential in the science about those ancestors of the Slavs. That was perhaps the most timid and backward nation in Europe. Professor Alexander Ivanovich Kirpichnikov in the book Saint George and George the Brave written in the XIX century said the same. Researchers of those poor witnesses and remainders are generally people with passionate love for what they are doing, with ardent fantasy but due to lack of knowledge in the subject able for astonishingly unscientific strained interpretations. They do not complain about the lack of materials. That is why so much
has been written on the Slavic subject; to tell the truth all that has been written has a rear peculiarity total absence of scientific facts. Proofs are based on mere assertions and categoricalness as though the authors themselves lived at that time and saw it with their own eyes. And should one implicitly believe them? That is a different question and the answer to it is connected with the readers' intelligence. Is it not indicative that science knows no findings confirming, at least indirectly, the ethnic history of the Slavs? The earliest monuments of their epigraphy relates to 993 a headstone with an inscription found in 1888 in Bulgaria, near the settlement called German. If it had not been for Novgorod findings of Valentin Lavrentievich Yanin, among which Slavic ones are likely to be present, science today would have known nothing authentic about the medieval period of their history. Only myths. But science has always been aware of another thing. The motherland of the Wends is the Central Europe; that is where they were caught by the Normans to be sold for slavery. The word slave is derived from here. Those were proprietary goods of the Normans; they were supplied to slave-markets of Byzantium, Khazaria, Great Bulgaria, Central Asia. By the way, on the route from the Varangians to the Greeks the Wends were the lion's share of goods turnover. The unlucky were being carried by ships, taken ashore in crowds with lasts on their necks, which was described by famous authors of those times (Ibn Rusta, Gardizi, etc.). Slavdom began from the Slaves of different colors It is striking that modern Bulgarian historians often mark with pride that: in the IX X centuries slavery in Bulgaria was a rare phenomenon at that time the number of slaves in Byzantium was really great. It is not even slyness, indeed. This is either uncovered hypocrisy, or total ignorance. Where have all the Bulgarian slaves disappeared in a flash? Those that had been
carried there by the Normans for years? They have become a nation first Slavs of Bulgaria. Because in order to gain a footing in power and be through with the Turkic world khan Bogoris in 864 865 imposed Christianity on his subjects; baptism gave the slaves freedom and a new master. Although how baptism was performed and who was performing it we know not. We just know the fact the declaration of the Bulgarian Church and the abolition of slavery. And, of course, legends painting this fact rosy; without them the feast would be dull and lamentable. Boris needed not the Slavs and not Christianity but the Church a spiritual institute controlled by him. It did not matter which ideology Greek, Latin or Arian it had. According to the Turkic laws a spiritual institute gave a chagan an autonomy in Desht-I-Kipchak and the title of tsar. It turns out vanity, not belief, was giving a nudge to the Bulgarian khan. Everyone understood that and played along as they could. Because with the title tsar Bogoris obtained a status equal to the Emperor, which the Greeks could not allow, that is for certain. They knew that a chagan becomes a tsar when an archbishop anoints him. That is why they did not appoint archbishop of the Bulgarian Church. They were in no haste. When Bulgarians were baptized they were given Greek names in order to forget the past more quickly. This might sound arguably, but that was the logical conclusion of the Great Nations Migration. The waters of the Altaic river were being absorbed by the lands of Bulgaria nourishing the roots of Slavic culture which was being originated there. On the ethnic field of Europe a new nation Bulgarians appeared. And a new country Bulgaria. Another splinter of DeshtI-Kipchak Later exactly the same happened in Serbia, Czechia, Poland, Ukraine; there they also changed the names of the Turki and called them the Slavs. That is the result of Christianization; the essence of the whole political action was in it.
N.M. Karamzin is so accurate. Carefully, as though he was insisting on the official viewpoint on the history of Bulgarians, he was denying it in hid own notes; he was accepting risk so as not to kill the truth. Bulgarians have different names in the Byzantine history; contrary to Nestorius many considered them to be the Slavs but Bulgarians had been formerly speaking their own language. Their ancient proper names are not Slavic at all; they are similar with Turkish ones, the same as their customs. If one knows the background of these words it is hard to add something. Bogoris became Michael in honor of the Byzantine Emperor Michael III, but that did not give him much. Khan's policy came to a dead-lock: the Bulgarian Church existed but without an archbishop it was as though it had not existed The Greek cunning consisted in the fact that Christian Bulgaria became free from Desht-I-Kipchak. But according to rule 28 of the Council of Chalcedon it turned into a region of the Greek Church with all ensuing consequences. And in a colony the tsar is unnecessary, as we know it. The Greeks were paying with concessions in border disputes and trade. They gave Bogoris Zagorie the lands which expanded the borders of the country. But for that he gave his consent for building Greek settlements in Bulgaria. That is perhaps all the Bulgarians had got; the Greeks were in no haste to deliver other promises. The game was over, which made Bulgarians turn to Arians and later to send an embassy to Rome with the same request to help with an archbishop. They meant they had a kingdom without king and a church without a patriarch Bulgarians seemed to understand to what extent they had been deceived. The Pope Nicolas answered quickly; he sent monks headed by the bishops Paul Populonian and Formoz Portuganian. That was an open invasion into Byzantium and its politics. And what else could he do?.. But the Catholics were in no haste with the ordination of the archbishop for the Bulgarian Church, but, to tell the truth, for another reason. They wished to teach the Bulgarians Christian
176 / 342
belief according to the Latin rule In a word, a colossal scandal was taking place. The Greeks excommunicated the Pope and prohibited the Catholics to teach the Bulgarians; the Latins habitually stroke aside excommunicating the Greek Patriarch. The dispute was running high rapidly; it led to the final division of the Christian Church into its eastern and western wings. At least it was one of the main causes. But not the reason. Not going into details of the scandal which are eloquent in their own way, let us turn our attention to the Pope's letter to the Byzantine Emperor Michael written in 865: You are annoyed to such an extent that you are indignant even against the rules of Latin which you call barbarian and Scythian intending to pique those who use it. Such intemperance, having no mercy even on the language created by God, the language which was used together with the Jewish and Greek languages in the inscription on Christ's cross. This is a striking revelation! I wish there were more of them. The comparison of Latin with the barbarian and Scythian language, i.e. with Turkic, is indicative in itself. But it is even more indicative that, according to the Pope, there is a Turkic inscription on Christ's cross. Indeed, under other conditions it should have been there; after all, the language of Monotheism was in question! The divine language of belief. Latin at that time was barbarian and very Turkic. Its reformation started later, in the XIII century, while the Greeks had reformed the Graeco-Barbarian language in good time, which gave them the reason to look down upon the Catholics In this connection another detail is indicative: the Bulgares were no longer called Hanifs the bearers of the truth, like other inhabitants of Desht-I-Kipchak. They were given the name Slavs which was in accordance with terminology of Europe of that time; it was considered that for their Church any combined language was suitable. Church Slavic, for instance.
At that time the policy of the Greeks was more successful than that of the Latins; they were the first who turned their look to the Bulgarian children and started to bring them up leaving reeducation of the elder to the Catholics. That is why the future of the Bulgarian Church belonged to the Greeks. The Byzantines knew that not a sword and money have power in this world but those to whom peoples souls belonged. And they started the hunt for the souls of the new generation. King Simeon is the creation of that policy; his subjects were the first who exorcised Tengri in the east of Europe. Here a lot can be explained by the toponymy of Bulgaria a bright page of history. The word Bulgar in Turkic means combined, i.e. consisting of different nations. And there are hundreds of similar examples, although Slavic politicians were trying hard to conceal them. For instance, Golden Sands on ancient geographical maps were called Uzunkum (long sands), the peak Vikhren Eltepe (windy top), Zhyltets Syrykaya (yellow rock), Vratnik DemirKapiya (iron gates), Izvorets Beshbunar (five springs), Lisa Planina Sakar-Balkan (bold Balkans). The Balkans, as it has been already mentioned, in Turkic mean mountains covered with forest. Everything is so evident and well-known that there is no point in going on with that; on this point a separate book can be written the material is sufficient. Bulgarian toponymy, of course, had nothing to do with the Ottoman period of the History of Bulgaria; it had existed long before the Moslems came there. From the time of the Great Nations Migration which formed Desht-I-Kipchak and its chaganats, Great Bulgaria included. Reading ancient names one comes across Bunar, Akbunar, OstriaChatal, Kyrdjali, Kazanka, Kazanlyk, Balchik, Delioroman And one of the most ancient Turkic toponyms of Bulgaria is the river Kibanlyk from which the chaganat began in the IV century. First settlements of the Kipchaks were there.
The ink on sheets of paper with new Church Slavic names of the Bulgares had hardly dried when enlighteners Cyril and Methodius appeared on the threshold of the country; they were also Kipchaks of whom the Greeks were taking care. They were allocated a duty to teach the Bulgares the Skavic language, Slavic writing and Slavic history that had not existed in reality. These seem to have been made of haze; they are too miraculous. Take, for instance, the Slavic written language Glagolitic and Cyrillic alphabet; it is considered to have been invented by them. But that is wrong. Firstly, why did the Slavs need two alphabets? This is the first thing that comes to one's mind when one reads about them. And besides it is known that Glagolitic writing appeared in Europe in the V century; several documents were written in it they remained in Italy and other countries. Cyrillic alphabet appeared after the brothers enlighteners were dead; they had not even seen it. There was no Slavic language when they lived; what written language can be in question here? What could be written in it? The most ancient monuments of Cyrillic writings is the inscription of king Samuel made in 993, i.e. that is the monuments that appeared one century after the brothers had been dead. Only experts are able to distinguish Cyrillic alphabet of that time and Glagolitic alphabet. And they can do it just theoretically. In Glagolitic alphabet there are forty symbols the number of phonemes in the Turkic language (adding hard and soft sign). In the Slavic language the number of phonemes is less, which means there are less written symbols. The brothers enlighteners were required to change Glagolitic alphabet or, in other words, bring it into compliance with the standards of the Slavic language which was being created by the Church. Which, as a matter of fact, is what was done, but not by them Their mission was different, which is to be discussed later. In a word, enlightened Bulgares forgot their native language calling it Proto178 / 342 Under the Sign of the Cross and Crescent
Bulgarian. Since then they have called khan Asparuh a Slavic prince not realizing that khan is the title of a Turkic aristocrat, their ancestor Not in a flash the Byzantines conquered Bulgaria; enslavements of the chaganat lasted for decades and centuries. Time was necessary so that sabers corroded, bows withered and steeds grew fat in herds. So that not one generation was gone. Christianization was completed by the Greek Emperor Basil II Bulgaroktonos. In 981 he gathered all the Byzantine forces and moved them to Bulgaria. But on his way to Sofia he was met by the tsar Samuel. Thank god sabers and helmets had not corroded yet, Bulgarians had not unlearnt to saddle horses; so they won. In summer of 1014 Basil II, again with an army not with the Bible! entered his church patrimony beating the enemy with persistence of a hammer (that is what Byzantine historians wrote about that campaign). The world had not known cruelty of that sort. Lots of corpses, burnt towns, ruined villages were left in the way of the Christians. Burn, smash, devastate was their motto. But they would smash not everyone but only the Turkic layers of the Slavic nation. The layer that hated the state Church and was searching for solace in the old belief. The Byzantines started persecutions against it. That is why in Bulgaria at that time Bogomilism was strengthening it was growing into a popular movement. Apart from the Bogomils, other religious sects appeared, which is the witness of the agony of the Turkic culture in the Slavic area. Ancient belief was dying. It was being choked by homebred prophets preaching homebred truths in which Monotheism was being mixed up with Christianity and pagan conceptions of the Slavs. That was a chaos in which a new culture was being born The Emperor Basil II Bulgaroktonos ordered to put out the eyes of those not betraying the old belief so that they could not see the sly, to cut their ears so that they could
not hear the shepherds, to tear out their tongues so that they could not address Tengri. For every hundred of victims they left one sighted person one man with one eye. And the young Turki were not mutilated; they were taken care of, hidden in prisons in order to take them away to slave-markets of Byzantium. However, judging by the works of Bulgarian historians, at that time slavemarkets reappeared in Bulgaria. Not the Wends were being sold there Fifteen thousand people at a time were thrown into darkness; blind and helpless, they were being baptized into the Greek belief and thus they became Christians, i.e. the Slavs That is described in Bulgarian chronicles where, apart from description of horrors of those days, a testament for the grandchildren remained: apart from patience they were charged with an obligation to avenge for what had happened. Or at least to remember it. Up to the XIX century the Bulgarians remembered something of their past; after that they have finally turned into Slavdom connecting their destiny with Russia, another deceived country. However, thank God, the name of Tengri has not been forgotten in Bulgaria; some day it will lead the Bulgarians through the complicated labyrinth of their history If, of course, God wishes so. In 882 the Byzantines' allies, the Normans, conquered northern lands of another chaganat of Desht-I-Kipchak the Ukraine, where Ascold was reigning. That was an attack of Arianism on the east of Europe. Kievan Russia appeared and together with it a new tragedy in free society of Hanifs. But is it right to call a tragedy what happened then? That was the growth of a new European culture: the fruit of the Great Nations Migration were getting through a tough selection. That was not a tragedy but real life in all its severity. East and West were checking each other for strength. Not a single major undertaking in the history of humankind has done without checking. Otherwise there would have been no progress. And no confidence in the future.
Who was winning? That is the question East or West strengthened by East? And was that a victory? It is not quite clear when the Ukraine appeared; it is likely that, the same as Great Bulgaria, in the IV century before the Normans came there it had been keeping the belief in Heavenly God in absolute purity. It was lying in patriarchal silence of Desht-IKipchak. The Normans came there by the example of the Catholic and Orthodox Greeks in order to cut a slice of the pie for them. Their coming expanded the orbit of European politics. The West was steadily winning; strengthened by the Turki it was more powerful. It is indicative that the Normans in Kiev did not meet with opposition. They came, saw and conquered; Kiev inhabitants themselves opened the gates and allowed to take them without a hand's turn. Why? Common sense is powerless here; the answer to the fundamental question of the history of Kievan Rus seems to be absent in literature. Was that because the chagan Ascold irritated the nation if it was not protected? Or there are other reasons? Unfortunately, Kievan Rus, its appearance, is perhaps the first mystery of the Russian history: did Russia start from Rus? However, if one reads Karamzin more attentively Nikolai Mikhailovich was a skilful diplomat; he described the conquest of Kiev by the Varangians but did it in the language clear not to everyone. Ascold and Dir, not suspecting a deceit, were hurrying to the shore: Oleg's warriors surrounded them in a flash. The ruler said: you are not Princes and you do not belong to a noble family, but I am the Prince and, pointing to Igor, he uttered: here is the son of Ryurik! With this world Ascold and Dir, condemned to death, felt dead under the swords of the murderers to Oleg's feet. This quotation contains what certain authors do not acknowledge the bitter truth. Even if one does not mention that
179 / 342
Oleg and Igor had other names, even if one forgets that the title prince was pronounced as konung by the Russians (Normans), the truth is evident: Ryiriks were the Turki belonging to a royal family which roots are in Altai. That was emphasized by cautious Karamzin italicizing the text. Ascold and Dir were impostors that had seized the power, which was a sin that is why the people did not defend them In Kiev there lived not the Slavs but the Turki who could not have failed to accept a person belonging to a royal family This assertion makes the history of Kievan Russia truthful when the Slavs are in question. Otherwise it is not clear who, how, from where and why came in the IX century to Dnepr. Although, it is possible, there is no need to sort this complex labyrinth out. E. Gibbon and other historians of that time had no doubts as against us. The term Russians was mentioned in Europe for the first time in the ninth century the Greeks were accompanied by the messengers of the Russian (konung) great prince, chagan or tsar. They were the compatriots of the Swedes and Normans which by that time had managed to gain the character of the odious and dreadful in France. The Scandinavian origin of the Russian nation is proven and explained in national chronicles and the history of the North. In Annales Bertiniani it is said that in Scandinavia, with the Russians, there was its own chagan; Khakan there is a proper name, and a rather common one And Gustav Evers wrote even more categorically: the Varangians and the Khazars are one nation In literature there are phrases like Rus son of the Turki, grandson of Daudsh. Or Urusbek, son of Kazan, grandson of Oguzkhan that very Oguzkhan who was the representative of Kushan dynasty. There are plenty pf similar assertions in world science. But they are unknown in Russia where since the XVIII century another viewpoint on the history of Russia has been dominating and this viewpoint is far from the truth. However, Karamzin helps here again: Sviatoslav, Igor's son, the first prince of the
Slavic name. Why the first and why Slavic? These questions are usually passed over in silence, but if one knows that Igor had another name Ingvar and was the native of Scandinavia, words might be unnecessary. It seems this generation of the tsarist family was later called Urus, at least the blazon and the history of the family witnesses of that. Its representatives had been reigning from of old in Egypt and were highly respected in the Turkic world from Baikal to the Baltic. One can assume that they continued the dynasty of Achemenids or Kushans. Archeologists know exactly; the reality was different as compared with what is described by historiographers. The Normans (Varangians) did not build Kiev in the IX century; the legend of Kiy and his brothers is just a legend. The town had been living and prospering since the end of the IV century; neither in architecture nor in population it was different from towns of Desht-I-Kipchak; it was also a result of the Great Nations Migration. That is witnessed by researches of scientists and their scientific monographs. Take, for instance, two volumes called Ancient Kiev by M.I. Karger where the author, speaking about the works of his colleagues, mentioned with sorrow: perhaps all the things found by archeologists in Kiev have later mysteriously disappeared in Moscow. And about many findings it was prohibited to announce they were inconsistent with assertions of the censored Russian science. Mysterious disappearances of archeological findings is not a Russian invention at all; that is the method of the western science that was used many times starting from the Inquisition. Take, for instance, the famous crown of the Langobards, with which Carl the Great was crowned; it was the sign of power in the Western Europe it was brought to Paris in the times of Napoleon. But they were admiring it not for too long. It was stolen right away when it was known that under Kazan they had found two crowns that were exactly the same. The similarity was so great that there were given guesses that they had been
produced in one and the same workshop by one and the same craftsman. And what is more, those wreaths were strikingly similar with the famous iron crown Lombardy from the sacristy of the cathedral in Monza. That crown which was possibly the copy of Attila's one Those findings witnessed a lot; and primarily of the sources of the western culture. And such scientific discoveries are disagreeable for the Church. Of course soon the crowns found under Kazan also disappeared from the safe of the Academy of Sciences of Russia where they had been kept. Today people judge about those crowns and wreaths by drawings. But one can add the crown of the Ukrainian chagan to this list. And of the Bulgarian one. Their lot is the same obscurity. In Kiev, it turns out, before the Normans came, before the Baptism of Russia, temples had been opened. Archeologists found ancient foundations of the Dessiatine Church; from the chronicles we know about Saint George Church and about Elias Church on the river Pochaina and several othersBut for whom were they opened if the town and its people were pagans? Or, more precisely, there was neither the town nor the people Instead of researching the belief of Kiev inhabitants, they invented the first Baptism of Russia in the VII century, which only emphasized the meaninglessness of the whole theory. If there was no Russia in the VII century, what Baptism can be in question? Rus is the country of the Normans It is useful to remind that Kiev inhabitants spoke the Turkic language, which is witnessed by inscriptions on the walls of temples. And the prayers of Kiev inhabitants. The past of the town remained in written monuments, in the Ukrainian language. There are words and expressions which were known to ancient Ruses, i.e. the Varangians. Hundreds of common words. And not only the Ruses can be in question; perhaps one half of the vocabulary of Taras Shevchenko was Turkic, and he
lived in the XIX century!.. Nothing is to be discussed here; in Turkic kobsar means playing a musical instrument - kobyz. All kobsars used to play a kobyz, and Korkut was the greatest of them. Korkut is the most ancient mythologized person, the first shaman, the patron of the shamans and singers. He invented a string musical instrument kobyz. It is possible to say that he was the first ashug or minnesinger. When Islam was established there appeared a myth of the unexpected death of Korkut; he died, as it befits a singer, with a kobyz in his hands. Death, creeping up as a snake, bit him the Turki denied their ever-living hero by themselves. They mortified him in their culture. The epic of the XV century called The Book of my Grandfather Korkut tells not about Korkut but of his creative work and other interesting events of the history of the ancient Turki mentioning Urus-Bek among the others. Ukrainian kobsars had an expressive language the speech that has been forgotten in the Ukraine. Gutsuls of Transcarpathia are the only ones who remember it. The Russian tsar Alexander II, by his order of May 30th, 1876, prohibited the Ukrainians to speak their native language; an exile was waiting for the opponents. Proud Taras Shevchenko was the victim of that order And the history of the baptism of Kievan Russia turns out to be even vaguer. In science there have never been any hints that baptism took place in the X century. Nobody knows where it happened in what town, who performed it, who became metropolitan, in what language divine services were performed. Everything was the same as in Bulgaria! There are several futile versions which have become established. And that is the most important event in the life of the Ukraine; it witnesses of its roots and the beginning of nationhood. In the archives of the Greek Church
from which hands Kievan Russia allegedly received baptism, scientists failed to find a single line on this point. That is a significant fact. However, the Bulgarian scheme of Christianization opens up the eyes on the baptism. That is a political process requiring forces and instruments, which the Greeks had been short of by the X century. That is why there are no direct and indirect proofs of the baptism of Russia by the Greeks which would have been evident in appearance of a new eparchy of the Greek Church by type of the Bulgarian one. And it did not appear. The structure of the Church remained unchanged Even in the XI century the Greeks considered Rus to be pagan. What else can be in question here? Kievan Rus is connected with Arianism. The Ukrainians did not stand against the coming of the Scandinavians; they had a common belief with them, not with the Greeks. The Normans gave the patriarchal Kiev a barely perceptible European polish. There were no religious wars on the banks of Dnepr because there was no violence; both the newcomers and the aborigines followed Monotheism. Both were the people of one spiritual and ethnic culture. Here are the words from their prayer; the same as in ancient Altai, it was to be uttered looking at the Sky: Khodai aldynda beten adem achyk bulsun, which means every man should face God with an open soul. And the prayer went on: The creator of the Earth and the Sky! Bless Your children; let them cognize You, the True God; strengthen the right belief in them. Christ was not mentioned; he was considered to be a foreign god. Kievan Russia knew only the image of Heavenly God! It prayed him. In the country was a spiritual institute with which the Greek Church had nothing to do. That is seen, for instance, in Russian Primary Chronicle where the Arian symbol of belief is given. Not Christian but Arian, i.e. Russian. Theologians also paid their attention to these delicate trifles; they mentioned that the prayer I Believe in Kiev was read not the same as in
Constantinople or Rome. This is strange, is it not? And the words and conceptions were the difference between the Arians and Christians. This observation led theologians to a discouraging conclusion: in Kiev, they said, that was half-Arianism. That is what they called the Russian Church of that time. That was totally absurd Arianism is not Churches with the elements of democracy and electivity of community, as theologians assert. That was an absolutely different thing: Churches not recognizing Christ as God. In other words not Christian Churches. That is that very non-church Christianity which differed Indian communities of Egypt. Another trifle giving a nudge letters from the Constantinopolitan Patriarch to Kiev. They remained. They are kept not under a wax seal, as it is common, but a leaden one which the Greeks used to affix to documents sent to autocephalous (in other words to foreign!) Churches or public institutions As we can see, one can assert anything, one can destroy or correct any text, any document or chronicle, one can even steal a museum specimen, but how can one get rid of trifles which at first sight seem to be imperceptible? The truth cannot be defeated. Any crime will leave its trace, i.e. an unaccounted trifle. It is to be found, and after that lies fade away. In the X century the Ukrainians did not become the Slavs and their country did not become a region of the Greek Church. That is witnessed by the agreement of 911 between Kiev princes and Byzantium. Its beginning was as follows: We, belonging to a Russian family, Carl, Ingelot, Farlov, Veremid, Rulav, Raul, Carn, Flelav, Ryuar, Aktutruyan, Lidulfost, Stemid. Here they are, the Russians representing Russia during negotiations. And if one opens the agreement of 944 in it there are also just Norman names almost fifty of them in which the Turkic origin is easily seen. They became mentioned in the history of Kievan Russia. To tell the
truth, that did not perplex Moscow scientists; in order to confirm the Slavic roots of Russia they changed the names of Normans. Helga became Olga, Ingvar became Igor, Valdemar became Vladimir. They called their Slavicization the reconstruction of names. Not falsification. At that nobody was confused; nobody turned red. Helga and Helg, Valdemar, Hunnar, Vermund, Faulf, Ingald the rulers of Kievan Russia; were they Slavs or Christians, their names would have sounded otherwise. In the traditions of religion changing of names of the baptized is obligatory. The Orthodox Christians, in order to be different, made their list of names, the Catholics made their own and the Arians their own. The same as they distinguish Moslems and Buddhists by the names. Let us mention one more time: there is the science called onomatology; every name has an explanation and history there. There are many books on this point and one can make a library of them. A name is the destiny of a man. Take the name Valdemar. In Scandinavian sagas it sounded like Valdimir, Balamir, Baltemir, Baltuemir. And each sounding is correct. Because the name meant belonging of the one who had it to the family of Balts. And the ending Amyr in Turkic meant peacefulness, well-being. Not everyone could be honored to have that regal name. The Turki thought that a name to a child could be given only by a kind person; there was a whole ritual dedicated to that. And every family had its own names which were handed down from generation to generation. Sometimes in Altai they would give several names in order to deceive the powers of darkness collapsing on a family while the real name was hidden; it was known only to the nearest relatives that uttered the name not straightly but allegorically or briefly An impostor was set equal to a deceiver, i.e. to a person that tried a strange lot on them trying to deceive God. That was a voluntary choice of a scaffold Giving Arian Helga the name of Olga they made her a Slav, Christian and Rus was made a Christian country or, more precisely,
another Greek church colony. But one can only deceive himself by such primitive actions. Sponsors of falsifications, apparently, knew that one needs to be a lion in order to defeat a buffalo. In Russia the Arian buffalo was defeated by the Catholic lion. Not the Greek fox. Late in the Middle Ages Kiev Arians became Catholics. Traces of that Catholicism (including the Protestant sense) are seen today even in Byelorussia, Poland, Baltic states, i.e. where some time ago Norman colonies existed. The union of the Ukraine with Sweden started from Kievan Rus; it was a political guarantee of the spiritual closeness of two countries. Yellow color on the flags of the Ukraine and Sweden is a confirmation that is the sign of their common spiritual past. That color is also present on the German flag another color of the Sky. Greek Christianity came to the Ukraine together with Moscow ambassadors in the XVII century when colonization of Little Russia started. But that is another story to be told later. The Pope also took interest in the east of Europe since the IX century: the Greek and Scandinavian policy was not unobserved by him. The Pope also felt the patriarchal weakness of the Turkic world. The Roman Church, it should be mentioned, was skillfully turning people into Catholicism, which happened in the X century in Kievan Rus. At that time on the geographical map appeared eastern regions of the Catholics; the Turkic speech not subjected to Rome was being heard there. By the time of the Church split, i.e. by the XI century, the following political areas were formed in Europe: Catholic, Greek, Arian, Moslem and Turkic. There were five of them. The energy that would turn the wheels of history during the nearest centuries was being accumulated there. At that time Desht-I-Kipchak was looking only at itself not accepting the culture
of their neighbors; it was getting preserved. Non-participation in geopolitics was its policy. The phrase sounds like pun but it conveys the meaning more definitely: creating Christian Slavic principalities, Latin kingdoms and Varangian Ruses the West was getting ready for repartition of the world. The results of the Great Nations Migration were no longer suitable for it. And the East kept silent. That is why colonization of the Eastern Europe was inevitable, like autumn after summer. The Church opened the epoch of new history so as to write everything on a blank page In its own way!
it. The maps registered the repartition of the world that started: Byzantium was loosing. At that it was loosing the subject that turned out to be wiser. It was not saved by Christian Slavic principalities that appeared in the Eastern Europe on a sudden. The center of gravity of the continent was moving towards Rome; the boundary of the Catholic Empire, on the contrary, was moving far beyond the eastern bank of Rhine covering the Baltic region, Carpathian Mountains and the western regions of the Ukraine. The Pope was taking interest in those regions; he turned his look to non-Roman Europe. The scope of activities of the Church was expanding rapidly. And with it the troubles of papacy were growing. To the virgin lands which in the IV century were irrigated by the waves of the Great Nations Migration that brought towns and villages there, invaded the Christian Catholic culture. That was the domestication of the aliens. Because the population of the new possessions of Rome was not ethnically changing; it remained the same. On the whole those were the descendants of migrating Turki, but the Catholics were skillfully changing their consciousness and way of life. And they became different people; they were no longer barbarians led by Attila. They became the natives. Who were they, those new Turki? Just the people speaking the Turkic language? No. The spirit was changing that was the difference! In appearance they remained the same, but in their souls A phenomenon not investigated by science is evident the decay of a nation, its spiritual rebirth. What is it? Nobody knows, but the Turki had that fate; religion split them into nations and minor nations; they were no longer recognizing each other and they stopped to remember the past. They were not divided into hordes, as it was formerly, but into Catholics, Orthodox Christians, Arians, Moslems and the followers of belief in Tengri. Alienation was perhaps the most important thing in their lives. The natives were dividing the natives not feeling solidarity and the former kindred.
East Changes Its Face

Greek Christianity declared in 325 by the first Ecumenical Council was on its way out in the XI century having finished its mission by the creation of the Church a social niche which took roots, expanded and became the political face of the West. Not the Emperor was the main figure as it used to be formerly. The Church was! Designed for introduction of a new culture and strengthening of temporal power, the Church subjected that culture and that power, which was new in the history of humankind. Of course the innovation was to have certain consequences the fight for political leadership in Europe which was running high with unheard-of intensity. The split of the West into parties being at enmity with each other was practically predetermined. The new mechanism of society control needed vastness; it was cramped in the narrow national frames which the Emperor Constantine left the Church. The Catholics were winning; their flexible policy was leading to changes of life on the continent. Those changes stirring up Europe by the end of the millennium were reflected by a geographical map perhaps better than by words; the results of events could be read on
The Church was leading them; it was dictating both the future and the past. Unheard-of persistence of the Catholics was fiercely leading them to victory. The Europeans were looking at Rome and failed to mention Constantinople. That was a revolution in the consciousness of millions that happened in the X century; it led to a revolution inside the Church itself, to its division into eastern and western wings, which became inevitable. At that time a new page of the history of the West was open; it was notable for supremacy of spiritual power over temporality. When and how did that happen? Nobody can say for certain. But that happened. Bulgaria, Germany and later other countries, including Kievan Rus, are the illustrations. The Catholics were on firm ground everywhere and did not conceal that. The road to the East for them was laid by Carl the Great early in the IX century; his legendary campaigns finished another stage of the Roman policy and opened the new one. Byzantium is the country that became indescribably rich early in the Middle Ages; formerly it had been the core of the Christian Empire dictating the rules of life to other nations but it lost the war for the East. On its own political field. It should be mentioned that at all times starting from the IV century its policy was being conducted too rectilinearly, which means predictably. At first the Greeks got round by the Egyptians that got out of their hand establishing a new religion Islam in the VII century (the Council of Chalcedon taught the philosophers of the School of Alexandria a lot). After that was Rome which managed to give its Church the status of a spiritual institution and also get out of hand of the Byzantine Patriarch Carl the Great changed de jure for de facto. The Catholics were conducting their policy with the help of barbarians and through barbarians themselves. That is how Rome was reviving due to ideological weapons which it was improving year after year. In 1054 the resulting event happened; the West had been preparing itself for it during five centuries. The Pope threw down the gauntlet to the Byzantine Patriarch feeling
himself strong enough. Both Churches, the Roman and the Greek one, signed the deed of mutual excommunication. Christianity has split. Forever. It only remained for formerly mighty Byzantium to live its last years in the century full of anxiety. Neither the Greeks, neither the Turki nor the Armenians that were reigning in Constantinople after Esaurians managed to raise the country; it was withering of ailment which it had suffered from its birth from the time of Constantine's reign. Freedom of belief was absent in the country. In terms of geopolitics in that race for power over East, West had the most advantageous position: behind the Turki there was half of the world; in their hands were gold, swords and words the main levers of power. But the Turki did not understand each other. They spoke the same language but still they failed to understand. They were not a single nation any longer. The spirit had disappeared. Religion washed out their closeness. They were living like phantoms of the former power, former grandeur. If a nation is deprived of its past, in two generations it will turn into a crowd and in two more generations it can be run as a herd, this ancient wisdom was not remembered. The Pope Gregory VII that in 1075 launched the new policy of the Church belonged to Tuscany, which is in the north of Italy where Italian Turki lived. Strong, a little bit broad face, grasping look of hawk's eyes; he would have been given the name Togryl (hawk) if he had been living in the Steppe. He hated the Turki; everything about them irritated him. Only the natives hate in this way. That Pope dedicated his life full of vicissitudes to the destruction of Altaic foundations on which Europe transfigured by the Great Nations Migration was standing. He managed to do a lot. For example, he issued a Dictate by which he was granted the right to appoint Emperors. That was a fundamental step. The Pope's biography is interesting. Before the Pope's tiara was accepted he had been called Cildebrand (Gildebrand). The
name is not occasional. The boy belonged to a family of a simple landowner; his maternal uncle, a dedicated believer, had sworn to make the boy a monk before he was born. Hence is his name coming by an oath; the Turki were the only ones who determined their children's fate before they were born, which was common in their life. That was a tradition. The monastery where the novice was being brought up adhered to Clunian ideas; that was a powerful current in spiritual life of Europe which started in 910 in Burgundy. It subjected to Rome. The monks vowed silence; hence is the sign language that the Clunists developed nobody could understand it except for them. But their actions were clear to everyone; they were directed against the barbarians. In the name of the triumph of Catholicism which the Clunists understood in their own way like purification and liberation of the Church. Of course their ascetic reformatory ideas were understood primarily by the Turki that wished to become real Europeans. Among the patrons and adherents of the Clunists there were perhaps all the important persons of that time: French king Lothar V, William the Conqueror king of England, German Emperor Otto and his wife, as well as Henry II, Henry III and many others The Clunian reform is also a page of the history of the Turki in Europe. The Western Church declared power over European monarchs; it was becoming king of kings arrogating the right of choice of a ruler. Thus the Pope hit the painful point of society; his blow was thoroughly elaborated: Christian kingdoms were to know in whose hands the power was and who had the power over medieval Europe Elections, as we know, were a ritual in Altai where a ruler was chosen by the will of Heavens; there existed a special code of rules. At first Catholic countries those that grew of the estates of gentlemen were also living with an elected leader. At that time power was changing in principle. That was the end of political culture that had come to the West in the IV century.
Of course not everyone liked all the decisions introduced by the Pope Gregory VII. But they were strengthening the power of the Church and the West. Protests were vehement; they were even close to killing the Pope, but in return he showed rigidity. Wars were changing each other. Europe was in full swing, but it was getting used to new reality. The Pope's power was becoming absolute; bishops were getting more important than kings. New political culture was being established for that time it was not Christian. The triumph of the Church started from the era of the crusades. From the seemingly romantic time described in the books monographs and novels but the objectives of the crusades in the East have always been understated And what was standing behind knightly romanticism in reality? And has that romanticism ever existed? The version of saving the Holy Sepulcher was invented for the simpletons; it is helpless since the Pope's surrounding were perfectly aware of the history of Christianity it knew that a sepulcher had not existed there. The Jews did not bury in sepulchers. Everything composed by Constantine about Christ and his sepulcher Rome had not formerly acclaimed reasonably denying it It means there was something else on what the Crusades were based in reality not a sepulcher? What was that? According to an evangelic legend after the descent from the cross Christ was buried in a sepulcher which he left after the Resurrection. The sepulcher is located in Jerusalem in the Church of the Resurrection and belongs to several Christian confessional groups at once. It is not possible to discuss its trueness because of full absence of reliable information. It is rather a place of pilgrimages of the Christians which had become established by the X century when it was given the mythologized past. If one discards the literary and romantic husk, events are read absolutely differently. That was a tragedy, a big tragedy;
hundreds of thousands of volunteer Catholics, like powerless zombie, were trying to conquer the Middle East for decades. They were searching for their death. By themselves. They understood that, but new generation continued what the previous ones had started. Unfortunately, their persistence trenching upon madness has not been explained by science Where is the motive of behavior? Is it not the belief which was required to be accepted without thinking? Was not madness being born with it? When thoughts become unnecessary that is quite possible. The version of the enmity between the Catholics and Moslems is erroneous: Catholicism and Islam were close allies at that time. It is enough to remember, for instance, that Sylvester II that accepted the Pope's tiara in 999 was studying with the Moslems when he was young; he had been living among them for years and carried on a friendly correspondence being the Pope. Gregory VII himself, the one that launched new Church policy, was considered to be the connoisseur of Mohammed's teaching in Europe; he declared he had the same God the Moslems had. And that was true. As we know, in the hour of danger the Pope was saved from the enraged Catholics by the Moslems; their detachment came close to the castle where the Pope was hiding and released him. After that together with the Pope they prayed in St. Peter's Cathedral; in the main Catholic temple a mullah was reading suras from Koran That is the truth! Should it be added that the Pope Sylvester was a Turki? His name that he later changed having accepted the Pope's tiara sounded like Herbert and was connected with belief full of belief. In Altai that was the name for the boys that had been determined to be monks before they were born. Given by a vow, by an oath that is the sense of the name. Her (ker) means belief in Turkic, ber to entrust, give. That Pope was an adherent of the church reforms. In his opinion and in the
opinion of his patron, the German Emperor Otto III, the West was to return to the Altaic tradition of diarchy that a part of Moslems retained. However, the opposition had another opinion Untimely, the death of Otto in 1002 and the death of the Pope Otto that followed put an end to their ambitions. The Moslem version is baseless for another reason a good half of the North Italy, South France and the whole Spain professed Islam. The adherents of Monotheism, neighbors and friends of the Catholics, were the Turki for the most part. They were called Arabs, but Arab, as far as we know, is not a nationality but the name of an inhabitant of Caliphate respecting Islam. For the Popes the Moslems remained the same as Cathars or Albigenses. But not the people of a different belief. Not feeling this delicate nuance it is hard to understand the life of medieval Europe. It is possible that turning to the East Catholic clergy was building secret plans connected with expiration of Islam in Europe. But that is also not likely. The Catholics had no other allies except for the Moslems. They were to struggle against each other in five centuries during the Spanish inquisition. And for that moment they were acting jointly against their common enemy Byzantium. But those were the Catholics that started the campaign to the East. Why was that so? The answer is not evident. But, considering the geopolitical details, one can come to an unexpected conclusion that was an attempt of mass manipulation of consciousness of believers. The first one in history! In that way the Church was checking its strength and itself. Because the Pope was not following the believers, as it had been formerly, but was leading them. And they followed. Forward-looking Catholics were frightened by the rapid increase of the flock, appearance of new nations; they were feeling insecurity of their dominating position
in Western society. At any moment eparchies could become uncontrollable and explosive. The reason was new people; there were too many new people coming to the bosom of the Church. Beautiful. Strong. Able to think. They did not take the Pope's words for granted. They could not. And the clergy decided to get rid of them and the old aristocracy with its unfashionable habits to think and discuss, as well as of the youth that could not make use of it and was yearning in idleness. The Pope wanted a war the slaughter that would destroy the dangerous part of the Catholics. It sounds blasphemously but death of certain Turki was required by the future of the West. Its quietude. The more people being able to think, act and sacrifice, the more quietly it is to control all the rest, - thought the Church. That was a severe ordeal, but wellbeing of future generations depended upon it. There is no one to blame for that. What can be done a steed cannot be a pack animal. It cannot walk tied to the tail of another horse; it is easier to kill it than to make it humble That is the spirit which it is impossible to break. They were born like that those terrible Turki that made honor top of priorities in their lives. And they needed no Pope neither from Rome nor from anywhere else. People for the crusades were being found by themselves; those were the people devoted to the Church and ready to serve and wage a war. They were choosing the most dignified; they were given absolution and blessed for the campaign for the Holy Sepulcher. They sewed a red cross on their clothes and proclaimed themselves crusaders the troops of the Pope. For them there were no leaders, equipment, provisions; they even had no plan of actions. Nothing. Only the Pope's appeals That is the consciousness control; its result is that the elder gave orders in the names of God, and those faithful to the duty of conscience obeyed. Without discussing or thinking. The Catholics asked absolutely nothing for themselves. All they needed was
to serve in the name of the Church. Initiative of a leader in the first Crusade was given to Peter the Hermit, a sordid monk that was suffering from susceptibility and asserting that he had talked to Christ. And everyone believed since the Pope was the first to believe. This is a very typical reaction for a Turki to believe a clergyman without thinking. That provocateur whom the Church made the hero of folk songs is plainly visible in The Song of Antioch. There is an episode when people complaining for hunger turned to Peter the Hermit whom Christ had allegedly entrusted to run the Crusade. Can't you see the Turkic corpses? That is excellent food, and the crusaders fried and eat the corpses of the infidels. And the author added: Meat of the Turki is better that peacock with sauce. It would be better to leave these words without comments, all the more so as they were written after the Crusades; at that time Europe was cleaning itself of the Turkic past and for it all was fair. Not an army but a hungry crowd gathered in haste was moving to the East in 1096 devouring all the eatables on their way. Even corpses of people and dogs. They were moving like in pitch dark, without a geographical map and without reconnaissance; all the big towns met on their way they took for Jerusalem and started to assault them. Those were befuddled people who did not know what they were doing; they heard the Popes words: That is what God wants. And they moved forward. Terrible force of religion made them marionettes. Descendants of the Turki believed not God but a human being, the Vicar of God on the Earth, that is how he called himself. They put a man over themselves since he had power. That is perhaps the main peculiarity of Christianity in which, as against other religions, a man became separated from God. From his own self. From sensible actions, finally. Vicars in robes came into their souls. That is what the conduct of Crusaders
was. It was separated. It cannot even be called religious fanaticism that is a flash, an explosion while here we are dealing with something different which common sense is not likely to define. That was consciousness control that led to mass madness; whole countries were running mad on a sudden; peoples behavior was becoming unexplainable. It is possible that the acute sense of belief raised by Altai in the ancestors of those people was declaring itself in such an absurd manner. And there may be other reasons. But they were controlled like a herd. And one cannot deny that. Showing humility they showed the enormous power of religion: who possesses peoples souls possesses the world. Their world! The Church really took possession of the West One can regard the Crusades of 1096, 1147 and 1189 in different ways but one can also regard them as the Great Nations Migration that was happening in reverse. The crusaders were taken not to inhabit new lands but to die there. They are the dust of time, the ash of society, slaves (kulas) not of God but of the Pope. They were being killed with their own hands. Those were the Turki; the Pope would accept only them. Crusaders from modern England, France, Italy, Germany were united by common speech. The people were communicating without a translator, which is perhaps the most significant and unexpected thing. Their marching songs had been heard in Europe from Attila's times; that is a proven fact. Later they were called the songs of pilgrims, but the new name was given them later when the medieval history was being rewritten. At that time they had been called marching and barbarian The first Crusade was successful: lots of corpses remained of the Pope's host; bones of Christians formed hills, an eyewitness wrote. The crusaders were not saved by a play performed by the clergyman Peter Barthol (Bartholomew) who found the Holy Lance the weapons of eternal redemption.
A Moslem lance put furtively by him the one by which Christ's body had been allegedly hit made no miracles but it raised the spirit of the crusaders and they believed in the miracle. And they also believed that the Moslems had been present in the East from the times of Christ The swindler was brought to light later in a Turkic way; he was led between two fires the method that had existed in Altai. They made two big fires close to each other and made him walk between them; he did so but his sides and stomach burned, which meant he had told a lie. That was it. The liar admitted the forgery at once; otherwise he would have been made to walk between two fires one more time. And there are too many other miracles that have not been disclosed The ideology of the crusades was built on them. With centuries miracles have become the property of church rhetoric; time and believers perpetuated them. To the same extent it relates to three knights in white clothes, believers in Christ Gregory, Fyodor and Maurice. They also allegedly came into view of blinded crusaders. To tell the truth, the Pope's legate Ademar was the only one who saw them After all, these are sordid times when thoughts are under a ban. But who knows? Was not that prohibition a bargain between the politicians of East and West? The first bargain that started the secret diplomacy on the level of the clergy. That is not a rhetorical question; there are certain facts connected with it. During the Crusades merchants of slavemarkets became fabulously rich, especially in 1212 after the childish crusades. Convoys of vessels with children were sailing from the Western Europe to Egypt, to slave-markets. In the port they were sold to Moslems for a trifling sum. Why? Why thousands and thousands of crusaders became slaves of the Moslems not putting their feet on their land? Defenseless children were delivered in crowds and crowds. Was that not the policy profitable for the Church? And the clergy did not turn red. It never turns red, unless of overeating.
However, the character of an implacable religious war that has later been given to the Crusades was incorrect. And it could not be correct. That is confirmed, for example, by the history of the English king Richard I who was ready to agree for the marriage of his sister with the sultan's brother. Or the history of the French king Philip-Augustus who, in sign of friendship, used to send falcons to the sultan and receive Arabic horses in return There are more than sufficient examples of normal human communication between East and West. Up to the middle of the XII century their relations had been quite normal, which is witnessed by existence of free Christians in Caliphate; their religious institutions were similar with Moslem ones. And that is perhaps the most significant thing. Eastern Christians, it turns out, did not eat pork, refrained from drinking wine, performed circumcision they were called Mozarabs. The Mozarabic liturgy which, for instance, had been used in churches of Toledo, was receiving abuse of the Popes. But their discontent changed nothing there. An interesting detail. In the Catholic Church the Mozarabs were called in Latin adscititti derived from the Turkic adji, i.e. living with the sign of a cross. But not Christians! The people, knowing each other, were striving after each other as relatives having the same ancestors. They remembered Altai Of course, that was also politics. But without religion! Coreligionists were communicating: they were all living under the sign of a cross. Hence, by the way, is the name of the campaigns the crusades; they were disputing because of the sign of Heavens. Kings of France (Philip-Augustus and Louis VIII) called Caliphate the Angevin Empire, i.e. crusader land derived from adji (anji) a cross again. What can be discussed here if in England when Off was reigning on the coins they used to mint: Mohammed the Prophet of One God (Tengri)? Or if a cross as the symbol of Heavens in Caliphate was treated
very respectfully but not to the same extent as in Europe? They did not pray to it; it was the memory of the Hanifs and the sources of Islam. In Koran (translated by Krachkovskiy) it is said: Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian; he was a betrayed hanif and did not belong to the Polytheists; and after that: Allah tells the truth! Follow the religion of Abraham, a hanif, since he was not a Polytheist! [3 60, 89]. Knowing the pre-Christian period of Monotheism, being aware about the release of the Jews by Cyrus, it only remains to show surprise that theologians and historians did not pay their attention to these words from Koran. They contained the answer concerning toleration that had been peculiar to East and West before religious establishments were granted the status of political institute. After the Crusades an equilateral cross disappeared from Islam; it was turned into an eight-point star. If one looks at its center (a little lower) a cross is seen of its own accord. However, it remained on the flags of the Moslems for a long time. That is witnessed by the banners of the Tatars from the horde the trophies of the XVII century exhibited in the Military Museum of Stockholm. The sultan Saladin did not return the Holy Cross to the Catholics not because of his cruelty or avarice. His conscience did not allow him encouraging idolatry, which he admitted to the king Richard. The arguments of a Moslem were rather weightier. That was seen during the negotiations about the holiness of Jerusalem during which they were speaking perfectly understanding each other. The both sides had common opinions about religion So what was the difference between them the Catholics and the Moslems? What caused the religious enmity? Nothing. Only politics. Masks in the political game were thrown off in 1204 during the fourth crusade. Masks were superfluous at that time; Deadly enmity with the Moslems receded to the
background in western politics. It was forgotten Lulling the vigilance of the Greeks, the Pope's servants wearing knights' armors did not move to liberate Jerusalem as usual but stayed in Constantinople. Simply stated that means they conquered the richest town of Europe calling it the Second Rome. For a week they were plundering the temples and did not manage to plunder them. Gold was taken out in bags; people did not know what to do and the ships could not bear such load. That was the most profitable military operation of the Middle Ages; no other wars gave greater loot At that time the Pope declared the Latin Empire, a new European state. To tell the truth, everything was done in haste. The Empire existed not for along time but the political map of the continent remained different forever since a new page of the History was open the Pope turned to church regions of Byzantium. West was searching for the routes and paths deeper in the steppes of the Eastern Europe. He was also attracted by Armenia, Georgia, Caucasian Albania; free lands from the viewpoint of the Catholics. But The sun over the planet was shining in a different way; life was changing not only in Europe. In the East it was also becoming different. There the retribution force was raising; a grand and mighty force that was menacingly expanding like a cloud on the horizon; its name was Genghis Khan. Desht-I-Kipchak was awakening; it had to answer the aggression of the Christians who by that time had colonized one third of its territories. It should be mentioned that after Attila the Turkic world was slowly decaying; it was falling into pieces. Flushing hatred was killing it. The Europeans no longer regarded Altai as their motherland; it was different for them. That is natural; peoples memory being polished for centuries and everyday cares narrow the horizon. From Baikal to the Atlantic, from Scandinavia to the Indian Ocean there was a life in which
confrontations and affairs did not quite down. The Turki were slaughtering the Turki. Perhaps all the wars of the Middle Ages were religious wars, their wars: they were fighting in feuding armies. Some for the Italians, others for the Byzantines, some for the Arabs, other for themselves or for something else Hirelings showed real ethnic cannibalism they were eating each other. Those that had forgotten their relatives were the victims of the foreign politics. For them the Eternal Blue Sky faded away; their red-rimmed eyes could not distinguish soft divine colors. Civil discords split Attila's country and divided Europe into two parts in the V century into the Christian and Arian parts. Following centuries continued the suffering of one part and exaltation of the other part of the Turkic families. They were living with foreign names. With foreign morals. As we know, force directed against itself is to fade out sooner or later and leave dust. Leaving this world the luckiest children of Altai got only one thing a fathom of cold soil. Their fellow countrymen did not know their names; tombs could remain unknown. Christian. Moslem. Or just no one's Whom did they want to astonish turning away from their mothers and fathers? Becoming strangers for their own nation? For their ancestor?! In this connection the book Feudal Monarchy In France and England of the X XIII Centuries by the French historian Charles Petit-Dutaillis dedicated to royal power is indicative. Either intentionally or accidentally the author shows two states close in the cultures with related royal families. Everything seems to be different in them from the viewpoint of a European but for a Turki everything is the same. Psychological portraits of kings and people around them tell a lot. After reading the book it becomes clear why Childeric, king of Franks, the founder of the dynasty of Merovingis, was buried in a barrow with his steed. Why there is a cross on coffins of the dynasty of
Luxembourgs. Why there are forgotten Turkic symbols and signs in the surroundings of the European nobility? Just because it could not be otherwise with the Turki those were their sings; that was their way of life The Church prohibited a lot, for instance, to eat horse beef, drink koumiss, fist law. But it could not prohibit everything. During those uneasy centuries Altai seemed to be a deserted island in the ocean of politics. The West, having become Christian, was forgetting that. And it reminded about itself. It did so by the birth of a great Turki; the genius of all times and nations. His parents called him Temuchin. In the history of humankind he is equal to Attila. And even higher; no one has carried out more significant reformations in the whole long history of humankind. The boy's father, Esugei-Batagur, was ruling over Altaic foothills; he was poisoned by his enemies. They would have also killed his family, but his son with a dagger in his hands was standing on their way. The man of courage was thirteen years old; in his eyes the fire of revenge was burning and his face was shining like a ray of victory. The murderers, seeing that, were taken aback and threw up their hands, which saved the boy who was able to escape. He escaped. He gathered a troop and, through his mother's help, improved the shaken positions of the family. Years went by; people were uttering the name Temuchin with trepidation in their voices the adults were in awe of the mind and fearlessness of the youth. Because his first deed was the revenge for his father, by which he recovered the respect for his family. That was the tradition. He made a wine bowl of the poisoner's skull and the rest of his enemies he simply slaughtered. Much has been written about the family tree of Genghis Khan; legends relate him to an ancient regal family, but such assumption is not likely to be well-founded, of which convinces the whole further history of the family. His ancestors had a low position in society; they belonged to the family of Borjigins which had not formerly proven itself.
That was a common family like thousands of others; it could have been a remote descent of Kushans, which is witnessed by a bird on the family flag. But what bird was that? According to some sources it is a falcon, according to other sources it is an eagle. The Arabs, judging by the book Djami at-Tavarih by Rashid-ad-Din, referred Genghis Khan to a large Turkic family called Kiyat (Kiyan), i.e. the remote. According to a legend that family participated in the Great Nations Migration but later it returned to its historical place of living. A Mongolian legend tells a nice story about the unearthly origin of the family of Genghis Khan and about his virgin birth. The descendants of these three brothers were called Nirun, sinless conception since according to Mongolian beliefs they were born by the light. Such eminent attitude to the hero is explicable; but for sure it had nothing to do with reality. Later Temuchin obtained power over Altai and he was given the name of Genghis Khan, i.e. the great khan. Another name would not have been suitable; he decided to revive the forgotten state Altai that would have changed Desht-I-Kipchak decrepitated in the course of centuries. The young man had a tough heritage; patriarchal orders threw the Altaians back; Christian West and Moslem East strengthened by the Turki, on the contrary, were moving on; they were leading a renewed life. There was a lot for the Altaic ruler to do. Temuchin decided to take what life could give not by force but by his mind; that was the peculiarity of the leader in seemingly hopeless situations Indeed, how could he, not having anything except for his mind and belief, gather the strongest army? How did he manage to conquer half of the world? In appearance that was a common man with big blue eyes and a red beard; he did not look like a hero at all although he was rather tall. What did he start with while creating his great country? He stopped civil discords that were torturing everyone, arranged a code of laws Yasa from which peacefulness and well-being for the subjects emanated. In
1206 it was decaled at a kurultai (general meeting of the people). Laws protected the power of the Great Khan and each of his subjects; they provided death sentence for deceit, betrayal, failure to render assistance to a warrior on a battlefield, theft, adultery and even gossips and listening-in. The ruler himself and his people were living according to Yasa; there were no exceptions. Even swore enemies became silent seeing the justice of the power of Genghis Khan who was proving without fail that if one does not comply with Yasa the state will be lost and cease to exist. Without strict laws or, more precisely, without strict execution thereof, there is no country and no nation. And that was right. But Yasa was not his greatest public undertaking. People of different beliefs must leave in peace, - declared Genghis Khan. We will become brothers again. No one on the whole planet had had that light thought. Everywhere religion was turned into politics. It was dividing and embroiling people while in this case it was uniting them. It is striking, East and West, the Christians and the Moslems, setting the nations on to fight were finding out whose religion was better, and an Altaic Turki reminded everyone of Heavenly God that created this world. The idea that Genghis Khan was a wild nomad and illiterate person is absolutely wrong. It is known that he was well educated in the field of religion, law and secrets of engineering. Close to him were educated people that would consult the ruler and give lessons to him and his nearest. Such a teacher was, for instance, Tata-tungKo (the name taken from a Chinese source in the Chinese transcription); later he held an important administrative office. The world is perfect when the Most High rules over it. That is the whole philosophy of Genghis Khan. But there was a lot in the background of that seeming simplicity belief in God that gave people the rules of conduct in society, directed towards the deeds and made honor and conscience
top of priorities. Belief gathered under the flags of Altai those that valued peace and justice. Not the crusaders united in a mad sword. People of different religions went to the army of Genghis Khan themselves; they felt fraternity there having one Father God Unfortunately there are not many documents remaining from that great epoch when one man armed with the Word gathered the strongest army. He had neither money nor power. Only the Word. Of course God helped him. In the eastern and western literature there are interesting details which turn out to be absolutely unusual for the unaccustomed men in the street. The Englishmen, Genoese, Franks and other Europeans were among the first that came to serve Genghis Khan since they had been attracted by Catholicism for a long time. Those very heretics described above. He had the troops of the Moslems that also wanted to fight for the pure belief and justice. There were no wild nomads or pagan Tatars there! Everybody knew that Genghis Khans code obliged to have mercy on towns and nations submitting voluntarily; they knew that Yasa exempted from taxes those temples and monasteries dedicated to Heavenly God This significant example tells a lot about with what Altai was living. And how it was living. Here we cannot do without the lines from the letter of the Pope Gregory IX who was bothered because the Europeans had left for the East being displeased with the Church. Accusing Frederick II, the head of the Sicilian court, who admired Genghis Khan, the Pope wrote: that evil king declares that the world was seduced by three deceivers Jesus Christ, Moses and Mohammed and two of them died in favor and the third one on a cross. More than that, he asserts that only fools can believe that a virgin could give birth to a child whose father was God, the creator of the Universe; he says, finally, that a man should believe only what has been proven by the facts or common sense.
And the opinion of Frederick II was shared by a lot in Europe. At the palaces where dukes and barons lived, in the huts of common people one could hear the prohibited verses of a categorical content: Destiny tells us, stars and birds flying foretell that in the future there will be only one hammer for the whole world. Rome that has taken the way of sins is shaking and will soon collapse and cease to be the capital of the world. Of course the verses were in Turkic language and sounded rhythmically. Who is their author? Maybe Genghis Khan or Frederick II themselves; at any rate they accurately expressed the sense of the words uttered by the ruler of Altai. It means the connection between East and West was not interrupted in the XIII century It turns out the punitive crusade against the Cathars started by the Pope in the south of France in 1213 and continued later cannot be called accidental. Maybe that was the place from which they used to leave for serving Genghis Khan?.. Here is the reason to think: the Truth captivated western society; in the following centuries it also found passionate followers that finally led the West to the Reformation. And the opinion of Genghis Khan that the Pope was stranger on this planet hardly needs any comments. The Pope responded harshly; the Catholic world was shocked Of course Altai had diplomatic contacts with the West; the Eurasian world was aware of Genghis Khans code, Of its first line. And it ran: We order everyone to believe in One God, the Creator of the sky and the earth, one giver of wealth and poverty, life and death having might in all the deeds. It is hard to imagine that these are the thoughts and words of a Turki whom the Europeans call a pagan now. Wise Genghis Khan being sure in the strength of belief in Heavenly God allowed his subjects Christianity, Islam, Buddhism whatever they wanted at their choice but after the communal prayed to the Most High. In his army ceremonies of other religions were not prohibited; one just had to believe in God in his soul and the victory will come, he was teaching since he understood the
Truth of life being twenty eight years old. For that he was called Sutu-Bogdo or the Son of the Sky. English historian Edward Gibbon wrote on this subject: The religion of Genghis Khan deserves our astonishment and praise. While in Europe the Catholics used to fall back on the cruelest measures so as to defend nonsense. They could have been brought to shame by the example of a barbarian that anticipated the teaching of philosophy setting by his laws the system of pure deism and full tolerance. His only and the most important dogma of belief was God that created all the good and filled with his presence the sky and the earth which are created by his might. These words convince of the fact that in medieval Europe there was a secret interest to forgotten roots of their former religion. And the best example is not even the words by Gibbon but an excellent work of an English philosopher John Locke, the founder of liberalism. In the XVII century, not realizing that, he repeated the religious conception of Genghis Khan but in a different scientific language. Word for word. Of course the striking similarity of thoughts in details! is not accidental; the knowledge of the scientist was being accumulated not in his conscience but rather in his bones. His blood was speaking. That is what the Pope was afraid of; that is what he organized the Crusades for. He was afraid that the Turkic Catholics would remember Altai, belief in Heavenly God and come to the conclusion of needlessness of the Pope and his retinue that were born away with politics and only politics. People, even if they are besotted by the Church, are dangerous because sooner or later the genetic memory will awake in them and regaining conscience after being intoxicated they will act. Nonsense and myths will no longer be a religion for them Genghis Khan is called a Mongol, drawn with narrow eyes and looking like a Turki in his face and clothes. And that is another trick of the West and its science that
deliberately distorts the past. Because of fear. Altaic barbarians had a different appearance; according to the description of contemporaries he had big blue eyes, exquisite and a little bit broad face, thick red beard; his father had green eyes and hence is the name of the family Green-Eyed (Borjigin) the Turki compared such eyes with unripe currant. The appearance of the father and son was exactly the same as had their ancestors who were taken to Europe by the waves of the Great Nations Migration. Europeans? That is what eyewitnesses asserted. But the politicians dealing with science disagreed. Who is right? And how important is that? A man is known by his deeds and actions but not his face. Genghis Khan was the most beautiful Turki in the world since he was living with belief in Heavenly God. And that is what the man was By the way, the word Mongolian appeared while Genghis Khan was alive. Maybe a little earlier. How? Unfortunately details are not quite clear here. But in 1206 the ruler of Altai declared to his subjects: The people that connect themselves with me are against everybody; the people that armed my powerful thoughts by their great strength. Those people, pure like a mountain crystal, I would like to be called Keke-Mongol. (That means heavenly happiness). That is where the word Mongols appears to come from. In the lips of Genghis Khan the word meant not people but happiness that belief gives to the people. That was the delicate design without any ethnic implication. Mongol, Mongal and Mogul were considered to be synonyms in the Middle Ages; a national idea was standing behind them it was strengthening not an individually taken nation but nations standing under the flag of One God accepting Genghis Khans code Tolerance was peculiar to Altai in its policy and activities. And that cannot be neglected. The Western Church was propagating new nations; Caliphate was denying
national roots calling the Moslems Arabs while Genghis Khan called for the unity of mankind. To the relations between the people who have one father and one mother Adam and Eve. He was searching for what can unite and reconcile. That is what was irritating both for the West and Caliphate the policy of Altai which was more challenging. Of course ethnic sense of the word Mongol was not in question at that time. The Chinese whom Altai paid impost were the first to know the strength of the army of Genghis Khan. The Emperor was astonished by the coming of faraway ambassadors and their request. And it was clear as day: Altai established impost to the Chinese Emperor, that paltriest of all men living. Hearing this revelation, the Chinese lost tongue. But it was quickly returned to them. Genghis Khan entered China, surrounded ninety towns and took them by storm. A huge Chinese army was groaning of its powerlessness. The riders filled with consternation; in small troops they appeared out of nowhere and disappeared after a sudden attack. They would hit and retreat; that was the Turkic tactics against a stronger enemy. It is commonly supposed that the Chinese invented a compass, which is wrong. They had already had a compass by that time. The genius of Genghis Khan was also present there; he proved to know China better than the Chinese. He waged a war successfully because of knowledge obtained by reconnaissance, which meant dealing with geographical maps. And of course geodetic instruments without which a map cannot be created; those were a compass and astrolabe which the Turki had had since their steppe history, i.e. from the I century. The army was steadily moving on; reconnaissance one of the achievements of Genghis Khan! was acting faultlessly in the campaign; it was foretelling the events of tomorrow. The Chinese received one blow after another; those blows were always unexpected and hit the most tender place. The Emperor's officials had nothing to do but to invite the messengers of Genghis Khan
and agree to pay impost to the Turki. However, these actions of Genghis Khan cannot be called a conquest that is wrong. Altai and China had too much in common, which is seen even from toponyms. Those were rather two parts of a big country of the Central Asia, of one single culture. Of the Great Victorious Empire the motherland of common ancestors: the cult of the Sky rallied them long before the Common Era. They were not a state in the customary sense of this word because in ancient times there were different conceptions of a state. It seems that was a simple change of the leaders that happened then like it happens in every big empire as time goes by By the second campaign Genghis Khan seized power over the North China. But the military leader would not have been the wisest of the wise if he had not been selective. God was opening him what others had not noticed. In salvoes of a salute made in his honor he saw a gun firing arms. And he understood that in the hands of the Chinese gunpowder is the key to the medieval world while they would spent it on salvoes not having the slightest idea about that. Western scientists describe invincible armies of Genghis Khan as the hordes of wild nomads (exactly the same as it was with Attila), but they keep silent about technical innovations. For example, about firecrackers the forbearers of artillery A book should be written to tell about Genghis Khan as the military leader. That was an artist on the battlefield; he would always invent something new. For instance, he gave every rider two horses so that he could change them during a campaign, and the army became twice as fast. The cavalry of Genghis Khan would appear a little earlier than it was expected by the enemy. Its blow would be precise and unexpected. In simple steppe thorns he saw defensive arms an iron thorn. He used them to break up assaults of his enemies and break up any pursuit scattering the thorns before the coming enemy. Everything in his army was inimitable like in a great artist's
studio. The next country after China on the way of Genghis Khan was Caliphate a Moslem country where lived the descendants of the Parthians, Bactrians, Kushans in a word, the Turki that had left Altai. They had not had the unity for a long time. Mohammed, the bigheaded sultan of Khorezm reigning on the lands from the Persian Gulf and the boundaries of India to Desht-I-Kipchak was acting disgracefully. Not like a Moslem. He secretly was feeling with the sect of Ismaelites that was developing the theory of Islam in its own way; it had different views on Monotheism and Koran. Their views were strangely close to those of the Catholics; the same philosophy of vicariate. The idea of vicariate found its followers among the adherents of different branches of Islam. Thus an inscription in Baghdad made in 1221 provided by V.V. Bartold adequately explains this thought. The Caliph Nasir called himself the imam whom all the people should obey, the caliph of God of the worlds. Self-exaltation was becoming normal among spiritual leaders both in Caliphate and in the Western Europe. It seems that is how the process of decay of spirit expressed itself while, according to a Turkic tradition, the clergy was to keep it. Changing the Turkic traditions of belief religious leaders were destroying the belief itself. Thus one of the caliphs of Baghdad receiving Egyptian ambassadors was sitting on the throne with a cloak of a prophet on his shoulders, with a sword of a prophet on his belt and with a staff of a prophet in his hands; to the question of the ambassador astonished by such luxury: Is it not Allah himself? the ruler allegedly replied: It is his deputy on the Earth. Arrogance, conceit and ostentatious luxury of the clergy gave rise to protests among the true believers. Hence was the growth of sects and heretical currents and dissents that became peculiar to the world of the Christians and Moslems. That is why the words Genghis Khan said about the purity of belief were clearly heard both in the West and in the East.
The great sultan realized who was standing in front of him not at once! Genghis Khan did not want to fight with the Moslems; he was searching for friendship and a union with his Turkic brothers living in Caliphate; he offered them beneficial trade through the silk route. In 1218 he sent a caravan with expensive gifts to the sultan. But the latter attacked the caravan; the merchants were killed and the goods were stolen. Genghis Khan claimed for gratification but Mohammed killed the ambassadors suspecting menace in them. After that humiliated Moslems themselves turned to the great protector of all the Turki, as it is written in their appeal. They were being displeased with the sultan having the soul of a slave that was waiting for the moment to proclaim himself the Arabic Pope, i.e. Allah's vicar on the earth (Agakhan). Details of those events are read in the Collection of Chronicles by Rashid-adDin as well as in a priceless work by V.T. Tisensgausen Collection of Materials Relating to the History of the Golden Horde (page 376). However, reading the eastern literature one should be as careful as reading the literature of the West, - by the reason of political bias of the authors. It is very difficult to get the facts but it is rather more difficult to analyze them. The answer to the profaner of Monotheism was immediate. But before that, as a legend says, according to a tradition of ancestors Genghis Khan climbed on top of a mountain and addressed to Tengri. He was waiting for an answer for three days and three nights, for tree days and three nights he had neither a crumb of bread nor a drop of water in his mouth; the wind was chilling him satisfying his thirst. When he was descending from the mountain he knew what to do. Seeing the leader the warriors started to chant: Tengri, Tengri. And pray Him Belief purifies consciousness, indeed. Hurrah shouted by thousands of
voices and strengthened by echo was heard around. Europe was hearing the shout hurrah from Attila's time and slowly getting used to it. To tell the truth, if one wants to be more precise, they were shouting not hurrah but hurray, which in the ancient Turkic language meant save and have mercy. Its another meaning is hit, smash, i.e. a call for an attack. That shout stampeded the Roman troops in 312; the Romans got used to it not at once New troops of the Moslems were gathering under the flags of Altai; there were about seven hundred thousand riders. Two great forces, two cultures personifying the East at that time were to fight. The world had not seen such fights in the times of Attila. Heavenly Altai against Caliphate, face to face. Voltaire wrote about that fight: Our European battles are nothing more than insignificant confrontations compared with multiplicity of armies that were fighting and perishing in Asian plains. That was a grandiose battle scene which is worth perpetuating in panorama. The world has seen a combat of that king neither before nor after. One and half a million people gathered in an open field. The battle near the SyrDarya river started in the morning and was over on the third day at night. Genghis Khan was proficiently making history; everything would become subject to him. They say that every doctor cures with his own remedy Complacence turned out to be a curable disease too. During the first hours of the battle the conceited sultan lost half of his army and after that it flashed upon him that he was facing the army over which Ala the guardian angel of the Turki spread his wings: that was an invincible army fighting for the triumph of belief in Heavenly God. From that moment he was thinking not about the victory but about how to escape. It is reasonable to suppose that that was the time the sultan became stumble at
his correct understanding of Koran. In 20th sura (ayat 102) it is said: the sinners will be gathered for the Last Judgment by the blueeyed. Genghis Khan's blue eyes full of anger strengthened his fear before the unexpected discovery. Maybe at that time the sultan understood: a true believer is not the one surrounded by power, luxury and wealth and not the one spending his days in ostentatious praying and ceremonies observance. But the one living under the laws of the Most High for the people. Like Genghis Khan. True belief is in peoples souls and conduct; it is never shown to the public. God sees it as it is. The battle flag of Genghis Khan was called sulde vital life, spirit. Hence, by the way, are the English and German words soul and seele respectively; those years they were uttered in that Turkic manner. The same as the word sultan. Sulde and Yasa were the voice of the Sky. They raised military spirit giving forces and firmness to the army. For instance, in 1221 1222, when reconnaissance detachment headed by the khan Djebe and his assistant Subutai found its way to the Caucasus, the local Kipchaks were not resisting for a long time because they were told about the holy war declared by Altai. The war for the triumph of Monotheism. The Great campaign for the truth started with that detachment. The campaign up to the last sea. The campaign known in the history of Russia as the Tatar Mongol invasion. Those were not wild hordes of the nomads In the history of humankind there are no similar examples; a detachment consisting of two tumens (twenty thousand riders) managed to march from Samarkand to Kiev; the route comparable with that of Alexander the Great, but the regiment did more than the whole army of the latter if, of course, it really existed. The riders made 120versts marches; they had no halting days during 12 days and thus exceeded all the military standards of the West. The detachment was regarded as a phantom, as the messenger of the Sky;
meeting it nobody dared raise their eyes on the flag of Genghis Khan everybody inclined their heads before him. The reconnaissance entered the Eastern Europe almost without a fight. Those were painful lands; from the IX century the Greeks were embroiling the local khans there. Later the Catholics joined the altercation It turns out that sending the detachment Genghis Khan knew what was happening in those regions of Desht-I-Kipchak. He also knew about the Christian invasion there and about their disgraceful policy of discord. And the ruler of the East, strengthening horse-tails, decided to redress an injustice; he ordered the reconnaissance to move so far until they meet the last Turki. And who would have done otherwise? Genghis Khan was not going to conquer foreign lands; he hastened to reach his brothers that were in trouble. His decisions were fully righteous. In 1223 the detachment reached the boundaries of the Western world Kievan Russia. Was that an independent country? It depends By the end of the X century the Ukraine deviated from Monotheism and became the eastern bulwark of the Christian Empire. But does the change of religion alter the state or ethnic status of a country? This is a question requiring a very serious discussion. Here, in its new colony, the West decided to stop the heavenly army. Of course the battle took place not because two ambassadors were meanly killed in Kiev; that was the confrontation of two worldviews, two cultures, two policies. The events were commensurate with circumstances: the murder of the ambassadors stopped the dialogue for peace. The Christians had no arguments for the dialogue about God; they wanted a war. Kiev showed that the East was not its friend The first alienation took place under Valdemar I (the Prince Vladimir Red Sun); at that time the Russian princes started their famous altercation; its actual reasons are not covered by the Russian history. They are never
discussed. And during that altercation the Arians were acting against the Catholics since Valdemar made Catholicism the official religion of Kievan Russia; his marriage and further reigning were possible only upon that condition. Penetration of the Catholics into Kiev was happening in a way familiar to Rome through dynastic marriages. Helga (Olga) was the first; her story is known except for perhaps the most important details. For instance, there were relations between her and Otto I the Great, the German Emperor. Relations of what kind? What was Adalbert, the bishop of Magdeburg invited by Olga, doing in Kiev? Why did the Byzantine Church object to canonization of Helga-Olga-Helen as an Orthodox Saint?.. These are not easy questions; behind them there is what it is customary not to mention. And there are too many such questions. Yaroslav the Wise, the son of Vladimir Red Sun, married a Catholic, the daughter of Olav (380) the Saint. Sister of Yaroslav the Wise, Maria, married Polish king; his daughters, Elizabeth and Anastasia, married Norwegian and Hungarian kings, respectively, and his daughter Anna married French king Henry IWhy? Inter-confessional marriages were strictly prohibited by the Church. Why was Valdemar (Vladimir) proclaimed king after the baptism of Russia and is not called so nowadays? Instead appeared the title Basilei (ruler) which in course of time turned into the name Basil. Are not there too many exceptions in this story? Everything in Kiev was happening by the Pope's will since then So the town was the terminal point of the reconnaissance of Genghis Khan not accidentally. The famous battle with the Russians (Normans) whose army, strengthened by the Catholics from Europe, was five times bigger than that of Altai happened on May 30th, 1223. Everything was on its side then. Except for God. We have done you no harm, - the Mongols said for the last time. God is one for all: He will judge us!. But the Russians
were keeping silent stubbornly. The battle commenced. The reconnaissance of Genghis Khan was retreating in haste; the Christians started a pursuit stretching their huge army into versts. Their advantage was fading away every minute. Only near the Kalka river he realized what had happened, but that was too late. A real battle started near Kalka That was the very devil of life. The small detachment defeated the huge army on which the Pope was relying in his dreams of the Second Rome in the East of Europe. But God created hell for the demons to die there, as far as we know The Mongol Tatar yoke in Russia begins from Kalka; they invented countless hordes moving from the East. Why? There are no explanations. And after all, what is a yoke? It was invented in Saint-Petersburg, during the days of the 600th anniversary of the defeat of Kalka, i.e. in 1823. Those three different words were for the first time used together by a schoolteacher Naumov; the public enjoyed them and since then children have been frightened by the Tatars. But any untruth is also dangerous because it gives birth to another untruth. After that in the same manner the South Russia was invented and the Mongols allegedly invaded it in 1223. To tell the truth, nobody has ever heard about that country and there are no documents where it is referred to. By that time the Normans were leaving the political scene; they were not able to create one more Russia. And they have not created it! On the geographical map lands lying south and south-east of Kievan Russia were called Tataria or the Great Tataria. People living there were called the Tatars. Modern Crimean Tatars are the split of that time. There is nothing to discuss here it is the same Desht-I-Kipchak and its people The history of Russia was being deliberately distorted and the same went for the history of Bulgaria, Serbia and other countries where
the Turkic khanates were being turned into Christian Slavic principalities with the invented past. And the word ige (in the Russian language yoke is pronounced as igo), by the way, is far from being ominous it means master, power. For the first time in Europe it was heard in Scandinavia after the Turki had come there. New power the power which is riding a horse was called so. That power was personified by Odin Vatan whose another name was Igg according to Scandinavian sagas. The same yoke came to the Eastern Europe. In other words after Kalka the khanates of the Eastern Europe wallowed in altercations recognized the destiny of Sulde and Genghis Khans code. Peace came to their lands. That is what happened then Of course the yoke took place! But what kind of a yoke was that? The new power (ige) gave the Christians new names: the Golden Horde, the Blue Horde Horde changed chaganat; that was just a change of signs. Instead of one administrative unit of Desht-I-Kipchak appeared another since Genghis Khan had reformed the social system; he abandoned the elections of the government and ordered to delegate power by inheritance. Like in Europe. That was a gross mistake witnessing of his unroyal origin; the conqueror of the Universe thus cancelled everything he had conquered. Alas, the intention to delegate power to the children and guarantee their well-being is an intention of a commoner: the abandonment of elections of the ruler deprives society of development and leaves the strong at a loose end It seems to be the truth that shooting can never be without missing. And that is right even for Genghis Khan who abolished those tournaments for the right to be called the strongest. In ancient times the name of the Turkic ruler chagan was pronounced as kekhan, i.e. heavenly khan, the highest ruler. The choice was considered to be made by God.
The chagan was being elected from among the khans; the khans were to gain such right by their feats There was a series of feats in the name of Heavenly God and the people This is what was written by Marco Polo in the XIII century: They elect the rulers of regions; after he dignified one is elected, the great khan is reported about that; the great khan approves of the elected and bestows him a golden plate, i.e. the symbol of power. A token. That is what was happening after Genghis Khan. For that moment elections of the rulers of regions remained. But the great khan, or the tsar, had no face any longer. He was nobody. Yes, the throne was taken by a descendant of Genghis Khan, so what? The Turki respected their leader not for his origin but for his deeds. Everybody knew that a feat in the name of Heavenly God makes a farmhand a khan and a khan a chagan No one of the sons of Genghis Khan was alike their father. Dull ordinary persons with red noses. They decided that a country created riding a horse could not be controlled riding a horse; the huge empire was divided into parts, which happened to be the beginning of its end. The elder son, Djuchi, took the lands west of Altai, but his son Baty was reigning there while he was not even called a khan. They used to say Sainkhan Bumpkin with laughter. He was fond of luxury, long table-talks; his life was sweet and funny and the people saw no use of it. It is striking. Genghis Khan, the ruler of a billion subjects, the owner of untold wealth, kept himself aloof from luxury; he wore common clothes made of linen which is still kept in the museum of Beijing; and the grandson was interested neither in the states nor in wars. He was an idler Baty waged wars which were successful, but that was not by his will! Thirty thousands riders were standing under his flag the Cossacks of Dnepr, Don and Itil and among them there were only four thousand Mongols (which came from Altai) they were sent by Baty's uncle Oktay. He also appointed Subutay military leader! That
was a real warrior! Giving respectful orders Subutay made Baty move on. Thus in 1237 the horde aggregated the Tatars of Ryazan to Genghis Khans code and calmed down the Russian prince in Vladimir. In 1240 Kiev, the mother of Russian towns, learnt what the payment for the betrayal of belief was. After that on the way of the army were Buda and Pest, Prague, Krakow, Pojeg and other towns that became Christian and Slavic on the spot. Subutay brought to shame Polish, Bohemian, Teutonic, Hungarian knights which had the reputation of the best in the Pope's army. Europe did not know a military leader of that level And if he was straight as an arrow, malignant persons would be found; only dirty things are written about the Tatars. They were too strong, which is never forgiven. But the facts remain. In the hands of Subutay there were threads stretching from European countries; he not the Pope! was conducting the policy of the world then. However, the Pope was approachable for him especially after the marriage of a French knight Baldwin Gueno and the Turkic princess in 1240. The marriage was obviously political; it opened the road to the court of the French king who was stubbornly searching for rapprochement with the East. Edward Gibbon wrote about those days which were hard for the Christians: The whole country north of Danube was lost in one day, during one summer it was deprived of its population and the ruins of towns and churches were bestrewed with bones of the natives that had forfeited for the sins of their Turkic ancestors. That is what he called the Hungarians, Czechs, Poles the natives. Europe turned out to remember its Turkic ancestors; it knew that Baty followed Genghis Khans code to move forward until the Turkic world stopped. This knowledge terrified the Europeans; it staggered them with the inevitability of requital. Those were dreadful times. In Baty's invasion the plot of the Apocalypse was read; people were talking about the Justice of Heaven.
The Hungarian king was the first to forfeit: at first he was delivered an ultimatum, and after that he was defeated. The Poles were defeated by Baty-khan, which happened under Sidlov, and then he burnt down Krakow and Breslavl. Europe was moaning. But it believed in justice of this Judgment descending on it. It is interesting that Subutay did not enter the lands of the Emperor Frederick II Hohenstaufen. That very one Why? That German Emperor, as we know it, was at enmity with the Pope and kept company with the Moslems. But that is not what deserved attention, but the first five letters of the name that the family had not had before it was elected to take the throne: now they write Hohen and at that time it was chagan. Those were the last chagans of Desht-I-Kipchak; from 1197 they were also reigning in the Sicilian Kingdom. The relics devoted to Altai. They stubbornly kept on calling their power Hunia. That is whom the Pope was fighting with. With Frederick I Barbarossa, Henry VI, Frederick II; the ancestors of those famous Germans were Attila's warriors and military leaders they spoke the Turkic language and believed in the Eternal Blue Sky. Among their family names the name of Conrad was especially respected. That is why Subutay did not touch the lands of his blood brothers and passed them by. There were a lot of similar lands in the West. For instance, Anjou region in the lower reaches of Loire; the Turkic speech was widespread there the river was called Luaryk (Dragon's river). The region became famous in the V century when a horde from Attila's army escaped there. As a matter of fact that horde gained a foothold in the northeast of France. Which horde was that? It is difficult to say, but a dragon was its totem. The toponym Anjou (and other derivatives from adji) is rather widespread on the map of Eurasia; it is the symbol of Altai. And of the Turki, of course. AnjeroSudjensk, Adjodaha, Anji, Anga, Andjana, Andijan, Adjitarkhan, Adjiyurt those were
the places where the refugees used to hide. God saved them there. The counts of Anjou were the sovereigns, the same as the counts of Flanders and Toulouse. The European dynasty was finally established in the IX century; its founders are Ingelger and his son Fulk the Red that became the first count of Anjou. That family left a trace in the history of France, England and Europe in general. The family was very famous in the Middle Ages; its representatives could be the example of the Turkic appearance. As a rule, they were tall, broad-shouldered, with a bull-neck and strong hands, red, with a hard strident voice, clear eyes which were very pleasant when they were calm and were fulminating in anger. That is the description by Henry II, the khan of Anjou and English king; he did not find it appropriate for himself to speak English. One April 9th, 1241 two best forces of East and West started a battle under Liegnitz. They could not fail to fight with one another. Due to numerical inferiority of the Europeans victory was again on their side. Having surrounded the enemy, the knights were getting ready to finish the fight. But Subutay did not intend to loose; maneuvering his army he defeated both flanks of the enemy. Clumsy knights did not even understand what had happened. And how That was the only army of the Catholics. Those were the most terrifying moments; the riders were slowly marching towards Rome and stopped to take a rest on the shore of the Adriatic Sea. There were no reasons to put the result of the campaign in doubt: the Catholic Turki were to be subjected to their rulers and not to the Pope that is what Altai had decided. The phrase shouted by Baty's herald to the defending Croatians and Hungarians is indicative: Baty-khan, the head of invincible army, tells you not to defend the king and his people that are alien to you by birth and give them into our hands (bold provided. M.A.). That phrase was uttered in the Huns' language clear to the Croatians, Hungarians and Tatars themselves. It should be
mentioned that there were no language problems in that war; everybody understood each other in the proper and figurative sense. It is impossible to imagine what was going on in Europe. It was full of panic and fear; people were waiting for the Justice of Heaven and discussing it. They were terrified not by the Tatars themselves but the order they were carrying; the Europeans were afraid of Genghis Khans code. They were afraid of responsibility before their congeners. Western society was demoralized; the Pope Gregory IX died of suffering; he was followed by the newly elected Pope Celestine and there were difficulties connected with the election of a new Pope. The bishops were full of superstitious fear; they did not hasten to try the Pope's tiara. Elections lasted for two years. The Catholics seemed to remember the words of Genghis Khan who said that the Pope was unnecessary on the Earth. In a word, the Church had no power. And in the meantime one detachment of Baty's reconnaissance entered Austria and without any resistance placed to take a rest there. Europe was full of apathy having lost itself. But the inhabitants of Gottland (Sweden) were panicking more openly than others; they stopped catching herring and putting to sea being afraid to bring Baty behind. Markets were closed; streets were full of people blind with fear and not knowing where to run. They were waiting for an invasion day and night, like one condemned to death is waiting for the hour of release. God, save us from the Tatar rage, - the Europeans used to pray. In England appeared an expression: To catch a tartar (to fight with a Tatar), i.e. to fight with an admittedly stronger rival. Europe was saved by chance. In March of 1242, before the attack, people in the headquarters learnt about the death of Baty's uncle, and he was acting as though he was replaced. He was tossing in tears and wanted to hear of no campaigns. The military leader was in a difficult situation: knots were tied but he could not attack without a khan
that was the tradition. The army matured for the victory was standing on the cross-road. About one and a half or two months were necessary to finish one of the most excellent pages in the military history of humankind. Standing on his knees Baty was praying Subutai to leave him home; the puny one was tempted by nothing, even by victory. He left the army to the mercy of fate showing shameful stampede of a winner. That was perhaps for the first time in history. However, Subutai knew that wisdom could succeed in everything. In order to keep the face of the army he moved forward a detachment of reconnaissance showing that his intentions were serious. In the name of Baty he sent a letter to the king of France which began: In the name of the Sovereign God I order you, the king Louis, to obey me and solemnly declare what you want peace or war?... The answer was sad but not without inspiration: Heavenly solace supports us! Because if the Tatars reach us or we follow them, that is the same we will go to Heaven. Refusal to resist was read in every line. The king wanted neither peace nor war; imminence broke down one of the greatest rulers of France Looking ahead let us mention that Louis IX the Saint glorified himself by communication with the East. He was very near to being elected sultan of Caliphate; people there knew that he belonged to a royal Altaic family; they knew that the ancestors of the family ruling in France had served Attila and when they had started to serve Aetius their horde had been called Franks This tells something to an unbiased person, doesnt it? And it will always be telling. The same as the fact that the word sir (tsar in Turkic) was widely used by the members of French dynasties What is more, Carl the Great organized his campaign to the East to get Attila's crown Here it is, Altai in Europe; Genghis Khan ordered to release it to control. The Turki respected Louis the Saint for his origin. By the way, he was close to converting Baty
into Christianity. But that was to happen later. Unfortunately, people failed to find the early version of the spelling of the name Louis the Saint. In the tradition of that time the names of European Turki consisted of two halves western and eastern ones which is known. How was his eastern name pronounced? It is most likely that it was pronounced like san, which in the ancient Turkic language meant respect, esteem. It seems that later in Europe that word was transferred into sanctus. Other versions are also possible adji, for instance. In any case he could not be called saint while he was alive as against respected or esteemed. It is indicative that back in the V century the word saint was met neither in Rome nor in Byzantium. But it was wellknown in communities of Egypt and the North Africa. It was also known in Rome. In the spring of 1242 Baty's reconnaissance detachment was smashing European towns while the army was retreating that is the way Subutai was cunning. But his ruse of war was not missed by other Turkic eyes from the family of Hohenstaufens. They understood what was happening and did not want to let slip their chance; they started following the retreating army in order to attack its rear But that is to be discussed later; that was an important moment not only in the history of Europe but rather of Russia. Sabutai's maneuver seemed to be successful and through the king Louis the Saint he declared that he forgave the Europeans that had renounced the belief in Heavenly God. Only then Europe heaved a sigh of relief.
Changing The West

Unfortunately it is not customary to tell a lot about the Tatar campaign in the West that has always been scant of certain details. And that is clear since those events arouse not very pleasant memories. And Sabutai
saved Arianism in the east of Europe; he gave it a couple of centuries of life because the shaking Church could not waste its time on eastern colonies and ideological rivals. It was licking its wound. Arianism remained in Lithuania; the Norman Rus was still alive there. Islets of the north belief remained in other Russian lands in Novgorod, Pskov, Suzdal, Rostov. Antiquity of their temples and monasteries speaks for itself; they all appeared with the arrival of the Normans, i.e. starting from the IX century, and were called in a Varangian way. At that time Novgorod was Kholmgrad; it was founded in 859, Rostov was founded a little later in 862, and Pskov was called Altynbur Those comfortless marshy territories with severe winters were considered to be the backyards of Europe; they were remembered only speaking about fur, wax and the edge of the world. The Pope failed to reach those lands since they were poorly populated; unchristian Europe with its inconspicuous culture based there This is not an insignificant circumstance; it made for the fact that there, to the islet of Monotheism, early in the XII century came the son of the Kievan prince Valdemar II (Vladimir Monomakh) with his retinue in search of reigning, solitude and peace. The youth's name was Giurgi; he made it into history like Yuri Dolgorukiy, the founder of Moscow, the prince of Suzdal. That was not a common person, as it is customary to suppose, but it is better to say not revealed or not understood. Practically nothing is known about him and his mother. Even their birthdates. But much is known about his stepmother, a Catholic, daughter of the English king Herald. The same as about his sisters and brothers that were Catholics too. It is likely that Roman orders that had barged in Kiev were alien to Yuri and he left his ancestral home How? It is possible that by the secret will of his father who wanted one of his sons to be an Arian. That is
possibly the reason. But the coming of Yuri Dolgorukiy to the North was marked by the transfer of the capital of Green Russia from Rostov to Suzdal in 1125; that was a stroke of policy that gave the dynasty of Ryurikoviches a chance for the future. Because under Catholicism its fate depended upon the Pope who granted power; and for the Rulers of Russia that accepted Catholicism the Pope was no longer dangerous because at least one of them always remained free from the Catholic tyranny. That was a very forward-looking deed For example, it notably soothed the situation in the Eastern Europe that had been formed by 1254 when the Pope Innocent IV sent a royal crown to Kievan Russia to the great prince of Galicia and Volhynia Daniil Romanovich and declared him his servant. That was the result of the backstage policy of the West, but it did not affect Ryurikoviches. The blow was deflected well in advance Departure of one member of the ruling dynasty so as to save the dynasty itself had been widespread from the first years of the Great Nations Migration in India, the Middle and Near East and Transcaucasia. That was a perfect means of self-preservation of royal power of the Turki; it worked many times. And it worked again. In Kiev Ryurikoviches were likely to disappear, but the dynasty could continue giving rise to, say, Moscow Russia. That is a determinative event in the Russian (Norman) history or, more precisely, in its prehistory since the dispute between eastern European princes was just starting to grow warm. The Pope was skillfully setting them on to fight Yuri Dolgorukiy, Norman's son, the bearer of Altaic traditions, was against Catholic Kiev but not against his congeners; the conquest of the town in 1155 is the best illustration that his life was the struggle for the retention of the family. What does that witness? It witnesses that the reasons of the fratricidal enmity that was destroying Kievan Russia have not been investigated. The main figure of the conflict was underestimated in that enmity the Pope whose logic was clear and simple. Being at
enmity, the dynasty is destroying the country! And itself. The Church changed the rules of demise of the crown, and that was it. The enmity began The enmity that was striven for by those who were dreaming of moving Christianity to the East. One of them, for example, was a Kiev prince Iziaslav whose son according to the old rules had no chances for the throne but he went to Rome and persuaded the Pope. As a result appeared a document of the Pope Gregory VII in which the servant of God's servants declared Iziaslav Regi Russorum, i.e. the ruler of Russia, in 1075. For that moment he was not king but a common ruler. There are many details of those events; they are known and unnecessary here, however now certain historical subjects obtain absolutely new tinges that had been barely perceptible before. Thus, Yuri Dolgorukiy ordered his Andrei to take Umai icon worshipped by the Arians away from Kiev in secrecy, and he took the priceless Turkic relic away since he knew that the Catholics were indifferent to the icons and spoiled them. From the XVI century, from the moment of appearance of Christianity in Moscow Russia, that icon has been called Vladimir Blessed Virgin; it is especially respected by the Russian (or, more precisely, Graeco-Russian) Church that appeared after Sophia Paleologo. This our assertion may seem not quite correct. There are plenty of evidences confirming that the Popes would harshly repulse iconoclasm. But these evidences also show the duplicity of the position of Rome. In its relationship with Byzantium it was really against iconoclasm allowing icons in Catholic churches. Inside his Church his position was absolutely different, which is witnessed by the decision of the Frankfurt Council of 794 or Paris Council of 825, where services in front of icons were declared idolatry. Many different evidences about Arianism in Green and Black Russia remained. For example, in 1238 here, on the
way to Novgorod, Baty's army turned back. Why? Baty saw: population there professed Monotheism. They imposed levy on the lands and went away. Beyond the Moskva-River and Oka in the XIII century the Turkic world and its belief ended; further to the North stretched the lands of Finno-Ugric nations and Arianism And the expression to impose levy was not horrible to the ear those days it meant to conclude an agreement of cooperation, as it would be understood today. According to Turkic traditions levy was validated by an agreement and witnessed that its provisions were met. Genghis Khan bequeathed to defend peaceful neighbors, and Baty would defend any town where they prayed Heavenly God; he had the reputation of a warder of Heaven, townsmen opened the gates for him by themselves he was expected by the Russian Arians that were not afraid of the Tatars. On the contrary, in them they saw protection since the ruler of the Russians himself belonged to the Tatars to the family of Ryurikoviches. Indeed, in the times of Chingizides Russia built more temples and monasteries than during all the previous centuries. Those were not Christian temples and monasteries but Arian ones. The same as in Scandinavia some time ago. Yasa released their clergy from levy in exchange for praying God and recognizing khan. Praying God is that levy paid by Russia. That is what the Tatars were fighting for for a pure prayer to God They were struggling for it. Is it not significant that Baty did not appoint his rulers in Russian khanates? Not a single one! Because he did not dare oppress the royal dynasty of Ryurikoviches. To tell the truth, he tested every Russian prince for devotion to belief and Yasa before allowing them to reign. But that is constituent territory of the federation management, as they would consider it today. Genghis Khans code required strictness, how else could that be?.. Levy obliged to detach an army for the one
who paid it so as to defend the prince. In case of aggression the Horde defended him by its army but for a separate payment for the rent. For instance, Novgorod lands were protected by Aliskander khan, Baty's vicar; he gathered the tribute from the Russians and safeguarded peace on the boundaries of Russia. At his command there was an armed detachment called gendarmes. Aliskander's destiny is legendary; better than anything else it shows that light time when Turkic and Russian cultures were standing near defending the right to life. They had one enemy the West it was bringing them together. The descendant of Ryurikoviches and the princess of the Horde, Aliskander was a foster-brother of Baty's son, Sartakh; both boys were being brought up listening to Turkic songs in the khan's palace Aliskander's father was the first Russian (Norman) who recognized Genghis Khans code, took a beauty from the steppe to wife and called himself Baty's brother Today his vicar is called Alexander Nevsky, a Slavic military leader, which he has never been. He could not be so. He was not Nevsky either. In the famous Battle on the Ice in the spring of 1242 Aliskander khan did not take part; a rent collector was not necessary there. The knights were defeated on the ice by a reconnaissance detachment of the Golden Horde. That is true! German knights, those cunning foxes, were creeping like vultures following the retreating Baty's army intending to attack its rear and get the military trophy so desired for a Turki. The Emperor Frederick II Hohenstaufen was searching for a chance to distinguish himself; he made a move which was very handsome from the point of view of military arts. The Turkic nature was seen in his action. But the progress of the Germans was keenly watched by Subutai's reconnaissance which was twice as more skillful in military arts; so it decided the whole campaign in the West. It put a period on the ice of the Chudskoe Lake. After all, that was the military leader of the Golden Horde Subutai who determined the policy in Europe; he was in
charge. And he was the one that was winning What a rent collector, to whom the victory of another person is ascribed, had to do there?.. Of course, the events on the lake had nothing to do with Russia; no one would send the knights into a campaign in those hard times when Baty was moving over Europe like a waterspout. And besides the Russians did not have their own army; their youth was serving Baty that was the condition of levy Could they defeat the German knights? Without any army? For information: hired army (archers) appeared in Moscow Russia under the tsar Ivan the Terrible in 1572 and the regular army appeared under Peter I. All its earlier battles and victories were indecently invented. Alexander Nevsky is an invented hero two men with one face, two destinies in one life. He was made Nevsky, a Christian, Russian Saint and military leader in the XVIII century when western scientists invited by Peter I were practicing in the historiography of Russia. They were inventing not getting around to adjusting events with one another. They were suggesting absurdity. They did not know shame Aliskander could not be Nevsky (which means from Neva) and military leader because he did not take part in the battle of Neva. After all, it has never taken place! Near the river Ijora the Russians (the Swedes led by the king Birger) and the Finns were fighting for the route to Ladoga. Alexander Nevsky was standing on the other bank of Neva and did not even see the battle but saw, according to a chronicle, its result the Swedes were taking the wounded and the dead onto barges. He had a mounted watch consisting of thirty six men; that was a small army for a military leader but enough for a rent collector. Even N.M. Karamzin marked that absurdity citing the chronicle: Beyond the river Ijera were found many Swedes that were surely killed by the Angels. Of course by the Angels. By whom else, after all?
But careful Karamzin found a way out of that tricky situation when he wrote the following: Were those the contemporaries who called Alexander Nevsky? In the description of his deeds in the Chronicle of Novgorod there is no such name. That is what we have! About the battle of Neva and its hero nobody knew at that time. And the way the prince Alexander and his son cared about the wellbeing of Russia, which is described in Russian epic and poems, is also an ingenuous invention for simpletons that appeared centuries later. N.M. Karamzin is very expressive here; he is as agile as a squirrel when he says one thing in the main text and an absolutely different in the notes. For instance, there are interesting details about the campaign of the Novgorod Prince Dmitry, the son of Alexander Nevsky, in Dagestan in 1277. The retinue joined the army of ManguTimur who was waging a war against Caucasian nations. Our princes conquered the town of Dediakov (in South Dagestan), burnt it down and took a considerable plunder and prisoners and by this feat deserved benevolence of the Khan who expressed it not only in praise but also in rich gifts. That was not their only joint campaign. It is interesting, what attracted Novgorod princes in the foreign lands? They did not go to the Caucasus by themselves, did they? But we know how that peoples protector used to gather rent. How he was gaining favor with the khan. How he used to cut off ears and wrest the eyes and noses of his subjects Even barbarians were astonished by his cruelty. In the Russian history he became the prince of Vladimir, the hero, while at that time the Russians used to scare children: Alexander will come and take you away. Karamzin did not conceal that Maybe qualms of awakening conscience made that peoples protector accept the schema of a monk not long before his death together with a new name Olex? Hence is the name Alexander that has made it into history
However, there is an evident mess about the names in the Russian history; as a rule they are presented in the Slavic transcription. Yaritsleiv, the son of sea-king Waldemar, became Yaroslav, the son of the prince Vladimir. Bogoris became Bureslav and later Sviatopolk. The names were changed with striking ease, the same as history itself. But there is The Saga of Olav the Saint where Russia and its people look far more realistic. At least that is more honest. Alexander Nevsky was a diligent vicar. He knew that for devotion he would be praised and for unnecessary initiative he would be abused; in a word he was living according to Genghis Khans code. Mother Russia was also living according to it during the Tatar yoke. Tartar honor is more evil that the evil, - the Russians would say, but they could do nothing bad because a law is a law at that time it was the same for everyone. Tatar honor is not easy; it required the truth and honesty from everyone It is even more striking that Aliskander became a Saint of the Russian Church while he had not been a Christian! He could not be an Orthodox Christian. It is possible that he was a Catholic like other princes, his brothers Nothing is to say here since this is not an occasional mistake. Yes, Kievan Russia and, for instance, Green Russia were Russian states where representatives of one dynasty reigned; but the spiritual unity was not in question there. Those were different countries with different spiritual cultures. And although the word Russia referred to the lands of Ryurikoviches; those lands were not connected by ethnic ties; the Russians spoke different languages at that time, in the proper and figurative sense. The rulers and the population. Thus in Vladimir-Suzdal Russia the Russians were called Varangian rulers and Finno-Ugric nations: Mari, the Mordovians, Komi. In Novgorod those were Varangian rulers and the Wends, apart from whom there also lived the Vepses, Finns and Karelians that spoke their own languages. In the Tver Khanate lived the Turki another language of Russia Its ethnic palette was
207 / 342
gleaming with aquarelle colors that were barely perceptible in the lands with small population. Time was necessary in order to mix all those languages so that the Russians would understand each other forming one country. This will happen only in the XV century. In Kievan Russia, on the contrary, there was homogeneous population; the dialect there was different having an expressive Turkic foundation it is the forgotten native language of the Ukrainians. One detail deserves attention here. Daniel, the Prince of Kiev, Russian King, was the last to give a bow to Baty, which witnesses that the Pope had been no more interested in the East and the Catholic Church turned away from the Kievan king in the hour of danger and he had nothing to do but remember the Tatar Monotheism and language. In this connection the history of Saint Boris and Gleb is interesting and indicative; Russia dedicated a great many temples to them. These are the first Russian saints, younger sons of Vladimir, the Prince of Kiev, the baptizer of Russia, killed in 1015 by order of their elder brother, Sviatopolk This is the information from the encyclopedia but it proficiently conceals a lot. Firstly, the baptism of Kievan Russia itself was Catholic, which is unquestionable. For it the Prince Vladimir was consecrated a saint of the Catholic Church! And not only him. Secondly, the deeds of his son (adopted nephew) Prince Sviatopolk are concealed; he was trying to move the idea of Slavdom further to the East and in that idea the backwash of the Greek policy was heard. That Russian prince was the first Russian who called himself a Slav. But a Catholic Slav! He was called Cursed, ridiculed and even his brothers Boris and Gleb did not Support him, for which they forfeited life but became saints of the Catholic Church. In Rome Boris has been known since 1071 as Roman the Russian and Gleb as David the Polish (those were their church names). Since then the policy of Kievan Russia
was agitated every time the ruler appointed by the Pope was changed. The state that was denying its former traditions of demise of the crown was open to all the winds and hurricanes; it was like a ship in the ocean without a rudder and sail. The idea of Slavdom was taking roots and the state language, correlating with politics, was gradually changing. It lasted for several centuries. Early in the XIII century the boundary of the Christian world was lying near Kiev or, more precisely, near the right bank of Dnepr, after which it was moved to the west. To the north-east of Europe it will come only in the XVI century when the Church has finished the Inquisition and the Roman missionaries turned regard on the East again. The centuries of calm were beginning; Yaroslav and Yuri Dolgorukiy counted on them. Together with those who were behind them. Those centuries allowed the dynasty of Ryurikoviches to end their existence in history. The time period given by God till Ivan the Terrible. Together with Ryurikoviches the century of Arianism was lasting; now it is called the old belief in Russia. And in certain regions of Russia there existed the bush belief which remained; it is still remembered by the descendants of the Finno-Ugric nations. There, in the North, Christianity did not exist either; it was known by hearsay. The so-called Truth of Yaroslav is indicative; it appeared early in the XI century after his victory over his brother Sviatopolk and accession in Kiev. Sviatopolk was an adherent of Catholic Slavdom in Russia; he was supported by the help of his father-inlaw, the Polish king Boleslav, he suffered a defeat. Yaroslav, the Prince of Novgorod that was defending the positions of Arianism, was his rival; the Normans assisted him. Those that were fighting with Christianity that had come suddenly to Scandinavia. The confrontation of two worldviews the Western and Eastern ones was well read both in the Truth of Yaroslav and his policy. Yaroslav the Wise was reigning
rationally but was he a Christian? Certainly not. As we know he was building towns in the Arian Russia; he was searching for support and found it there. By his orders he strengthened connections between the regions of Russia and united them into one state. The ruler's efforts were partly successful; they were not long but nevertheless under him the Arian belief was steadfast. The Old Belief, or Russian Arianism, is a phenomenon of spiritual life in Russia which is absolutely unfamiliar to science. Very few are aware of it. But nevertheless The khan's wife was a follower of the Old Belief; the khan denied the Christian match although the Pope Innocent IV in his letter of February 10th, 1248 was persuading Aliskander that his father, the Prince Yaroslav, took oath to accept the new belief before his death. And he meant that the son was to become a Christian so as to find stillness and glory in the shade of the Western Church. It is also written in the letter: like a faithful guard of the Christians he should immediately notify the knights of the Livonian Order if the Tatars start a campaign against Europe again. The answer to the Pope was short: we know the true teaching and we do not accept yours and do not want to know it. From this reply new mysteries of the Russian court begin. Mysteries that crunch on one's teeth like a stone that appeared in bread together with meal. They break their teeth because of inventing half-Arianism, Greek baptism or something else. While there are no traces of Greek Christianity in Kievan Russia at all. That was marked by Karamzin who said: Daniel (the Russian Prince) made friends and quarreled with the Pope several times. In 1249 he expelled the bishop Albert whom the Pope Innocent had sent to be the head of the clergy in Russia This is the way certain pages of the Russian history are read. The Pope, not the Greek Patriarch, was to bless the head of the Russian Church. Here it is, the stone crunching on the teeth, but it is being stubbornly ignored. Scandinavia and Kievan Russia were
living under surveillance of the Pope after the X century The history of Russia is full of omissions. There are dozens and hundreds of them, big and small; they are crunching on the teeth like stones in bread And in that chaos of absurdity Baty turned out to be a dubious person. He had nothing in common with what is presented now. Catholic missionaries under the pretence of Venetian and Genoese merchants visited Baty in Sarai; they inclined Baty who was not very bright to Christianity: he was the first one in the Horde who doubted the belief of his father and grandfather. People took his conduct for betrayal; that was the explosion of the Horde, but it did not bewilder the khan. He made his wife and son baptize. And he himself refused to baptize standing before a clergyman when everything was ready he found out that the latter had just read the burial service and he was very much afraid of the deceased. That was certainly a trick of a man willing to attract everyone's attention. The Turkic Herostratos. But he was burning not the temple of Artemis but the Golden Horde which has never shown itself after Baty. It was ill and it was withering; the germ of Catholicism found way into its body: at that time the first colony of the Catholics appeared on the border between Europe and Asia; that was the outpost of the Christian Empire. For the betrayal of the ancestors, for the treason of belief the Horde inhabitants disdained Baty; he lost his face and was nothing in their eyes. At first the khan was patient and ignored disrespect, then he complained to his uncle and failing to find support there set about murdering odious people. He would execute at a spell. For a smile. For silence. Any joke he considered to be directed on him. Even younger brothers considered it their duty to offend Baty who was at the peak of glory; they would say openly: Baty is not my master; he is an old hag with a beard one can strike him down by one slap in the face. They threatened to beat him with a
stick or to tie a wooden tail to a part of his body. No conqueror has ever been maltreated like weak-willed Baty. The aristocracy was the first to suffer. It was close to the khan In the Horde there was an irrepressible conflict: the traitor could not be killed and the people did not want to see him. However they did not dare touch him; the tradition of power was deemed to be sacred. There was the only way to take: the nobility was leaving its motherland. Some of them left for the Caucasus, others for the Central Europe or Central Asia. Some of them moved to the North, to the Russian lands uncontrolled personally by Baty. The best people were leaving. The Golden Horde was squeezing them out. Unfortunately that was the same after Baty too The decline lasted for a century; the ocean of sorrows was overflowing before the Turki who by that time were not considered as the bearers of progress by anybody. They were not invited to reign. That was a dreadful time. Foreign lands left no choice except for becoming a different nation. Or, more precisely, getting accustomed to foreign customs having an illusion of finding salvation in return. To leave one's motherland is a tragedy which not everyone can stand. The Turki have gone through it several times, which, as a matter of fact, is witnessed by the whole their history. Destiny was throwing the messengers of Altai to a great many regions making rulers, military leaders, clergymen and scientists for other nations of them. Their trouble has always been giving increase to humankind. And great pleasure. That is really true. Perhaps all the reigning families of Europe consisted of them The list includes the Popes, kings of England, France, Germany, Sweden, Norway. Here is the description of one of them: That is the man with red hair, of average height, he has a lion quadrangular face with bulgy eyes that are nave and meek
when he is in a good mood and he looks daggers when he is irritated. Only a cavalryman can have such legs; he has a broad chest and athletic harms show that he is a strong, dexterous and brave man. That is how the English king Henry II looked this is one of his descriptive portraits. The same words are suitable for Attila and other military leaders. They all had Turkic appearance which cannot be disregarded. And a broad face and crooked legs is perhaps a national feature. Like a kimono for the Japanese or sombrero for the Mexicans Here it is useful to remind again that the English king Henry II would not have been able to understand even a couple of phrases from the modern English language; he spoke Turkic, i.e. low Latin. However, the Angevin family is worth remembering again in the Middle Ages it was the standard of nobleness and knighthood in the West. It may help one understand the situation that was being formed in the hick town of Moskov which was located in the Vladimir-Suzdal principality where Ryurikoviches reigned. That is the repeating of history of Europe of the V century and India and Persia one thousand years earlier. One thing on top of another. There, to Moscov, people would run away from Baty as they used to run away from Attila in Anjer. People were running away from their natives. Or like in Adjodakha (Ajdokhye) in the epoch of the Arians. Everything was the same. In the Russian lands the sprouts of new society were growing; that society consisted of the refugees and for that time it was Turkic. And not Turkic at the same time!.. Moscow Russia was accepting and absorbing a great value aristocratic families which were noble and educated; it gave them shelter. Being expelled by Baty and recognizing the foreign statute and foreign sun they were becoming Russians. Aksakovs, Bulgakovs, Goduovs, Kutuzovs, Kurakins, Nakhimovs, Suvorovs, Turgenevs, Tolstoys, Yusupovs Hundreds of names, hundreds of families. And what families! They spoke the Turkic language.
From them, from those precious splinters of the Golden Horde, Russia and its nobles began. It is known that the history of Russia is the history of the nobles, although such assertion is correct only partly. Without the boyars the nobles were nothing. Like a body without a head. The boyars are a special case. This is the way the Turki used to call their most esteemed people from aristocratic families, the elders representing families at the meetings. Those were the bearers of nobility, wisdom, decency and honor. The nobility of the nobility. The salt of the earth. These qualities complied with their clothes noticeable but too uncomfortable for everyday life too high sheepskin hats, caftans with sleeves up to the floor. According to a tradition the boyars were prohibited to do anything with their hands; their servants did everything for them. The boyars were obliged to think and give advices. Long spade beards emphasized the antiquity of roots of their families. Those were the people being able to enter the tsar's premises without a report; during the meetings they would sit around the tsar on a carpet with their feet under them. The same as English lords, they had pillows with sheep hair. In Turkic their meetings were called tuma (duma) and they themselves were called the boyars of the tuma (duma); they were the ones who elected the tsar. In Turkic boyar means ancestor (boy ar), a man of noble origin. And a boyar or tuma means a person in attendance of the tsar (tuma - protection) Starting from the XIII century people were only leaving the Horde, which was marked by family books and books of heraldry of the Russian nobles. And not only Russian. That mourning time was reflected in the monograph Russian Families of Turkic Origin by a great turcologist Nikolai Alexandrovich Baskakov. His work is a bibliographical rarity; it illustrates the selfdestruction of the Altaic nation: a man existed and disappeared; a family existed and disappeared It is indicative that in his monograph there is nothing about the boyars who in Russia were considered to be the people whose family origin is explained by
nothing. There is nobody with whom to discuss this established opinion. Pay with faith to those against you, Altai taught. This knowledge helps in the foreign lands. This advice, terrible in its correctness, was a Turkic adapt. It is better that nobody has ever known it. But people around Baty knew it. They were putting up and paying silently. They were putting up with the fact that yesterdays enemies became constant visitors at the khan's palace. They were paying to the knight of St. Mary Alfred von Schtumpenhassen recommended by the French king Louis IX the Saint who had become Baty's counselor and the patron of the new Horde Church. Life turned upside down, words cannot explain what had happened. Patriarchy and powerlessness were pressing on the Horde; the words it is usual became too frequent, which everybody understood. But they did not deny the laws which were outdated: the authority of Genghis Khan was pressing too hard; there were no people who dared change Yasa The Turki, deprived of elected power, were living hanging about. The world was changing while they were not. Illusion prevailed in the Horde; state structure was failing. Failures in politics were followed by the weakness of spirit which was taking away the most dignified and strongest people not willing to vegetate. Baty was not even watching at that worldwide catastrophe having proclaimed himself the Great Khan of the Golden Horde. He did not understand or did not mention what was happening around. He was living for his pleasure in the world invented by his grandfather. Nobody was destroying the Horde it was doing so itself by its orders Every ship dies in its own way, - the sailors say in such cases. To the credit of the Europeans it should be said that they managed to find the way out of the difficult situation caused by Subutai. The West showed pliancy, viability; the Pope managed to make Destiny take his side. He made it smile. It seems that was the will of Heaven; the Catholic turned out to be smarter.
demonstrated the position of the East. After the victorious campaign of the Tatars in 1242 chaos was prevailing in Rome; the bishops were afraid to take the place of the deceased Pope. Finally they gathered a conclave that elected a Genoese by birth, descendant of the knights, Cardinal Sinibaldo Fieschi, count della Laveya to be the Pope. An ambitious man with Turkic blood in his veins was to act; he made it into history as the Pope Innocent IV. A rarely smart person. A lawyer, not a theologian. He intended to turn the Tatars into the allies of the Church, for which he made up a challenging and, we can even say, outstanding plan. At first the Pope decided to conduct policy from a blank page to forget about the defeat. His persistent interest to Kievan Russia and Baty had serious reasons; that was not idle curiosity. He did not want the repeating of what was about to happen. In 1245, at the Council of Lyon the Pope started to prepare a crusade against the Tatars; he declared fundraising and secretly sent a messenger, the monk Giovanni del Plano Carpini to the capital of the Mongolian Empire, the town of Karakorum. The objective was the union with the Moslems; the Pope sacrificed them to politics. The Catholics were changing their ally. And their policy together with it. They opened a new page of the European history; this page was to be written during five centuries; Kievan Russia and the Golden Horde would perish during that time and a country obedient to Rome - Romanovs' Russia would appear instead The Pope Innocent was a great strategist. He suggested not a war but a union to the East so that Altai and the West would be standing together. That saved Europe from a new invasion. Anticipation of events shown by the Church is the skills of real politics. However the Tatars were not that simple either; they got the core of the cunning of their congener; as against the ruler of the Golden Horde those were smart and intelligent people. The answer of the khan Guyuk discouraged the Pope but
That was an order sent to the great Pope to know and understand it, the answer of the master of geopolitics who did not need a fellow traveler on the road of Time. A tough answer. The letter began in Turkic from the words by the force of Eternal Blue Sky and than the language was changed into Persian thus the khan Guyuk showed the head of kings of Europe an open disgust. At first he judged him for free treatment of God, which some time ago had perturbed Genghis Khan: How do you know that God gives absolution and bestows mercy, how do you know Him?. No one except for God can give absolution that is what people have always known in the East. After that it was carefully emphasized in the letter that Genghis Khans code by order of God started a sacred war for the revival of the Turki: You yourself are the head of kings; all of you should propose service and obedience to us. From this time we consider that you have submitted to us. And if you do not follow the order and resist, you will become the enemies. The Pope, that Vicar of Christ, the main figure of the West, was almost nobody in the eyes of the East. Hence is the humbling language of the message One would think, a letter is a stroke on the canvas of history, but there is so much standing behind it. The epoch is very clearly seen. The letter was found in 1920 in the Archives of Vatican; it was analyzed by the leading Orientalists of the world that recognized the message authenticity and marked a unique character of the language and graphics. The expression Persian way meant Saracenic way, which means the letter was written in the language that was used by the Moslems of Iran. It is indicative that its Saracenic part was written by a metaphrast Temir, Yaroslav's (Alexander Nevsky's father) subject. But of course this is not the main thing. In the letter one could find the goal of
the military actions of Genghis Khan in Europe; sacred war for the triumph of Monotheism was in question. In Kiev the messengers of Genghis Khan announced the order of God, for which they were killed. This letter, and it is not the only one, allowed interpreting known events in an absolutely different way while people had formerly judged about them basing on different assumptions and fabrications. And lots of books are not necessary; it is seen that arrogance let the East down. It overestimated itself and did not consider that against it were the same Turki who also wanted to win. But they had weapons of which the East was unaware the Church and monastic orders, knights of spirit being able to do what seemed impossible. The West suggested a fight. A deadly fight elaborated to the last detail. Like between David and Goliath. The East did not know that. It relied on its army assuming that the relation of forces was in its favor a priori. It is enough to remember firing arms which was seen not by everyone in Europe; they still used bows there Here is an episode of a conversation between Marco Polo and the khan: How do you want me to become a Christian? You see, the Christians are ignorant, they do nothing while our clergymen do whatever they want. I sit at the table and the bowls full of wine come to my hands by themselves; nobody touches them. Bad weather will be banished by our scientists wherever they wish. If I become a Christian, my subjects will ask why I had accepted the belief of Christ and which might and miracles of Christ I had seen. In the Middle Ages belief made the decisive account of the feeling of power since perhaps all the scientists worked in the calm of monasteries; they were living like hermits. In monastic centers the schools of the East began; the union of religion and science was an unwritten rule. The true belief was the one that did miracles and gave discoveries. And the sign of white belief (equilateral cross) in the East was working miracles. A cross is good and it makes only good and justice, the khan was telling this to Marco Polo.
And the latter, being scared by his bold thought, realized that the Christian cross had none of such qualities it was the means of torture and death. A scaffold on which people were being killed At that time the West was weaker in everything. It made the European Turki search for unusual ways in politics and in life; they could be saved only by extraordinary and outstanding happenings. And the Church had a plan suggested by Genghis Khans code itself if, of course, one reads it attentively. An ingenious plan called the Inquisition. The gist of the matter is simple: so as to avoid attacks from the East they had to erase the traces of the East in Europe. Rome understood that Yasa declared war not to the Europeans but to the Turki. It obliged to move on until you see the last Turki. Baty did not move towards Constantinople; the Turkic speech became silent there. It was bogged down in the new Greek language that was bringing the nations of Byzantium together. The Pope's counselors, to tell the truth, rose to the emergency; they managed to find the only continuation of the game that seemed to be lost. The Turkic mind just needs to be perplexed and it will find the way out. At first the Inquisition was discussed at the Council of Toulouse (1229) after the defeat of the Russians at Kalka. After that it was discussed in Lyons (1245) after Baty's campaign in Europe. The decision was suggested by the monk Dominic that belonged to a noble family of the Oguzes (Guzman) which was of a royal origin. The Great descendant of Altai notable for the perfect understanding of reality, in advance, in 1220 during the war with the Cathars, foreseeing events, decided to form a monastic order for the inquisition. Not the one the Church had but one of a different type menacing and powerful. So that it controlled the courts, searched for the guilty and performed investigations and interrogations. In a word, a court and an executioner in one.
It is indicative that at first as a model Dominic took the traditions of the Cathars against whom he was fighting; he wanted to defeat them using their own weapons. His monks were to act the same as Cathar shepherds to be modest, to dress without luxury, wear common clothes and preach the Catholic teaching. Which meant to be the contrast to the official clergy in appearance Dominic himself graduated from an Oecumenical University; he started as a common missionary among the Moslems; he had wide life experience. In the order that was being created by him many things were practically the same as the Moslems and Cathars had it with the only difference that behind different monks scouts of Catholicism gigantic power of the Christian Church was standing. Thus the Dominican order appeared and a great many people were moving there. By themselves What people were they? Let us assume that is not known. But a beard, hood, feathers of hats, vestment, boots were obligatory for military monks. Their uniform. The name order is to be added here; in Turkic it means given from above that is what they called themselves. A portrait is ready. Of course those were the best from the Europeans; they were going to fight with the enemies with the Turki because in their souls they themselves were irreconcilable Turki. On the blazon of the order Dominicans placed dogs sniffing out heresy so that everybody saw that they had thirst for tortures and executions, those dogs with bare teeth; they were not attractive monks. They subdued everyone to those dogs sniffing for heresy. A decree of the Pope Innocent IV obliged the Catholics to help the Dominicans. That meant to watch one another day and night so that children would inform on their parents and parents on their children. The West started shadowing of itself not forgetting the care about souls, scientific studies and other pretty words by which the order was covered becoming the cruelest host of the Church. The Brotherhood of Belief and the Knights of Jesus Christ were especially notable; they consisted of
real sadists. But there was no other remedy except for the Turkic blood; seas of blood saved Europe from a new invasion from the East The Inquisition consisted not only in executions, tortures and scaffolds that were peculiar to the medieval Europe but also in scaring the people so as to break them and their minds down. It turns out the fires on town squares were lighting and warming the lost people; the Church was throwing wood into the fire for their welfare. It passes understanding. However, burning one heretic they saved thousands. Of course not everybody liked the Inquisition, and in the majority of the European countries the clergy condemned the Dominicans. But it was suitable for the long-sighted politicians among which was the king of France, Louis the Saint. He set an example supporting the Inquisition in his country, which gave him an opportunity to protect the Pope's interests and conduct his own defense. Destroying everything connected with the Turki he was keeping it. Or veiling it, to put it more precisely. That was another historical absurdity that became the property of medieval Europe. He appointed Robert the Small, also known as Bugr, the main inquisitor. He was a Cathar that had turned to Catholicism, a Bulgarian Turki by birth. The historians do not know whether that was a masquerade or malicious intentions. That inquisitor was more devoted to the Pope than others; according to his reports he covered Burgundy, Champagne and Flanders with fires the Cathars and other heretics seemed to have disappeared. But at the same time they remained. They were not protruding but were silently waiting through the storm Who knows, maybe Bugr himself was the savior of the Cathars? The ones that had taught them the rules of the new European life. Of course the Europeans could not deny their culture. That is impossible. They were hiding its roots inside themselves. There are hundreds and hundreds of examples and the most significant is the works by Dante
Alighieri that coincided with the climax of the inquisitorial times. His Divine Comedy is interesting; in it the poet and philosopher calls for purification of culture and spirit and he does so in the tradition of the Altaic epos which he could not neglect! But perhaps the most significant word is the tractate About Folk Speech where Dante acts as one of the creators of the new Italian language and Italian poetry. New languages in Europe are also traces of the Inquisition. It is all about the culture that was to change the old Turkic one A dog, the rescuer of Italy, is not accidental; it was to defeat the Turkic she-wolf hindering formation of the social structure. You should choose a new road, the poet says in the Divine Comedy but in order to defeat the she-wolf and get on top of the pleasant hill it is necessary to visit another world inferno and limbo and that is another Altaic plot, it was met in the Altaic epos many times and it is well known to researchers. Everything was interlacing and nothing was getting lost that is the peculiarity of the Pope's inquisition. They were burning in the fires but they did not get burnt. Characters taken by Dante are evident It is known that barbarians once remade the symbol of Rome the Capitoline she-wolf they changed the figures reminding of the infants. Taking away everything unnecessary the monument has been made famous by still recognizable outlines of figures of Romulus and Remus. That was a hard work of reconstruction of the symbols of Rome and after it had been completed the monument has never been called Roman. Romulus, the founder of Rome, was called a tsar (Caesar) in a Turkic way. And in the dog the rescuer Dante might have shown the Dominicans with whom the Europeans connected their hopes at that time. Not everybody understood the
intentions of the Church; it wanted to change Europe. There were victims. A lot of victims. Bloody and violent. The Inquisition is a political issue, after all; like a flood it was sweeping all before itself giving ride to a new life. The Europeans were cleaning themselves as they could! And that dirty work was certainly done not by the Church but by the temporality. The clergy did not perform executions; it organized them so as to save the rest. The European Turki that did not want to be exemplary Catholics and forget their native language were proclaimed heretics. Those were the most stubborn people; they could not do otherwise they doomed themselves for the worst and were ready for self-destruction. That was a convenient method of punishing themselves, which was at one stroke used by others among whom was the king Louis the Saint. Of course! The inquisitors obtained everything that belonged to the victims since the children of the heretics were deprived of the rights for titles, property and respect. That is why aristocrats were being persecuted in the first place: they were the most stubborn and the richest. Castles and estates were getting empty; knights and knighthood as the way of life peculiar to the Turki disappeared in the epoch of the Inquisition since that was society that was living under the laws of the horde. They disappeared not because of their loss to the Tatars; they were defeated by the monks that had been being at enmity with the knights for a long time. That was the enmity between aristocrats and the masses that had taken power in their hands. The Turki against the Turki again. It does not matter whether they had a cross or a sword in their hands. It is not occasional that the masses were the first to join the order of Dominicans. Some of them were attracted by an opportunity to spoil the life of their former masters. Those were very gloomy days when religion was being turned into the weapons of impostors that wanted desolation of castles and estates since they considered them to the sources of the Turkic contagion and heresy in the West. In every eparchy even
appeared a special bishop dealing only with the Inquisition; secular people from among those to whom the Church trusted were his assistants. The repression machine was growing in full public view. And that was what did frighten the people. New blood was shed in 1229. That was a trial balloon but not real inquisition. The south of France which estates were full of heresy suffered; there the sacred war of Genghis Khan was discussed by everyone the people wanted him to come to Europe. Time showed that those words were prophetic. At that time, in 1229, the Church was using the knights crusaders while the monks were getting stronger. The Dominical order was just trying the monastic boots on The blow fell on the possessions of the count of Toulouse, Attila's descendant. Kick him away, - the Pope was shouting, - together with his adherents from the castles, deprive them of lands and let the rightful Catholics take what now belongs to heretics. In the Pope's words was hidden the answer to certain mysteries of the Inquisition. Hearing them the Catholics were making a queue in order to become rightful and own the castles. It was as easy as pie to do so because the heretics were distinguished from the righteous without any difficulties. The Pope's legate Arnold Amalric said: Kill everybody; God will distinguish the natives and the aliens. They only had to kill. Everyone. And a lot. In order to become righteous. As J. Maillol accurately defined, in that battle some thought they were fighting for belief, although in reality they were fighting for temporal wealth, and others were fighting for what cannot be called anything else but Motherland. New Europe was becoming the motherland for millions of Europeans whose ancestors were born in Altai. They were fiercely fighting for it. God himself was distinguishing the natives from the aliens.
And anybody could be called a heretic. The results of the Great Nations Migration should not be forgotten; they remained the reality of Europe: the ancestors of any European were the Turki What can be discussed here if even the word heretic is Turkic it was used to name those who denied the views of the Church. In Turkic heresy means what is to be denied. Wordfor-word! To the letter. And ordeals that appeared at that time are also an Altaic invention. Unfortunately, that is not astonishing everywhere the Turki were fighting with the Turki. And they could not invent something new even new words and new tortures. The clothes of an inquisitor or cardinal did not change their nature; their world and knowledge remained the same People were just changing their appearance so as to be called rightful Catholics, Orthodox Christians, Moslems. Brothers were wittingly becoming strangers for each other. Ordeals is a questioning system; its goal is the revelation of the truth. The most common way to the truth in Altai lay through two fires: two big fires were made and the suspect had to walk between them. If one was burnt it meant one was guilty. If not he was innocent They used the fire when all the common means of the court were done with. They called that the trial by ordeal. They also used drawing lots, oaths, judicial combats. Then fist law was introduced there and quickly became very popular among the people. Later appeared a challenge to fight a duel. To Europe the trial by ordeal came together with German tribes, and only the Turki had it All this can be read in works by Marco Polo or Rubruk. But the most reliable was the trial of the cross. A complainant and defendant stood in front of a cross with their hands up; the one who was the first to draw down his hands was declared guilty. They also had the trial of a holy peace of bread or cheese. If a piece stuck in the throat of the accused, he had to admit committing the crime There was a certain ritual called ordal (accept from above). It was used by the Inquisition which of course
216 / 342
made it more complex but failed to invent something new. It was just modernizing old methods of interrogation replacing the trial with tortures.
become alien for them long ago Not European! The inquisitors saw where the West was defenseless: it was keeping language traces which were connected with Altai and with the Turki. It was necessary to change the language and invent a new one, which was not difficult in the dismal scenery of total fear. As the history of nations showed, speech was less conservative as it is commonly supposed. Two or three generations and about two hundreds new words are enough to make a new dialect of the language appear. And it the language is permanently distorted, it starts to have no resemblance to itself even faster. There is a science dealing with making speech more complicated and creation of dialects and slangs. Even pupils practice in it inventing languages not clear to their parents. It is clearly seen in modern Russia where American words start to replace Russian ones. It is the same process that was taking place in medieval Europe; sooner or later it will give a new dialect of the Russian language Under Peter I that was happening with the Turkic language; because of politicians it was supplemented with words from the dictionary of Finno-Ugric and other nations so as to have the desirable Slavic dialect of the Turkic language. Experience in this work is vast; methods were made perfect their use was started during the Inquisition so as to renew the low Latin which was being enriched with words from other languages. Perfection was given by the Jesuits; there was a whole order working on the Church dozens of universities and schools subjected to it. Now only a delicate ear can catch Turkic sounds in the French, German and English speech. And there are plenty of them. Another way of liquidation of language traces is to introduce a new language and call it the language of the light, which happened in Russia where in the times of Peter they spoke at first German and later French so as not to speak the old Turkic language And
The Catholics were covering Europe under the Inquisition. Humanly their actions are clear and explicable. The European Turki were searching for their place in the sun feeling themselves the owners of their culture. Their new ideological weapons worked without fail. And the scale was slowly inclining to the West It was winning. The Church should pray on that letter by the khan Guyuk in which the East rejected it. That letter made Europe strong! Its wounded pride was speaking at the top of its voice and made Europe Act. Europeans realized that the Tatars were their brothers but did not hasten to move to their yurts again. And to leave the soft Mediterranean climate. In the Tatars they saw the people of a different culture which was not European and of different nature which was not Mediterranean. It means that culture was alien! And almost everything in it irritated them; especially its rectitude. Foreign brothers? Of course. They were different, like a prince and a beggar. But each of them considered himself to be the prince In order to remain a nation it is not enough to speak the same language and look like one another; common culture and common thoughts are necessary and there were none of them: the spirit of Altai, i.e. the belief in Heavenly God, has become part of European culture due to the Catholics and Arians. It was changed, but nevertheless! However, nobody mentioned that in Europe; the image of God was so organic and entire in the West. It was recognized as an achievement of their culture. Altai ceased to be Eden paradise during the Inquisition; the Europeans remembered it like something distant, fairylike from their childhood. But they did not remember pagan Rome; it had
those experiments were coming from Europe, from the Inquisition that gave the striking abundance of dialects in two basic the Romanic and Germanic languages. At the same time, during the Inquisition appeared classic Latin and much later Esperanto, an artificial language with the Latin alphabet. Maybe those experiments are the reason why today the French fail to understand the language of the Franks and Burgundians, their ancestors, and the English fail to understand the language of the Britons and Saxons. Is it not the reason why after the Inquisition remained derelict literary writings? For instance, the fairy tales. Charles Perrault took known but anonymous plots; hence is striking similarity of his fairy tales with Altaic ones. He himself called them: The tales of former times with morals. It seems this is the explanation of the striking similarity of works by Shakespeare with the Turkic epos The first blow of the Inquisition, as I have already said, fell on the South France; from the IV century it was notable for its Turkic originality. Especially Languedoc province where rebellions were frequent; for example in 1242 they beat inquisitors to death; that was a strange region. They knew that a rebellion would cause a wave of repressions but could do nothing. They were patient. Time passed and everything started again Lands of Languedoc absorbed a lot of blood. A wall was against a wall; a billow against a billow. The heretics left for the settlements where they were waiting through the Inquisition and everything else. And Occitanie, or South France, the country of the oc dialect, remained.
religious freedom but in it they saw political freedom. For independent Languedoc, for free Occitanie they were giving their lives burning themselves in 1243 in the castle of Montsegur after the defeat connected with Baty's disgraceful running away from Europe. To tell the truth, the native language was called Provencal there; it was considered to be kindred with Catalan. But that was all the Inquisition managed to achieve. Heretic hearths were all over France from north to south. The French were forgetting their native language but not the spirit of freedom. It was their peculiarity In Italy the Inquisition was raging in the Turkic Lombardy where the French scenario was repeated almost entirely. After the murder of the servants of the Church persecutions started; and again the country gave shelter And in Venice, the town of heretics, the Inquisitors' hands were short. The same as in Naples where they managed to do nothing They only spread fear. But that fear was multiplied not by the fires of inquisitors but rumors which the Church was spreading so as to suppress the people and make them obedient. And in the territory of the modern Germany they also did not know the real Inquisition; everything there was happening according to their own scenario. In Hunia, or the German-Roman Empire, the Pope's agents had lack of self-confidence they would have had to destroy everybody. The Church restricted itself to poisoning Manfred, the son of the Emperor Frederick II. And the last heir of the family, sixteen years old Conradine, the grandson of Frederick II, was executed in the fire. At first he was anathematized and called poisonous king, the descendant of the viperous family of Hohenstaufens. That was done, having accepted the Pope's permission, by Carl the Angevin who revenged for his relatives executed by Attila some time ago. The imperial epopee of the last chagans of Europe ended in the fire of the Inquisition. In Germany started the Great Unroyal period (1256 1263), the darkest years. The Church was establishing the
The year 1242 was chosen not occasionally; Baty's troops were standing near the boundaries of Italy and the Cathars hoped for him. The Church had never been as active and strong as during that year. Courageous southerners were fighting for
principles of Christian theocracy, which is akin to a new baptism. That dark business was carried out by the temporal power; it organized a mighty civil war after the tragic death of the Emperor. For years kings and anti-kings were fiercely fighting for power; they destroyed Hunia. On the banks of the Alba the Turkic speech became silent by itself; heresy defeated itself without the Pope's assistance. And the new dynasty of Gabsburgs that captured the throne in 1273 was reigning according to the standards approved by Rome. In Czechia the Inquisition was taking course drowsily and very late. Several awesome actions and nothing more. The most famous figure is Jan Hus, the rector of the Prague University astonished by saint simplicity of the people. He was against selling indulgences giving absolution for money and was the adherent of returning to the principles of the early Christianity, i.e. to the Altaic tradition. He was burnt The past was being forgotten everywhere in a special way. Firewood was often thrown into the fire deliberately. And on the Balkans it all happened in a different way; the Inquisition gave an inverse effect there: the Christians turned to Islam. Numerous executions in Bosnia gave a frightening result, which stopped the Church that was afraid that Bosnia would infect Europe; after all, perhaps one third of the Western population followed Islam at that time. The Pope understood that he had gone too far. And he stopped.
Of course there were heretics among the clergy but they were also changing together with the parishioners. Those were secret monks and bishops, the keepers of the old knowledge that were to show themselves during the Reformation. Communities that had not recognized the orders of the Inquisition did not disappear; they had the same names: Bogomils, Albigenses, Cathars, Olivites, Euchits, Joachimites. The stubborn were against the Pope and against injustice that was dominating in Europe; their heads were cut off, they were being burnt in the fires, but they survived. They were not dying. The same as the Russian Old Believers that were persecuted by authorities from the XVII century. Unfortunately one would hardly understand the psychology of those fearless and stubborn people. Their measure of life was different unclear to modern people. Not much remained from them with all their oddities. Their books were burnt; their philosophy is judged on the basis of the stories of the inquisitors. Nevertheless, time showed that heretics regenerated by the end of the Middle Ages and became Christians, i.e. real Europeans. That was a great achievement of the Church or, more precisely, an achievement of the whole western culture for which a lot of people, including the king of France, Louis the Saint, with his main inquisitor belonging to the Cathars, worked. Old heresies were melting like snow in winter. They were drying up like a tree deprived of water. Explaining the origin of the world in their own way, believing in transmigration of souls, heretics equaled Christ with God. Doubts of their ancestors concerning the divinity of Christ were over. Not denying Altaic traditions, they did not deny the Christian prayers as such, but for them it had a sense which was different from that of the Roman Church. Let it be so. Sometimes heresy consisted in pointing to the vices of the Catholic clergy, not religion. They did not touch the religion. And that is perhaps the most significant
It is significant that the Inquisition was not killing all the heretics; that was not what the Church wanted it was taking them away, and they, like islands in a stormy ocean, were hiding under water staying in Europe and showing that the traces of the Great Nations Migration in Europe were eternal. They were not destroyed by gales and storms. At most they were covered under water. They were hidden away.
219 / 342
victory of the Church; it consolidated the West. Not entirely. In Europe remained Moslems and Jews but their century was getting to an end; in 1480 the forcible baptism broke out new inquisition that finally united the West. Of course there were some dissatisfied among the Christians; they will always be, but in society those people were nobody. For instance, they were perturbed by the servants of God that were wallowing in luxury. The welfare of the bishops is God's share, the property of the dead, help for the poor that is what the heretics thought. And people agreed with them. They were disgusted with the order which the inquisitors bore; the Pope took that into consideration and forgave them because the main thing had been achieved. Heretics entered the Christian Church and became its flock They had to play a part of the black sheep in the flock, which is perhaps obligatory for any decent society. Thus Europe was changing extirpating the past and creating the present. Some of the heretics started to go begging; they denied everything earthy, the same as eastern dervishes, which was allowed. They opened a special monastic order for them. Others found protest in philosophizing, and nobody hindered them In that muddy and quiet area, like in a marsh, the source of the Reformation that was to lead to the split of Catholicism in the XVII century was arising. The Reformation is the result of the Inquisition that saved Altaic dissents of the Europeans. The Protestants and later Calvinists, Anglicans, Baptists, Adventist, Russian Old Believers in their views were certainly connected with Altai and its philosophical school. They were keeping the philosophy of the East as far as their new European packing permitted. Regardless of the established opinion, among the heretics there were really smart people that were searching for their seditious place in the new culture of the West, and they were sometimes naively
choosing the Christian interpretation for deeds of certain Altaic heroes. Thus Erlic became Lucifer, Satanail, and Ulgen became Christ, the Word Son This subject was covered in books where one can see how the theory and practice of the heretics were changing in time depending upon the background and preparedness of the readers. Every author was looking for his own way to answer eternal questions of life. Among them are Voltaire, Gibbon, philosophers of the XVI XVIII centuries. Even Leo Tolstoy. They had enough like-minded persons because dissent has always been necessary in the West: Europe was a perfect sponge ready to absorb all the heresy if only it was philosophically reasonable Maybe that is how its Turkic nature showed itself; Europe will never manage to do away with it. New religious currents were peculiar to the West after the Inquisition; everything remained almost as it had been, only the stresses were different. Belief was changing together with the people imperceptibly. In this connection special attention should be paid to the fact that is mentioned perhaps by all the serious historians: before the Inquisition heretics had close relations with the East with Eden. Their spiritual life was brightened there. It is proven not only by existence of the well-known divine language that united the coreligionists but rather by the fact that eastern preachers were nourishing the West with ideas and spirit. They did so since they were elder and more experienced. Let us remember Augustine's works on theology. Or works by other doctors of the Church that were making the foundation of Catholicism. First Saints of the West are the messengers of Altai. That is not an exaggeration; the Christians declared themselves: The world begins from the East. The phrase that became their motto for thousands of years: Ex oriente lux. Later, in order to conceal the Turkic belief, the Church called Altaic preachers Manichees spreading Zoroastrianism, which has nothing to do with reality.
Although there might be an element of truth in those words But what has Iran got to do with it? Its spiritual culture? After all, Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism are different religions; they are different as playing kobyz and playing cello although they both are string instruments. Their history started in the Middle East. Manichaeism is a variation of belief in Tengri; as it has been already mentioned here, it was spread among the fire-worshippers, i.e. Zoroastrianism followers. The founder of the teaching, Mani, was born early in the III century in a Turkic family; he studied in Palestine and visited Altai and India. In his consciousness there was a proper combination of Altaic and Jewish knowledge, hence the similarity of Manichaeism with Christianity and Tengri's teaching. But only similarity of appearance. And nothing more. By the way, for his teaching Mani was crucified in 277 and called the Savior Is it not the plot of the Gospels?! Here are the words by Mani himself: Those who have their temple in the West with their flock will never reach the East. Those who have chosen the flock in the East will never reach the West. But my hope is that my teaching will move both to the East and to the West My church will be spread in all towns and my annunciation will touch all countries. That is what Mani thought, and he was doing everything in order to accomplish his idea of the oecumenical teaching As a matter of fact, that idea was taken by Catholic bishops during the Inquisition. Having slightly changed it, they made it the foundation of the policy of the Christian Church, which allowed them starting the colonization of the East. It is better to begin the subject of the European heresy not from Manichaeism but from the history of Nestorians, the most mysterious Christian sect. Its appearance is connected with the IV century, with Nestorius, the Archbishop of Constantinople, but the piquancy of the situation is connected with the fact that the sect had existed long before Nestorius and Christianity in general terms. It started from the rise to power of the
Arshakids in Parthia since the Arshakids were the first who brought East and West together. Those rulers started to spread Monotheism and the Turkic culture together with it three centuries before the Common Era. It is evident that neither Christianity nor Manichaeism could exist at that time. Not much is known about the Nestorians. And at the same time when Sasanids got power, they started persecutions against them their ideological rivals, which led to dispersal of the sect in the Middle and Near East; its geography led to formation of the Church of Nestorian Character. i.e. a spiritual institution connected with Altaic Monotheism. It seems nature had something which allowed the Christians calling that ancient Church Christian. Maybe because they used to sink into water three times during the baptism? Maybe an equilateral cross is the reason of such an early establishment? And maybe John the Baptist, from whom, according to the Bible, Christ accepted belief? John the Baptist belonged to that Church We have food for thought here. Acquaintance with the Nestorians, their ceremonies, philosophy and geography made the author of these lines think about them as the people of Altaic white belief which in other sources were called Hanifs or Turki. The area of their settlement is from Mongolia to India and Ceylon, from Syria to China, in other words, the territory of Persia of Achemenids and Parthia of Arshakids. No doubt they had Altaic ceremonies the ones on which Monotheism was based. They appeared during the Great Nations Migration. Everything coincides, even the language of services. To tell the truth, it is customary to call the language of their services Syrian but this language did not exist at that time. To be more precise, in antiquity they called it Cyrian, i.e. the language of the tsar Cyrus, the Jews wrote their Bible in it cognizing the secrets of the teaching. That was the language of divine services of the ancient world.
The Jews called that language Aramaic, but the new name did not explain a lot: Aramaic texts did not remain; it seems they have never existed. And the Turkic ones remained, which was described earlier, and they are also known by the history of monasteries of Acoemetae where the Nestorians lived. Their first monastery was built on the bank of Euphrates; later it was playing the leading part in Monophysite disputes and bringing Tengri's teaching to the masses. In other words, that was about the language fixed by the cursive writings of Achemenids and later Arshakids, which means the Turkic language. And the fact that the Greeks called it Syrian just makes one regret. It is known that changing one letter of the Holy Writ may cause the destruction of the whole world, - as it is written in Talmud. Among the historians there were different talks; one of them was Mandeaic. They included Sabbataians and Christians of Saint John; they remained, which, as a matter of fact, made the author of these lines draw unexpected conclusions. In the ancient Turkic language subbat sink into water, mandy take a dip, hence are the names Sabbataians and Mandaens. Tarmid (that is what the Mandaens call the clergymen) means a seeder, i.e. the teacher acting as an enlightener All these are the terms of the Altaic white belief. Their main book was called SidraRabba (big book) or ginza (treasure) these are Turkic words transformed in the course of centuries. From kyznak treasure, treasury. Or from sydra extract in the sense of speaking the truth. Hence, by the way, the sutra in religious philosophy of ancient India This may be continued. And there is only one conclusion. The terminology of the early Christians is suspiciously Turkic. All of it. At that that is confirmed by the sources from different corners of Europe that seem not to be connected with each other; the name of Tengri was heard there. Only the presence of wondering preachers explains that striking
similarity. And that is true, among nonNestorians there were ellecesseias, from the Turkic wonderer or preacher. Europe called them Gnostics The circle seems to be closed down, is it not? Back in the IX century the Moslems remembered the saying of the Most High and were not ashamed of it: I have an army which I call the Turki; I located them in the East; when I am furious with any nation, I give my army the power over it. Excellent words; they are astonishingly accurate. They are cited in the books by the great scientist of the Moslem world Mahmud Kasgari; they contain the whole history of the Great Nations Migration. Here one reads about Apocalypse from which the collapse of the Roman Empire started. Here one reads about Attila whom the pagans used to call Scourge of God. Here one reads about Islam which was regarded by the Christians as the visitation of God. Here one reads about the Turki that have forgotten Tengri: the French, the English, the Scandinavians, the Germans, the Russians Since they were the most notable pearl in the crowns of dozens of nations those children of Altai that have lost themselves. It turns our, before the Common Era there was the center of Monotheism in the East And maybe that is the source of the views of Cathars in France which are undistinguishable from those of Sabbataians in Mesopotamia? Maybe that is the reason of hostility against Christianity of the Arians in Scandinavia and Mandaens of the Low Euphrates?.. In that center they were raising knowledge, thoughts, teachings, philosophy. And of course the people of belief! When the Inquisition limited the moving of Altaic preachers in Europe the center lost its influence on the West and heresy withered since withered the umbilical cord that connected the born child with his mother. Words fail to convey this; in Europe the chosen were enjoying that elixir of wisdom. The most elegant connoisseurs of wisdom. Philosophers. That is why the teaching of the Bogomils and Cathars coincided with what people knew in Altai and
with the knowledge of the northern Buddhists. The source was the same! It was nourishing the East; it was the tradition with which were living the Catholics that saw the light of day in the IV century. It is possible that the reason of the Christians' evident antagonism against the Altaic matter is that it is closer to God; it touches the Sky with its head What if theological discrepancies have nothing to do with it? And it is all about human envy? Judging by literature the Inquisitors were not very sophisticated in the theory of religion; like butchers they were using not their heads but their hands. That was a violent fundamental fight; in all the western countries history keeps its traces. And the fact that the Church won does not witness anything. Historiographers dependent on the Pope wrote their history, but that is just a story of one of the participants of events. Here it is important to listen to the opinion of the other side. And it is absent Time makes the decisions of History. Not the Pope. Luckily, the Church understood that in the XX century and made the fire of conscience underneath it. The Pope John Paul II at the turn of the third millennium apologized for the Inquisition and the tragedy connected with it. He seemed to have realized that not the people were burning in the fires but the culture of medieval Europe. Libraries disappeared without a trace because they were in the Turkic language. But have they disappeared? Or they have just lost their owner? Those books are kept in Vatican in special archives called Jesuit. Only members of the Society of Jesus have access there; to tell the truth sometimes illegal visitors enter there. Because of curiosity. Some books were translated and published in Latin; they are the cultural layer of medieval Christianity. Derelict books in a strange language are available in all the great libraries of the world; they are not called for. Dead weight Among them the works by Teleghdi from
Hungary were accidentally discovered they are about the Turki of Europe; the book was published in 1598. It seems to be the last one on this subject. That is not even a book but moaning of a man whose motherland was dying: one third of the territory of Desht-I-Kipchak has forever become part of the West at that time.
Literature Part III (main sources)

1.[AbulGazi]TheFamilyTreeoftheTurki// WorksofAbulGazi,theKhanofKhiva.Kazan, 1906. 2AdjiM.Europa'sAsia.M.,1998,English translation,M.,2004. 3.[Alikbekov].TheAdatsofKumyks/ TranslatedbyT.B.Beibulatov;RecordedbyM. Alibekov.Makhachkala,1927. 4.ArtamonovM.I.ThehistoryofKhazars.L., 1962. 5.BartoldV.V.Islam//CollectedWorks.Vol. VI.M.,1966. 6.BartoldV.V.<IslamontheBlackSea>// Ibid. 7.BartoldV.V.AbouttheQuestionofthe CrescentastheSymbolofIslam//Ibid. 8.BartoldV.V.AbouttheSabians//Ibid. 9.[BartoldV.V.]TheBookofmyGrandfather Korkut:OguzHeroicEpos.Baku,1999. 10.BartoldV.V.KoranandtheSea// CollectedWorks.Vol.VI.M.,1966. 11.BartoldV.V.TheCultureofIslam//Ibid. 12.BartoldV.V.TheMoslemWorld//Ibid. 13.BartoldV.V.SabiansandKhanifs//Ibid. 14.BartoldV.V.OrientationofFirstIslamic Mosques//Ibid. 15.BaskakovN.A.RussianFamilyNamesof theTurkicOrigin.M.,1993. 16.BelikovD.ChristianityoftheGoths.Issue1. Kazan,1887. 17.BeliaevL.A.ChristianAntiquities.SPb., 2000. 18.Beowulf.TheElderEdda.TheSongof Nibelungs.M.,1975. 19.TheBible.Brussels,1983. 20.[Biruni]AbuReikhanBiruni.Collected Works.Vol.1.Tashkent,1957. 21.[Biruni]AbuReikhanBiruni.India.M., 1995. 22.BlocM.ApologiaofHistory,orthe OccupationofaHistorian.M.,1986. 23.ButanaevV.Y.KhakasRussianHistorical andEthnographicalDictionary.Abakan,1999. 24.VeberE.RunicArts.SPb.,2002. 25.TheGreatChronicleofPoland,Rusand theirNeighborsoftheXIXIIICenturies.M., 1987. 26.VerbitskiyV.I.AltaicForeigners.M.,1893.
Reprint.GornoAltaisk,1993. 27.ViolledeDucE.E.LifeandEntertainment intheMiddleAges.SPb.,1999. 28.ViolledeDucE.E.TheRussianArts:Its Sources,Components,HigherDevelopmentand Futurity.M.,1897. 29.VodovV.TheBirthofRussianChristianity: ConversionofVladimir,thePrinceofKiev,and itsConsequences.XIXIICenturies. (ConceptionReview)//RussiabetweenEast andWest:CultureandSocietyXXVII centuries//ForXVIIInternationalCongressof ByzantiumExplorers(Moscow,August815th, 1991).PartIIII,M.,1991. 30.GergeiE.TheHistoryofPapacy.M.,1996. 31.GibbonE.TheHistoryoftheDeclineand FalloftheRomanEmpire.PartsIVII.SPb., 19972000. 32.GolenischevKutuzovI.N.MedievalLatin LiteratureofItaly.Sretensk.2000. 33.GrantM.RomanEmperors.M.,1998. 34.GurevichA.Y.CultureandSocietyof MedievalEuropewiththeEyesof Contemporaries.M.,1989. 35.GurevichA.Y.CampaignsoftheVikings. M.,1966. 36.DarkevichV.P.ArtMetaloftheEast(VIII XIIIcenturies).M.,1976. 37.DashkovS.B.TheEmperorsofByzantium. M.,1997. 38.DiringerD.TheAlphabet.M.,1963. 39.ReportsoftheInternationalCongress DedicatedtotheMillenniumofChristianityin RussiaandtheUkraine(Ravenna,1988)// RussiabetweenEastandWest:Cultureand SocietyXXVIIcenturies//ForXVII InternationalCongressofByzantiumExplorers (Moscow,August815th,1991).PartIIII,M., 1991. 40.AncientRussianTonesinAncient ScandinavianWritings:Texts,Translation, Comments.M.,1987. 41.AncientTurkicDictionary.L.,1969. 42.EgerO.WorldHistory:in4Volumes.The MiddleAges.SPb.,1904.Reprint.M.,1999. 43.ZaborovM.A.TheHistoryoftheCrusades inDocumentsandMaterials.M.,1977. 44.ZaborovM.A.CrusadersintheEast.M., 1960. 45.ZadvorniyV.TheHistoryofthePopes.Vol.
III.M.,1995. 46.IngstadH.AttheWakeofLeibtheHappy. L.,1969. 47.InostrantsevK.A.OnHistoryofpreMoslem CultureoftheMiddleAsia.Pg.,1917. 48.Jordan.AbouttheOriginandDeedsofthe Geths.Getica.M.,1960. 49.IcelandicSagas.L.,1956. 50.IcelandicSagas.IrishEpos.M.,1973. 51.TheHistoryofChina.M.,1998. 52.CardiniF.TheHistoryofMedieval Knighthood.Sretensk,2000. 53.KaramzinN.M.TheHistoryoftheRussian State.Vol.IXII.SPb.,18421844.Reprint.M., 1988. 54.CargerM.I.AncientKiev.Vol.12.M.;L., 1958;1961. 55.[Carpini]JohndePlanoCarpini.The HistoryoftheMongals.SPb.,1911. 56.KeenM.Chivalry.M.,2000. 57.KirpichnikovA.I.SaintGeorgeandGeorge theBrave.SPb.,1879 58.KlimovichL.I.TheBookaboutKoran,its OriginandMythology.M.,1988. 59.KovalskiyY.V.PopesandPapacy.M.,1991. 60.TheConceptionoftheHistoryofAncient RussiainSynthesizingWorksbyGerman HistoriansNamedHandbookontheRussian History//RussiabetweenEastandWest: CultureandSocietyXXVIIcenturies//For XVIIInternationalCongressofByzantium Explorers(Moscow,August815th,1991).PartI III,M.,1991. 61.Koran/TranslationbyI.Y.Krachkovskiy. M.,1963. 62.KryvelevI.A.TheHistoryofReligions.Vol. I.M.,1975. 63.[Landyshev]StephanLandyshev. CosmologyandTheogonyofAltaicPagans. Kazan,1886. 64.LebedevA.P.TheHistoryofSplitof ChurchesintheIX,XandXICenturies.SPb., 1999. 65.MadolG.,AlbigeneDramaandtheFatesof France.M.,2000. 66.MatuzovaV.I.EnglishMedievalSourcesof theIXXIIICenturies:Texts,Translation, Comments.M.,1979. 67.MelnikovaE.A.SwordandLyre:Anglo SaxonSocietyinHistoryandEpos.M.,1987.
68.MelnikovaE.A.AncientScandinavian GeographicalWorks.M.,1986. 69.MetsA.MoslemRenaissance.M.,1996. 70.TheMythologicalDictionary.M.,1991. 71.MurzaevE.M.TurkicGeographicalNames. M.,1996. 72.MullerL.TheBaptismofRussia.TheEarly HistoryofChristianitybefore9888. FragmentaryTranslation//Russiabetween EastandWest:CultureandSocietyXXVII centuries//ForXVIIInternationalCongressof ByzantiumExplorers(Moscow,August815th, 1991).PartIIII,M.,1991. 73.NationsoftheWorld:Historicaland EthnographicReferenceBook.M.,1988. 74.NikitinA.B.ChristianityintheCentral Asia(AntiquityandtheMiddleAges)// EasternTurkestanandtheCentralAsia.M., 1984. 75.OsokinN.TheHistoryoftheAlbigensesand theirTime.M.,2000. 76.PipesR.RussiaundertheOldRegime.M., 1993. 77.PigulevskayaN.TheMiddleEast. Byzantium.TheSlavsL.,1976. 78.PigulevskayaN.SyrianCultureinthe MiddleAges.M.,1979. 79.PodskalskiyG.ChristianityandTheological LiteratureinKievanRussia(9881237): DedicatedtotheMillennium(9881988)ofthe BaptismofRussiaPerformedbySt.Vladimir: (ConceptionAnalysis)//RussiabetweenEast andWest:CultureandSocietyXXVII centuries//ForXVIIInternationalCongressof ByzantiumExplorers(Moscow,August815th, 1991).PartIIII,M.,1991. 80.[Polo]MarcoPolo.TheBook.M.,1955. 81.PoppeA.TheRiseoftheCultofBorisand Gleb:FragmentaryTranslation//Russia betweenEastandWest:CultureandSocietyX XVIIcenturies//ForXVIIInternational CongressofByzantiumExplorers(Moscow, August815th,1991).PartIIII,M.,1991. 82.PoppeA.PoliticalreasonsoftheBaptismof Russia.ByzantineRussianRelations: FragmentaryTranslation//Russiabetween EastandWest:CultureandSocietyXXVII centuries//ForXVIIInternationalCongressof ByzantiumExplorers(Moscow,August815th, 1991).PartIIII,M.,1991.
83.[Prelovskiy]PoetryoftheAncientTurkiof VIXIIcenturies.M.,1993. 84.[Prelovskiy]ShamanisticSingingofthe SiberianTurki/TranslatedbyA.Prelovskiy. M.,1996. 85.PetitDutaillisC.FeudalMonarchyin FranceandEnglandoftheXXIIICenturies. SPb.,2001. 86.WrightW.AShortHistoryofSyriac Literature.SPb.,1902. 87.[Rubruk]WilliamdeRubruk.TheTraveling toEasternCountries.SPb.,1911. 88.RussiaandTheSteppe:ReviewofWorks byC.J.GalperinGeorgeVernadskiyand Eurasia,RussiaandtheGoldenHorde: MongolianInfluenceontheRussianMedieval History//RussiabetweenEastandWest: CultureandSocietyXXVIIcenturies//For XVIIInternationalCongressofByzantium Explorers(Moscow,August815th,1991).PartI III,M.,1991. 89.SmirnovaO.I.PlacesofPreMoslemCults intheCentralAsia(AccordingtoToponymy Materials)//CountriesandNationsofthe East.IssueX.M.,1971. 90.SteblinKAmenskiyM.I.TheWorldandthe Sagas.M.,1971. 91.SteblinKAmenskiyM.I.ScaldicPoetry// ThePoetryoftheScalds.L.,1979. 92.[Sturluson]SnorriSturluson. Heimskringla.M.,1980. 93.TatischevV.N.CollectedWorks:8Volumes (5Books):Vol.4:TheRussianHistory.M., 1964.Reprint.M.,1995. 94.[Tacitus]CorneliusTacitus.Annals.History //SelectedWorksin2Volumes.Vol.I.SPb., 1993. 95.TisengausenV.G.CollectionofMaterials RelatingtotheHistoryoftheGoldenHorde: ExtractsfromArabicWorks.Vol.I.SPb.,1884. 96.TisengausenV.G.CollectionofMaterials RelatingtotheHistoryoftheGoldenHorde. ExtractsfromArabicWorks.Vol.II.M.;L., 1959. 97.TheMillenniumoftheBaptismofRussia: DedicatedtotheMillenniumoftheBaptismof KievanRussia:(AccordingtotheMaterialsof theInternationalSymposiuminTutsingen, May7th10th,1987)//RussiabetweenEast andWest:CultureandSocietyXXVII
centuries//ForXVIIInternationalCongressof ByzantiumExplorers(Moscow,August815th, 1991).PartIIII,M.,1991. 98.TheMillenniumoftheBaptismofRussia: InternationalChurchConference:Theology andSpirituality.Moscow,May11th18th, 1987.Vol.12.M.,1989. 99.UspenskiyF.I.TheHistoryoftheByzantine EmpireoftheVIIXCenturies.M.,1999. 100.UspenskiyF.I.TheHistoryofthe ByzantineEmpire:thePeriodofthe MacedonianDynasty(8671057).M.,1997. 101.KharaDavanE.GenghisKhanasa MilitaryLeaderandhisHeritage.Elista,1991. 102.KheshE.CultureoftheEasternSlavs: FragmentaryTranslation//Russiabetween EastandWest:CultureandSocietyXXVII centuries//ForXVIIInternationalCongressof ByzantiumExplorers(Moscow,August815th, 1991).PartIIII,M.,1991. 103.Christianity.Encyclopedia.Vol.13.M., 19931995. 104.TsultemN.O.TheArtsofMongoliafrom theAncientTimestilltheBeginningoftheXX Century.M.,1986. 105.ChichurovI.S.ByzantineHistoricalWorks: Theophan'sChronography,Nicephorus's Breviary.M.,1980. 106.ShakhmatovA.A.Researchesonthe AncientRussianChronicles.SPb.,1908. 107.ShakhmatovA.A.AncientFatesofRussian Nation.Pg.,1919. 108.TheEposoftheNorthEurope;Waysof Evolution/EditedbyN.S.Chemodanov.M., 1989. 109.TheEpochoftheCrusades.SPb.,1999.
Part IV
Muscovy and Russia
The Russian Card

The fire started by the inquisition went out only by the XVI century; the Dominicans were carrying out their mission: they destroyed the traces of presence of the Turki in the Christian world. They were changed by another order of the Church the Jesuits who, as though they were plasterers, were scraping holes and blood stains on the walls of Europe. They overmastered all the universities, created new languages and architecture, rewrote books and reproduced pictures, took terrible barbarous heritage away from the archives In a word, in their own way they rebuilt the European culture and made its facade like we know it today without Heavenly God and without the Turki. Few people remember Tengri now. The Jesuits appeared in the West in the middle of the XVI century because of Ignatius Loyola, that genius of intellectual wars. As a matter of fact Loyola did the same as Genghis Khan; he invented brand new tactics and arms which allowed a not numerous monastic order to bring the West, the Church and later the whole world under its control. The Jesuits are, say the least of it, top of the Turkic spiritual culture subjected and transformed by Catholicism. It sounds arguably, maybe even obnoxiously, but A separate book is necessary to open those unobvious things hidden in the family tree and the name of Loyola, in the structure and principles of his famous brotherhood. As is well known, he was the native of a barbarous estate in Spain, the most Catholic of all the Catholic countries. He knew the native language, he was an excellent rider, he could fence perfectly and he played a trump. In the Turkic language his name means to lead, accompany a dragon; the family was among those who accompanied the elections of the tsar, which means those were the boyars Loyolas mother, Donna Marianna
227 / 342 Muscovy and Russia
Saes de Licona-i-Balda belonged to a very ancient and noble family of the Balts which has already been described here He based the order on the Altaic claustral rule which was modified and brought to such an inconceivable perfection that they got a mechanism for destruction of the Turkic culture. The European Turki, inventing the most sophisticated methods, were always trying to get rid of their own shadow, in which they have never succeeded; that is why a new book about the Jesuits is necessary on its cover should be a snake eating its own tail. What can be done if their belief has changed but the testaments remained the same? The Jesuits carried out an intellectual inquisition mistily calling it the Renaissance. But the renaissance of what? They did not specify At the same time the epoch of great geographical discoveries reached planetary scales; it affected the fate of entire continents. That pompous name concealed the ideas of Manichaeism prevailing in the Church policy. They were bearing the idea of unlimited world domination. Appearance of Venetian, Genoese, Spanish and Portuguese colonies expanded the boundaries of the Christian Empire over the banks of Europe. The goal of discoveries of new lands was obtaining new colonies. Those were two shapes of the western policy self-defence and longing for world domination. The renaissance and geographical discoveries were opening the mysteries of Rome which had not been mysteries for anybody any longer. However, they were not concealed, which is witnessed by the whole history of the late Middle Ages. The colonies were growing because the East allowed colonizing itself. The descendants of Genghis Khan broke up and spent everything their great ancestor had gathered. The Far East, the Middle East and the Near East they have lost everything. There was no force that could offer rebuff to Christianity. There was a rotten stub
reminding of a tree it whose shade half a world had been laying recently. No spirit, no desire, only rot. That was felt after 1396 when a lame Timur appeared in the Golden Horde like a whirlwind and dishonored it like a bride The Turkic power was dying betraying the belief of its ancestors. It could not have another future. Only violent death for which it doomed itself. The story of Khubilai, Genghis Khans grandson and favorite, is indicative. He inherited China but it all happened dolefully and the same went for the other Genghisides. In 1271, after long court intrigues, Khubilai was forced to return the Chinese written language in the offices and the Chinese etiquette at court, to accept Buddhism and take a Chinese name Shitsu and call his dynasty Yuan. He was no longed recognized as a ruler. In reply Genghis Khans grandson asked to seed steppe wormwood in front of the windows of his palace. And in the evenings, looking at that tiny meadow, he used to tell his children: Remember your ancestors, take care of this meadow; that is the grass of modesty. But wormwood told the children nothing; they were being brought up by the Chinese. By his new order of demise of the crown Genghis Khan deterred the guardian angel of the Turkic world. The departure of spirit from the steppe country was inevitable The family of unregal origin that had power could give a tsar; it was known before as a matter of fact the Turki had always been living with that rule. That was the distinctive feature of their society in Persia, India, Transcaucasia, North Africa, Europe. Everywhere. No one was allowed to change what God had given; even Genghis Khan himself, no matter how great he was. However Near the abating Horde new life was being born where everything was otherwise, in an old way; Moscow Russia was growing strong there the lost pearl of the former East. Giving shelter to aristocrats from the
Horde it remembered the past and thus was becoming more and more interesting for Rome. It was not a country (its ruler was approved by the Great Khan); it had no history but it had vertiginous possibilities captured by the tenacious West. The Church noticed that new society was appearing on the political scene of the Eastern Europe the Turki that had been through with the Turkic world. Exiled from the Horde, serving the Varangian dynasty of Ryurikoviches they were moving to the tops of power in the East. Those people had different names but they had not forgotten their native language, they safeguarded their national clothes and customs jealously, which, as a matter of fact, was their peculiarity and remained the peculiarity of Moscow Russia up to the XVIII century, i.e. till the rampancy of Romanovs That was the repeating of what had already been known; they were creating a new country on the old Altaic model. It was growing strong; Muscov was becoming the main town of Russia; the capital of the country that had not been created yet. That became clear in 1325 when the reign of Ivan Kalita, Alexander Nevskys grandson, began; the Muscovites were invited as rent collectors for the Golden Horde, its baskaks. One would think, Altai considered it a shame to serve others, but for some reason the Muscovites neglected that adat. They understood that every Time had its rules of honor and a baskak was profitable and necessary Why was that so? How could those that had always valued their principles, neglect them? There are many questions here. In this way, from questions, Moscow Russia began. A considerable share of the rent from the whole Russia was settling in Muscov; something was stolen, something was taken above measure, but the wealth was used for the benefit of Ryurikoviches; it was strengthening the would-be royal dynasty. It is evident that new Russians were aware of Altaic roots of the Muscow Prince and
regarded their ruler as the only legitimate power. They made fealty and served it. They were strengthening it!.. That is why after Baty families were still leaving the Horde for Russia. Not much is known about the family tree of the Ryurikoviches; it seems to be deliberately concealed but, according to chronicles take, for instance, Annales Bertiniani in the IX century they were called the chagans of the Russians and Scandinavian sagas of the X century called them konungs. In Russian that is the same the grand prince, the ruler of a region, principality. And in Turkic it is not like that; in those titles were very important hints which reveal a lot As it has been mentioned, only a person of regal origin could be a ruler of that level; that was the will of God. The ruler with absolute power and obligatory responsibility. He was to forfeit his own life for his failures Genghis Khan deprived the power of responsibility before society and thus killed it. It becomes clear why the title of a chagan disappeared in the Horde and why it was remembered in Russia. An expression kek-khan (kok gan ~ kogan ~ chagan) meant heavenly khan, i.e. the one sent from the Sky to have power. However, its explanation and translation would be more correct if one considers that in the ancient Turkic language the word khan also meant blood. The ruler of blue (heavenly) blood. That is the word-for-word translation of the title That is how the expression blue blood appeared it was mentioned even in the verses by Scandinavian scalds and French troubadours. The same linguistic replication is seen in another well known expression white bone (as it is in the Russian language, while in English only one expression blue blood exists). In Turkic Aksuek was the name for the chagans relatives, confidants and higher nobility. Aksuek means white bone, but its another meaning is noble That is wordplay. Without explaining that it is difficult to understand the history of appearance of Moscow Russia; it loses its logic and its events loose their meaning.
The rent allowed subordinating other Russian lands: either by concessions, either by fear or by cunning. The Muscovites also brought Vladimir Principality under their control; in its territory Muscov was located since 1328 it has lost itself. That entailed the move of the Russian Metropolitan to the new capital, to Ivan Kalita. Thus the Muscov prince was becoming the Grand Prince, which was in accordance with the Turkic tradition of diarchy. Muscov was taking a lot and living richly under the defence of the khans army; the town of Baskaks knew no other trades. And did not want them. Quietly, without wars, Ivan Kalita was extending influence and strengthening his positions; he was recognized as the Grand Prince, i.e. the head of the family of Ryurikoviches. No matter how good or bad that was, but well-being of Vladimir and Suzdal, Novgorod and Pskov, Yaroslavl and Tver all the Russian tributaries of the Horde depended on him. The Prince was gradually pressing his brothers neighbors, which was continued by his son Ivan the Red another collector of the Russian lands. Their income was increasing; it was steady and hence was influence and respect. Only Tver and Kazan, where settled the same castaways form the Horde, could compete with Muscov. They were at enmity between each other. Their enmity was desperate. It is arguable that in the times of the Golden Horde that was the strife of Russian principalities for the right for a greasy bone falling off the Great Khans table. To whom it was to belong to Muscov or to Tver? There were no other reasons for enmity. Only power bringing one closer to the khans table. Or, more precisely, to the precious bone. Power was given by sables furs; they interested both, the Muscovites and Tver inhabitants; they were setting Russian konungs (princes) on to fight. People knew no other treasures except for fur in Russia and thus they were taking it Looking around they were turning soft gold into yellow gold, into power. That was connected with risks
and troubles since neither Muscov nor Tver had their money and markets up to the middle of the XIV century; they had no trade either since they produced nothing Russian merchants would go to Iran and India through the Horde to get certain goods. That was a long and dangerous way not only for contraband fur. Their attention was attracted by the West because of half-legal trade and occasional bargains. Not the East. Europe wanted to buy up Russian fur; it was giving gold and hope with it. That trade allowed selling the excess of the rent of the whole Russia unknown to the Horde. That was a simple intention on which, as a matter of fact, the West was relying; it started to nudge Muscov reminding it of the former traditions of Novgorod. Those traditions opened loopholes to European markets for the Muscovites; they were moving them away from the oppressing Horde but everything was to be legalized. And for this purpose it was necessary to subject the Great Novgorod so that Heizen trade offices that controlled the European markets could send ships for Muscov contraband without fear. Discreditable practices were being adjusted; they cannot be called an economic war since the might of Novgorod was unapproachable. That cannot be called an intervention either. Muscov had an outside chance for the victory in that strategic operation; it could win not because of its strength but its policy. By an unexpected maneuver, for instance. And it won that game perfectly playing Russian cards. What was that? In a few words that is a sort of ideological weapons for peoples control so as to influence their consciousness, conduct and make them related with a foreign ethnic area. It can be added that that was a chain of steps in the domestic policy of the whole Russia directed towards the creation of the Russian State and new Russian culture. In a word, the idea allowing Moscow to unite Russia and become the head of it moving Novgorod and Tver away the same as all the other competitors.
That was not a new invention; it had worked during the epoch of the Roman Empire. It was brought up to date by the Byzantines in Bulgaria and Serbia and used by the Catholics in the Western Europe. Those were words and decrees that changed peoples nationality and chained the people to the policy of the arising state. The Wends, Veps, part of the Finns, Turki, Varangians were called the Russians at one bout. A new nation. Before that the name had referred only to the Varangians (Normans). And at that time it referred to everyone. The Russian meant an inhabitant of Russia, a subject of Ryurikoviches. According to Annales Bertiniani, Scandinavian sagas and other manuscripts of that time, the term Russian (Rus) referred to the royal family. By the X century its meaning was expanded since the term Rus had changed. Formerly Rus had been the name of the coast north of Stockholm where the royal patrimony was located, but on the other coast of the Baltic appeared patrimonies of the Normans, so all the subjects of the Normans were called the Russians. Such transformation is common for the Turki. With the lapse of time the subjects of Cyruss family were given the name of the Kirghiz, the subjects of Bars family the Barsils or Parthians, the subjects of Kushan family Kushans, and so on. The terms had no ethnic signs and no hints on the spiritual or family relations and common culture. Just the sense. It referred to the population. But it made everyone the natives. Brothers. Fellow citizens. That was a political success of Moscow; neither Kievan Russia nor Novgorod managed to reach such elegance of thought. The decision was brilliant. A word, just a word united multilingual dependents of the Horde and gave them the chance to create a state A Russian meant not a Horde inhabitant! For the Horde inhabitants coming to Russia that was enough; their new name
allowed them taking roots in a foreign ethnic area, joining new society and taking to it like a duck to water Everybody was so near. Word creation that seemed to be innocent opened astonishing horizons. Of course no one saw the Western trace in that. And that was the first touch of Moscow policy by Rome; Christianity was starting an attack on Arianism, on its last citadel in Europe that remained only in Russia. Of course from outside it did not look like a fight of two religions. It was different. The Great Russia was being united by itself; the Moscow Prince was conquering neighboring lands; new Russian culture was arising of its own accord. But in such a way on its own account! nothing can be born in life. Everything has its reasons and consequences. By its Russian card Moscow was repeating certain known things from the epoch of Arians; a pot was boiling where cultures of different nations were being melted; for that time near the pot was standing a chef with the Popes tiara on his head. He was making dishes and the menu, he was setting the table and treating to the Arians; his dishes were cooked according to Christian recipes European policy was conducted by Rome at that time. The marriage of the Moscow Prince Ivan III and the Greek Princess Sophia Paleologo which happened in 1472 on the initiative of the Pope opens ones eyes on a lot of things connected with those occasional events. It explains a lot. Sophia, the Popes pupil, was ruling in the Kremlin; she approved the decisions! The Russia card was also interesting because it allowed Moscow Horde inhabitants finding their way to Novgorod, since they were the brothers, and demolish the Novgorod veche. Through its pupil Rome was skillfully making the Moscow Prince do what it wanted of course everything was done not in one day. Not even in one year. Weakening credulous Novgorod inhabitants by exaction and slander, increasing their rent, Ivan III was
acting through family ties, through the rules of the dynasty. He was provoking the events as he could until he personally appeared in Novgorod in 1478. And the town bent to all his will. That was a victory by fall of the Russian Moscow over other Russians. Certain Novgorod inhabitants belonging to the family of Ryurikoviches were taken to Moscow and the simpletons were resettled in the depths of the country so as to weaken the Varangian clan in Russia and strengthen the Moscow one. To Novgorod they sent the protgs of the Moscow Prince. It seems at that time the town has become full-fledged Novgorod and not Kholmgrad. Those were dramatic changes to come; new capital and a new ruler were to appear on the political horizon of Russia; to tell the truth that ruler subjected to the Horde. From Novgorod they removed not only the princes relatives but also the bell of the veche the symbol of freedom of the North Russia; it was brought to the Moscow Kremlin and hung in a bell tower so as to ring it with the other ones The Russian brotherhood consisting of the other ones made account of bell-ringing too. So that everyone knew where to ring. And how. In order to rally the people new monasteries with Arian rules were founded. Or with Altaic rules, to put it more precisely. One of them was Kaliazin Monastery; the abbot there was a boyar Kojis son; in his youth he accepted monkhood and took the name of Makar (Makarach), which in Turkic meant the great ruler, the great Arian; later his name was changed into Macarius in a Greek manner At that time religion was taken seriously in Russia since Arianism not only united multilingual nations but also entitled the Moscow Prince to become tsar in the nearest future. And although the name Russian did not mean a tributary of Moscow it was not embarrassing. On the contrary, it seemed
natural since life was changing in favor of arising Muscovy. And Mr. Great Novgorod was being lost in the vanity of new life. Soon the northern port of Russia became a sleepy town. Pskov was to follow Here is another long history that has not been written yet; their fall is the result of the designed policy of Rome that had its interests in Scandinavia and in the European North. Those towns were its competitors. Moscow was winning only because of its sense; it had no other weapons It is striking that the conquest of the North Russia was clear to the Horde and gave rise to no suspicions! Why? Because there people understood events in a different way as compared with Novgorod; they saw endeavors of the Moscow Prince there. Ivan III was conquering towns one after another: Yaroslavl, Novgorod, Tver, Vyatka, Perm and other principalities while the Horde inhabitants were hailing him as an adherent of the Great Khan and a devoted servant. They gave him presents. That was an eloquent witness not of the success of Moscow policy but rather of short sight of the Hordes power. It was not able to notice anything any longer. Strictly speaking the Horde had no serious problems with Moscow Russia till 1497 when the Law Code was accepted there with its standards of the court and violence instruments; they approved of the executive power one and the same for the whole Russia. In other words, until Russia turned away from Genghis Khans code. The document proclaimed the Russian State, the subject of law, which was not mentioned in the Horde. They were enchanted by Moscow and its success there. It seems that delight was the result of estimations of the Popes councilors that had settled in the capital of the Golden Horde in the times of Baty and affected its policy Is it doubtful? Not at all. Although it seems doubtful. In Sarai there was a huge Western quarter. And not only one. The fifth column in the Horde was approved by Baty himself. And the Moscow Law Code became a
juridical monuments of the epoch although on its pages the Turkic law was set forth the law used in Europe, the Near East and China. The Muscovites continued the tradition of Desht-I-Kipchak in Russia being unaware of that. Again, they took what they knew That is the mystery of human nature; it appeared in the Russian Turki too. Wherever they lived, everywhere they were doing what the traditions of their ancestors told them to do. Of course they tried to change those traditions considering conditions of new life but, as the saying goes, the smell of musk remained. Always. Moscow jurisprudence was born not by itself; it had an ordeal, a judicial combat or the trial by ordeal and a kamcha (whip) was the most important thing it was the mother of order on which Moscow law was based. The Turki could not recognize anything else The document was in accordance with Genghis Khans code but some differences certainly existed. For instance, Ivan III took the title of The Ruler of the whole Russia and the Grand Prince of Vladimir, Moscow, Novgorod, Pskov, Tver, Perm, Yugor and Bulgaria, which is also in accordance with a Turkic tradition. The title showed the numbers of the horde, i.e. those standing behind it. One more step and the ruler was to become the tsar of Arian Russia, but time was necessary for that. And the will of God. It is arguable that as a matter of fact the title was pronounced in a different way; the words chagan and khan were present in it. Today it is impossible to ascertain that since documents of those times were either corrected or destroyed, but from the documents which have not been touched by censorship it is clear that princes in Russia were called becks and khans. For example, that is what Athanasius Nikitin, a merchant from Tver, wrote about the rulers of Russia late in the XV century. The same titles are present in other documents of that epoch. The same as, judging by the same sources, in the prayers to God in Russia they used the names: Tangry, Alla, Khudai, Dangyr, Gozbodi Such things cannot be called accidental.
histories at the direction of the Jesuits. Of course gathering Russia together was happening everywhere in different ways but one hand deciding the case was felt. In 1463 the Yaroslavl Principality fell followed by Rostov in 1474. In the winter of 1478 the Great Perm was weakened and later Tver and Vyatka. Some princes gave their lands to Moscow and gave their children in its keeping. Others, selling everything, started to serve the Kremlin. And some of them guaranteed quiet reign while they were alive signing away their lands to Moscow after their death The family case of Ryurikoviches was to be decided! The strongest was to take power; he was to unite not Russia buts his tukhum. That would be more precise. In Russia principalities were not independent but appanage; an appanage was called a share of a member of the princes family in the family ownership. Appanages were run by a member of the Grand Princes family, i.e. the head of the family of Ryurikoviches. Those were the rules of a Turkic yurt. Russian princes were relatives But for some reason they became Russian history under different names. Take, for instance, Shuyskiys their home was located in Shuya (hence is the name); it seems they were the cousins of Moscow Ryurikoviches. That family played an important part in the Russian State those were the noble boyars. Its representatives were called Shuyskiys, Skopin-Shuyskiys, Glazatiy-Shuyskiys, Barbashin-Shuyskiys, Gorbatiy-Shuyskiys and later the word Shuyskiy was split. And the branch of the royal family sort of began anew. In his The History of Russia Tatischev writes the following about Shuya citing Western sources: Russia also known as Hunigard since the first Hun settlement was located there. Its capital was in Shuya The capital of the Ruses is Khiva or Shuya. These words are valuable since they were written in the XVIII century when they had just started to correct the history of Russia. As we can see such information about Russia and the Russians is absolutely different compared with what has been set forth in later Russian
As a matter of fact hyphenated names and their split were the confusion or, more precisely, the division of a family into generations. The more generations of ancestors existed, the more gentle a man from that family was that is a well known fact. At the same time splitting veiled the royal family, its young growth; that was selfpreservation it appeared with Achemenids, Arshakids, Ryurikoviches themselves, their close relatives, for instance William the Conqueror and other Norman rulers that were the representatives of the same royal dynasty that gave rise to certain European aristocratic families. For example, in the Frankish State the first royal dynasty of Merovingi had the same roots as Shuyskiys. But as distinct from the latter, their family nest was not in Khiva (Shuya) but in Merva. Hence the nickname of those kings blue-eyed and fair-haired like their congeners from Altai. Turkic origin of those Frankish kings is so obvious that the bishop Gregory of Tours in his The History of Franks preferred not to mention the name of Merovingi. Although it is possible that those names were later crossed out by the church censorship. A name (pronounced as imya in Russian; im in Turkic means sign, password) is the sign of destiny, the password of the ancestors. So from the times of Altai remained the sacred royal family. It was being made immortal. Moscow of Ivan III was maturing; it was becoming prosperous. There were voevodes with retinues but they were not able to defend the town; Russia was not entitled to have an army its rights were restricted by the agreement with the Horde Here another mystery of the Russian military history is revealed how could Moscow unite Russia, wage wars and gain victories without an army?! Two answers are possible. Either there were no wars or they were invented! And as a matter of fact they have never taken place.
Take, for instance, the Kulikovo Battle of 1380. The legend of the Kulikovo Battle was invented in the XVIII century. Its idea was given by a German named Kranz who wrote a book called Vandalia in the XV century; in it was mentioned the battle of the Russians and Horde inhabitants that took place in the autumn of 1380 near the river Blue Water. The Russians won the victory; they took a lot of cattle with them This is the whole information provided by that annalistic source to which certain historians refer. There are thousands of similar episodes; from this one begins the legend of the Kulikovo Battle, of the monks with pagan names from the Holy Trinity-St. Sergius Monastery and a great many other things. The German was habitually calling the Normans the Russians, he was also very keen on geography he knew that the Blue Water river was a confluent of the South Bug (the Ukraine) and that White Russia was fighting on the side of Russia; it was also at enmity with the Horde. It had an army. However, the same was written by Karamzin in the notes to the text part of his History. One way or another, in the Kulikovo Field there are no traces of the battle And they have never been there Some time ago the Russian Church clamored against free interpretation of history since the lives of St. Sergius and other Russian figures were called into question; those people had nothing to do with the army of Demetrius of Don. However, later the Church acquiesced to the pressure of politicians. Demetrius of Don was not aware of military issues; he was placid as an infant as his contemporaries would say, he was a timid and unhealthy person, till the end of his life he kept girlish pudency and wore haircloth on his naked body, i.e. the sign of grief and powerlessness. The autumn of 1380 he spent in Kostroma. The prince has never held a sword in his hands but he became a Russian national hero under Peter I and he was made a
Russian Saint under the president Gorbachev, i.e. in five centuries Legends that appeared in the history of Russia are politics, its game and, more than that, the tactics of the West which was originated by the Emperor Constantine when he declared of Christianity. If the Gospels were invented, why couldnt one invent the lives of Demetrius of Don, Alexander Nevskiy or other less significant characters? So they were inventing them Those Greek traditions came to Moscow in the XV century. At that time appeared the word Slavs in relation to the Russians. It was uttered not loudly but with confidence. That was started in the Kremlin. Of course there were no new people in Russia, everything remained as it was, and the word with an ethnic feature was suitable; it made the Russian card stronger. That western word slave, as we know it, was perceived in the Eastern Europe in different ways; in Moscow it was introduced under Sophia Paleologo, the Greek ruler. It had the spirit of Byzantium which found its way to the cavities and cracks of the Kremlin and had become the essence of Russian politics. Having lost Byzantium and Constantinople in 1453, the Greeks regarded Russia as a heaven-sent opportunity; they needed an ally in the fight against the Moslems and Catholics. Their first instigating letter was hazy; it came to the Moscow Prince in 1393. But it was not successful. The Greek ideology, the same as the Greeks themselves, did not seem worth paying attention to the boyars. Nevertheless, the Greeks caused disputes among the Russian clergy: deposition of the Moscow Metropolitan Isidore was possibly the result of their interest Here is an obscure and very confusing story which it is absolutely impossible to grasp. But the fact remains, the Russian Church (metropolitanate) was divided into the Eastern and Western parties. One remained on its former positions and the other was merged into Christian (Uniate) rules. The former was established in Moscow, and the latter in Kiev.
The country of Ryurikoviches was a colony of the Horde, consequently, its foreign policy was conducted by the Great Khan. But the dialogue of the clergy was not prohibited; toleration was one of the traditions of the Horde it was used by the West in its policy. There is an opinion that in Russia the Greek Church power was established. That is not true. Karamzin gives the examples of intercession of the Great Khans in relation to the Russian Church and its metropolitans. In 1313 the metropolitan Peter went to the Horde and obtained the right to handle church matters from the Khan Uzbek. The former metropolitans were also entitled in the same way. That is witnessed by the text of the document: the former Tsars entitled and bestowed them; we entitle them in the same way and bestow them, God help us. And, according to the tradition, the khan prohibited Ryurikoviches to collect rent from the Church since the metropolitan and his people prayed God for us, preserved us and strengthened our army. Rome had clearer memories of Moscow; it proclaimed the metropolitan Isidore Cardinal and the Popes Legate in Russia. In return Isidore appeared in the temple with a Latin cross and mentioned the Pope Eugenius during the liturgy, for which he was promptly taken into custody The Russians did not want to be the Christians and the Ukrainians agreed The country of Ryurikovices that was lost in the woods was in the spheres of interest of the Western Church; they wanted to see it if not as a foothold than, at least, as a redoubt in the attack of Christianity on the Moslem East. That is why they kept Sophia Paleologo for the Moscow Prince although the French Court asked her hand the same as other Catholic rulers of Europe. Why? The answer is evident. It turns out that not only intellectual elite was a peculiarity of Moscow but also its advantageous geographical position. It was sitting on the withers of the Golden Horde, on its most exposed and defenceless part in
the North. It was rancorous and humiliated; secretly it thirsted after blood and revenge. That attracted the Christian West to the Muscovites; it needed an ally on whose weaknesses it could play when necessary. And in order to put everything into practice an intricate plan was made up. In 1469 the Cardinal Vissarion, a Greek that had accepted Catholicism, sent an emissary to Moscow to the widower Prince Ivan III. The goal of that visit was to show the niece of the former Byzantine Emperor, Zoe Paleologo; the messenger brought her portrait but the main things he explain orally. At that he did that tactfully; he said that that was a bride for another one but under certain conditions their marriage would not be effected. That was a proven method of the Catholic clergy to attract the rulers of the Turkic countries to the Church. That happened with the Langobards, Burgundians and Englishmen. To tell the truth, there they used to send beauties seeing whom a man could hardly vanquish temptation; in this case on the portrait was a maiden of doughy appearance. Sending the portrait of the bride to Moscow the Pope cherished a hope that the maiden from the imperial family brought up close to the apostolic see would sooner or later convert her husband to Christianity That was a step thought-out to the last detail. The offer to become relatives with Paleologos caught fancy of the Moscow Prince; he understood the advantages promised by that unexpected marriage. A prince, rent collector whom everybody hated could become the Byzantine Emperor under favorable conditions. Who could resist such splendor? The prospect only made for the unification of Russia. Everything was staked: conventionalities and rules of decorum were neglected. Moscow was ready to agree for everything if only But here in the scene of transient events we have a nuance which should not be neglected in future. What belief did the Greek maiden follow? Was that not the Catholic belief? Why did she change her name? Her brother Andrew, a great swindler, was a Catholic; he
managed to sell his title several times in succession Another brother accepted Islam That was a very strange family. Preparing the Princes marriage Moscow remained Arian and used to read the prayers in Turkic. That is why the Moscow Prince was entitled to rule by the khan as Genghis Khans Code promised. If his belief had been different, he would have been sitting not in the Kremlin but in prison. It turns out, for the sake of the marriage the bride herself denied Christianity? That is very likely. But there is not a single line about that, at least, in known books. Nevertheless Russian chronology does not conceal that the Christian Church of the Greek persuasion was established in Russia after the Greek maiden had come under Boris Godunov who formalized it in due course in 1589. But that is to be discussed later. That dynastic marriage was effected on June 1st, 1472 in Rome in St Peter and Paul's Basilica. For its sake the Russians undertook to place a Latin archbishop in Moscow and create facilities for him. To give privileges to the order of the Templars whose people were to come to Russia under the pretence of merchants. More than that, the Muscovites themselves asked the Pope to appoint his ambassador and counselor who would correct the mistakes enquiring about their belief. These are the true words from the letter written by Ivan III to the Pope where the Prince declared of obedience to the Roman Church. One would think, everything is clear? No, nothing is clear. Those were false promises and the marriage was extramural When the emissary delivered the letter to the Prince, in Moscow they saw a comet, a star with a tail and recognized it as the sign of the Sky they decided he would approve of lies. On the spot they made a reply to the dangerous letter that embroiled them with the Horde but opened the way to the West. They made it in haste, being unaware that the Pope Paul II was dead and the Pope Sixtus IV had taken the throne. The mistake was corrected in Rome.
The Russian ambassador edited the text at his discretion; he inserted the new name and added certain things from himself, for which he was punished later. That is how Moscow presence in Europe started from forgery and lies. However everything happened in the best way possible; they met the embassy at the summit level and believed it. For the wedding ceremony the bride was accompanied by noble ladies of Europe, the retinue was acting at the level of the royal one but the fianc was absent, which made the wedding atmosphere strange. It turned out that he was unaware of the ceremony. Another oddity happened during the ceremony, which bewildered many people there: the fiancs representatives had no rings the wedding was unexpectedly fast for them. However, the Russian ambassador was not at a loss; he said that rings were not a Russian custom, although that was wrong. Nevertheless, the ceremony was finished. Its haste astonished the Pope; even he did not expect such a rapid outcome. On the next day the Pope aired discontent because the marriage had been effected without notifying the Moscow Prince (Duke). It is possible that those words of edification were the pose of the pontiff in whose palace the bride had been brought up. It is possible that that was hidden policy started behind the Popes back by the bride and fianc. Everything was possible in that unbelievable wedding which happened to be the turning point in the destiny of Russia. In the meantime the newly-wed maiden was offered congratulations; people from all over Europe were coming to see her. The celebration in Rome lasted for a clear month. Moscow was obstinately keeping silent. Finally, having got commendatory letters, the wife left to get acquainted with her husband. On her way people were meeting her giving her expensive presents; noble people considered it an honor to hold the bridle of her horses. On the 1st of September she arrived to Pskov and an unexpected thing happened. The woman who was supported
by the Pope and was indebted to him for her wellbeing forgot everything she had been taught. She accepted the blessing of Russian clergymen and listened to their prayers. That was an open challenge. The Popes and his servants instructions turned out to be a mere name; hidden duplicity of the princess was revealed down to the ground. In Rome they did not expect such treason from their pupil. And that was not the end. Entering Moscow the Popes legate Anthony accompanied the wife bride; he was to come forward and cross the town with a Latin cross. He did so in Pskov and other Russian towns he would move forward in a red cloak and red gloves and mark a town with the cross. But the Prince himself did not allow him marking Moscow with the cross since not very long ago he had sworn of faith and obedience in his letter to the Pope. The Prince sent a boyar and the latter stole the Latin cross and the embassy did not have another one. That looked like a conspiracy. It seems that was a conspiracy indeed. According to a secret arrangement with the bride before her coming to Moscow she baptized into the Arian belief and was given a new name concordant with a Turkic expression saph iy (follow the prophesy). Was that a condition of the fianc? That is not known. At any rate, Zoe Paleologo left Rome and Sophia Paleologo entered Moscow. And the second marriage happened, according to the Eastern ceremonies, and only after that the Prince touched her The Byzantine Emperors niece violated the instruction again; she was sent to Moscow as the messenger of the Church, the spy of Rome which he has never become. And she was to forfeit since in 1439 the Greeks signed the Florentine Union and thus acknowledged full subjection to the Pope. As a matter of fact everything was different; the princess started a political game with a long continuation. Her husband was a pawn in her game and the Russian people that she called the Slavs according to a Greek tradition were the pieces. Those
strange people did not deserve another name; the Great Russian princess was living according to Byzantine rules with her own idea of nations and her subjects. Power was the lot of that woman; she was dreaming of it wallowing in it And for the Moscow Principality an earnest trade was beginning. The West did not conceal its interest in that new unit that was being born on the political map of Europe; it regarded it as its property or as possible loot. It all depended upon the chance. The success of Russia and its victories were necessary primarily to the West; they raised the ante in the game of big politics where a pawn was to be made a queen. Every player was trying to do it in its own way. East and West loosened the purse strings. That was possibly the standing on Ugra of 1480 which Russian historians turned into another legend of a battle that has never taken place. The standing was happening far away from Ugra. And that was the confrontation not of military but of political forces; the Moscow Prince had nothing to do with them for that time he remained a fawn standing apart and not being a queen In that scene of intricate events appears another almost imperceptible nuance; that was the sign of the epoch that has not finished in Russia yet. A man named Ivan Friazin became the Russian Princes ambassador in Rome; he corrected royal documents. As a matter of fact, pursuant to western texts, that was an Italian named Jean-Battist della Volpe, secret Popes agent. He was the first European who became a Russian, a confident of the Moscow Prince! Thousands of Catholics from different countries, members of Papal orders, followed his example. From them began the ideological aggression but none of famous Russian historians noticed it. And in Russia it caused the Time of Troubles, the departure of the dynasty of Ryurikoviches and the October Revolution of 1917 More than that Russia started from it! It was difficult to notice since
Russian historians often acted as participants of that sabotage not being aware of that. Take, for instance, V.O. Kliuchevskiy, a famous historian of the XIX century; he got theological education in the Eparchy of Penza where the school of Jesuits and Stundists was strong. His thesis called Foreign Legends about the Moscow State reflected western views on the estimation of events. The same approach is basic for other works of the famous author; in them Arianism in Russia was turned into Christianity of Greek persuasion; the information about the Ancient Russia was carefully sifted through the western sieve so that one cannot object the fantasies of the people by whose order Kliuchevskiy was writing are so evident. The author does not even mention the Turki and Desht-I-Kipchak desperately following the false Jesuit model of the history of Russia based on the theory of Slavdom Is that science? That was the reverse side of the Russian card that allowed any foreigner and any villain entering Moscow and its power. One had to call himself a Russian and take a new name, which was rather easier than to become and Udmurt or Mari where the knowledge of language and customs was necessary. The Russians had neither language nor customs. Everything in Russia was Russian. Everything was the same. On November 12th, 1472 Sophia Paleologo from Greece was proclaimed a Russian. According to contemporaries, from that moment she was reigning in Moscow dealing with state problems in her bedroom. Our ruler himself is the third to act in his bed, - they used to say in Russia about their Great Prince who did not seem great any longer. The cunning imperious woman was teaching her husband how to unite Russia; she inculcated him into the conceptions of politics, state and Slavdom. That was reflected by the Russian Law Code that changed the whole domestic policy of the vassal state. Outwardly Byzantine presence was shown in the growth of splendor and introduction of new ceremonies of the court,
removal of the Prince from the Boyars and noblemen and appearance of the Slavs in Russia Here it is the shadow of Byzantium. Certain Russians turned to her like to an oasis in a desert but some of them conceived a dislike for her for her passion for the intrigues and patronage of western traders that were openly cleaning Russia out. When the princess Sophia came here our land became agitated, great moods came here like in their Tsrgrad under their rulers. The new ruler did not care about the contempt of the aristocrats at all; she shrank from them without disdain. The Prince Kurbskiy spoke out perhaps clearer than all the rest: In the kind family of Russian princes the devil infused evil manners sending an enchantress to it since Sophia was exposed as a person dealing with soothsayers. The goal justified the means; she took a group of malicious people with her to Russia. Nothing could stop her in her race for power. She was moving not looking about. Everybody was aware of another sin of the Great Princess; she poisoned the heir to the throne, the son of Ivan III from his first marriage, in order to establish her son Basil, the would-be father of Ivan the Terrible. That is a legend, as certain historians assert, but strikingly it reminds of the murder of another prince Demetrius who was the last in the dynasty of Ryurikoviches. Heirs to the Russian throne died one after another after the coming of Sophia Paleologo and nobody could explain that It is strange, after all. However, whether that was a legend or not, but filicide in the Moscow Kremlin started. Not only children were killed then; the whole princely family was poisoned, which was ascertained by criminalistic examination. Sophia herself was poisoned too. By arsenic and mercury Who could poison in the Kremlin? The Prince started avoiding his wife after her another conspiracy had been revealed in 1497 they intended to kill little Demetrius who was the Princes grandson
(his elder sons son) By the Great Princess will Moscow life really changed; palace murders, conspiracies that had been torturing Constantinople some time ago became frequent in Russia. And not only they A lot was taken from the traditions and etiquette of the Byzantine court; a lot of things were admired. The Greeks were skillfully introducing the thought being the basis of the ideology of Slavdom into consciousness of the Russians to admire the West and belittle themselves. They knew that slaves began in that way from admiring their master. But those actions were esteemed as introduction of the Russians to Christianity. In Russian minds Ancient Greece and Rome were turning into centers of world culture. While their own past was sinking into oblivion The world was being simplified to primitivism. Remember: come to reign and rule over us; from these words the history of Slavic Russia begins. That is its first step on the road of Time. F.I. Uspenskiy mentioned: the coming of Greek natives to Russia after the fall of Constantinople was enormous. Those were basically clergymen; some of them stayed to live there and others departed having got alms. Disallowed metropolitans, bishops, archmandrites and abbots were searching for titles and profit in Russia. And they always managed to find them! That was a terrible shadow force that was called Russian; it was standing behind Sophia Paleologos back. As a matter of fact Moscow was full of crowds of arrivistes for whom the Kremlin found offices in the Russian Arian Church. Of course from those people one could hardly expect any educational influence except for their propaganda of the Greek belief and their dominance. They used a great many flattering words which, like poison, found their way to the souls of the Muscovites that suspected no evil Having signed the Florentine Union the Greeks were coming to Moscow not with empty hands those were secret soldiers of the Pope that, like worms, started to corrupt Russian spiritual culture. Is it the way Kievan Russia began? Or Desht-I-Kipchak?
It is striking foreign seeds were placed in the ready soil. The Muscovites wanted to forget native Desht-I-Kipchak and Altai and, to tell the truth, there was no need to persuade them. They wanted Greek lies in order to find their Slavic roots in it. Hence that crusty hatred for the Turkic world, which has always been peculiar to Moscow since then. Only blood brothers can hate in this way. And once one recognizes lies as the truth, he becomes a different person. It all depends upon the ability to represent lies. Upon package and layout Who does not feel the dark never searches for the light, they say in the East. Moscow Turki felt neither the dark, nor the light. The Greeks created maps for them. That was the repeating of what had happened in medieval Europe after its hiding the traces of the Great Nations Migration To Moscow that was searching for itself Slavdom seemed to be a pleasant shadow during a hot day. The Russians were taking everything they could if only that was new and distinguishing. They admired and enjoyed everything. For instance, the blazon of Paleologos (black double eagle) was turned into the blazon of Moscow. Not a single one from among the Slavs remembered that the eagle had flown to Byzantium from Altai where it had been known before the Great Nations Migration Everything was forgotten at one stroke. Sophia brought Byzantine traditions to Russia; those traditions were rapidly changing the life of its capital. The townsmen themselves wanted that; they were ostentatiously changing themselves and their conduct trying to gain favor with the Greek Princess, which became a peculiarity of the servants and the nobles to gain favor for momentary profit. But that is how they were living in Europe It is indicative that the boyar Moscow that was defending ancient traditions started to decrease in number; the boyars were being removed from the Prince. And judging by a comment of a Venetian named Ambroggo Contarini who
visited Milan in 1476: here are a lot of Greeks from Constantinople that came with Sophia Paleologo they, the Greeks, were the authors of the Moscow rebuilding. They called the tune. The Kremlin supported the newcomers in every way; they became masters of the situation, hearths of Christianity, i.e. new spiritual culture that was propagandizing the West The new religion toed the starting line in Moscow. It was interesting primarily to those who were to be called the noblemen soon. Alas, the answer of the Russians merits regret; it showed not only the weakness of spirit but also entered folk traditions of the Slavs, which is seen from the notes of the same Venetian: They are heavy drinkers and boast that despising the abstainers, i.e. the Greeks. To drink because of grief became a habit in Russia. That is another feature of the slaves who were given freedom. They were like convicts jauntily playing with their chains. Formerly they used to drink there only in a merry pin, only on the occasion of a victory or feast. Here is another phrase by the same author: The Prince runs a big country; he could have had enough people (for an army) but a lot of them are useless people. He could have had but he had not The notes of the Venetian are also interesting because in them the Popes ambassador, who was pluralistically a spy, gathered information about strong and weak points of the Moscow Principality; he was the one who marked that the Princes son of the first marriage had got in wrong with him because of disobedience to his stepmother and predicted the lot of the poor youth. He reported of many unpleasant details that were peculiar to Moscow. Sophia was reigning on a grand Byzantine scale. Her manners are more expressive than words. She was always temporizing and concealing her real intentions. And that was also marked by the Popes ambassador. In 1479 the Princess invited the
Metropolitan Gerontius in order to consecrate, according to the Greek ceremonies, the grand Cathedral of the Assumption built in the Kremlin; at that she did not notify the Prince. But illegal consecration of the temple was interrupted; the people interrupted it saying that God's wrath was coming and the ceremony was not divine the metropolitan was forced to finish it according to the old ceremony. It even happened that in Russia there were certain doubts concerning the trueness of the Greek belief; there were many reasons for that. And there appeared an appeal not to accept the Turki to the Metropolitans and pontifical chairs. The purity of Arianism was in question! But that was too late; the Greeks calling themselves the Russians were diligently destroying the spiritual culture of Russia. Seemingly betraying Christianity, in reality Sophia was introducing it. She invited architects and artists from the Golden Horde to raise and decorate temples and palaces of Moscow. The Princess needed to argue the Russians into superiority of the Christian, i.e. the Western culture by all available means. To suppress them with scale. And she was successfully doing what she could and how she could. For example, she invited an Italian craftsman A. Fioravanti known in many countries at that time. That gifted architect, judging by his name, was a Turki by birth, the native of the Turkic Ravenna; he built The Cathedral of the Assumption and The Annunciation Cathedral in the Kremlin. Moscow was also decorated by the Palace of Facets, the Prison Palace, The Archangel Cathedral and other new buildings. Although they were Arian, they were necessary; the princely capital wanted to be the royal capital the heir of Byzantium. Establishing the symbols of Christianity in Moscow, the Greeks were establishing themselves and their power. The idea of the third Rome had not been born yet (it had not been formed!), but it began to crystallize: Russia followed Europe and entered into the Renaissance.
The Turkic heritage was dying or, more precisely, it was being veiled. Everything was happening almost like in the West. Only without fires. Sophia was unaware that in the architecture of the Kremlin established by the Italian, in new cathedrals and towers Turkic traditions were repeated after they had been accepted in Europe in the IV century. The same tent style that was made the basis of Gothic architecture. Moscow architecture is a matter of a dispute of long standing; its participants, as a rule, speak for its Christian roots. One could agree with them but in this case it is necessary to explain what had been happening in Russia before Sophia Paleologo and her people came. That is, before the first Moscow Christians. And it is also necessary to explain what architecture Turkic towns of the Eastern Europe had. These questions are not evident and simple. The versions of adherents of the eastern viewpoint, who are in a minority, are more convincing. They were expressed by an expert in medieval architecture named --; his book incited the discussion. In the creation of stone items the author saw the result of combination of historical and natural components. Sometimes his arguments are nave, which tells nothing; he did not know much about the Great Nations Migration and culture of Altai, Parthia, Kushan. As a matter of fact, the Church prohibited studying them, but substantially he was right the source of the European architectural traditions was in the Central Asia. That was confirmed by the professor L.R. Kyzlasov who in his monograph mentioned an ancient town of temples in Khakassia Tigir-Balyk (Tengris Town). This unique place is waiting for researchers. So-called international Gothic that was born after the Inquisition appeared in many European countries simultaneously. Although for the origin of an architectural style such plurality is impossible, which is clear to all men of good judgment. In terms of architecture Moscow buildings did not differ from those of the towns of Desht-I-Kipchak
Kazan, Bulgar, Sarai, Kiev, Elets, Astrakhan, Tobolsk and Tyumen Later they were called Slavic, ancient Russian or Christian when the known history was being falsified. After all, architecture is another trace of the Inquisition. And another thing proving that manuscripts don't burn and peoples culture does not disappear. It only can be called in a new way.
About The Bible And Koran Again

Moscow wished to be a Slavic state, but circumstances did not make its dreams come true faster. Basil, the son of Ivan III and Sophia Paleologo, who replaced the former, was notable for feeble-mindedness, humility and strange tranquility. The young Prince, of course, continued his fathers line but he was doing it very drowsily. His faint reign was marked by two light strokes. Firstly, on the model of Great Novgorod he destroyed another bulwark of the Varangian Russia the Pskov Republic and invaded Smolensk and later Ryazan. Secondly, he made Byzantine luxury more common in Moscow modest everyday life. Palaces, entertains, intrigues they are the features of twenty five years of his reign. That is all the Great Khan had left; he was longingly staring at the West but never dared make a step towards it. Basils main heritage were not his deeds but his son the first individuality on the Moscow throne, Ivan the Terrible. A personality of European importance! He was the one dealing with politics in a big way. Like his father, he was not a Christian and paid rent to the Horde; he had to send it to the Crimea to the new curator of Moscow However, before describing the history of Ivan the Terrible and his tragic lot it is important to clarify certain details that were peculiar to the Eastern Europe at that time.
His history was written by the winners the Christians they were applying their judgment. But there were the defeated, including Ivan the Terrible himself, they had their own truth and their idea of what was happening. Nobody would listen to them; that was not customary since their lot was disdain. Or concealment. And is the scene of events entire without them without the defeated? That is why in our book there are pages dedicated to them and their bitter truth. So that everything is fair. The rent that was being paid to the Horde was called commemoration in Moscow. The Russians were still hiring the army of the Horde. It would stay with them for as long as it was necessary because of war and as long as it was possible because of the amount paid. For instance, in 1512 they paid the khan seven thousand rubles in gold for the campaign in Lithuania, and the army honestly fulfilled its trust. And today we are fighting for you day and night and help you, reported the Roman bey Khalil to Moscow, to the Prince Basil III, the conqueror of Pskov and Smolensk. The Russians used to pay rent (commemoration) before and after Ivan the Terrible. In 1614 Moscow gave the Crimea seven and a half thousand rubles and in the 1640s it had to pay twelve thousand. That was natural; the union with the Horde was advantageous for Ryurikoviches it gave them an opportunity of political development. And although from the time of Baty the Golden Horde had been in crisis it did not give up and was trying to survive by means of the army. That would do for some time but, of course, that could not last for long. A new policy was necessary but it did not exist. Commemoration remained perhaps the most important item of income of the khans treasury. The same as military trophies. Of course the weakness of the Horde, disorder and enmity came not by themselves; the country was diligently being weakened from the outside, which was done really elegantly. Was that by chance that the khan Berke accepted Islam while Mamai entered
Catholicism. Certainly not. Was the Kazan khanate separated by chance? And Astrakhan?.. Nothing happened by chance. It was all logical. The split of the Horde was planned by the West. Civil discords that started in the time of Baty were an artillery preparation before the attack of Christianity on the East. That was the reply of the West to Batys campaign in Europe. It was notable for unheard-of impudence and rarely long duration. Unfortunately historians are humbly raking over the dust and ashes of those events without perceiving the Turkic culture and not considering the results of the Great Nations Migration. And everything was interrelated there; one thing caused another. The sacred war declared by Genghis Khan lasted from the time of Baty till the time of Ivan the Terrible; the East was hopelessly loosing in it. That is what, in our opinion, was the distinctive feature of that epoch: the shaking of belief and religion these are the reasons of the defeat of the Turkic world. Including the Horde of Genghisides and Russia of Ryurikoviches. Their culture was not pagan. In the IV century it attracted the Europeans by its rectitude and strength; in a thousand years it was interesting for other reasons; the teachers were irritating their pupils. They were disliked since they were the teachers. Considering all its weaknesses the Horde reminded the West of the past that it was burning out by the fires of the Inquisition. The last reminder, the last citadel of the pure belief was doomed the same as the rulers standing behind it Unfortunately now it is hard to understand that, but speaking about the Horde or, more precisely, about Desht-I-Kipchak we are also speaking about Moscow Russia like about the right and left hand of one person. From the point of view of the state that was one country where Christ was denied, which means his Vicar on the Earth was denied too. They praised Monotheism there, for which they forfeited. For many aristocrats that was the
essence of Christianity to recognize or not to recognize the Popes power. Long ago religion had become politics and its game in the West. That was not concealed. In the East the Popes enemies were living; they did not recognize him as king of kings. Here it is the main reason of dissent the attitude towards the Pope! It has not changed yet, which it is also hard to understand. Because even the state structure of modern Russia resembles of that of the Horde: Tatarstan or Chuvashia are playing the part of Moscow Principality they are also sovereign but they have no real power. The only difference is that today the tsar is called the president and the capital has changed Sarai has been substituted by Moscow. The language has been changed. Some other things have become different. But there are no fundamental distinctions. The same federation, the same orders, the same commemorations but everything is called otherwise. In a modern way. The Horde is the territory that has become part of modern Russia with all its Horde problems and population. The Horde inhabitants are the ancestors of the majority of Russians those whose motherland lies south of the latitude of the Moskva river They are in question here; they are those defeated whose opinion was not asked when the history was written. Failure to understand that truth means the failure to understand the past of Russia. And if in the capital of the Horde, in that federal center attacks of Christianity were successful, Moscow Russia defeated them remaining an impregnable citadel before which Sophia Paleologo receded. That is what was making Russia, constituent territory of the Horde federation, the leader. Firmness of spirit. Independence of politics. It was dealing with the West in the name of the Turkic East; it was being esteemed and respected even in the khans headquarters. It can be mentioned all at once; that was the merit primarily of Ivan the Terrible who, not asking the khan, threw down the gauntlet to the Pope by his Livonian (1558) and Caspian (1560) wars. And thus he
continued the sacred war of Genghis Khan for Monotheism. After the Inquisition attacks of the West had political reasons. Borrowing the teaching of Heavenly God the Church no longer wanted to connect the roots of its belief with Altai. It wanted to rewrite the history and establish its place in it. By that time the Western theology had made a centuries-long way; it introduced new ceremonies and had power it could change the starting point of the place and time of the beginning of that way. The world begins not in the East, - it was asserting. That was the sign of the Renaissance. The Christians, born away with politics, were in conflict with their conscience again. Constantines myth was realized because of church scientists; invention became the incontestable truth people became accustomed to it. What else can be discussed here? What history, what traditions?.. In Altai they knew ninety nine ways to address Heavenly God Tengri, at that they were all different. Bog (God) (Bodgo or Boje), Khodai (Kodai. Khudai), Alla (Ollo, Elo), Gospodi (Gozbodi). They also used the names Dangyr, Tangra, Tura, Tigir. Two and a half thousand years ago the Sky heard these words. Later, in the IV century, the word Bog (God) (that is how the word God is pronounced in the Russian language) was taken by Christianity. In Altai (in Turkic) it meant to find peace, belief. Khodai (in Turkic it literally means become happy) meant that Tengri was the Creator of existence and He gave the happiness of life. Moslems and Christians of medieval Europe used the word Khodai; hence, by the way, is the western transcription Got, Gott. Alla was pronounced in Turkic when Tengri was asked for something; it was derived from al (hand), in other words Giving and Taking Away; reading a prayer one had to turn the palms to the Eternal Blue Sky. The word was taken by Islam, but for the Turkic Moslems the names Tengri, Bog (God), Khodai and Alla remained synonyms. The same as
it was with their ancestors who were the followers of Monotheism. In the Horde and in Russia only these names were known. People prayed with them; that is why in certain western sources the Russians and the Horde inhabitants were called the Moslems. In this connection ancient proverbs (and there are a lot of them) are indicative: Khudai salgannan khutulbachan, which meant You will not escape the will of God. Khudai somy or The Image of God Ala the guardian angel. Allai (Aloi, Eleei) or Oh, my God. Kizi alazy chorche, kizee korinminche or Guardian Angel is invisibly present. And so on. There was no Islam in the East of Europe; that was eternal belief in Heavenly God it was not divided into Christianity, Arianism, Islam or something else. Belief is belief. God is God. That was the edge of tolerance. Moscow of Ryurikoviches was notable for the Arian look that it had brought with them from Scandinavia; Sarai had an Altaic, more ancient look after all, it was dominating in the Horde regardless of the antagonism of royal power. But where, in what source one can read about what united the Horde and Russia? They were parts of one state, one entire culture! There are no such works. That unity is not convenient for the West The Churchs first messengers to the East of Europe were the Popes legates the monks Giovanni del Plano Carpini (1245 1247) and Guillome de Rubruk (1253 1256); they were to carry out their mission and secretly collect information about the unknown country. Later, in centuries, their notes were published in separate books and can serve as a decent reference book on visual reconnaissance. Marco Polo also became a spy, but not of his own volition for many years he was living with the Turki (1271 1295) and serving the khan and thus he knew the life of Desht-I-Kipchak from the inside. By the Popes order, upon his return to the
motherland he was put in prison in 1298 and forced to share his recollections Rome was collecting information about the Horde and the Turkic East not missing any details. One would think, about what can those decomposed notes tell now? It turns out they can tell about the past of Russia! About what it was ordered to forget. Priceless pages that have not been touched by the church censorship; they are more true than scores of textbooks and monographs that were written later. The Popes spies reported what they saw with their own eyes. Without analyses and conclusion. Their information is objective and, from this point of view, it is irreproachable; the policy of the Church was based on it. That is what it is interesting for. The Popes legates voyages happened in the XIII century when the Western Europe was getting a warm by the fires of the Inquisition; the Pope wanted to revenge the Horde in the East: the Christian Empire wanted to settle accounts with its offender and expand its boundaries. The legates were marching on the virgin soil that had not been touched by the Popes plough yet. In the patriarchal region. Unfortunately there is no reliable information about the Horde except for the books of the travelers. In the XVII century many things were burnt and a lot was rewritten at the behest of the Jesuits; a new alphabet was introduced so that people could not read old books written in Glagolitic alphabet and in the Turkic language; that was Cyrillic alphabet. That was the Russian Inquisition started in the epoch of Romanovs. Thus from Nestors Russian Primary Chronicle written in Kiev remained the name and several short extracts; the rest has been rewritten. There is a unique work on this point written by the academician A.A. Shakhmatov, and that is not the only work But at that time, under Ryurikoviches, it was all different; the rewriters of history had not got accustomed to what they were doing yet. The world of the Eastern Europe, including the Moscow Principality, did not call itself Slavic because of shame; it was living free, in purity
and patriarchal comfort. That is what the Popes legates saw the measured world that was not feeling that the storm was coming. That was the last century of freedom; it came to its end together with the dynasty of Ryurikoviches with Ivan the Terrible In that period of history there is one rather interesting fact: Carpini, the Popes messenger, was to bring to Altai a letter for the presbyter John, the white pontiff; that was one of the subject matters of his mission. There were no arguments more important than the Popes correspondence, regardless even of archeological findings and books describing the Turkic belief. Those notes are also valuable since they have the spirit of time that was driven away in the works of historiographers. Alien eyes see better than eyes of a local man. Thus the Popes legates in the foreign country were writing down what, in their opinion, could be used for the benefit of the Church there, in the Eastern Europe. For instance, the following Rubruks comment on Batys appearance is worth much: To me Baty seemed to look like Jean de Beaumont. Business and objective information it is not accidental, although to an extent it is preconceived. Since the guests are usually shown what hosts wish! It never happens otherwise. However, one question is appropriate: how did the Popes monks communicate in the foreign country; what language did they speak? Carpini and Rubruk did not go into details on this point, apparently, because they considered that unworthy of attention. And from the same texts it is seen that they had no difficulty communicating with people they met. At least, there were no limitations in conversations. An interpreter corrected certain formalities, but he was not engaged in the conversation, the same as the attendant, as against the monk himself who sometimes turned to the interpreter for clarifications. Low Latin again?! And this time in Desht-I-Kipchak? Or not?
To tell the truth, Marco Polo, a smart and noble citizen of Venice, as he humbly described himself, was more reliable than the Popes monks; he began his Book from the recollection of how his father and uncle, intending to improve their state of affairs, left for the East. The Great Khan met them cheerfully; they had a long conversation and perfectly understood each other since (citing) those people were reasonable and knew Turkic. The dialogue of East and West was in the Turkic language. Ibn Battuta, an Arab traveler, visited Desht-I-Kipchak those years; he left his notes a real chant to the free country. He wrote an amazing book which cannot be called historical since it has too much warmth, light and vitality After reading the works by that Arab and Roman monks, those by great Russian historiographers faint: they are preconceived and too helpless. There is nothing more to say about them. A lot of information about the Turkic culture remained in Russia; sometimes it is kept in unexpected publications. For instance, in works by Athanasius Nikitin, a Russian merchant who sailed over three seas, in them it is written that prayers were read in Turkic and people used to pray not in a Christian way. The merchants notes were published by the Russian Academy of Sciences; authenticity of the comments is doubtless; one just comes across inaccuracies of translation sometimes. Here is an extract from it:
A Rus er Tangryd saklasyn, Ollo sakla, bu daniada munu kibitz er aktur, nechik Urus eri begliari akoi tugil, urus er abodan bolsyn; rast kam daret. Ollo, Khudo, Bog, Daniry! And here is the translation: And the Russian land God bless it. Oh God, save it! There is no such a wonderful county in this
world, Although * of the Russian land are unfair. Let the Russian land live in peace, And let justice live in it! The Russian prayer ended as it was proper for the prayers to Tengri with the word God: Alla, Khodai, Bog, Tengri It seems comments are unnecessary here. However, the main thing requires a qualified comment! And it is absent. Full text of the prayer is worth paying attention since in it a little bit corrupt 22nd and 23rd ayahs of 59th sura of Koran are set forth. More than that, in the prayer there are Allahs epithets (from 4th to 31st) accurate in order and writing. And that seems to be extraordinary for Christianity Questions arise by themselves here: was there Christianity in Russia? And what was it like? And the same goes for other prayers. Ata chin ash Izhesi, i.e. Father, God of spiritual food that was the beginning of an ancient Turkic prayer in the name of the Most High Tengri. And it seems these words sacred for a Turki are similar with the Russian prayer Our Father. An interesting question, is it not? The Chinese history is no less interesting. One would think, what did it have to do with the Turki and the Moscow Principality? It turns out it was directly connected with them. The North China was part of Desht-I-Kipchak; we intentionally pass over in silence the history of the Uigurs and Kirghiz, as well as the North-Eastern China inhabitants so as not to enter modern politics although in that history there are interesting but not indubitable facts. For example, here is a common question which is far from modernity: why did the Chinese build the famous wall on the border with Altai? Not for Guiness Book of World Records apparently. It turns out, not to defend from the nomads either. The Great Wall was raised in order to stop the departure of people from the empire; the Chinese were
leaving for the North in families and entire villages. Life there was more cheerful these are the words from a Chinese chronicle. Life in Altai was more cheerful! Is this not an estimation of the Turkic life? Would pilgrims from India, Tibet, Iran and the Western Europe try to reach the pagan Tatars? And they were coming there; belief attracted them, which is written in historical books. Carpini, the Popes legate, wrote about the Turkic belief as follows: They believe in One God whom they recognize as the creator of all the visible and invisible and the creator of bliss and torture in this world, however they do not worship him with prayers, praise or ceremonies of any kind. Where is paganism here? And the line has not been finished; the author has not said the main thing since the Turki had not let that stranger into their secrets. But they made an exception for Rubruk; it seems they had taken the fancy of him because of his appearance and due to the fact that he had been sent by Louis the Saint, King of France, the descendants of an Altaic dynasty The monk was surprised by the belief of the steppe inhabitants; it was like Christianity but was not clear for him. He asked the person that was accompanying him, but the answer was: Do not say that our master is a Christian. He is not a Christian. I found a man that had a inky cross on his hand and believed that he was a Christian since he answered all my question like a Christian. That is why I asked him: Why dont you have a cross with the image of Jesus? And the answer was: That is not our custom. How do you believe in God. He answered: We believe only in One God. And I asked: Do you believe that He is the spirit or flesh?. He said: We believe that he is the spirit. And I asked: Do you believe that he has never been human?. He answered: Never. Rubruk was attentive to the details of life; he managed to see a lot: I saw a house over which there was a cross I entered it and saw an altar which
was decorated really beautifully. On the golden cloth there were embroidered and laid images of the Savior and the Blessed Virgin and two angels, at that the outlines of their bodies and clothes were embroidered with pearl. There was also a silver cross with precious stones in its corners and in the middle and a lot of other church finery, and in front of the altar eight oil lamps were burning. A very valuable observation; it describes the decoration of a Turkic temple and also shows that the Catholics were too far from the Church which had been established by the Pope Gregory the Great. During the centuries Catholic Europe had changed beyond recognition; it had lost its roots those very roots to which the Pope Gregory had carefully grafted it!.. The Church thought that it had been born on its own account. And that can never happen. A son cannot be his own father. Rubruk did not even understand why the Turki did not recognize Christianity. The monk did not know the true history of the Church and the traditions of Monotheism which the Romans had followed some time ago. He did not understand why the Pope Gregory called himself the bishop not of the Romans but of the Langobards, i.e. not of the Christians but of the Kipchaks the keepers of the pure belief in public. The people that Rubruk met were the relics of belief; in their souls they were keeping that warmth from which in the IV century started Christianity approved by Constantine. The Orthodox Christians and the Moslems called them the Hanifs The sources of Catholicism were hidden in the spiritual culture of the Horde. Like coal in the site of big fire. It turns out that accidentally the Popes messengers found their way into the time machine but were not ready for that fantastic voyage into the past. Failing to understand the core of what was happening, Rubruk, like an honest man, was sincerely astonished, and as a true believer he had no doubts he was basing on his knowledge and his rectitude which the Church had taught him. In the image of God he saw only Christ.
He saw him being unaware that under the Pope Gregory the Great there had been no image (look) of Christ; they had had a lamb. And the image of Umai the legate considered the image of the Blessed Virgin since he was in haze. And he was mistaken because of his bias. And ignorance. By the end of the Middle Ages the Western Church changed certain ceremonies; the old ones were being slowly forgotten that was the march of Time: things were changing and much attention was directed not to the spirit, as it had been before, but to ceremonies. Not to deeds but to humility. That became a brand new European feature. And those innovations expanded the gap between yesterday and tomorrow. Rubruk is not to blame that he was unaware of something; the monk expressed the knowledge of a strange belief in known terms of Christianity; he could not do otherwise. His consciousness was created by the Church; theologians painted his past as they wanted to see it they did not mean to make cloud-castles whatever beautiful they were. Time will come and they will fade away this is the lot of all the air-castles. Even of the most beautiful ones Either with a Catholic cross or without it. The East and its clergy, on the contrary, were notable for the knowledge of God. For it all the other religions remained versions of belief in One God, branches of one tree; hence the Turki had never destroyed and humiliated the gentiles. An alien belief was not alien for them. That was a distinctive feature of the Horde with its vassals Moscow, Kazan and other khanates. Not a singe religious war has happened there. There were many wars, as we know, but they had nothing to do with religion. That is why the Catholics found their way to the Turkic East and became the natives in the spiritual area that was clear for them; they knew: the one who believes in God is the native. Simplicity of these words expresses
the Turkic philosophy, which explains a lot. For instance it explains Genghis Khans uncertainty and bewilderment of the academician V.V. Bartold who in the Middle Asia met Nestorians speaking the Turkic language and calling them the Christians although they followed the ceremonies of Christianity. The famous Orientalist was astonished because the word Christianity was alien to those people; it was not met in their written monuments. Bartold, an outstanding scientist of the European school, the same as Rubruk, seemed to know nothing of the Turkic belief at all! He is the author of excellent works on Islam but he did not understand that from of old the Turki had believed the One Who is really the master in the Sky. Those were the Christians whom they were teaching the basics of religion in the IV century!.. Not vice versa. The Europeans know the truth about themselves from the books they write themselves while the truth has disappeared from there a long time ago: the books were written for the sake of the Church at its behest The Jesuits were the first who started to correct the truth about the Russian belief when Ivan the Terrible was reigning, which marked the end of the dynasty of Ryurikoviches. Warriors of Christ want nothing but to convert the pagans into the Christians these words expressed the core of the policy of the Society of Jesus. For example, their organization appeared in India on May 6th, 1542 when Framcis Xavier, Loyolas (the head of the Jesuits) right-hand man came there. He had sweeping powers; all the doors were open for him. Full authority was in his hands. Xaviers work turned out to be really hard; in that Portuguese colony he would appoint and dismiss the rulers and the nobility. He would appoint the clergymen. Even the governor was afraid of the Jesuits As a matter of fact, in Moscow Russia it was to be the same. Ivan the Terrible had just time to think and be poisoned by mercury.
The orders strength was immense; it was not restrained by the borders of continents. The Jesuits reached Japan, India and America. They found their way to the Moslem East and did a lot of mischief there. Because of them Islam was changed it became Arabic Everywhere the West was burning the Turkic traces out and remaking the past in its own way. Moscow was not an exception; on the contrary, it was the subject of its particular interest. From 1801 the headquarters of the Jesuits, as we know, moved to Russia; these are their words: one cant understand Russia with his mind. That is why the past of Russia has gone for good the poisoning of the dynasty of Ryurikoviches which crossed the paths of the Church. Looking ahead it is necessary to say that to invent the history of Moscow Russia is not an easy task. V.N. Tatischev was the first who set about it when Peter I was reigning; he was not a scientist but the factories manager in Ural and later the head of the Astrakhan Government. His work The Russian History from the Ancient Times was controlled personally by Y.V. Brius a person about whom we know a lot and at the same time nothing. Those were the people around Romanovs western reformers, the Popes protgs, Jesuits that were arranging the deeds for years ahead. That senator, the confidant of Peter I, was translating western books into Russian; he ran the business of the royal printing shop and was trying hard to arrange the history and geography of Russia. The ideologist of Peters reforms! The Russian tsar dared not make a step without his consent. It is not known whether Brius was a Jesuit or not; his past is mysterious. But he became a Russian without any difficulties. He just had to call himself so. That was him who in 1720 gave Tatischev a chronicle called Armchair that gave rise to and formed the foundation of (that is what Tatischev has written) the Russian history From where did that chronicle appear? How? It was not fake. That was something else that had no definition and
248 / 342
Muscovy and Russia
looked like a summary. In it events of the past were roughly estimated, which gave rise to and formed the foundation of the Russian history. Failure to comply with the facts It is not clear how Brius, the first Russian historian, put the ancient Slavic text of the chronicle together? Where did he take the ancient Slavic language of the nation that had been called the Slavs not long ago by the Greeks? It happened that in Siberia the Old Believers gave Tatischev the possible prototype of the Armchair chronicle the one from which the Jesuits obtained information for their works. They were considerably different. That observation led Tatischev to an unexpected thought that such Nestors lists can be obtained with considerable additions. The new history of Russia was based on those considerable additions! There are too many questions And there are no answers. One can understand the Bulgarian Slavs; they call their ancient Slavic language proto-Slavic silently adding that that was the Turkic language. But how can one understand the Russian people of the XVIII century that were still speaking their native language? Their Slavic dialect was to appear; the Jesuits were elaborating it in their universities in the Western Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania. Apart from the language of the chronicle, one should pay attention to the ease with which Tatischev cites the works by European and Asian historians; the Uralian manufactures erudition is impressive. Considering that he read no books in the Russian language, that such books did not exist and that he did not know foreign languages, his authorship is unlikely if not suspicious. The same as the Armchair chronicle itself. How did it appear? But the XVIII century was notable for the fact that the royal power, carrying out one reform after another was creating the new language (the Slavic dialect) and the new Russian culture instead of the Turkic one. It
was necessary to reflect Slavdom in history. How? Nobody knew that. At first Tatischev was engaged in geography; according to him it is rather easier to invent geography than history. It is possible that the word invent had certain shades unknown to us but Tatischevs work is nothing more than an invention in five volumes written by the tsars order. Thus the Russian authorities took the Jesuit baton in the East of Europe and were moving on. The Scythians were called the ancestors of the Slavs. Tatischevs Scythians spoke the Iranian language which later gradually passed into the Slavic language by itself. Of course no proofs of the new theory were produced. And they were not necessary. Russian people have been persuaded of the absurdity since then that the Slavs came to the bank of Dnepr in the IX century and built Kievan Russia the motherland of Russia there. They came out of Novgorod woods where they used to live in huts and dugouts and built Kiev all at once?.. Thus Ivan the Terrible was deprived of the relatives and ancestors, i.e. the Normans that came from Scandinavia and founded Russia. Who are they, those mysterious Turki that became castaways even in their motherland? The history of Moscow Rus and Russia cannot exist without an answer to the fundamental question The ancient Altaians, according to anthropologists, were divided into two groups the Europeoids and the Mongoloids. Mongoloid features more ancient ones were dominating in mixed marriages. Of course appearance standards are not reliable speaking about the nation that was formed of a union of tribes: skin color and eyes form did not matter. Spirit was the main thing for them! It is important to understand and accept that. Three thousand years ago belief in Heavenly God united the tribes of the Central Asia into one nation and gave them new morals. That is what happened then they
accepted the common language and rules of conduct which they called Turkic. The word Turki was not of an ethnic but rather of a religious character it united those who believed in Heavenly God and compared their actions with His commandments. Science knows several versions of the origin of the word Turki. Perhaps the most popular is the Chinese version the word means strong, healthy. The version is interesting but it is not likely that it is correct. Why did the Altaians take a Chinese name? Latest researches showed that the Chinese learnt that word from the inhabitants of Ancient Altai; people there called themselves Turakut and Trkt. If one remembers that Tura is Tengris name - one of his ninety nine names the name of the nation obtains a clear sense. Hence tiure, tere cross and kut soul, human vital force All these sounds, in our opinion, are closely interrelated. Thus we have the people believing in God or the people of Divine Force or the people with souls full of God. That is what Turki meant three thousand years ago. At least in the XI century B.C., judging by Chinese findings, people knew it. In The History of China the following is written: in the 20s of the XX century in the basin of Huang He archeologists found a settlement and burial places made of bronze (the Anyang finding). In the first instance they were astonished by written monuments, a huge archive of inscriptions such writings were met only in Altai which the Chinese called Shan (Yin). That is a very valuable finding. In Chinese there was no written language at that time. Excavations of a royal barrow provided not less valuable material, which could be called a significant event of archeology but even experts did not know much about it. Burials of horses, weapons, finery and vessels belonged to the Turki that is why nobody wanted to advertise them. In Neolithic China they knew neither a domesticated horse, neither a chariot nor such weapons. That was also witnessed by the experts.
The main findings were the items of the animal style that was the characteristic feature of the Altaic culture during the following years. The Chinese have never been able to depict the animals in the position of an impetuous jerk. That was the Turkic unique style. And the last thing. At that time the northern border of China coincided with the outline of the Great Wall, i.e. it lay to the south of the found town That was the country called Altai. That version has its adherents and opponents. Its universality is attractive. And its accordance with reality. Since exactly the same happened with the followers of Islam; they were called the Arabs. The Egyptians, Syrians, Lebanese and other nations of the Great Nations Migration and the Turki that lived there after the Great Migration became the Arabs after the establishment of the new belief. As a matter of fact, it was the same in Russia where the Arians were called the Russians although those were different nations. Belief in One God united them; it was the difference between the Muscovites and the Christians of the Western Russia that recognized Christ and the Popes power with him. The term Russian was not of ethnic but of religious character. That lasted for more than a century; it was akin to the terms Turki or Arab. The Turkic religion did not know loud prayers or bloody sacrifices the ceremony was modest. And complicated. That was its peculiarity. The Turki differed from the pagans in their conduct. That was the unity of actions that created the nation; that is what they asked Tengri in their prayers that is what their life was full of: I ask You for two things, Do not refuse me before I die: Vanity and lies, move them away from me, Do not give me poverty and abundance, Give me daily bread to eat, So that, getting a bellyful, I would not deny You
And would not say: who is God? And so that, getting poor, I would not steel And would not take Gods name in vain The Turki called the law of their life and the rules of their conduct Kishi Khaky. What is that? It is unlikely that one can explain. That is the right to be a human being or an obligation to society; there also other interpretations. Kishi Khaky was based on ideology imposing traditions and customs, feasts and ceremonies and even the contents of proverbs and fairytales Since they are the actions. They are the core of the Turkic culture the spirit was being born in them. That meant respect for the elder, for a father and a mother, a maiden and a brother and also the prohibition to offend the nearest, humiliate somebodys dignity and honor and encroach upon foreign property. People were living as the Most High wanted since they had a conviction: God sees everything. He was to judge them. The Turkic religion consisted in actions, in good actions and not in words and ceremonies. They did not make a show of it. God is in soul, - they used to say there. Good actions reflected love for the nearest since the Turki appreciated deeds but not words and promises. Belief obliged to do good and avoid evil: Defeat rage with love, answer with good for evil, defeat avarice with benevolence. Kishi Khaky was the conscience of society, which is also right since conscience is the spiritual strength of a man. In other words the revelation of spirit and belief. A believer began from it. Conscience was an inner voice; it dictated the actions. It said what was good and what was evil, what was honest and what was dishonest. It turns out, in order to be a Turki one had to accept God and live comparing his actions with Him. Skin color, eyes shape and even speech were of no consequence. Since the Turkic nation was motley! And so numerous! For centuries it was living with an established law with Kishi Khaky The word Tengri was a pitchfork of its life.
People had to learn Kishi Khaky and follow it from infancy. The Turki respected their fathers and mothers and their relatives that gave them life with Gods help. They knew that they could not kill without Gods will. They could not sin and steal. To tell lies was also a sin for which one had to answer at the trial by ordeal. They were prohibited to envy their nearest even in thoughts; envy was called red eyes disease and the most disgraceful vice. They were leading their lives and God kept an eye on them. Belief purified consciousness. Of course Kishi Khaky were notable not only for prohibitions; that would make them too simple and unattractive. The right to be human opened the way to Heavenly God and to the finding of sanctity. It taught what one had to do in order to reach the top of happiness. And the highest happiness was bliss; it was given only to the chosen. Even on the highest mountain one is not closer to God, - they used to say in Altai. And they would add: Tengris sign is godliness. Pious people were called pleasing to God or blissful. They were buried on tops of mountains and over their tombs a barrow, mound or temple was raised. Bliss started from a difficult trial: in his soul a man accepted his imperfection, vanity and helplessness that is how the education of spirit began. Or the victory over oneself. Because if one makes a show of ones self that is the beginning of sin and the end of belief. Self-exaltation made the first angel the devil and pride drove Adam and Eve out of paradise; in Ancient Altai people were aware of that three thousand years ago That is what a folk legend says. It astonished a Russian clergyman Landyshev who in the XIX century came to baptize the Altaians into the Christian belief by force. That clergyman failed to understand why in the Middle Ages the Europeans considered Altai to be the Earthy Heaven and the plots of Heaven came to the West from there. Neither in the Ancient Egypt, neither in the Ancient Greece nor in the Ancient Rome people were aware of them.
And Altai was aware since only those who accept their imperfection can understand: without God he is nothing. Good and evil, poverty and wealth are given only by Tengri, - an ancient Turkic proverb teaches. And a man taking the path to God believed without doubts. Belief obliged to feel sorry for the cruel and wish their reformation with ones whole heart not answering for cruelty. To search for the truth and stand for it to the last gasp. The same as mercy and peacekeeping, which was another duty of the blissful: in the monasteries called abata those people were cognizing the world. A father having the feeling of selfrespect would oblige his son to study the course consisting of three sciences: the ability to ride a horse, to use a bow and to tell the truth Otherwise he would not be a Turki. Everybody knew about Khishi Khaky and those rules were certainly being written down. But those records did not remain since skin was used instead of paper a perishable material. Paper was invented in the II century. But there are phrases which were engraved on stones in runes; they are full of wisdom Nevertheless it is fair to say that Kishi Khaky have not disappeared. They were taken by the Church as the commandments of the Law of God And that is the most striking thing they are there from the IV century, from the appearance of the Vulgate the book from which Catholicism started. The Kipchak that accepted Christianity and took the name of Jerome wrote it at that time in Europe there were no other experts in the theory of belief. Only the Turki The reader should not hasten to argue: nothing happens by chance in the world where God is the ruler. It has been already mentioned here that the Roman clergyman named Rusticus visited the monastery of the Acoemetae to check the translation of the Vulgate. The Acoemeti were considered to be the keepers of knowledge and wisdom. Their name is derived from Kishi Khaky that they followed. Ac in Turkic means pure, saint, right, im means sign, password, akim secret conjuration, sanctity keeper And the
explanation that the Acoemetae allegedly means incessant in Greek is absolutely meaningless since the appearance of the Acoemetae (Nestorians) in the East had happened before the Greeks knew Christianity. Hence khakim sage in Arabic. In the Ancient Altai the figure nine was considered to be Tengris figure. That is why in Kishi Khaky there were nine clauses of the law for everybody and nine clauses for the blissful. That is in accordance with the tradition of the Turkic belief: everything is threefold. The Christians added one rule borrowed from the Jews to Kishi Khaky the one about Saturday. And so that nobody had a chance to guess that Gods commandments had existed a thousand years before Christ the Church prohibited mentioning the Turki that had given those commandments to it. . The Jesuits, the Popes selected troops, were necessary to conceal the truth. Because of the Jesuits the Turkic world was going deeper into the abysm; pagan Tatars, wild nomads, barbarians from the East appeared in it. After the fall of Constantinople these words have become part of the Christian vocabulary Whatever they say, the appearance of the Society of Jesus was a handsome answer of Europe to Batys campaign. The same as the Inquisition. Europe was skillfully taking revenge on the offender. The Catholics, meeting the challenge for the sacred war declared by Genghis Khan, imposed their weapons and the conduct of a battle which turned out not to be equal to the strongest army in the world. They were armed with the words. Another word! Not God but the Pope. It was being implanted into peoples minds and souls; it was uttered by secret and open members of different orders. Behind the words about the salvation, compassion, love for the nearest and other postulates in reality the Church remained cold the highest skill of politics. And only becoming familiar with
new weapons the Pope designed the way to the East, to the Horde where in the XIII century Plano Carpini had laid a road that Plano Carpini who was a Franciscan and a member of the order of the Minorites, i.e. the order of reconnaissance and analysis the most secret order. The Horde was absolutely not ready for an ideological fight; by force of habit it was searching for a feat in the open fighting on a horse with whistle in peoples ears. It is important to mention that in the Turkic East there were no church and political institutions for which the East was notable; they were skillful in waging a war but not it cunning. They could not analyze, in which the Catholics were perfect. That is why in the XV century the Horde fell; a long and tormenting agony started. One more peculiarity is to be mentioned here; it is not well known although it distinguished the epoch of Ivan the Terrible reigning. The Western outposts of the Horde are in question; Moscow Russia was interested in them from the first years of its existence. Those were the lands of Ryurikoviches in the Ukraine not being subject to Moscow. Those lands where Christianity was being preached from the X century; they were controlled by kings appointed by the Pope. The fight for the Ukraine, for the eastern outpost of the West and the western outpost of the Horde lasted for more than one century. Batys campaign was an episode, an insignificant stroke. The war waged by the Popes monks was more serious and deeper; it affected peoples souls but the world did not hear about the battles of that war. People did not understand that they were being colonized; they recognized the decline and conflicts as the destinys will. They were being set on to fight and they were being amenable not thinking that that enmity was desirable for someone. The Turki were killing themselves by altercations. The rival was using them to wage a war that was the peculiarity thereof.
The struggle of Catholicism and Arianism in the Ukraine was over very soon; the dispute was exhausted by the XV century the Uniates won the victory But the winners did not have much time to celebrate their victory; the Ottoman Empire was the reason it considered itself to be the heir of Byzantium and it needed relations with Greek colonies that remained on the Black Seat coast. At its disposal was Islam unknown in the Ukraine, which made the politics in that region more complicated. And it simplified it: the Ottoman Turki, as against the Latins, spoke the same language with the Ukrainians and thus they were the foreigners and the natives at the same time. They were accepted but with fear. Again three rivals were to wage a geopolitical war for Desht-I-Kipchak. There, at the approaches to the Horde, the interests of East, West and South met. The relation of forces was not equal; Rome and its secret weapons had the last word. But the Pope was waiting for the right moment so as to win using others. He took everything into account; even the fact that each chaganat of Desht-IKipchak, including the Ukraine, consisted of the yurts lands which according to an ancient tradition were controlled by a khan that obeyed the chagan. And they remembered that in Rome. Those were the yurts (principalities and khanates) that allowed dividing the Ukraine; they were those bits into which it was being torn together with Desht-I-Kipchak. For example, the Crimean yurt, the constituent territory of the Horde federation enjoyed the same rights as Moscow or Kazan ones: the Great Khan entitled the ruler of the Crimea to run his region. As the Horde was weakening, yurts with their rulers got a chance to become independent states. And that is what happened: in 1438 appeared the Kazan Khanate followed by the Crimean Khanate in 1443, the Atsrakhan Khanate in 1459 and later Kasimov and other Khanates. But was that freedom? Or the result of the silent policy of Rome that wanted the Horde to split? It is possible to dispute for a long time on this point States never appear by themselves; they are created by the
253 / 342
Muscovy and Russia
powers that be Take, for instance, the Crimea. The first member of the dynasty of Genghisides-Gireis to take the Crimean throne was Devlet-Girei; the Catholics gave power to that descendant of the powerful Turkic families of Shirins and Baryns. Alas, they were standing behind the khans back. In his youth the khan was being brought up in Lithuania at the court of the Prince Vitov and in his mature years his policy was in accordance with the interests of Poland and Lithuania; with their help he defeated all his rivals. The Catholics represented by Genoese merchants gained a strong foothold in the Crimea although at first they also had discrepancies with the khan, but the military squadron sent from Genoa rapidly settled the dispute. Since then Devlet-Girei was doing only what he was ordered to do. The Crimea attracted the West not only by its geographic position but also by old Christian traditions Korsun, Surozh. The Greeks called the Crimean population the Slavs considering the peninsula to be their church colony. Then the Catholics came. However, in 1454 their wellbeing was disturbed by the coming of the Turkish squadron; it made the Genoese abandon their hopes for clear sky: the Turks conquered both sides of the Bosporus and closed the way to the Black Sea for the Italians. The Crimean Catholics were doomed to failure without any relations with Italy. This opportunity was promptly used by DevletGirei. He (a Christian? Slav?) turned out to be a wise politician; he managed to get beyond the control of the Church. He accepted Islam and thus continued the traditions of Monotheism. The Church had nothing to answer; it was keeping silent. The khan left the way onto which the Pope had led him; obedience standing on the foundation of wisdom was saving the Crimea the Christian expansion was over. They started to build mosques and medrese; the khan and his retinue performed a hajj into the Middle East. Escaping from the sticky obedience
people returned their native language and remembered their native songs It is striking, today even not very well educated Crimean Tatars, as against well educated Englishmen, French, Ukrainians or Russians will be able to understand a medieval text written by an ancestor It seems Islam was the only right choice for the Crimea in that situation; it left freedom and kept the national culture. It gave the Turki a new birth. Accepting Islam the khan was released from the Popes secret and open advisors that surrounded the throne and became a man from a different world. Life was going on the best way possible. But after the Khans death everything was back; a bloody strife started and the Catholics obtained the voting right again. And they enjoyed it. The Poles made Nur-Devlet the ruler and gave him power; in a year he was deposed by - behind whom the Greeks were standing after they had brought up that offspring. The Turki also took part in the intrigues; two -s sons were being brought up at the sultans court. His two other sons were living in Lithuania and later Moscow gained them over since it was also dreaming of taking part in the Crimean events. The peninsula was the southern gate of the Ukraine and the Horde the keys to which were in the Turkic sultans hands. His firmness had effect; the Turks found the cause and brought not only the military squadron but also ground troops there. Istanbul outplayed the Church considering experience that it had got late in the XIV century liberating Bulgaria from the church dependence. And it was making the right stroke of policy deciding not to wage a war with Mengli-Girei but drive him into the position in which he himself would have to look for a union with the Moslems. The Turkish army started the campaign not against the Khan but against the Genoese in the Crimea supported by the Crimean khan. That was a delicate plan of the Khan.
The Turks won the battle near Cafa; they were stronger than the enemy. The siege did not last for long; the Turkish troops killed the Genoese, caught the Crimean Khan and sent him to Istanbul that was the captivity of honor. From 1475 the khan was living in the sultans palace; he was treated respectfully but his return to the Crimea was not in question till 1479. That fatal year in Istanbul they learnt about the preparations of the Golden Horde. The Horde Khan could not reconcile with the loss of the Crimea, its vassal, and his numerous cavalry was getting ready to return what they had lost. The Turks also knew about the agitation on the peninsula; some wanted the Horde inhabitants to come and others did not. Some people were hopefully looking at the West to Poland and Lithuania perfectly understanding that they could not help in an open fight with the Hordes cavalry. During the discord, when everything was to be decided, Mengli-Girei came to Bakhchisarai. He appeared as if out of nowhere. That was a different khan. With a Turkic heart. The years of captivity cured his Slavic disease, his toadeating. Honor returned to him. And the pride of his nation A miracle, that was a miracle indeed. The Crimeans certainly lost the land battle right away. But when the Horde inhabitants victoriously reached the Black Sea not expecting anything, a surprise was waiting for them. A mighty squadron was upholding perfectly armed sultans troops that were ready to fight. Several volleys of a large bore cannon were enough to make the Horde inhabitants turn their horses back aghast and run away from the Crimea at top speed. Excellent archers and perfect riders understood that their time had passed: sabers were powerless before ship cannons. That is when the Crimean Khan Mengli-Girei got onto a horse and the dynasty of Gireis declared itself. With a small detachment he overtook the Horde Khan near Takht-Lia and killed him To Bakhchisarai returned the great khan of whom the people were proud.
Being the winner the Crimea charged itself with the Horde. Ambassadors from Kazan, Moscow and other vassal khanates and towns were to be entitled to rule by it; they brought rent and levy there and the Crimea decided whether the khans army should help a vassal or not. In the Crimea under Mengli-Girei a new political and spiritual center was growing; from there (and not from Kazan at all as it is commonly supposed!) the ideas of Islam were rushing to the Turkic world of Europe. That was a phenomenon which could not go unnoticed. One spiritual culture of the Turki was to be changed by another one. And the most important thing in those events was that the Crimea took the place to which Moscow laid its claim. If it had not been for the killing near Takht-Lia, Ryurikoviches would have surely seized the power in the Horde; Moscow had to make the final step to reach its goal. But instead of power it obtained a rival and Ivan the Terrible was to go on the warpath with it. That was not a common rival; it belonged to a different spiritual culture and had certain allies. Two forces remained on the political scene of the Ukraine the Christians and the Moslems; they were closer to each other than it is considered today. Note should be taken of that, let alone the policy of Ivan the Terrible in the Kazan Khanate. The Moscow Prince was fighting not against Islam, as the Russian historians assert. Kazan Tatars did not have Islam! Christianity and Islam had not so many differences; they appeared later and they are of political nature. Creating the colonial system the West distributed religion to different levels and gave the world those familiar features that it has had since then. That should never be forgotten. The same as the fact that the Middle East and the Near East the centers of Islam for a long time were controlled from the Colonial Office of Great Britain. The English have been dominating there for centuries.
255 / 342
Muscovy and Russia
The Europeans gave power to desired rulers, spiritual leaders of the Arab world and made them national heroes and religion has been made as we know it now. Without the Turki! Here is an example, and a reasonable man will be able to make a conclusion himself. From 1583 Mecca and Medina their complex of the mosques called Haram have become the pilgrimage. The center of Hajj. Why? Because the former tradition was different; the Moslems used to walk to Jerusalem, to the sacred Mosque of the Rock Qubbat as-Sahra built by Turkic craftsmen in 691. That was the first mosque of the Moslem world. In the XVI century it was necessary to send it to back as a Turkic, i.e. an outdated one. The question of the first prayer buildings of Islam is fully covered in works by the academician V.V. Bartold. Among other things they describe a building founded in the times of the Prophet in the suburb of Medina. But that was not a mosque but rather an area for praying looking like a shed. Later it was called the mosque of Arabic type. That was the time when the Moslems were humbly starting to search for their architectural style. The second mosque (which was really a mosque) was built by the same Turkic craftsmen in Medina; the same as Qubbat asSahra mosque it is oriented to Altai! Because in the times of the Prophet the Moslems prayed to the East. According to a legend that mosque was called Kilisa and that type of buildings mosque of the Turkic type. It still remains as the classic style of Islam. And the appearance of Mohammed ibn al-Wahhab in the XVIII century can be explained in different ways but one cannot deny that the preacher was against the innovations tearing the Islamic world apart. That was Arabic Luther and his actions were the Moslem Protestantism. Wahhabites (preceded by the Habalites) were struggling for the reformation; they were notable for intolerance against innovations and they were calling for refinement of morals, fraternity, inviolability of the former (Turkic!) traditions and fighting against Christian
colonizers and the clergy appointed by them In Wahhabism and other Islamic heresies everything is not that simple as certain religious activists are trying to present it now. Since that was the European conception that Islam appeared in Arabia out of nothing and that Allahs words that were made the basis of the belief were for the first time uttered by the Prophet in the VII century. It was important for them to change the former conception of Islam. In the XV century the Moslems had a different conception compared with the modern one. The early Islam was notable for ceremonies, different world outlook and, which was the most important thing, the history of Hanifs that preceded the history of Islam. All the people knew it and were proud of it. It started not in Arabia. Not in the desert. Not in the VII century. But one and a half thousand years before the Prophet when Altaic people worshipped the Most High putting out their hands and opening their souls to Him The appointed clergymen called that great past of the Moslems jahiliya the time of ignorance, which does not witness anything. The temporal science is not that credulous; monuments open the truth of history to its searching glance. It becomes clear that furious ignorance jahiliya was necessary to conceal the policy of the colonizers in the Middle and Near East. In order to weaken Islam and deprive it of its roots and history. The example of Alexander the Great is significant the point is that the hero of the pre-Islamic period was recognized as Allahs prophet; it is allowed to write about him and praise him. Jahiliya has nothing to do with him; it seems that is because he was a colonizer that had come from the West. The same as the Jesuits and their predecessors. Even in Ferdowsis Shahnameh Iskander is represented as the prophet of Islam; he visited Mecca, Caaba and performed other ceremonies of the Hajj By degrees his fantasy and legends started to overshadow the foundation of Islam. The truth was becoming forbidden and lies were
popular. Wahhabites were against that. They remembered that under the Prophet Koran was written in the Turkic language and the history of Islam was different. In the Moslem culture the science of the ancient was formerly standing apart; today nobody ever mentions it. They do not even know what it is. It is not mentioned either by theologians or by historians. Modern ignorance and helplessness of the Moslem world are the results of the Colonial Office activities If you spit into the Sky you will find your own face, - Altai was teaching some time ago. And they have been finding it repeatedly. Always! Centuries of the colonial burden are the seal on the eastern culture. The Islamic world lost its prosperous Caliphate; it lost not the memory about itself but its role of the leader in science and in politics. In everything. During the last five centuries they have not won any war and have not brought up any great person It gave nothing except for acute ambitions. Here it is essential to set forth the words by a great Moslem philosopher of the XII century Abu Biruni a Turki by birth, which are still relevant today: On its early stage Islam has become the target of the intrigues of glowering people that interpreted it with wild guesses and told the ingenuous people what Allah had never created. And the people took their speeches for granted common people are easily inclined with their hearts and souls to different fables. Consequently the Moslem legends were being confused. That is the middle of the XII century. At that time they rewrote Koran from the Turkic language into Arabic and changed the ceremony. A violent war was waged inside Islam, which later simplified the intrusion of the European colonizers there. In his books Abi Biruni exposed the saboteurs of peoples souls: Allah helps only those that try to reach Him and the truth about Him. But that is a line from Kishi Khaky The East suffered particular damage from the Manicheans and the Jews;
some of them accepted Islam so as to do it harm and lead the Moslems away from the true belief in Heavenly God whom the Turki called Alla. The enemies complemented Koran as it was advantageous for them. Great God, that is true. Discrepancies of Koran were marked in the VII century. As is well known there were several lists basing on which Seid ibn Sabit was putting the only needed text together while all the rest were burnt by the Caliphs order. But the canonical cross, as it turned out soon, was suitable not for all the believers. On the contrary, very often the texts which considered to be burnt went public That is a long and well known story which shows when disagreements on which the enemies of the East were gambling appeared in Islam. In the times of the Prophet! In the Middle Ages, as we know, Islam was called the Egyptian heresy in Europe since it repeated the ceremonies of the Eastern (Monophysite) Christianity. It has been already mentioned here that in the VII century the Christians of Caliphate (not to mix them up in the streets) were obliged to sew a yellow triangle on their clothes and ride a horse like women do it, i.e. sideward. Later appeared special clothes for the Moslems it was the distinction for the followers of two religions. There were no other distinctions. Those facts are known to the science; they should not be striking. The same as the fact that in the Ukraine, in the Crimea, Christianity was known from 449; Christian colonies existed in towns. The Scythian Eparchy related to the family of the Eastern Churches; it is likely that its spiritual traditions are kept by the Crimean Karaites who are no longer called Christians. And at that time they were called so Many things were different at that time. However, today nobody is sure that the Karaites were those Christians. The history of that nation is hazy although it is very ancient. Judging by the language they are the Turki and judging by blood they are the Jews. Those Jews that in the times of the
Persian king Cyrus accepted Monotheism. The nation that deviated from paganism by the example of the Turki. They are the relics of Time. Like mammoths. Their belief is unique in its history and traditions. They are the remaining mirror of Altai and an example of classic Judaism. During the Judaic Wars of the I century in Palestine the believers were persecuted by the Romans and part of the Jews left for the Crimea and settled there In the culture of Karaites there are really many early Christian features. When Isaurierns appeared in Byzantium the Christians of the Greek persuasion came to the peninsula; that was a different religion That is why there were no hostile demonstrations against the coming of the Moslems to the Crimea in the XV century; people there accepted Islam which was kindred in its spirit The whole Ukraine was within an ace of becoming an Islamic state. But that did not happen. The Church skillfully discredited Islam representing it as a force hostile to Europe; those were the fruits of colonialism taken from the tree of lies. It is useful to mention again that there was a time when the Catholics called themselves adherents of Islam and read Koran. The example of the Pope Sylvester II that accepted the Popes tiara in 999 is indicative; before his election the Pope was living among the Moslems in Europe his knowledge is covered by the aureole of legends. And the Pope Gregory VII that started a new Church policy in 1075 was considered to be the best connoisseur of Koran in Europe; he declared that he believed in the same God as the Moslems. Vatican has not officially changed that opinion yet; by hook or by crook it has always been trying to be the native in the Moslem area And if that is right it is not strange that in the middle of the XV century the Pope Pius II suggested to call the sultan Mehmed II al-Fatih the Emperor of Greece and the whole East in return for his baptism. It could not be otherwise. In Rome
they were perfectly aware that in 615 the Prophet sent his people to Abyssinia to the Abyssinian Church and turned to the eastern Christians like to coreligionists. The Prophet asked to help true believers find piety and put certain cares of the Moslems onto their shoulders. And those cares were connected with the written language, which is written in Hadiths where the role of a Coptic writer is emphasized That is a period of the early history of Islam; it has not been lost. Temporal scientists are perfectly aware that the Turki rendered assistance while Islam was being established; they took part in all the events of medieval world. That history returned from oblivion the forgotten words of the Most High those words that should be repeated again and again: I have an army which I call the Turki; I located them in the East; when I am furious with any nation, I give my army the power over it. They were kept by the great Mahmud Kasgari. In the XIV century they remembered that: the Catholics have not been able to reach the spiritual sources of the East and besmirch them yet. It is evident that these are the lines from the disappeared ancient Koran the one left by the Prophet. Those Korans were kept in the remotest corners since their text was in the Turkic language. In Cufic writings. One copy of that Koran is kept in the archives of the Hermitage Museum in Saint-Petersburg It is quite possible that these words about Allah attracted the rulers of the Crimea; accepting Islam they saw their historical mission in a new way. From the words of the Most High it is seen who was propagating religion and it also becomes clear why the language of Altai became the language of Monotheism. And the Crimea decided to continue the tradition of Islam among the Turki of Desht-I-Kipchak. Why not?.. Indeed, the Armenians, Syrians, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans and all the others who belied in Heavenly God used to pray in the Turkic language then. Sacred books were written in the Turkic (Hun) language. Those books are kept in the
libraries of Vatican, Armenia and other church centers. They can be met with the Moslems for instance, in the library of an Iranian town called Kum. Books written in the divine language do not disappear But nobody reads them. Nobody can! The language is not clear that is the reason. The history of liturgical books is worthy of attention; it concerns the past of Altai, Ukraine and Moscow Principality. The whole Turkic world. Since with those books they were bringing up the rulers and people of the epoch that preceded the Catholic Renaissance. Those books were the basis of the world of the Middle Ages and imposed morals on society Is it not interesting to know about the library of Ivan the Terrible? And about the spiritual culture of Moscow Russia? Or the Horde? Let us remember, since very few know it now, that paper was invented in the II century by the Turki living in the Chuya Valley by the river of Talas (Takasu). Not the Chinese! It was called kagit. A book (in Russian the word is pronounced as kniga) (kinga) is also from the Turki it meant in a roll. The most ancient books known from the times of Achemenids started from the Turki. A case for a roll was called sanduk in Turkic (in the Russian language there is a word sunduk meaning cheat) This may be continued endlessly citing eastern medieval authors, but book industry started in Altai, which is witnessed not only by the paper but also by the design of ancient Korans. It is impossible not to notice their Altaic ornaments. The same as the fact that every new thought or line of the text was to be written in red ink; hence is new line (in the Russian language it is called red line). The Turkic world was a book country; books were appreciated there. Altaic ancient epos knew a black book, big book, golden book, book in a silver cover, book as a roll and books of other types. From the black book, for instance, they obtained knowledge about towns and
rivers. It is possible that that was an atlas or a guide. The golden book was about battle skills; the heroes were to know it by heart, the same as the black book. It contained not only battle rules but also the code of honor. The book in a silver cover described recipes, feeding rules, fasts and diets. The Turki also had liturgical books which existed, according to a well-known archeologist professor L.R. Kyzlasov till the XVII century, i.e. till the Russians came to Altai. After the council of 1666 the newcomers from Moscow that became Christians gathered those books and burnt them together with temples and the clergymen. But belief did not die all at once. The last clergyman lived till the 30s of the XX century; that was Mariasov who remembered the runic writings and the ceremonies of his ancestors. Unfortunately that knowledge was enough to sustain a conviction under Panturkism article, which meant death sentence. The ancient Turki treated Altyn Sudur or The Book that Has Fallen from the Sky with special respect. The book of the future; they read fortune and adjusted the deeds by it. It was the handbook of khans and rulers of the Horde there are evidences of that it was brought to the Crimea together with the attributes of power of the Horde. The Crimean khans library, as the eyewitnesses used to say, became the richest archive of rare literature in Europe (after the Russian invasion to the Crimea it disappeared but surely it has not been lost). Of course there were several copies of Altyn Sudur or The Book that Has Fallen from the Sky; in Tibet it is kept as Golden Sutra the Buddhists received it from the Turki in the I century and do not conceal that. Altyn Yarug Nom Golden Glitter Sutra came to them from Altai. Judging by the Turkic folklore that was the symbol of learning. The Chinese also used to read Yrk Bitig Foretelling Notes that remained in the Buddhist world. Those books have a distinctive
feature. In the text there is the name of Tengri (Tanra), to the letter, but the Hindu translate it as Vishnu and the Buddhists as Buddha. That is the tradition of religion! Very often Tengris name is not translated at all but replaced with Him, He. Without explanations And everything is clear. The West learnt about the sacred books of Altai in the IV century. It is possible that Altyn Sudur was called the Vulgate there This is an uninvestigated and forbidden subject. Just a blind-spot. But the academician A.E. Krymskiy, researching the medieval books of the Arabs, saw how the translations (not original texts!) were becoming Arabic literature. The Thousand and One Nights, for instance, was formerly called Geser-Ephsane (KhazarAphsana) and was written in Turkic; the scientist found its original in a library of Baghdad Arabic literature, including the liturgical literature, consisted of the borrowings; its pearls are foreign. And all the serious Orientalists are aware of that. The Arabic language appeared only by the end of the XI century. And for about two centuries it was being established Koran, its extracts repeated Altyn Sudur That is seen from the text of Koran itself. Here is a line from sura 96: Read in the name of your God who creates. According to a legend Mohammed, meditating on the Hira mountain, heard: Read! That was the first word of Allah to the Prophet. Islam started from that heavenly Read! The way of Catholic Christianity started from the same Read!; in the IV century it was heard by St. Augustine, the doctor of the Church And as is well known people read what it written! For the first time Koran was rewritten under the sultan Maxmud Gaznevi, the cruel ruler of Caliphate; the Hindu called him the iron tyrant personally he ordered to consider Arabic everything that was Turkic in the East so as to support the bazaar of eloquence. That was a strong but not very smart person. Later, when the Arabic language appeared, Koran was
supplemented again several times essentially and slightly. And not to know that means not to know the history of Islam. Or to neglect it. It should be mentioned that the language of Koran is a special subject but turning to it one should not forget about the year of 696 when the Caliph Abd al-Malik started the reorganization of his chancery. In his opinion it was impossible to deal with the Moslem matters in the Greek language or, more precisely, in the language of Byzantium that had invaded the Middle East, and introduced the language of Koran and Pehlevi, i.e. the Turkic language and, using modern terms, its Azerbaijanian dialect. The Jesuits, in their turn, edited the Caliphs order. Instead of the words the language of Koran they wrote the Arabic language but under the Caliph al-Malik, as is known, it did not exist and the reference to Pehlevi was simply taken away from the text And they got what they got ignorance. It was not accidental that the scientist Krymskiy declared after many years of research that the language of Koran was non-Arabic speech; phrase structure was different there. The scientists conclusion could not be challenged by Moslem scientists the experts of Koran. Because the Turkic trace is evident even in the names of signs of the Arabic alphabet: ba (tie), sa (count), jim (food), dal (branch) etc. These are the words from the ancient Turkic dictionary Somebody should notice that! As a matter of fact, the Arabic language was created on the basis of the Turkic language, which is confirmed even in trifles. When the Arabic language became everyday for the Moslems they chose the Syrian written language for it and called it Karshuni (Garshuni). As a matter of fact that was one of the calligraphic versions of the written language of Arshakids, i.e. of Ancient Altai. In other words that is the language that was used by the Christians and the Moslems as well. The appearance of Karshuni, i.e. the Arabic written language, signalized a new stage in the culture of Islam that had set
itself against Christianity. That is seen in the term itself: karshun in Ancient Turkic means as against. Secular scientists paid their attention to blank pages of Koran but were not able to explain anything. And those pages are also explained by the Ancient Turkic dictionary. Here is an example. The ancient Turki knew the words furkan, burkhan (prophet, Tengris messenger). In Koran there is the word furkan but it is translated in different ways. Blessed is The One who sent Furkan (Koran) to His slave for him to be the teacher of the worlds (Sablukov) while Krachkovskiy and Porokhova translated that word as Distinction [25 1(1)]. In the meantime that is all about the Prophet sent by Allah, which is seen from the text of sura 25. The same goes for the translation of the word burkhan in sura 23; it is now understood as foundation and power (translation by Porokhova), which is not in accordance with the text [23 117]. As a matter of fact, the Prophet is in question here the well-known phrase is repeated: There is no God except for Allah and Mohammed is His Prophet. It turns out Koran, the sacred book of the Moslems, has not been really read yet?.. And that is not all. In the text of Koran it is said about the Khanifs that opened the way to the true belief for the Moslems. They were neither the Jews nor the Christians. But who were they? Who was serving rightly inclining (that is the sense of the word) to Monotheism? Those that according to an established tradition are reckoned among any nations, even the most ignorant ones, but not among the Turki. A sorrowful constancy. As we can see, history is a very interesting science. And maybe it has the answer for the question about the library of Ivan the Terrible, for example? The books that brought the prince up and allowed him to find his place in history and attain the name of Terrible disappeared in a flash when the Jesuits came to the Kremlin. Isnt it strange?
An astonishing regularity is evident those were Turkic traces in history that would disappear with the coming of the Jesuits. That is what has happened in Europe, in the East and in Russia. Why? Well, this is the question for an acquisitive mind.
Christianity and Islam in the Russian Tsardom

By the beginning of the reign of Ivan the Terrible clouds were hanging over the Moscow Khanate. They were coming from the South. From the outskirts of Europe the Crimea was turning into a prosperous region and it was keeping in mind its rival; it was just necessary for it to establish the legal standing and to prove its leading position in the Eastern Europe where the Khan of the Golden Horde had been previously ruling, by its deeds. That is the hardest thing while getting power: it is one thing to win the throne and it is a different thing to keep it. The difficulty was that the Crimea, the same as its shadow Moscow Russia was not notable for the number of inhabitants. At all times that had been the dwelling of breeders, farmers, merchants, craftsmen people of peaceful occupations. Not warriors. The Crimea inhabitants did not know military arts; that was the lot of the chosen in the Golden Horde of those that lived by Don and Yaik; the vastness and population were different there. Turkic Kipchaks were bringing up their professional warriors there. The Ottoman Empire could render no assistance and it required its policy and reasonable actions from the khan. The latter needed to be taught to rule and find the force to search what they had in common with their neighbors. And that is the great art. Power fell on the Crimean Khans shoulders unexpectedly; he was not ready for those harsh trials. The crown that fell down was too heavy and too large. Bakhchisarai could not become the capital of the steppe country; there were too many obstacles and it was not ready for a great many things It was too small to be called the Crimean Desht-IKipchak!
Of course those difficulties inspired the northern competitor that was uniting Russia and faced the same problems not being able to understand them in full. The smell of power infatuated both Moscow and the Crimea. However, finally the Crimea found its way to the orbit of Europe and left its trace in history; it was being discussed. It found its way not because of agricultural products for which it was notable and not because of politics. That was because of slave-trade! The Ottoman sultan found an item of income that was as profitable as agriculture or cattle breeding: to find and sell human beings. That required dynamic actions and made the Khans diplomacy more significant; the Christians were the first who started to look for friendship with the Great Khan and a union with him. Formerly, in the times of Byzantium, that trade was carried on by the Russians (Ryurikoviches); they would gather crowds of slaves in the ports of the Black Sea. Slavetrade was an important item of income in the existence of Russian Principalities. Fur trade was a cover! One can judge about the scales of slave-trade by this fact: by the XII century, for instance, the following nations have disappeared almost in full: the Vitiaches, Wends, Polans, Drevlianes and other nations of Russia. It seems they were caught and taken away by the Russians; history has never mentioned those nations. That was a demographic catastrophe and to a great extent it disrupted the economic stability of Kievan Russia. By the XII century the center of slavetrade moved to Prague; it was still carried on by the Ryurikoviches those that accepted Christianity. It is indicative that the bishop Adalbert in 989 went out of office of the Bishop of Prague when he realized that he was not able to stop the scores of slavers that were moving there As is known, that was the year of the baptism of Kievan Russia it was moving to Europe with its goods that were bringing a fantastic income to it and to Byzantium.
Everything was changing; the changing of Constantinople (at that time it was Istanbul) status caused the trade rules changing. New rules hit Ryurikoviches in their pocket and also affected the West. Since the Turks were sending the caravans of slaves not to Europe but to the Middle East where the Slavs white goods carried a value. Especially women whom poor Moslems were buying jointly. Competition in the West of Europe became strained because of the Turkish Sultan. The Crimea turned into a foothold from where the incursions into neighboring territories started. But that had nothing to do with a war there. Everything was fine and there were no poor people in the Crimea: people were living prosperously and they prayed Allah. Wellbeing seemed to be the rulers good luck But as a matter of fact it was all different. Dangerous trade glorified the Crimea, but that glory was not flattering. The Crimean Turki did not become warriors; they were not robbers as against Zaporozhye and Don Cossacks, Kipchaks and their subjects that did not accept Islam and kept on believing in Heavenly God. They were hired. It is not difficult to hire Cossacks; they wanted to avenge themselves on Poland for invading part of the Ukraine; they were willingly captivating the Catholics the Poles and Lithuanians. All of them. They always found people willing to participate in an incursion. And that was a trouble. Politics turned a war into trading and profit and thus devaluated the priceless pearl of the Turkic crown military arts. The nation that in the course of centuries was proud of its warriors that were very good at conducting battles was willy-nilly becoming a gendarme; it was making its gains on blood and misfortune of other people. It was living in prosperity but also in sin. Arts that became an occupation touched the Cossacks hereditary professional warriors of Desht-I-Kipchak; they were the first who have lost their face some of them could do nothing but fight; they had to
gather into gangs, elect a chieftain and rob others for the benefit of the Crimean khan. Life did not suggest anything else. The Hordes army that used to be mighty some time ago was growing small; it did not accept Islam and was foreign to the Khan. Like goods it was being let out lease to anybody who would pay By the way, the oprichniks and archers of Ivan the Terrible that came to Moscow Russia became goods of the same kind; they did not care with whom they were fighting and to whom they were serving. If only they were paid. The Crimea, the country deprived of the poor, was prospering. But was that prosperity? The khan got down to a dangerous business; he was riding an outlaw horse on which there was no bridle If in the middle of the XV century, under Devlet-Girei, the country was living due to its Hordes equipment and the Turkic adats were in order, the Khans successor (appointed by the Catholics!) changed the adats for Shariat. For the country where population did not accept Islam that meant death since only the Crimea was Moslem. And not the whole. And only officially. The Khan, following the teaching of Imammate according to which the khanate was to be headed by the ImamCaliph (The Prophets successor) followed the rules of Shariat while ruling. And those were absolutely different laws and different orders that were not clear to the masses. The ruler and his subjects were speaking different languages. Without an interpreter. Their position was critical, especially when the Khan changed the state structure or, in other words, abolished Genghis Khan's code. That was a fatal mistake. It was enough to loose the nation forever. The steppe federation collapsed at that moment. More than that, unfortunately the Khan declared himself the owner of land and everything on it and together with it the impost, yasak and kalan (land tax) and the Turkish treasury fixed annual earnings for him. That had never existed in the steppe before. And it could not exist! Land was the
gift of God, they used to say; it was not property and it belonged to the community. Violation of that ancient adapt set the people, primarily the Cossacks, against Islam and the Great Khan Maybe the Catholics reckoned upon that; they knew Islam and its laws rather better than inexperienced Crimean rulers. And although the Khan had the title of The Great Khan of the Great Horde and The Crimean Throne and Kipchak Steppes (Ulug Yortning, ve Tekhti Kyrymning, ve Deshty Kypchakning, Ulug khani) he was recognized only by the Crimea and the Ottoman Empire. And nobody else. At least Deshty Kypchakning turned back on the Crimea and its khan. The ruler of the Steppe was sitting naked; for an overwhelming majority he was shallow but had a famous title. He was not respected In the young country there was another intractable problem that was also entailed by the contradictions with ancient traditions, - the problem of royal power. Formerly the Great Khan or Caesar was called the chagan with whom the highest clergyman Gods shadow stayed. From the foundation of the Golden Horde or, more precisely, from 1261 the patriarch was living in Sarai since the Khan of the Golden Horde had title of the tsar and the highest khan; everybody obeyed him without complaint since his power was sanctified by the Sky. And under Islam the title of the tsar was abolished and the former second person of the state that connected society with the Sky was at a loose end. And that is the catastrophe. In the Moslem Crimea there was no place for the most important person; it turned into a wanderer that disordered the power. For instance, its presence in Kazan could entitle the Kazan Khan to call himself the tsar and not to obey the Crimea By the way, it also explains why in 1547 Ivan the Terrible proclaimed himself tsar although his predecessor had not called himself that way. In the horde occurred a spiritual conflict; like headstone it was pressing on the Crimea not letting it on its feet. In no ones
lands that stretched from Perekop beyond Ural a great trouble was to occur; power was rolling in the mud. No ones. It could be taken by anybody even the idlest people. Crisis initiated by the Catholics in Turkic society was inevitable. So the Moscow Principality lifted up its head. It is not known whether that was ordered by Rome or not, but Sophia Paleologos grandson Ivan the Terrible not declaring his intentions sheltered the head of the Steppe clergy and in 1547 became legal Turkic Tsar, i.e. the ruler of Desht-I-Kipchak. No matter that the title was rather theoretical than actual, but Ryurikovich, the child of Altai, was recognized by the majority of people that were tired of the absence of power. That was the biggest political victory of the Kremlin. Its evident success. Goals and seriousness of the Princes intentions had been seen in his policy since then. In 1550 he convened the Council and not simply approved the new law code instead of that of his grandfather Ivan III but documentarily established his reign. He expanded the rights and territories of the Moscow ruler. Nationhood was in question. The document concerned the redistribution of lands, estates and patrimonies, the role of the nobility, lynch law and a great many other issues which had not formerly existed in Russia. The tsars next step was the preparation of the Council which took place in 1551 and became history as Stoglav. The Council is interesting because at it Moscow Russia officially denied Arianism and accepted Tengrianity, i.e. the religion of Altai! Politics and the Metropolitan required that. This can be asserted because of the decisions of the Council which are available to anybody. The Jesuits were not able to correct or destroy them. They have corrected and destroyed a lot, but not the decisions! The Council, as is known, touched the liturgical issue, namely the rules and the set of clergymen for the services, liturgical books
correction, new icon painting rules, two fingers for the sign of the cross, hallelujah singing and several important religious ceremonies. It approved new eparchial administration and many other things This information can be expressed by one sentence: Moscow Russia created the new Church with Altaic ceremonies, which made Moscow the center of spiritual life of Desht-IKipchak and its capital instead of Moslem Bakhchisarai. And that became the reality! The tsar simply denied Scandinavian symbols and Odins belief and the Council registered that. Thus Russia returned to Altaic sources. That is also confirmed by the fact that Stoglav did not recognize the Christian calendar. Names were given in the former Altaic manner with adding fathers name. The same as it had been with the Turki. Nobody expected such vigor and energy from Ivan the Terrible. The rivals of Moscow had more humble and simple ambitions; they did not have enough scale, design and intellect. Kazan was trading with slaves delivering them in small lots to the markets of the Middle Asia; it was hidden in Volga woods and did not take part in politics. Astrakhan (AdjiTarkhan) was even further from the center of events. Only the Nogai Horde was a force, but it was the force of yesterday that came from Attilas times; it was on its way out Those khanates were certain elements of the broken antique vase; the khan MuhammedGirei was the first who took a risk to put them together. He decided to unite them on the basis of Islam or, as they used to say then, to put them under the Gireis horsetail. In 1521 Sagib-Girei, the Crimean Khans brother, ascended to the Kazan throne; that was the first messenger of Islam. In one year Astrakhan recognized the supremacy of Gireis horsetail. Islam came to Itil together with the Khans power; life seemed to be changing. At least, on the surface. However, the Nogai Horde got involved; it did not want to change the ancient belief of its ancestors. The Nogai, those bold
and nimble people, captured the Crimean Khan with his retinue in Astrakhan. And they invaded the Crimea. For about a month they were devastating prosperous Crimean towns; not a stone was left standing after them. But they did not trench upon power And religion either After their incursion about a half of the khanate population disappeared, as it was reported to Moscow by the Russian ambassador Klychev; 15 thousand Tatars remained in the Crimea. That was the end of the Islamization of Desht-I-Kipchak and of the Crimean politics together with it The Kasimov Khanate was really dangerous for Moscow; it appeared in the second half of the XV century when spiritual disorder in the Horde was getting stronger; there was the town called Birinchi (Bryansk) where some time ago the residency of DeshtI-Kipchal Patriarch had been located that was a sacred place worshipped in the Steppe. So they remembered it; the discarded clergymen failed to find another refuge. Kasimov tsars and tsarevitches that appeared out of thin air belonged to the family of Genghisides, i.e. they were the people not of royal birth, and thus they were not recognized as legal rulers. It seems that those impostors put the boyars of Ivan the Terrible wise to the idea of reigning in Moscow. So that everything was in accordance with the strict letter of the law. Moscow tsar, as is well known, ascended to the throne on January 16th, 1547 when he was seventeen years old; he did not become Terrible all at once. From his childhood he was surrounded by the chosen Greek tutors and Russian boyars that were taking care for their enrichment and pleasures. They were not very interested in politics that was the lot of the clergymen that were designing young tsars future actions in advance. They brought the idea of reigning to Moscow since they knew secret mysteries of power very well. Of course nobody was thinking about serious upbringing of the Great Prince; he was growing up as he was. Seeing people whose conduct was directed by instincts and
carnal pleasures from his childhood he accepted debauch as the rule of life. Hence those unbelievable rumors that were around the Moscow ruler even when he was alive; it is hard to tell the truth from lies in them Later the Jesuits tried their best to represent Ivan the Terrible not as a human being but rather as a monster. But what is known for certain is that from his childhood he was morbidly selfaffected, which was inherited from his father; his egoism played a fatal role in his destiny. Ivan the Terrible made himself the last Ryurikovich in the number of Moscow rulers. His tragedy was preceded by events that came to Russia together with his grandmother that had deceived the Pope. She brought the Western anger on the princely family and led it to the brink of the grave. Although at first everything was going on successfully. The young Prince of Moscow Russia, having adjusted all the necessary formalities, proclaimed himself tsar under the laws of the Turkic belief. And he was absolutely right. That meant that he became the master of the Kazan Khan and all the other Khans of the former Golden Horde the same as all its trade and proceeds. His words were based on his actions; Moscow could gather an army of 150 thousands hirelings Ivan the Terribles decision to reign, as against Kasimov tsars, was more convincing; a real force was behind it. And that is not all. As the tsar of Desht-I-Kipchak Ivan the Terrible invited the castaway Horde inhabitants and the nobility of neighboring khanates to serve in Moscow; for the newcomers he created new estates, patrimonies, privileges and offices. That was a serious policy as against the Crimea. Everything was thoroughly planned and promised good results. Moscow did not repel people; on the contrary it attracted them and allowed them to live according to ancient Turkic traditions In conditions of unsteady diarchy that was the best strategy. That was the essence of the ideological victory over the Crimea.
By his law code Ivan the Terrible declared, although not very loudly, about his claims for no ones heritage of the Golden Horde that part that had not recognized the power of the Moslem Crimea. The document contained the outlines of the future of the country for the following decades; it was executed in Turkic and for the Turki. Specifically. That showed the rulers intellect and the scale of his intentions. The young tsar, getting firmly established in his new title, boasted of his relations with Genghis Khan referring himself to the family of Genghisides It was important for him to become the native for too many people. Thus in his words there was no intentional deceit; the family of Ryurikoviches was really ancient; it used to reign in Scandinavia. Some scientists derive Ryurik from Arian and equal it with raja and Ryu from which reks originated in the West. Many things seem to be true here; the past of a family can be seen in its tamga and on its blazon Certain distant connection with Genghis Khan is quite possible but is it important? Was that the main thing? E. Gibbons publisher provided interesting observations; he collected them from different authors and they are connected with the early history of Ryurik- the history that is not known in Russia. Prince Harold that lived in South Jutland was exiled from his motherland in 814 and found shelter in Germany. The son of Charles the Great accepted him and gave him the region called Rustrigen. In 850 a nephew of that Harold (or his brother?) named Ryurik made the region the home of sea-rovers; from that place they started devastating incursions to the mouth of the Thames and other ports of the northern coast of Europe. Including the Baltic region. The appearance of the toponym Rus in the North-Eastern Europe cannot be called accidental; it is connected with Rustrigen. And with the colonies of Ryurikoviches. It is possible that the word Rus is a brief form of Rustrigen. The Crimeas reaction to the rise of Moscow was languid. It did not expect such
adult wisdom and good impudence from the youth. But the intellectual elite of the Horde that had settled in Moscow under Baty was worthily declaring itself giving the lessons of politics. Sooner or later it was to approve itself. Kazan was the first to make a stand against Moscow where there was the second largest eparchy of the Russian Church. As he did not want to be controlled by it, the Kazan Khan Safa-Girei did not suggest anything in return; the position of Russia was obviously stronger the Sky and adats were on its side and there was no point in calling them into question. They were also strengthened by the fact that the Kazan nobility was avidly looking at Moscow wishing to move there faster; it was carrying on negotiations during which the Moscow tsar was generous he would give the settlers titles and estates. Academician V.V. Bartold provides interesting information. It turns out, in the X century the towns Bulgar and Kazan were poor towns consisting basically of felt yurts. But by the XV century they became stone towns. Not Bulgarian boots were article of commerce there but slaves that were being caught in Rus and delivered to Samarkand, Bukhara and other centers of slave-trade. Slave-trade and the absence of anticipated results were not suitable for hereditary Kazan aristocrats which were notable for philosophical searching, deep spiritual knowledge and high poetic and musical culture; they were the first who turned their look to the rising Moscow. Their interest was logical; they did not feel like living in the provinces. And the young tsar was not stingy. He turned out to be wiser than the elders that surrounded the Crimean and Kazan Khans Of course discrepancies with official Kazan reached an inevitable stalemate; they were being settled by the army that was dictating the conditions of Moscow policy. Since then luck has turned its back to provincial Kazan forever, although it has never actually visited there. Alas, on its way there it is always late or it has a wrong address.
That was not easy and not that primitively as it is customary to present now. That was a certain policy, race for power because the tsar appeared in Kazan. Only one tsar was to remain of two existing ones. It cannot be in a different way. In 1550 SafaGirei died and his two-year old son UtamyshGirei inherited the throne. That was the best possible way for an attack. The Russian army was taken to Kazan by the former Kazan Khan Shakh-Ali who wanted to revenge upon the Murzaes and Becks that had flopped to Safa-Girei. Next year the Tatars gave UtamyshGirei and his mother, Suumbike, that became Shakh-Alis wife, away to the Russian tsar. Shakespeares genius is necessary here to describe the tragedy around Kazan. Ivan the Terrible who was but twenty years old had no experience of military campaigns; without Tatars he could not approach inaccessible Kazan. The assault was performed by Don Tatars and everything was professionally done according to the rules of military science they made an undermining under the town walls and exploded them, after which hirelings entered the town through the breaches and finished their work in the town streets As it always happens some people hailed the winner and others hated it. It seems that the term Tatars has been studied by everyone who felt like it. However, plenty of words usually conceal the fact that it was mentioned perhaps for the first time in Orkhon inscriptions in the VIII century. That was not an ethnicon, i.e. it did not refer to an individual nation. That was all about the Horde or the Hordes Khan whose name was Tatara that was a widespread Turkic name. That is why the professor N.A. Baskakov believed that the Tatars were not successors of an ancient nation but former grandsons of Genghis Khans greatgrandson, the Hordes Khan named Tatara. Such explanation seems to be in accordance with the fact that after the time of troubles and the split of the Kazan Eparchy, i.e. in the XVII
century, the ethnicon Tatars was established in the Volga region; it referred to the Russians that did not accept Slavdom. The appearance of ethnicons Crimean Tatars, Caucasian Tatars and other ethnicons possibly has the same sources. In that situation the tsar had nothing to do but destroy his rivals. All of them. Without mercy. He was killing not the Moslems but the enemies of Russia. In Kazan Islam was followed by some several dozens of families that had arrived from the Crimea; according to one source there were thirty of them. Of course the fathers of town were not discussing Islam when executions started. The tsar followed an ancient rule which was mentioned even in Scandinavian sagas: if you want to win you have to do everything. One should not be pitiful to the enemy, no matter how piteous it is. The Russians did not bury the corpses of their enemies; they were throwing them on float-boats and let them down Volga (Itil) so that everybody was frightened. That disgusting show was also in accordance with Turkic traditions; it was defeating other rivals of Moscow without a fight A psychological attack. Astrakhan that was broken-down by fear was the next to collapse. Till 1556 the Russian Turki did not know the bitterness of a defeat; they were wondering along Itil and they called it Volga in Russian (from the Turkic bulga); they were smashing the Bashkirs, Chuvash, Cheremis, Mordovians. The tsar was trying to subdue everyone and make everyone his subjects. People had never seen such cruelty before: wolves have never been tearing people to pieces in this way. Villages were burning with people in them after the slightest disagreement with the power of the Russian Turki had been heard in them Is it harsh? Yes, it is. But all the people were living under those rules. And did Genghis Khan or Charles the Great unite their countries in a different way? The boundaries of the Moscow
kingdom expanded; it is important to emphasize that that was the Turkic power. The power of the new Turki! From the Arctic Ocean to the Caspian Sea, from the eastern borders of the Baltic region to Ural. The biggest country of Europe; the youngest one For the first time the Russians were defeated in the Caucasus where the Caspian province of the Roman Catholic Church was located; the bishop there was appointed from Rome. That was an isolated territory of Dagestan about which very few people were aware in Russia. Exploiting the success of the Kazan campaign the Russians decided to defeat that bulwark of the West. Sophia Paleologo was dreaming about that; she bequeathed her dream to her son and grandson Here we have a lot to think and ask about; nothing has been studied yet. The Caspian war that had nothing to do with the conquest of Kazan revealed the intentions of Ivan the Terrible who, the same as his grandmother and father, was the enemy of Catholicism. He was born with that feeling. It is possible that he was dreaming of Greek Christianity that his Greek tutors were dreaming to establish they were whispering that Moscow would become Tsargrad and have power over Europe. He was possibly regretting of the vanishing of Arianism although its hearths remained in the north of Russia in Solovki and other monasteries and were bringing instability into society. Since those were the Arians that were against the tsar in the state. They were stretching themselves to the West after the Stoglav Council. Ivan the Terrible could not allow their union with the Catholics; after all he was a forward-looking politician. Oprichnina designed by the tsar had particular goals the fight against internal enemies. The tragedy of the metropolitan Philippe, an adherent of Arianism, who was choked by oprichniks, is an example but it is not read as a tragedy. The new has always been killing the past especially when the past is preparing distemper. On July 25th, 1566 Ivan the Terrible appointed Philippe, an Arian, his relative, the
head of the new Russian Church upon condition that he would not tamper with politics. And when they intercepted the letters of the Polish King with dubious proposals to certain boyars, executions started. But the Patriarch took the side of the opponents of the tsar and the laws Everybody knows what happened after that. The enemy from without Rome was more important for the Kremlin. The Catholics that wanted Christianization of Russia impeded all its plans. The reformation of the Russian Church drew Ivan the Terrible into the fight of ideologies which quickly grew into an armed war. No choice was left for it; it had to move to the Catholic Caucasus and begin Livonian wars with the Popes Order. Moscow could not stand off; it could close its way to the future and deprive itself of its allies. That was a solid argument for the young tsar and the boyars standing behind him. As a matter of fact, politicians have been always (!) dealing with religion at their discretion for the sake of alliances. This is not by chance that there are hundred Christian Churches in the world. And each of them considers itself to be the only right one and calls itself Orthodox. There is a sufficient example contacts of Ivan the Terrible with the English court that was the Popes ardent opponent from Henri VIII. In 1534 the king became the head of the Anglican Church; Tengrianity was its ideological base. It was bringing England and Russia together and making them allies. In the Moscow Tsardom which was becoming a state a dilemma appeared; they would have better denied it as undesirable but there was nothing instead. Ivan the Terrible who was an inexperienced politician took extreme measures; his victories at the Volga turned his head and he took his army to assail the Caucasus. And that was exactly what the Pope was waiting from him. Of course that was a total breakdown During the following forty years the Russians carried out ten campaigns to the Caucasus wishing to prove something to the Pope. And ten times they were defeated by the local Tatars that were guarding the Caspian province of
the Roman Church. The Eastern bulwark of Catholicism held its ground. It was saved by the same Turkic hirelings the Cossacks that were living along Terek. That was the irony of Fate. The Church was paying for them to the Crimean Khan the same as Ivan the Terrible himself used to pay The Caspian war is a little-known page of the Russian history; it is remembered not as often as the Kazan campaign although it is the source of the conflicts that still continue in the Caucasus. The failure in the Kazan war made Ivan the Terrible angry and he started a new attack on the Church rejecting the instructions of his councilors he declared the Livonian war with the Popes knightly order. And he lost it. The Church that had no army only seemed to be defenseless. The young tsar was the victim of unfamiliar politics; they were playing with him like with a bull waging a red flag in front of him, which made the bull get tired and be mistaken so that the toreador would launch the final strike By a sword the tsar wanted to establish what was to be established by a word. The West certainly did not forgive the Moscow tsar for those two wars; because of his improper self-concept he was mistaken choosing the enemy and the means of struggle with it. That is the peculiarity of fatal mistakes they are never forgiven. That was clearly seen in 1581 when the Popes messenger Antonio Possevino, the secretary of the Society of Jesus, came to Moscow; he cherished hopes to incline Ivan the Terrible to Christianity. The legate gave the last chance to save the dynasty. But all in vain. Their conversations gave no results; the tsar did not want to accept Christianity and the Popes power together with it; he was playing like a bad actor showing childishness and insisting that he was the wisest politician in the world and the future ruler of the world. Maybe that was feasible but the ruler should not have told the Pope about his intentions.
After his revelation the Church had nothing to do but approve of liquidation of the recalcitrant. In Rome his disease was considered to be incurable and dangerous. No, the tsar was not killed; he killed his son in a fume and thus deprived the throne of a healthy heir leaving only Fyodor, the feeble-minded tsarevitch However, nobody knows what happened in reality; the Jesuits could organize any murder that was their style of struggling. One way or another, poisoning became common in the Kremlin, which caused feeble-mindedness and diseases in the royal family. The family of Ryurikoviches was being poisoned, which was confirmed by the examination of remains. Arsenic and mercury doses exceeded all critical limits. The highest ones. Even the tsarevich Demetrius (son of the seventh marriage!) killed in Uglich his throat was cut and nobody knows who has done that suffered fainting sickness That was the result of the Caspian war, the final chord of the triumphant march of the Catholics whose front of activities turned out to be considerably wider than Ivan the Terrible thought. The Crimean khan was also breaking into Moscow politics but his actions were not sophisticated and well-thought-out. In 1571 the dzhigits plundered and burnt Moscow down but failed to change anything in it. They were not able to do it. Their actions were addressed to Istanbul that was trying to sow the seeds of Islam by force. And after the incursion the Russians increased the impost to the khan, built the town anew and started living as if nothing had happened. Moscow has always been notable for a rare property originality. It is hard to find another word although it can be regarded in different ways. Thus for a bag of gingerbread in 1570 it bought the Don ataman SarykAzman and for an insignificant amount he used to rob Polish and Lithuanian caravans shown by Moscow. The Muscovites used to call Don Tataria the land of the Don Army. The word concealed the motive of their future
269 / 342
Muscovy and Russia
policy: those lands that did not belong to the tsar but were included into the Russian church eparchy were called Tatarian. The result was seen only later The Don ataman allowed building fortresses on his lands, allegedly for protection from the Moslems. From those fortresses the colonization of the Don Army lands started and after the Azov campaigns of Peter I Russia overmastered Don in full. From the hapless ataman and plunder against order the Russian Cossacks began; in other words those were new hirelings of the Moscow army oprichniks and later archers. Conditions upon the Cossacks or, more precisely, Don Tatars were hired were set forth in the Military Regulations approved in Russia (1572) That is how began the Russian army, or its part that no longer depended upon the Crimean Horde and was almost native to the tsar. Is it necessary to remind that the Russians called the atamans and their close associates Tatars since they had Turkic names tatara, Kaban, Ermak, etc. The word Cossack had not become customary yet. Those were peculiar hirelings and speaking about them it is important to emphasize that they were in accordance with Eastern traditions and had been formerly called in Turkic khazara. The oprichniks became the individual army of Ivan the Terrible; in Altai, Persia and Parthia such army was called the immortal thousand. Moscow Princes could not have anything of that sort. Those were the royal guardians. And the retinue. It always consisted of one thousand riders (strength was replenished on the same day). That was a tradition it remained in Europe. The Popes guardians were the Swiss and everything was arranged on the same basis. These are also the guardsmen of the English crown; their high hats and regulations can tell a lot to men who know. From khazara archers and after them hussars and dragoons secondary
selected appeared in Russia; the royal guards was replenished from among them. Here we have another story that represented the Russian policy from a dependent Varangian guards royal guards appeared all of a sudden The sign of new time came to Russia together with Ivan the Terrible. It is indicative that the encyclopedia derives the word hussar from the Hungarian hussar and the word dragon from the French dragon. It is customary to think that now although both words came from the Turkic language. The same as the warriors came from the Altaic army where a dragon was the symbol of the ancestors. In the army of Achemenids, for instance, there was an immortal thousand of bodyguards; the rules which later became the rules of conduct of the hussars and dragoons had also originated there. The immortal were headed by hazarapati, which in Turkic meant captain of the thousand There is no place for doubts here; everything is well-known. These words can be derived from any language of the world, but the first tsar outside Altai was Cyrus and his guards were called khazara in honor of Khazar the guardian of the underground world in the image of a savage dog. Is it not the reason why dogs are present on the emblem of the Dominicans? And dogs heads in the symbolics of oprichnina? Questions, questions, questions About oprichnina, or one thousand royal archers, one can read in works by N.M. Karamzin. But not everything. The toponym Khazaria also belongs to this range: the Khazars were the guardians of the patriarchal see in Derbent. The Kasimov Khanate was the first that tangled in the nets of the new royal policy; it was lying between Don and Moscow Ivan the Terrible was also original here; in 1575 he entreated the Kasimov Khan, Sain-Bulat, to ascend to the throne of Russia and become tsar. The simple-minded Tartarian, being tempted with the promises, agreed to be Simeon Bekbulatovich; with that name he has become history. But as soon as
the celebration in the capital was over and the passions settled down, the new tsar was drummed out of place and his Kasimov Khanate remained within the boundaries of the Russian lands The old tsar returned to the throne. In Siberia Russia was acting in the same original way. The legend of Ermak who allegedly conquered that taiga country and presented in to Ivan the Terrible is in accordance with other Russian myths. But if it had not been for Tengrianity accepted by Moscow at the Stoglav Council the world would have never heard about Ermak, that ataman without an army and his campaign that has never taken place. After all, Siberia was part of Desht-IKipchak that was voluntarily rushing to its new ruler. It was not necessary to conquer coreligionists. The first Russian tsar died in 1584. He spent his last years in tortures and diseases; that was a man without a face. He was dead while he was alive. His skin became yellow, he had fish eyes, his actions were unpredictable and his madness was permanent. A poisoned man children would cry when they saw him Is it not the reason he was called the Terrible?! He left not the country but a wound streaming blood and a great many contradictions: there was no power, which inspired the enemies of all sorts. If the tsar was alive for another year, it is not known what could happen. But The Catholics, like bees in a hive, frightened by the Livonian wars, wanted the decisive victory. Poland and Sweden were looking at the Pope waiting for his nod to invade the Russian lands. The country was hanging on a thread. On its throne was sitting the feebleminded Fyodor who was not even able to understand the severities of his position. He would agree with everyone Politics was taking its course. Power was transferred to Boris Godunov, tsars wifes brother, brother-in-law, who was tired of ruling in the name of the
monarch. That was a skilful man; he was rapidly rectifying Ivan the Terribles mistakes and drawing the threat away from Moscow. At first he embroiled Poland and Sweden and then made them his allies. At least they were not enemies The Russians were inclined to Christianity and stopped denying it; their former vigor and aggression were fading away. That was noticed in the West on the spot and the pressure was reduced. A glimmer of hope for a break emerged, which was really necessary for Moscow Boris Godunov, as it is seen from his family tree, was a descendant of Cheta Khan who left the Horde for Russia in 1330. People of that family served to the Russian throne as boyars, stolniks, okolnichiys, waywodes of noble titles and had other titles and were granted estates from the tsar, - that is what is written in the Russian book of heraldry about them. The family name Godunov is Turkic. To tell the truth its translation is not pleasant for the one who has it rectum lower part or, in a figurative sense, thoughtless, the stupidest this is the explanation of a famous turcologist N.A. Baskakov. And he adds: that is a good family it is lucky and very ancient. According to a Turkic tradition a child born during the year of a pig was given a bad name because during that dangerous period shadow forces steal children and mutilate them. And a bad name frightens evil spirits and serves as a periapt. A bad name was often secret; only the nearest knew it. And they uttered it so that only shadow forces could hear it It is hard to say whether Boris Godunov was lucky or not; today he is represented too odiously not sparing gray paint since he outplayed the Catholics. Without a war he returned towns lost during the Livonian war to Russia and brought peace to the people. His greatest deed was the establishment of the Russian Orthodox Church. The Muscovites became Christians. That important event happened in 1589 Godunov could find the way out in
hopeless situations. That was him who did not let Russia become the Popes province. And he was also the reason of the time of troubles that has crossed out the conquests of the Russian Turki and made them inglorious forever Of course the official science has a different opinion about the baptism of Russia, which according to many researchers, does not fully conform with logic and the course of history. But the truth cannot be changed for the sake of the tsar or the Vicar of Christ. The truth never dies. And it does not disappear. It can only be forgotten. But not forever! Christianity came to Moscow Russia in 1589, not earlier and not later, in six hundred years to a year! after the official date of the baptism; it was the result of the policy that had been prepared in advance. Ivan the Terrible with his Stoglav Council made the first step; the tsar was close to winning and could become unattainable for the Pope and even repeat Batys campaign in Europe if he was not so arrogant. Tengrianity gave him trump cards; he became the native in the world of Buddhism and Islam but did not make a profit on that Boris Godunov was different although he was looking at the West too. However, not a single ruler of European countries hit upon such a beautiful compromise that he found and thus outran Rome with all its orders on the curve of history. That wise decision can be compared with those of Solomon but the official Russian history simplifies it and interprets it as the establishment of patriarchate in Moscow. And nothing more! No. This is absolutely wrong. In Moscow, long before Godunov, in 1448 was established a metropolitan of the Ancient Orthodox (Tengrian) Church of Desht-I-Kipchak. This fact shows that by the XV century with the mass coming of the steppe inhabitants the traditions of Arianism in Russia started to fade away. This is a very complicated fact in itself. And if we add that a metropolitan is not an independent Church but just an eparchy, many things become clear In any Church there is such a
structure meaning subordination and control levels eparchies and metropolitans. The Ancient Orthodox Church is apparently the Church from which Christianity in Armenia and Ethiopia, Constantinople and Rome began. The same traditions, the same sources. Later, after some time, they were called Christian; at first they were as they appeared in Muscovy. Not European! That is, without any elements of the Western culture. They were Altaic. As we know Moscow Russia started to get accustomed to the western culture rather late. Till the last moment the country was trying to keep its expressive Eastern face. V.N. Tatischev, F.I. Uspensliy and other historians named certain eparchies belonging to the Ancient Orthodox Church state. At that the authors agreed that those eparchies existed before Moscow metropolitan. For example, Bryansk eparchy was mentioned in chronicles of the IX century in it was a monastery where Church masters were buried. There were also Eletsk, Kazan, Kiev, Ryazan-Murom, Sarai, Tambov, Vladimir-Suzdal eparchies and eparchies located in Siberia, Kazakhstan, Middle Asia and in the Caucasus. Inside those eparchies there existed their own metropolitans That was a great institute of Monotheism that existed in Desht-I-Kipchak for centuries. Baty, Genghis Khans grandson, was the first who began to destroy it. Attempts to deny the steppe clergy seem to be too primitive since many people, including the Popes legates Carpini and Rubruk; temples and ancient icons remained from those times Take Andrey Rublev, for instance The terms that are well-known in Russia, like pagan Tatars , loose their sense the same as the history of the baptism of Russia they were impudently invented. Christianity in Russia began when in 1586 Boris Godunov invited the Antiochian Patriarch Joachim, the second person in the Greek Church, to Moscow. F.I. Uspenskiy wrote: When they met the Moscow
Metropolitan Dionysius was the first who showed benediction, in other words he showed that the Greek was to obey according to the church hierarchy. The Greek did not object; he perfectly understood the gesture since he knew what was behind it. The Turkic belief was higher and elder! If Moscow was a Christian town and if it had really accepted Christianity from the Greeks it would have been the first to bow down. But it was sitting in their presence These are fine points of the protocol and church diplomacy. The Antiochian Patriarch Joachim arrived to discuss the conditions of creation of a branch of the Greek Church in Russia with Boris Godunov. Joachim was to deliver that request to the Constantinople Patriarch for good presents. For the first time Moscow officially declared about its intentions to become Christian if, of course, the letter of Ivan III to the Pope that has been mentioned here doe not count. There is a reasonable question: why were the negotiations carried on with the Antiochian Patriarch that was living in Damascus, Syria? What did he have to do with the Russian lands? It turns out he was directly connected with it. From of old Syria was the country where people of different religions were living Moslems, Christians, Nestorians, Jews. That tradition was established when Cyrus was reigning. And they were living peacefully; hence its ancient name Cyria. The academician V.V. Bartold gives examples when Christians and Moslems would pray under the same roof; one half of the building belonged to one community and the other half to the other. Kilisa mosque was not deemed to be a rarity there. It is also indicative that Catholicos for the Nestorians was appointed by the Caliph by approbation of their community. But to some extent that tolerance was ostentatious and to some extent it was necessary since according to the traditions of
the Greek Church the East belonged to the Antiochian eparchy They had to be peaceful! It turns out that was not by accident when after the collapse of Byzantium the rejected Greek clergymen were hastily leaving for Russia. And Moscow accepted them since it knew about that tradition from Sophia Paleologo In a word, the Antiochian patriarch considered himself at home in Russia; he was the native. He was in his eparchy. During those first negotiations with Boris Godunov they discussed the creation of the Russian Church of the Greek persuasion that would include its own eparchies and conduct its policy. There was an urgent necessity in that. For the state that was rising on the splits of the Golden Horde; a new belief was necessary the one to unite everybody! And at the same time to continue old traditions and ceremonies not to give rise to agitation among the people. The Greek Christianity, in Godunovs opinion, was the most suitable for that purpose. Firstly, it entitled Moscow to enter Europe and thus stop the frictions concerning belief with the Pope. Secodly, as distinct from papacy, it was not dangerous for the royal throne since the Greek patriarch had no power. Deprived of the flock, he was in deep trouble and represented rather a mirage than the Church. The Russians needed it in that state powerless!.. So that they could control it. In a year the Greek Patriarch Jeremiah appeared in Moscow; the cause was a trifle to obtained the charity from the Russian tsar to build the patriarchal temple and house in Istanbul. It turns out he was not only poor but also homeless. There was no place for him to perform divine services. And there was nobody who needed them. This fact shows not piteous position of the Church but means that it had no position at all; it had no influence. The head of the Church that was once omnipotent left for the foreign lands fro charity. Jeremiah was the first Greek patriarch that paid a visit to Russia or, more precisely,
that was not a visit but the Russian tsar had him on the carpet! During secret negotiations Boris Godunov and Jeremiah were discussing the Greek Church in Moscow. The Greek did not feel like calling it Russian trying to reserve the title of a patriarch. That is why he was not suitable for the Kremlin but it would have agreed with his condition if he had agreed to live not in Moscow but in Vladimir that they intended to make the center of the new Greek Russian Church, otherwise the tsar would have lost his title. So the Greek became obstinate; he could not be the Greek Patriarch and the Russian head of the Church, his subject. The negotiations reached a logical stalemate. They made a compromise decision, which was more suitable for the Greeks: the Greek Church remained in Istanbul and the Russian Church became its part and rendered welfare assistance to it. Boris Godunov did not stick to resolve since the tsar Fyodor wanted to establish the highest patriarchal see in Moscow. Even the defective one understood that the Greeks ha only the name; that was the only article that Moscow was to buy. Buying the name was a crazy attempt advantageous for Russia which obtained a political face and the second (new!) Church. That plan became the subject matter of the following negotiations; they were openly carried on by Moscow. However, the clergymen of the old school headed by Dionysius, the Ancient Orthodox Metropolitan of the whole Russia, was against that plan; the Metropolitan lived in Moscow and could not let his competitor there. But they did not listen to him since he had not played his part to the end. He let the Russian have the tsar. They did not need more. And in order to settle down the affray, the wayward old master was deposed and sent to Novgorod. The rumors ran that from Novgorod he moved to Bryansk (Birinchi), to his abode, to spend his last day there But did that happen in reality? However, the Ancient Orthodox Church still exists there; it has forgotten itself completely. It is called the
Old Believers Church, but why? Nobody knows. Giving rich presents to the Greek they stroke hands. The Eparch Job was elected the first Russian Patriarch; he was promoted by Boris Godunov his admission happened in the Kremlin on January 26th, 1589. Soon the council of Greek bishops determined: to appoint the Russian Patriarch the fifth, the last in the Greek Church hierarchy and allow the Russians to elect their Patriarch in future. That is how the Russian Christian Church began; it was independent from the Pope That is, in six hundred years after the official baptism of Russia by the Greeks! It is striking nobody denied that fact but at the same time nobody noticed it. The Council of Constantinople of 1590 was convened with reference to the establishment of patriarchate in Russia; it approved the new Christian institution in the name of the whole Eastern Church the Christian encyclopedia reports. It sounds magnificent, but the word council provides a different audience. And at that council there were several Greek metropolitans and archbishops who were not authorized to speak in the name of the Eastern Church. Portliness and substantiation which were peculiar to the Councils of the early Middle Ages at which other Churches were established had gone for good and instead there was hastiness and bustle. But this is not the most interesting thing; there are two other details which are kept in the shadow of History. The first detail is that the Greeks signed the document certifying the election of the Russian Patriarch not reading the papers, which witnesses of the haste in which the Church was being created. They did not even have time to translate the documents into the Greek language; hours and minutes mattered: the acceptance of Christianity could prevent the war between Poland and Sweden. The second detail is the list of the most important persons of the Greek Church;
it did not contain the Patriarch of Kievan Russia who, as they believe in Russia, was baptized by the Greeks in the X century. Why? Because that Christian Church to which Moscow Metropolitan allegedly belonged has never existed at all. There also were Constantinopolian, Antiochian, Alexandrian, Jerusalem and the fifth newly elected Russian Patriarch. And that was all. It is not clear who represented Kievan Russia in the Greek Church. There is only one possible answer nobody. That is why the baptism of Kievan Russia is surrounded by omissions In works by Karamzin we find another phrase concerning the events which followed the signing of the Florentine Union in 1439. It turns out in the Ukraine bishops again had their own Metropolitan consecrated in Rome; he was given the name of Gregory the Bulgarian, Isadores follower; he left Moscow together with him. It turns out the Pope still used to sanctify in Rome, i.e. he appointed the head of that Church which was established in certain principalities of Kievan Russia in the X century. They wanted to include the Noscow Metropolitan into that Church. But they failed. Whatever they say, the XVI century was constructive. The Russian state was being built not on an empty space. And not with bare hands. That was the reconstruction of the Golden Horde; the state was changing itself, its way of life the spiritual institute was not standing apart. That was happening in the West some tine ago power was taken by the people that had Turkic family trees but did not want to be called the Turki. Thy were also changing their countries adjusting them to the reality of new life. People and traditions remained; names of common things were changing. Their appearance. That was the peculiarity of constructiveness of the XVI century. In the rebuilding the change of epochs was seen: the Turkic features were replaced by the Slavic ones. The same as it had been in Bulgaria.
For instance, the former belief in Heavenly God was called Christian not changing the ceremony. Common people did not notice the sign changing; they would still pray God. The clergymen also saw no difference. Theological searching appeared in Moscow after Boris Godunov during the time of troubles when everything was put in its right place. And Boris was looking for a dialogue with the West. He was trying the best he could. He needed peace. In the changing of the former culture he saw the beginning of the dialogue acceptable for Russia. That was the only was for it to be heard This is probably the biggest difficulty that does not allow understanding the events connected with the birth of Slavic Russia. It seems to be inconceivable that all the ancient Russian features were previously Turkic. The same as ancient English and ancient German ones. But they could not be called otherwise That is the trace of the Great Nations Migrations. They changed the Church and created the Slavic state in Russia but nothing changed. Only the names. However, that is not true. Some things were changing. Russia, the same as the West, was turning away from God and the ancestors Or God was turning His back to it?! The spirit was changing; duality was wearying for it. And deed was no longer dignity. A slave is a slave even when he belongs to himself Christianity was leading people to redemption but not to creativeness and perfection. It became the step to serfdom that connected the people of Russia and the horde into a single Slavic nation for centuries. The Russians were purchasing the Russians like goods in order to make them their capital. This is the biggest catastrophe when a man does not notice another man. The Christian Church helped them; it was leading them to serfdom that was in Byzantine traditions and took its ugliest form in Russia It never happens otherwise here; everything is put to desperate shifts. It was certainly impossible to reform
275 / 342
Muscovy and Russia
Russia during a day. It was not ready to put on heavy chains of slavery. The Greeks proposed the Greek rules for the Russian Church, but strange rules were not suitable: they wanted to declared four eparchs (Novgorod, Kazan, Rostov and Krutitsk) the vicars of the Patriarch. The same as the Greeks had it. They failed since that could destroy the former hierarchy. Reasonable conservatism still existed in society: the masses and the clergymen were grumbling. But not everybody understood what Boris Godunov was establishing. The essence of changes was stated even better by the Constantinople Patriarch Jeremiah: The old Rome collapsed because of heresies; the second Rome Constantinople was affected by Hegarenian grandsons the Turki; the Great Russian State the third Rome excelled everybody at piety. Russia was choosing the role that the Greek Church had formerly had the master of the Eastern (Slavic) world. That is what happened. Moscow outplayed Rome on its political field. What Ivan the Terrible was trying to establish by force, Godunov established by the words. And thus he saved the country from splitting. Another great innovation of Boris Godunov dealt with domestic policy. It was personified by the word Christian which was new in Russia; it was derived from the word krestianin (in Russian it means peasant and the first part of the word krest means cross), i.e. the bearer of new belief or ascribed to the cross of his parish. The royal order assigned the peasants (Christians) to the lands and they ceased to be free plowmen as it was in Desht-IKipchak. It was prohibited to move from one place to another. That was the condition of Slavdom and the spiritual institution that Russia obtained. Every Christian was ascribed to a specific church; to a parish. That was the first step to serfdom and slavery. But it was not noticed either. That was a blow that hit free village community uluses and yurts. The
steppe freedom was on the way out; it was being replaced by Christianity There was a price to be paid; interests of the country and the Church required that Wishing to live under strange rules and with a foreign belief in the first instance it was necessary to change themselves. And the thing suggested was not serfdom and not legalized slavery that appeared later but another territorial structure. It was not prohibited to leave one place foe another but with assent of the authorities That is how mother Russia has been living since then with registration, not like a free country. The royal order also gave economic security to small estates since they lacked it. Privileges concerned the Christians. Thus they declared war on the boyars, the owners of big estates, the keepers of antiquity Sooner or later the division of society was to happen; the power in a Slavic country was supported only by those who were dissatisfied and offended, i.e. by the nobility owing small estates. The masses are always more sensitive to the new. So they were being turned into the adherents of Christianity. Big landowners and monasteries that possessed vast agricultural lands protested against the order but the tsar would not listen to them. The order stipulated population registration, which meant fair tax collection, levy and many other things that is why it was attractive. And the main thing it made the royal power stronger. The people that owned small estates were becoming the support of the state. The nobility new Russian aristocracy was growing from them! The number of the Kremlins rivals increased; they were jealous of luck that was not turning its back to Boris Godunov, the first Russian reformer, the builder of a great power. And he was taking power without hesitation. This animosity was clearly seen in 1598 when the tsar Fyodor died and did not
leave a heir. The boyars, being afraid that odious Godunov would be elected, turned to the dowager tsarina, Irene, and asked her to ascend to the throne. She refused. Boris was also keeping in the background. There was no power in the state, which was oppressive. There were rumors that Demetrius, the legal heir to the throne who had been killed six years before, was alive and lived in Poland but was ready to take power. That reminded of a conspiracy that was really taking place. The rumors were not born by themselves; they were started by those that hated Ivan the Terrible and Boris Godunov, the continuator of his policy. Those were the Jesuits that were preparing the False Demetrius and the Time of Troubles in advance so as to be through with Boris and his rising Russia. They were the only ones for whom the chaos coming to Russia was advantageous. They were starting anxious times Offensive strategy was being prepared by Rome, in which it was faultless. Rumors, gossips, slander its usual means were successful in Russia, as it turned out. There, in Russia, were good experts in that. Something essential was necessary to destroy the unity of Russian people. And they found it. That was Islam which the Catholics understood better than the Russians. That was the only was by the division of belief to divide a whole nation into two parts. There are many examples of that. Take Pakistan and India. Sudan and Ethiopia. The Balkans. The Caucasus. Russia. Everywhere the division of people was happening in the same way Russian history asserts that at first Islam appeared in the Kazan Khanate, but at that different dates are provided: either 734 or 922. There is no more precise information; however, the same goes for the baptism of Russia. Whom did the masters of Kazan, Sarai and other eparchies of the Ancient Orthodox Church, those strong centers of belief, serve in the XVI century?
In the Kazan Kremlin, for instance, one half of the land belonged to the metropolitan his house and court were located there. The Khan lived in close vicinity. In town, according to a drawing by Vitzen made in the 1660s, there were no mosques. On this and other drawings one can see the Kazan Kremlin, Court Palace and the Cathedral of the Annunciation. For whom were they opened? Maybe for Kazan khans if one remembers Sain-Bulat from Kasimov the Kazan Khans son who spent his last days as a monk in a monastery in Tver region? What belief did he adhere to? Was he a Moslem? By the way, why did Boris Godunov want the Kazan metropolitan to become the Russian Patriarchs vicar in the Volga region? Why, indeed? Nobody would ask such questions while it could have been useful. These are interesting questions After all, that was the second biggest eparchy in the country. Perhaps the only source insisting on Islam in the Volga region is the book The Travel of Ahmed Ibn-Fadlan, the Messenger of the Caliph Al-Muktadir to the Tsar of Sacalib; it describes the coming of Baghdad preacher to Itil in 922. According to the front page, that is the translation from Arabic made by the academician I.Y. Krachkovskiy, the famous translator of Koran. In appearance the work is solid and detailed. But only in appearance. Speaking about Ibn Fadlan it necessary to emphasize that his name can be found in no Arabic sources of that time. Nobody can tell what the text of his records saw Thus one can reasonably ask: what did Krachkovskiy translate if neither the original nor the author have existed in nature? And how was the academician translating the Arabic text of the X century if in the X century there was no Arabic language? The Book of Corrections by Abu MAnsur Muhammad ibn al-Azkhar al-Azkhari form which the Arabic language began appeared in fifty years after Ibn Fadlan. These are not rhetorical questions; they were originally answered by the academician V.V. Bartold and other
277 / 342
Muscovy and Russia
orientalists they passed them over in silence. Thus they kept their face and reputation. And Ibn Fadlan is usually studied by those that are closer rather to politics than to science. They started their studies in the XX century. Its first pages give rise to bewilderment and doubts If what Ibn Fadlan says is true than other books about the Turki are forgery. Either one thing or the other. Third is not given. The text of his Travel is a compilation of tales and anecdotes which have become common for the Russian literature about the Turki starting from the XVIII century. A man living in the X century could not see what was invented many centuries later. For instance the fact that the Turki eat lice and enjoy that dainty. Discussing their dirty life the author and his editors did not know that baths were invented by the Turki; the ancient pronunciation was bu ana (in Russian it is bania) the literal translation is mother of steam. Consequently their life was not dirty. In the Travel by Ibn Fadlan there are very few examples which are in accordance with reality. There are very few of them. For instance, how can one believe that the chagans wife sitting on the throne in front of an important guest moved hr legs apart and without any confusion scratched a certain naked part there. We closed our faces because of shame, - the Arab writes. They do not clean themselves from faeces and urine, the same as sexual uncleanness. And they do not was themselves with water at all, especially in winter So why did they use kumgans in their everyday life? And tubs? And hairy gloves that were used instead of bast wisps? And birch wisps? Why did the Turki heat the baths every Saturday to be clean on Sunday a day off dedicated to Tengri and their souls? One of the Turkic masters had a beardless son whom a Khoresm merchant liked very much and inclined him to sodomy. And then: and if such an old man puts on a fur coat he looks like a goat. It is possible to keep on citing but it is disgusting to do so. The book consists of dirtiness elating those
who have not fully read it. The editors name hypnotizes. And this book, this forgery is the sign for a serious reader Who needed falsification? The manuscript was found by A.Z. Validi Togan who called it the Mashhad lis; A.P. Kovalevskiy dedicated the most part of his life to it; other scientists also wrote about it. Among them the Syrian named Sami adDakhhan stands out; in 1960 he published a book about Ibn Fadlan. This is the only author who paid attention to discrepancies and oddities in the text and to the fact that that subject was studied only in Russia. In this country the biggest experts in Ibn Fadlan appeared during the last hundred years. In the Volga Bulgaria the Arab could not meet the Russians they lived two thousand kilometers to the West let alone the Slavs that lived only in Bulgaria then. His observations are disgusting and there is not wish to comment: we came to the country of Bashkirs that belong to the Turkic tribe. We were very careful of them since they were the worst of the Turki, the dirtiest ones inclined to murder. One man meets another in the steppe, cuts off his head, takes it and leaves the body. They shave their beards and eat lice. The eyewitness look on peoples traditions has a bitter taste. In the deformed imagination of the Arab or his editor all the Turkic liturgical ceremonies and feasts ended with mass coupling. And one can read that on ever page. But there are also the elements of the truth there. And if some of them are in trouble they lift their heads and call: Ber Tangre!, which I Turkic means: I swear by One God since ber in their language means one and Tangre means God wrote Ibn Fadlan. This is the truth. The Turki were not pagans. And the author of the Travel knew that. But he did not ask the simplest question before putting his pen to the paper: why did they need to ask Ibn Fadlan to convert them into Islam?
And who was that omnipotent Ibn Fadlan? Belief is not changed on a sudden. Tangre was the guardian of the Turki. Why did they need to replace him? L.I. Klimovich provides interesting information about the acceptance of Islam in the Middle Asia in his book called The Book about Koran, its Origin and Mythology. Bukhara inhabitants that believed in Tengri accepted Islam after the attack of the Arabic army and when it retreated they became disbelievers again. That happened four times. Only after the unbelievable cruelty of the Arabs and bribery of the nobility the Bukhara Turki eat humble pie and forgot Tengri In Khamzin it was even crueler That was not the struggle of ideologies. The Arabs would even go to mosques with arms! The Turkic resistance to the new belief was so strong. Were there different Turki living in the Volga Bulgaria? Without Tengri? And weaker in spirit? For whom is it advantageous?, - it is better to start the investigation from this question. And one will discover what those that let Ibn Fadlan into Desht-I-Kipchak wanted to conceal. A real Arab coming there would have stood on his knees and kissed the ground of the great nation instead of disgracing it. That would have happened since in the X century Koran was written in Cufic writings in Turkic. The Moslem knew Allahs words about the Turki, they knew about His army that was bearing the flag of belief. They knew that there, along Itil, the Hanifs described in Koran were living Ibn Fadlan must have known that. But he did not know. It means he was not an Arab. Here is another example, Ibn Fadlan must have known it. In 883 the new Caliph invited the sages to Baghdad and asked: For how many years will I reign? The answers were different. And the most grey-haired sage uttered quietly: As long as the Turki want it. And everybody laughed because of his bitter truth: the Caliphs army consisted of the Turki; they were the ones who appointed and deposed leaders. The clergymen and the
clerisy were also formed of Desht-I-Kipchak inhabitants Is it not a shame to forget that? Only late in the Middle Ages, due to the Jesuits that found way into Islam Arabization of the East began; it began five centuries after the events described in the book How did Ibn Fadlan know what was to be? The Islam world was proud of the Turkic culture and respectfully called it the science of the ancient. From the viewpoint of the Arabs their world was divided into two parts the science of the ancient and the Moslem science. The East was notable for the largest philosophical schools founded by the Turki; they made the Moslem culture glisten. This is well known to secular scientists that have read the works by V.V. Bartold, A.E. Krymskiy and other Orientalists In the Volga Bulgaria not Islam was the religion. Otherwise there would have taken place the changes that came to the Crimea together with Islam, namely the reign according to Shariat, land ownership, polygamy. Religion is the morals of society, the standard of its living. It is expressed by not how people pray, how they hold their hands and what they say but by their conduct before and after praying, by their everyday life, families and even death headstones are also information about belief. And did Moslem cemeteries exist in Itil in the X century? Where are their traces? They are absent. What Ibn Fadlan followers present as Moslem monuments and cemeteries is beneath criticism. For instance the arrows of the X XIII centuries. They are called Islamic because of Cufic writings seen on their surface But this is the written language of the Turki! Of the Hanifs! Burials in coffins which are also called Islamic are not less strange. According to Kazan archeologists faces of eth dead are allegedly turned to the south although the tomb itself is oriented to the east. Burial places were called pagan with certain Moslem elements.
It is hard to add something to this ridiculous description. As a matter of fact this is the face of provincial Kazan. Now it is secondary in everything. Even in thoughts. Before the XVI century the chaganat called Volga Bulgaria was living under the adats; its history and archeology confirm that. What can be disputed here? Take, for instance, the barrows; there are plenty of them in the Volga Region. Did they bury the Moslems in barrows?.. Or take the Kazan icon of Umai; the Russians call it the Blessed Virgin of Kazan while generations of the Turki would pray to that relic before and after Kazan collapsed. That icon gathered the worshippers of belief in eparchy. The Kazan icon of Umai was respected by inhabitants of Kazan and the lands controlled by Kazan spiritual masters. These are modern Ivanovo, Kostroma, Nizhni Novgorod and other regions Who were those parishioners that have left such a rare miraculous icon? The ancestor of modern Tatars, Russians, Bashkirs! Is it not interesting in the whole history there were no religious wars there! Even no conflicts. At any rate they were not registered in chronicles and folk legends Maybe that will make the Turki think about their history? How can one live in forgetfulness? Its a shame. Of course somebody accepted Islam before Ivan the Terrible. For instance Berke and Uzbek, khans of the Golden Horde, were Moslems they were searching for the allies in the East while Mamai khan was a Catholic. So what? People of the Golden Horde did not follow them; otherwise history would have recorded the collapse of Desht-IKipchak earlier than it has taken place. In the Kazan eparchy there was the order into which nobody would have been allowed to meddle. Even the Arab whose name was Ibn Fadlan, the Caliphs messenger. In the Volga Bulgaria and later in the Golden Horde they were building mosques close to hostelries for merchants coming from the East. The same as synagogues and Armenian temples. But who and where has
proven that those cult buildings attracted the Turki of the Volga Bulgaria? Or of the Horde? Or of Moscow Russia? Those Turki that would lift their heads up to the Sky and proudly call: Ber Tengri! Indeed, why did they need foreign temples? Early in the XVI century there was an attempt to establish Islam in the Volga region when the Crimean khans brother took the Kazan throne. But it did not last for long. They remembered Islam under Boris Godunov. But not in Kazan but in Rome. They managed to take advantage of the difficulties of Moscow there. The Jesuits created the fifth column. And the time of troubles started: religious wars became full of acuteness, protest and despair. They were escalating not belief but the protests of Kazan against the Russian Turki. They did not think about their souls. In the flag of Islam people of the Kazan khanate whom Ivan the Terrible was oppressing saw the flag of freedom and recognized it. From their point of view they had got the chance. They were dreaming of free Kazan. About liberty And that is a political and not a religious dream that still has not faded away there. The blow of the West hit the target. In the Volga region Islam had a political shade and the people did not understand higher standards of that religion. Heavy drinking, free conduct of men and women, deemed observance of ceremonies alas, they stroke the eye and still keep striking the eye. They cannot be concealed. They wanted to take the foreign and lost their own Of course there were and there are real Moslems there but the number of them is very low. The Volga region is the center of political games, the land of eternal conflicts of the Turki. Three religious currents approve themselves there. But what is indicative, pilgrimages have never visited there since in this place there is no solitude, there are no Moslem relics like in the Middle Asia, for instance.
Only the poverty of spirit. This Moslem region of Russia is not adorned even by the mosque built in the Kazan Kremlin regardless of historical truth. One can never deceive Time! But one can deceive oneself. Speaking about Islam in Russia it is useful to remember that Koran was published there for the first time in the XVIII century. First Moslem communities appeared at that time. And Ibn Fadlan will not argue out of that since more serious documents remained.
obtained the Russian look under Ivan the Terrible and continued as Christianity under Boris Godunov. The time of troubles was taking nourishment under the domes of temples; it was living there. That is why it is more correct to regard it as the continuation of the Inquisition and the killing of the Turkic culture in the Eastern Europe or, more precisely, its replacement by the Slavic new ground. The West won again and success, as far as we know, is never blamed. It is being admired and that is why the history of Russia looks so terrible; there is no correspondence in it However the world is made so that there are no secrets in it. Sooner or later everything is revealed. What did start the time of troubles that undeclared war? Nothing. The Catholics simply did not regard the Russian Turki as the Christians and invented another name for them schismatics, i.e. those having a similar belief or those that fell apart from the Church unity. This is possibly a serious cause for a war. But what has a religion to do with it? However, the enemy was named The Western Church was preparing the Russian time of troubles (strife, rebellions) forgetting about beneficence and coreligionists. Inspired by the success of the Inquisition it was steadily attacking. But since the Russians had neither a secret monk army, neither parent headquarters nor regular army they could rely only on citizens-in-arms. And they were taking action. Hence that meaning of the time of troubles provided by Ozhegov in his dictionary. It is correct but not full when you know that that is a Turkic term. The tracing of the word bulga-. i.e. to mix up, to trouble, which was heard then, early in the XVII century. The same is witnessed by ancient Altaic proverbs: Times of troubles are suppressed by the warriors or Knowledge becalms the time of trouble in the masses, or Care for yourself in the time of troubles. Rome understood: the Russian example of disobedience to the Pope is
How Rus Became Russia

From the rule of Boris Godunov, from his great unification of the country, the Russians start the time of troubles, there is such a term in the Russian history. It is impossible to understand what that means. The term can be compared with haze or, more precisely, with mud concealing the past, but the Russian Language Dictionary by S.I. Ozhegov does not connect it with mud and explains it as rebellion, civil commotion, discord, strife, troubles. This may be right. However, was that the real peculiarity of the time of troubles? Rebellion is the cover of life; it is the result of politics. Like smoke is caused by fire. Civil commotion and rebellions never take place of their own accord; they are prepared and controlled by political forces that later call certain times the times of troubles since for them it is convenient In Altai they knew that prayers the same as secular life overwhelmed with dirty thoughts were called troubled. That is seen from the church history of Russia since it contained the essence of events. That was the start of the fight of Churches the Russian Church that appeared in 1589 and the Catholic Church. That was the peculiarity of the time of troubles!.. Church battles that led to the split of 1666. Not civil commotion and not discord. And certainly not impostors that were coming from the West. The Catholics were fighting with their longtime rival with the Turki that
dangerous for Christian Europe where the Reformation the answer of the North to the Inquisition was developing. They were preparing the Protestant (Evangelical) Union approved in 1608 and a peasant war was waged. The Lutherans, Calvinists, Anglicans, Methodists, Baptists, Adventists were trying to move away from the Roman Church and its protgs. Believers were tired of the Popes politicians that caused only agitation and anxiety. By the conquest of the Russian land the Pope hoped to improve the undermined positions of the Church although the result of events seemed to be doubtful. But there were even less chances to win in the North. Politics there was being corrected by the Reformation and not by the Pope. He had lost his influence by that time. In the Kremlin they were aware of that and they were drawing conclusions. But very humble conclusions. The Moscow state was standing against Rome almost without allies; relations with the English court established under Ivan the Terrible could be continued but they were not. It seems strange and even unnatural half of Europe was against Rome and Russia was a remote forefront solving its problems on its own. If it had been affected by the Reformation the history of Europe would have been different. But it was never been affected. Why? Because in Russia there was the schism, i.e. the sign: Christianity had not become part of its culture. Consequently, there was nothing to reform. That was too early. There, in that backwater district grandfathers patriarchy was being kept and into that patriarchy they were unsuccessfully trying to force Christian orders. That is right, to force. That was an important circumstance although it was not important for the whole continent. But it should be added that at both sides of the negotiating table were sitting not common Europeans and Russians but the Turki that had called themselves the Englishmen, Swedes, Poles, Russians and thus their policy is seen in an absolutely different way. They did not manage to go
without ascertaining who was elder and who was more noble. And although the dynasties had the same Altaic roots there were generations of families, which it was very hard to comprehend That is why it is practically impossible for Turkic aristocrats to come to terms; it is beyond their opportunities. They recognized only the rules of a fight or the ordeal. That is, a war. Dissent was also strengthened by the fact that Moscow diplomacy depended upon the West; in other countries Moscow was often represented by the Popes agents who were not willingly sharing European secrets, which complicated the activities of Ivan the Terrible and Boris Godunov and immobilized them. And of course that was not all. The young country, like a boat in the sea, was shaken by the rowers themselves by aristocrats that were the tsars confidants and councilors. For instance, they did not recognize Boris Godunov as the tsar because of his unregal origin. For the noble boyars he was an impostor, an arriviste. Certain boyars wanted to make Russia part of the West, which was leading to instability in society However, this is well known from literature about the time of troubles. To amalgamate with the West or, in other words, to become Christians, which meant Slavs, was the wish of the natives of the North Russia, the adherents of Ryurikoviches that remembered the Great Novgorod; spiritual culture of the East was alien and unclear for them and the West with its mysteries seemed to be closer. The Russian Turki from among the nobility owning small estate in the Horde wanted the same; in Christianity and Slavdom they saw sanguine hopes that promised wealth and power. Their intentions were feasible Russian society that originated from different nations was not entire. It was splitting into ethnic and religious groups. In every possible way. They were the reason of the time of troubles the enmity between themselves started by the variegated nobility fostered by
Boris Godunov. That was him who granted privileges to the Christians and drew them nearer to the throne. The Kremlin, declaring a new religion, started the fight of the followers of the old and new beliefs. It divided society into the natives and the foreigners. Hereditary nobles were against the boyars and the nobles owning small estates were against the hereditary ones. But all of them wanted to be the Slavs. The decree of the establishment of Greek belief caused chaos in Russia, which is akin to killing the country, and it could not have happened otherwise. The change of belief is the change of political culture. That was happening everywhere The Catholics also took part in the formation of the Christian party that was dreaming to deprive the tsar of power. So that everything was the same as in the West. As the Christians had it. The free and independent empire that Boris Godunov was planning to revive in place of Desht-I-Kipchak was initially alien for the Slavs; they did not recognize the Turkic traditions of power even in Christian packing. They needed the Pope. And only the Pope. The master for themselves! Being born away with the idea of Greek Christianity, Godunov did not understand at once that he had dug out a grave for himself. He became tsar accidentally and was holding on to the throne and surrounded himself by similar casual people that sent him to glory. They and nobody else put Godunovs relatives into dung carts and carried them over stubs and logs, without a cover and mattress in the rain some of them died on the way, - the Nikons chronicle reports. The tsar was really digging out the grave for himself. In seems unbelievable but those were not the Catholics but the Slavs that were hanging the Western lips that put False Demetrius I on the throne. And they had a secret conspiracy not with the impostor but with the politicians that were standing behind him; in 1605 they made a villain Russian tsar by the bayonets of the Polish army.
The West based its strategy on strife and the split of the people. The impostor was the Trojan horse of Catholic Rome but its bridle was in the Slavs hands They agreed to be controlled by anybody if only that was not their native tsar Boris. And the Russian Church could not answer; it failed to find the words to stop the fight of temporal interests. Under the patriarch who was alive the country was living without a patriarch. Although as a matter of fact there were two of them. The old Tengrian one was wasting his time in Bryansk (Birinchi) and the new Christian one who made no decisions was sitting in Moscow since he was not the second person in the state. He was appointed by the temporality the same as the Byzantine patriarch some time ago. The servant of the throne. Declaring Boris Godunov the tsar he performed his mission. It is evident that the time of troubles started from the absence of spirituality; in the Christian country there was no unity of spirit and body: the diarchy was violated. That trouble that has destroyed the Golden Horde has become companion of Russia, its generic sign. The history of Byzantium was repeating; that Empire was defeated by Rome for the same reasons. The Turki, their nation and their country begin from spirit and end with its departure In society appears hidden hatred for the neighbor, the envy for success of the foreigners and the desire of estrangement. The Slavs expressed these lowest qualities of their souls and they did so unwittingly. Calling themselves the Slavs the Turki were living in different society. With different values. Shepherds were telling about the salvation of soul and not its purity as it had been formerly. The nobility was concerned for its own skin and not for its deeds. Those that estranged themselves from Kishi Khaty were not the Turki any longer they were the Slavs (slaves) with a yoke on their necks The same was happening in medieval Europe, which is witnessed by the vivid Latin expression: subdidit se iugo Christi. It means: to accept
the Christian belief means to put on a yoke. The expression can be certainly interpreted in different ways but will the sense be changed? If the previous belief restrained certain vices of soul with the Russian Slavs it was different: their vices were coming out raising the mud from the bottom. The lowest Turkic diseases were coming to full flower; the new belief turned out to be that biological solution where agents of diseases were activated. That was their medium. Their life. Alas. Godunov was being sunk by the natives those that were attracted not by free Russia but by privileges promised by Christianity. They did not understand and could not understand. Muscovy was not a union of principalities (yurts or khanates) like Desht-IKipchak or the Horde but the patrimony where one ruler with plenipotentiary power was necessary. The empire of the Byzantine type. It was being created by the tsar that declared about the new Church. Unfortunately the idea of the empire did not become popular in society at that time. However that idea did not exist as such. Godunov himself suffered the same Turkic diseases that became acute after the acceptance of Slavdom. He hated the opponents of the law, revenged for rascality and executed for insignificant defaults especially when they were trying to limit his royal authorities. Perhaps the tsar was right in his cruelty. But history has seen that many times. The law cannot be supported by force. Hatred and cruelty only gave birth to response hatred and cruelty. They were thinking about spirit and words without which the royal power (yes, royal!) is impossible. Blood ran in torrents, the flywheel of evil was spinning and they did not have time for the idea and patriarch who was the first to head the tsar off from the wrong way. The traditions of Greek belief did not allow the patriarch to do that. Unfortunately the patriarch was engaged in the fight of clans; the Russian Church could not become the justice of the peace and reconcile the Slavic aristocrats
with the tsar; it was trailing along at the back of events. The Patriarch Job did everything he could so that Boris Godunov was elected tsar in 1598. The Church was protecting the interests of the throne. Not the country, not the people That is the peculiarity of Greek belief to serve the throne! Everybody saw at once: the Patriarch was earning his bread, which meant he was a slave. This note is important; it explains why there were many opponents of the throne and high society lacked the unity and why the disorder started Controlled patriarch means controlled Church. Controlled Church means dead spirit for which laws are dead! And one can pass the fairest laws in the world it does not matter since nobody is going to observe themt neither power nor people. One would think, the patriarch was acting against the impostor that came to Moscow, anathematized him and proved that False Demetrius was the runaway monk Grishka Otrepyev; the Polish Catholic clergymen to whom he sent his messenger agreed with his arguments. So what? The rest of Moscow that united into the Polish boyar party against Godunov wanted Grishka Otrepyev. And nobody could prevent that. Neither the tsar nor the patriarch Spirit was not alive in the country! Belief was shaking and the masses readily recognized anyone looking like Ryurikoviches as the tsar. Because of powerlessness of the Russian Church the Catholic cobweb covered the upper levels of society, i.e. the boyars and the nobility that was spinning up the flywheel of the time of troubles at the direction of Rome engaging new forces into it. Russia was raging; the point of a political barometer was moving between gale and calm; however the patriarch did not notice it since he was busy with court cares. Secret Popes monks invented the reforms for the Slavs in order to limit royal power and expand that of boyars and the nobility and thus they were attracting adventurers that were dreaming of estates. The overloaded Russian Church was silent.
And the reformations were invented to everybodys taste so as to make the people possessed with false ideas of freedom and justice and act against royal power. That is what Rome was thinking of. According to the initial plan which was not secret they hoped to finish the time of troubles during three years. That was the planned process; the Catholics gave three years to destroy Muscovy from the inside. In elaborating the reforms for which the Slavic people were allegedly waiting the Popes monks were doing the work of the Russian Church. They knew that it did not care about the moral health of society and was bound up in race for power near the throne The West would use every opportunity to take hold of any new foothold in Muscovy; it was skillfully using its rivals blunders and it knew about the Russians far more than the Russians themselves. In this connection the marriage of False Demetrius and Marina Mnishek is indicative. The fianc turned to his ideological protectors with a letter in which he asked to find him a wife that would at least outwardly respect Greek belief and follow its ceremonies. However the Cardinal Rangoni answered with a grin that Demetrius ancestors themselves, i.e. Ukrainian Ryurikoviches belonged to the Catholic belief and married Polish and other princesses. His overt grin meant that Catholicism had old traditions in Russia. That was Catholicism and not Greek belief to which Moscow Russia was to come So the history of the baptism of Russia is secret only for the Russians! When the impostor entered Moscow the patriarch Job was deposed; those were certainly the Slavs who did that. They put a black robe on him and dishonored him in the temple and then in a cart he was taken out of town and put to the Staritsk monastery The deposition of the patriarch is the sign of outrageous unbelief that came to the lands that used to be pious some time ago. That had been impossible before. In the long history of the Turki nothing of the kind has
been registered: man of mould could not lay hands on a higher clergyman that was worshipped since he connected people with the Sky. This person was the one who would declare the will of the Sky. Unfortunately those manifestations of outrageous unbelief repeated with the second and third Russian patriarchs. They were also deposed by the Slavs who put them to violent tortures. The Russian Church of the Greek persuasion had no respect from the first years of its existence since the pastor served not the people and not to the country But the West needed the weak Church in Russia in order to establish the Slavic ideology there. Ignatius became the new patriarch under False Demetrius I; before his election he was known as the Ryazan Eparch he was the Greek that had been brought up in Rome. That secret Jesuit and Catholic headed the spiritual life of the Russian state during its most important period! He headed it not knowing the language which his nation spoke. Fantastic How did he get the Ryazan eparchy? That Greek was made patriarch by the previous patriarch Job that had been just deposed. The unlucky was brought to the ceremony by force; he was not consecrated voluntarily as he knew that Ignatius followed the Roman belief. Do not let him be the patriarch The unlucky was threatened and thus he was made to perform the ceremony after which he uttered prophetic words: Like the ataman is like his hang, the shepherd is like his herd. That was a foreign man in the foreign country. However he obtained the right for spiritual exhortations of the Slavs that did not need anything else. It is hard to explain what was happening without emotions. That was normal in the country of voluntary slaves in whose souls belief was replaced by profit; they did not utter in their prayers any longer: I ask You for two things, do not refuse before I die: keep vanity and lies away from me, do not give me poverty and abundance, give me my daily bread to eat. They were listening to the foreigners and their protgs! The same as in Bulgaria.
On June 24th, 1605 False Demetrius himself gave the eparch Ignatius the patriarchal staff: the impostor was feeling at home in the Russian Church he would promote and depose whoever he wanted. One week later he made Filaret (the boyar Fyodor Zakharyin-Yuryev) metropolitan. One would think, what for? And this is a significant event. Not because, according to the encyclopedia when in 1605 there was the news of False Demetrius actions Filarets mood changed: he became more cheerful and expressed hope for the near change of his lot. And not because Filaret seldom visited his metropolitan and was living in Moscow for the most part close to False Demetrius. But because in future his son became the tsar Mikhail Romanov, the founder of the new dynasty. The Jesuit patriarch needed an assistant that knew remote places of Russia. And Filaret was suitable for that position although he had nothing to do with real clergymen. But he proved an outstanding politician; he knew how to divide and what to divide in order to rule. In other words, he knew how to start the time of troubles They did not find a better candidate. That short historical instant given by destiny was enough for Ignatius to send a great many letters to eparchies and metropolitans calling for the flock to pray so that God chastened the Basurmans that were pressing on Moscow. They emphasized the Basurmans; the patriarch and everybody behind him saw danger in them. This is indicative. In delicate words of his letters was a call for disobedience and rebellion. The patriarch wanted to cause a stir among the people. To create the enemy image The apparatus of the Popes intervention was working in its usual way; the Russians were certainly unaware of it. But they understood that Ignatius was a silly man and a drunkard and he often used dirty language and blasphemed, - that is what contemporaries used to say about their spiritual parent. That is what he was.
The Greek patriarchs actions were directed by serious politicians. They were standing in the shadow of the time of troubles. The Russian Basurmans frightened them in the first instance Those were competitors in the race for power. Basurmanism or, more precisely, a religious current that was becoming strong in the Volga region and along Don certainly cannot be called Islam; it is clear that that was not Islam. Everything reminded of the situation that had been in the Middle East some time ago; there had also been the protest against Greek belief growing in the souls of Monotheists that had not wanted the Greek baptism. That was a real protest! In this connection we can remember a memorable event that took place in 637 when the Caliph Umar after the victory over the Iranians asked his best warriors to quote at least one adage of the Prophet. Nobody was able to do that. Only one said: Baslama. That is all that Islam distributors knew about it in the VII century In the Volga region to a great extent it was the same. Not many from among the clergy had a clear conception of Christianity. Why was it better than the old belief? Discontent with new orders impellent for the people. The lands that were previously part of the Golden Horde and were accustomed to the old way of life were full of discontent. Slavdom was foreign for their spirit. There, east and south of Moscow, there were spiritual tents of the Russian land where people still recognized only Tengri. Their Khodai. In that Turkic Muscovy people were feeling with their hearts that something was happening in its Church kingdom. But what was that? They could not understand. The old belief was being prohibited and the new one did not approve itself and was too weak. How could it live?.. That protest that was growing in the Volga region had nothing to do with Islam in reality. There were no bearers of Islamic culture! Decades had passed before they
appeared. It is possible that in the Arabic East people did not know about Kazan or Ufa. The growing rebellion had Islamic symbols Monotheism since people knew: only in Islam remained pure belief in Heavenly God and Christianity had lost it. The Turki were becoming Basurmans. They were becoming them inspiredly. They were accustomed to spiritual purity and they could not live without God. After all, they were the Hanifs! Moscow changed their belief and was deceiving them. And could those that did not want to be the Slavs protest? Those that did not want to be farm laborers? Desperate and pitiless rebellion was the only way. The deposition of the patriarch Job seemed absurd to many people since it was a deviation from belief in God and something inhuman and sinful. If coreligionists treated their pastor, a saint person, that way who needed such coreligionists?.. Common people have always been looking for simplicity in explanations. The clergymen themselves nudged them to rebellion. By their actions. And seditious decrees by which Russia was being divided and torn into pieces. Especially as among the Russian clergymen there were many Greeks, which should not be forgotten. In 1606 there was a rebellion headed by Bolotnikov; that rebellion was not connected with Islam at all. However, it was not connected with Russia either. The rebellion happened on Don that was not part of Russia affected by the time of troubles. The Cossacks turned against Greek belief, against Slavdom (against the Katsaps) that was being imposed by Moscow. But they followed False Demetrius recognizing him as Ryurikovich, i.e. the legal tsar, which emphasized the absurdity of that situation The people of Don fully lost themselves; they were demoralized. They simply were not ready for the ideological attack of the Catholics.
The same blind discontent was expressed by the Volga region that was ideologically connected with Ivan Bolotnikovs Cossacks, which made the rebellion a peasant religious war. The rebellion was especially vigor where Islam had been known from the times when the Crimean khan had been the ruler. It proves that the time of troubles expressed the conflict of belief that arose in Moscow Russia and was heard like an echo in the whole Russia For the Turki it was the continuation of the tragedy of the Horde. Its second act. The term peasant war is not as evident as it seems at first sight. It is connected not with farmers but with Christians. That was a religious war in its essence, which is witnessed, for example, by the peasant war early in the XVII century in Russia. Or the peasant war of 1524 1526 and the Thirty Years' War in Germany (1618 1648). They were waged not for the land but for belief. In Germany the enemies of Protestants were the Catholics and their protgs. In Russia the enemies were the same Catholics. During the epoch of persecutions the Protestants were thinking about an alliance with the Russian Church; it was not by chance when in 1562 they published Luthers catechesis in the language clear to the Russians. Hussites, Lutherans and Calvinists were the first ones that rushed to the east of Europe but they were bad politicians and unskillful diplomats. The Popes nuncio turned out to be more skilful; he outwitted them Of course this observation is not indisputable to a great extent but one can make a comparison between the terms Christian and peasant; at least in Russia these words appeared at the same time late in the XVI century. The same as Basurman and Besermen which at first were the synonyms of the term Moslem, which was mentioned by N.M. Karamzin in his works. The old Altaic spiritual institute was destroyed and a new one was not created. Waiting on a crossroad the people began to search for hope for salvation and future. The rebellion welded them together Was that by chance or not but such people welded
287 / 342
Muscovy and Russia
together by the idea were headed by Kuzma Minin and Demetrius Pozharskiy, the liberators of Moscow. Those were real Basurmans, the opponents of the Greeks, against whom the Russian Jesuit patriarch demanded to fight. They were also called Tatars; they were fighting against Christianity that was calling Slavs its allies That was the beginning of another division of the Turkic people. Into the Slavs and the Tatars. In documents of that epoch Volga, Don, Ryazan and other Tatars are mentioned. They were marching under the green flag with the image of Heavenly God. They were against the Katsaps, i.e. the Slavs. They were the ones that released Moscow from the Catholics the Turki who cared for the lot of Eternal Blue Sky They remembered that Moscow was the new capital of the Horde. Those people were living under old testaments; for them the world around them had not changed with the names and signs changing; the ancient Horde is our mother that gave birth to us, - they used to say speaking about sharp practice of the Muscovites. The Don Cossack Bolotnikov (or, more precisely, Balcha) that headed the Southern movement learnt about Islam in the Turkish prison but he did not change his fathers belief And who were those in whose honor the monument was raised in the Red Square Minin and Pozharskiy in reality? It is not likely that somebody knows for certain. It is clear that they were Russians since they lived in Russia. But they were fighting against Christianity. It means they were the Tatars?.. Or Basurmans?.. Their ancestors were called the Kipchaks and their native Nizhni Novgorod was called IbrahimYurt or Bulgar (that was an ancient place of fairs where merchants from all over Oka would come; they used to say: we are going to Bulgar to bargain.) By the way, the Russian hero Kuzma Minin was buried for the second time according to a Turkic tradition in a barrow crypt. But certainly this is not the strangest thing. Russian historians remembered about
Minin and Pozharskiy only in the XIX century! It seems at that time appeared their surnames and Christian names. Or that is wrong?.. Bolotnikovs real name was Balcha, which meant marsh (pronounced as boloto in Russian) in Turkic. And what about Novgorod inhabitants? Not everything is clear here. Karamzin on whose initiative the monument in honor of Minin and Pozharskiy was erected said nothing about them. From the short biography of the prince Pozharskiy it is clear that he had Turkic roots that were close to Ryurikoviches, the same as his relatives Ramadanovskiys. The same is witnessed by the emblem of the family yataghans and an arrow are certainly Eastern symbols. It is possible that the princes surname was Bozhir and his ancestors were engaged in metallurgy and blacksmithing, which is reflected by the symbols on the emblem. And Minins origin is read in his name. Kozma in Turkic means scone, fritter and min means flour. It seems he was a flour trader. Or a baker Their unchristian past is also confirmed by the fact that those heroes of the time of troubles have not been canonized by the Russian Church although they were consecrated saints of a lower rank. Unfortunately these and other issues connected with the history of Islam in the Volga region have not been researched. It was prohibited to study Basurmans in Russia. According to Russian academician generals there was nothing to study there; Moscow decided once and for all that Islam in Russia appeared in the X century from the Arabian visitor. And that was it. An unexpected thing is possible There is a nation living along the Vyatka river that still calls itself Basurmans; it is possibly a split of the past, the descendants of the defenders of Moscow from among the irregulars that were headed by Minin and Pozharskiy. The Turki, but very special Turki that did not accept either Islam or Christianity. Who are they? One cannot read that in a historical and ethnographic reference book.
Of course after the impostor was deposed the Jesuit was expelled from the patriarchal chair of the Russian Church. He was violently beaten and spent the lees of his life in Poland where he publicly declared about his Catholicism that he was serving all his life. His position was taken by the Kazan metropolitan Germogen, a Turki by birth and spirit; he had authority not because he was an ardent opponent of the deposed Jesuit but because he was regarded perhaps as the only clergyman that was feeling the force of religion correctly. The sentiments of the Kazan eparchy originated from him. From his exalted position in Islam he saw what Russian Christianity was loosing Monotheism and freedom of spirit. In other words that was the core of the Turkic spiritual culture the return to which could calm the people down and bring peace. The Patriarchs conduct showed that that was possible and made people respect him the head of the Church that could see a little bit more than anybody. That was the Patriarch Germogens nature; he did not fit in repugnant Moscow society. He was a rude person by nature but he was strict for himself; he would express his adherence to the old traditions directly or indirectly. In 1609 he ordered to bring the remains of the murdered tsarevich Demetrius from Uglich to Moscow and that was his tribute to the memory of Ryurikoviches, then he called the blinded Patriarch Job from the monastery and made a crowd of the Slavs in the square repent betrayal, perjury and murders on their knees. And they cried and they repented since they knew that that was the justice. The Patriarch never forgot about his adherence to the past; hence his weight in the country. Was that an act of purification? Maybe. Or the desire to return to the old belief? That is also possible. After all whom did Russia betray if not God? That was the punishment for transgressions, - the Patriarch thought That conservative person from Kazan who headed the Russian Christian
Church was possibly right the change of the political culture is a very complicated process. Germogen stood for the truth even when the crowd dissatisfied with the reign of Basil Shuyskiy took him to the place of execution and, shaking his beard, was crying for his content to change the legal tsar Basil IV for the impostor False Demetrius II. The Patriarch remained tough although he himself hated Shuyskiy. They threatened him with death but he showed them the sky and said: I am afraid of the one living there. He remembered the Turkic tradition only God could change the ruler and he saved the tsar and took hatred and fists of the berserk crown upon himself. He was also tough with Bolotnikov when he approached Moscow and wanted to invade it. And he would have done it. The wise Patriarch said that power could be changed only legally. And the insurgent calmed down; their ardor was dampened The delicacy of the sense of right and wrong was his peculiarity in everything. But at the same time he was a timid person. He saved Moscow and the tsar but could not save himself from the accusations of the Polish boyar party that was playing the master in the capital. And he forfeited. At that time in Russia the Turki were fighting with the Slavs like the new with the past, the Altaic with the Greek, but very few comprehended what was happening around. Everybody was fighting with everybody. However in that fight, the same as in playing marked cards, they did not win; those that were the masters of the game, those that were harassing the players and those that were making the game more excited they were the winners. They were too far away in the West. In Rome. In Russia Westerners were headed by Saltykov, a person of simple Turkic origin saltyk means flat-footed, lame. He brought the second wave of the time of troubles: on a sudden second rate aristocrats found Christian souls in them and were getting closer to the race for power That swarm was more numerous and more dangerous.
They also supported the reforms that allegedly were necessary for the country and, more than that, they were interested in central authority. And they found a suitable leader False Demetrius II also known as Tushino thief. In 1608 he settled in Tushino, Moscow region, from where he was trying to invade Moscow with the aid of the Polish army. That was a new protg of Rome, another man of unknown origin. However, the Slavs amusedly accepted him as the tsar. Being nobody, that villain has left a trace in the Russian history. An outstanding trace. In 1609 he met Filaret patronized by False Demetrius I and appointed him Patriarch of the Russian Church instead of Germogen. Thus there were two Christian Patriarchs in the whole Russia one for the legal power, the other for the self-constituted one. It is hard to say which one was more important. Filaret was ruling over eparchies that recognized the Tushino thief he was serving and making his living there. More than that, in the name of the Russian people that impostors patriarch entered into negotiations with the Polish king Zygmunt concerning his son Vladislav whom he promised the Russian throne The new Patriarch was an outright betrayer and did not conceal that. In 1610 the power of False Demetrius II was over; a Tatar named Peter Arslan Urusov beheaded him for his cruelty and at that he uttered the following: I will show you how to drown khans and put murzas to dungeons. And Filaret hastened to disappear abroad with a Polish detachment that was guarding him. On their way the runaways were captured by Polish Russians that appointed Filaret into the embassy to the Prince Golitsin that was to enter new negotiations with Zygmunt. By a strange concatenation of circumstances Filaret was always lucky; he managed to avoid tortures and prison, which caused a lot of suffering to other traitors and betrayers. Negotiations with Zygmunt, the same
as all the previous ones, were a failure. The king knew that Russia was doomed and he saw no point in participating in negotiations concerning its lot. Regarding himself a descendant of Ryurikoviches he started a war to get the throne with no conditions. Later Sweden was engaged when it also remembered the Arian past that connected Moscow and Stockholm; according to an agreement with Shuyskiy, that descendant of the Varangian Ryurikoviches, it wanted to support the Russians in their fight against Rome. In a word, everything was getting more strained and complicated. As though on purpose. Those were complicated diplomatic negotiations. In the opinion of certain Russians they were the only legal way out in the situation in Moscow Russia after Ivan the Terrible was dead. The Polish dynasty, as is well known, was founded by descendants of Ryurikoviches that accepted Christianity in the X century. They were the Catholics by spirit but the Turki by birth. During the centuries the dynasty became relatives with European, especially Sweden, monarchal families. However that did not change the essence of their family trees Hence intense interest of the Poles, Swedes and Germans in the events of the time of troubles in Moscow. And the time of troubles was getting more and more strained. Filaret stayed in Marienburg; he did not return to his motherland. The Catholics were attentive to him and allowed him to visit the academy in Vilno where he could improve his Latin that he had learnt from one Jesuit in his childhood. Captivity, studies and the war in Muscovy lasted for years that is a different history in which only one thing is interesting. The academy where Filaret did his studies was founded on the Popes order for the chosen young men from the best Lithuanian Russian families; the Jesuits were the teachers there. They were teaching theology, history and the methods of influence on Orthodox Christians so as to incline them to secret conversion into Catholicism.
In other words, that was a forge of workers for the time of troubles. That forge was not working rapidly; the Pope Clement VIII, its founder, did not believe in success. Till June of 1605 he did not take action on his relations with False Demetrius although he carried on a correspondence with him. So he did nothing till he died. The Pope that took the name of Paul V stroke life into the Russian time of troubles. He was its think tank and he ordered the Cardinal Rangoni to prepare an agent; Rome designed the destiny of the impostor and provided sufficient means and covering force. The Pope Paul V was born away with the idea of introduction of the Slavs into the Catholic world and would stick at nothing. His interest to the East is possibly explained by the fact that he was of the Turkic origin, which is witnessed by the Popes emblem on which a dragon is depicted. The ancient sign of his family is exactly the same as on the emblem of Kazan The Popes secular name was possibly an echo of the past Kamill Borgese. The Turki understand it even after it has been remade in the European manner. The Jesuits headquarters were located in Vilno where the Church Union was being elaborated that was the plan to unite the Eastern and Western Churches under the Popes mastership. As a matter of fact that idea was being realized in Russia of the time of troubles. They turned the Russians into the Slavs a military monster controlled by the Pope that will invade Don and the Caucasus, occupy Persia and hit the Moslem world from the east. That meant protection of the Popes empire from the enemies from without. The Catholics did not conceal their plans. In order to execute its plans the West needed the time of troubles in Moscow. That was another step of the colonization of the East. For the first time that plan was announced on August 29th, 1584 by the Popes legate Possevino (that one who was trying to incline Ivan) in his letter to the Cardinal di Como. He designed the outlines of the time of troubles and proposed a term of three years for Poland to conquer Muscovy.
And the future campaign of the Slavs to the East with the conquest of Persia was also designed by him the same as taking the Turkish Moslems in the rear Thus the Jesuit showed the outlines of the foreign policy that Romanovs were conducting during three centuries. Persian and Turkish wars that took away thousands of lives were waged on the order of Rome They were advantageous only for it. At that time persecuting Ivan the Terrible the West was preparing boyar traitors that finally killed the legal power in Moscow. At that time the West started to talk over influential Slavs whom he promised awards and privileges. He was prepared for anything in order to possess Russia the huge gates to the East. In his letter the Cardinal Possivino called Rus that became an ally of the West Russia. He was the first who said that word! New toponym was created according to Jesuit rules: -ia ending reflects the traditions of Latin. Hence such Latin names as Alnglia, Italia, etc. I.e. country instead of the Turkic stan. But Jesuits, those authors of the modern European toponymy, were always making mistakes. For instance in France the province where Oc dialect was spoken was formerly called Languedoc or Occistan. Adding the Latin ending -ia to the Turkic toponym they had Occitania, which was a tautology. The same mistake relates to France itself it was formerly called El de Franc. The -land which is often met in European toponyms is derived from the Turkic il, el, el (nation, country) which was turned into lan, land through elen (somebodys country, personified land) by the Jesuits That was in accordance with their traditions: to replace a letter in a word or a word in a sentence. And the word obtained an absolutely different meaning. False Demetrius I was being prepared in Vilno too. The Jesuits found him in Zaporozhye where he was hiding himself
from the Russian tsar. That nice monk was the Patriarch Jobs clerk; he was nearly exiled for his impudent speeches against the tsar Boris, but he escaped to Lithuania. Contrary to a dismal Russian legend he was not silly; the tsars biography was put together very realistically and professionally and he was suitable for his role: his conduct was notable for royal deeds and manners. To tell the truth, he was often overacting, for which he fell into disfavor. For instance when he was asking the Polish king to appoint him tsar and not the great khan. As for the rest, the Jesuits pupil was acting perfectly. N.M. Karamzin describes the conventual tsarinas recognition of her son, False Demetrius I, in detail. She agreed for deceit, which was so disgusting for the saint title of conventual and her parent heart since she had no choice either death or royal life. Amiable Russian people were steeped in tears when the mother and the son came out of a tent end embraced after a long parting However those Russian people were really astonished hearing the words of the Jesuit Nikolai Chernikovskiy who hailed the new monarch in Latin that the people did not understand. The prepared impostor was recognized and accepted by the nobility of the capital they showed discrimination in good manners, those manners that the tsar Boris lacked. This shows that the Catholics knew the situation in Moscow. Their sweet lies pleasant for everyone were worse than poison for Godunov; it was weakening his power. He could not stand against their subtle lies and died of unbearable heart-heaviness being accused of a mortal sin. The word overtook the tsar but not poison and it has been killing him for many centuries even though he is dead The second impostor on the Moscow throne was also prepared by the Jesuits. They put about a rumor that the tsar Demetrius was alive and his coachman had been killed instead. The Catholics knew: the
Turki being simple-minded like children are notable for their credibility to rumors. Because the Catholics were children themselves: they would lie and believe their lies. The Jesuits trick was successful. Learning the desired news about the saved tsar the masses were willingly following the impostor; they were headed by the Patriarch Filaret. The Jesuits that had conquered Europe always waged a war using lies, in which they were the best. Moscow was living according to their plan being unaware of the reasons of its agitation. Another conspiracy of 1610 caused political death of Basil Shuyskiy, the last legal tsar in the Russian history. He himself denied the throne and moved from his royal chambers to his old boyar house and left the country to its fate. Heart almost stops beating when you read about the details of the time of troubles described by Karamzin. The lot of Shuyskiy is the lot of a noble Turki that showed inability to live in new conditions. He was to perish! The fact that he was called the captive tsar makes one shudder. The Slavs who had an aversion to new regicide immured their monarch in a Christian cloister considering a cell to be the threshold of a grave. In the times of white belief cloisters served for different purposes not to immure people there. But everything changed. In the same way the Church was dealing with many Western kings in whose veins there was royal Altaic blood. They were not killed but sent to die without bread and water in peace of a cloistral casemate. And the Poles party that invaded the capital was steadily playing the master; that swarm of rodents could be stopped only by citizens-in-arms. The Patriarch Germogen appealed to the nation. But that former Kazan Metropolitan was heard only in the Volga region from where long-awaited support came. The Russian Church seemed to have found itself; finally it was directed by the interests of the country and not those of the tsar. If only that was true According to a crazy tradition the third Patriarch was deposed too and immured in a
cell the reliable threshold of a grave like Shuyskiy, where he died of hunger in 1612. Who needed his disgrace and dreadful death? The question is still open. But the answer to this question is set forth in the aforementioned Possevinos letter: the saint throne cannot allow Russia to be controlled by non-Catholic rulers from Denmark or Sweden or, even worse, by the Tatars or Turki. The word Tatar in the Jesuits lexicon had a religious meaning and referred to the Turki that had not betrayed Monotheism. The Patriarch Germogen was one of them; he was a Tatar and by his patriarchal will he released Muscovy from the loyalty oath to the Polish king that Polish Russians had managed to obtain. That is what Germogen suffered for he left the Catholics without victory. It is indicative that he was deposed the same year when the country found itself and spirit and pride returned to it after it had been put onto its knees It started to win. After its liberation from the Catholics Russia entered upon the election of the tsar of the whole Russia. And a wrong thing happened again; everything fell back into place. At the Council where delegates of towns and estates gathered there was no unity. It all was made even more complex by the absence of the Patriarch who was to legalize the elected power to sanctify it. It was impossible to choose a tsar without a Patriarch since he was the only one who could approve of the elected by anointment, which meant his assumption of power that was an Altaic ceremony. There would be no anointment everybody at the Council understood that but they were all trying not to mention lawlessness. And they were keeping silent. It should be mentioned that the elections were in accordance with the time of troubles with reformations, conspiracies, outright forgery and rumors. Due to the Patriarchs absence at first they decided to turn to a foreign candidate. They were arguing which king Polish or Swedish to
swear? They denied both although both monarchs were the relatives of the Ryurikoviches. Then they remembered Tatar tsarevitches Genghisides. They seemed shallow. They also denied noble boyars since they were mixed up with the time of troubles In a word, they were dealing with dirty wash. Finally when the elections reached a stalemate someone suggested Mikhail Romanov, a youth of common origin; the boyars Morozov, Sheremetiev and the Polish Boyar Party grandees supported him. This candidates success was seen in one thing: he had nothing to do with the time of troubles. That was his only dignity; he had not approved himself in any other way. In that mess they did not mention that on February 21st, 1613 the Council that was tired of scandals and squabbles elected Mikhail, the Patriarch Filarets son, the tsar. That was the son of the patriarch that was studying the Jesuit science in Vilno. Mikhail was not present at the Council; he was elected in absence; that was possibly made so as to avoid the ceremony of anointment. That was the trick. Because from the point of view of those that called Muscovy Russia Filaret was the Patriarch, which in their opinion legalized the elections But what was that Patriarch? And where was he? They would not say. They sent the Councils embassy to the new tsar that was hiding in Kostroma region in the Ipatievsk Monastery. Boyar traitors were begging the young man to become the peoples father on their knees. Three times he refused so that everything seemed decent and then he agreed One would think, that was a play another reformation of the time of troubles. But no. Those events are clarified by the detail that explains that that was not just a play but a play which was well directed: before the Council the candidate changed his surname he was Zakharyin-Yuryev and became Romanov, i.e. Roman. It seems that staying in Poland the father sent that advice that was necessary for the victory and determined the lot of the one
from among the people, as they say about the first of Romanovs. And it becomes clear why they lying over the elections of the Russian Church Patriarch and who controlled the Council and all the Russian life. Many things are explained. Even the Patriarch Germogens cruel death. The events of the time of troubles are clarified and become more distinct and logical. The Slavs betrayal is evident. No official troubles can conceal it. Russia was simply sold to the West When the army is hesitating it is getting troubled, - an ancient Turkic proverb teaches. It contains untranslatable pun, i.e. events become troubled. That is what was happening in Rus when it was being turned into Russia. That was a hard time. It can be called even terrible. The new tsar faced insoluble political problems; in the first instance that was domestic policy. To gather a country tormented by the time of troubles, to temperate the boyars and nobles, to catch the robbers that controlled the roads and impeded trade hundreds of important issues were waiting for the new tsar. It was complicated by the empty treasury; Moscow could not even afford to hire archers. The throne was living without guardians. The problems of foreign policy were no less important. The war with Sweden started in 1614 was lost by Mikhail But then, as though with a wave of a wand, the Slavs that had neither an army not assets, started to win. One victory followed another. The Swedes that had not lost a singe battle wanted to make peace with Moscow. The king Gustav Adolph waived the right for Novgorod region that was fully controlled by him. At the Polish front everything was strange too. Under somebodys order the Poles retreated and wanted to make peace and suggested cartel. From where were those great privileges coming? And what for? Such questions were not asked then.
Because Rus became Russia; it was being discussed in Europe. That explained that the Swedes turned into good neighbors and Poland renounced its claims for the Moscow throne; that the French king Louis XIII suggested to exchange ambassadors with Moscow; that the English king Jacob I decided to lend Mikhail money. The young tsar was doomed for success. They did not require much from Moscow just to destroy the hearths of the Turkic spiritual culture to the end. That was the payment for privileges granted by the Pope. And he also wanted to reform the Russian Christian Church where the tradition of Monotheism remained and make it closer if not to Catholicism itself than to Catholic canons. In 1619 Filaret returned from the captivity; he was exchanged for a Polish colonel and using opportunity of the Jerusalem Patriarch Theophans presence in Moscow the son called his father the Patriarch of the whole Russia. That was cynicism which failed to meet any rules. That was perhaps the most violent attack on the Russian Church prestige. The illegally elected tsar approved the choice of the impostor False Demetrius II, which certainly caused the catastrophe of the state. As a matter of fact, the whole XVII century was a bloody catastrophe. People were dying for their faith to Heavenly God. For devotedness to the law. The Old Believers and Moslems of Russia are a tough echo of that royal decision. It turns out the Church split of 1666 and Islam in the Volga region were prepared during the time of troubles. For Rome it was important to abolish belief in Tengri and sponge the peoples memory of it at all costs to replace or to destroy it. All these things could have not been written here, after all, belief is a private matter of the people, if it had not been for another circumstance another royal decree approved on May 20th, 1625. It determined the limits of the Russian Church power, which was absolutely new. From that decree they started the Church split on which the Pope insisted or, more precisely, they started the
abolishment of the Turkic spiritual institution. The Church was groaning of those innovations. That is grief. Or, more precisely, a tragedy. In the reforms there is certainly no sin; all the countries take the way of renewal sooner or later. But this is a different case! The tsar Mikhail granted his father the Popes rights. He chose a region similar to that of the Pope in Italy where the Patriarch had plenipotentiary power; there was popular court there and he was the master of peoples bodies and property. That was a unique state within a state; the second Vatican. The Patriarchs region was run by offices court, church and state ones. Everything was exactly the same as the Pope had it but with Russian grandeur! In every office there was a boyar with clerks and apprentices. The Church innovation later moved to state offices which glorified the tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, the inventor of Russian bureaucracy. Bureaucrats became the army of the throne; they were the only ones that allowed the dynasty of Romanovs to control the country for centuries. In total despotism With the passing of the years the Russian Church was getting less and less like its predecessor; it was notable for foreign features then. For instance, the Patriarchs court was no less grand as that of the tsar. There was also a group of advisors, its own administration the boyars, nobles and boyars children waiting for the Patriarchs orders and devotedly executing them. The secular features were replacing spiritual ones. That is what made the Russian Church closer to the Western Church: the ceremonies and appearance were becoming top of priorities. They were trying to forget spirit, conscious and deeds. The things against which the Reformation was directed in the East were flourishing in Moscow, which gave harvest the ideology of Slavdom which was being thoroughly polished. As a matter of fact, that new worldview was the result of the time of
troubles That was the essence of the Western Christianization. Its result speaks for itself: slaves instead of free people. The signs of the Turkic culture were being skillfully and cunningly hidden. Thus the Patriarch, the same as the Pope some time ago, made the tsar prohibit fist fights. He aired discontent concerning Christmas trees which were one of the decorations of Tengris birthday the 25th of December. He also abolished other folk feasts that impeded Christianity. So that everything was the same as in the East. For instance, Ary-alkyn (in Altai it was celebrated on the ninth day of the Epiphany - Christmas) he called the Baptism of Christ, a Jewish holiday. Although nothing changed; people would make holes in the ice on frozen rivers and lakes and duck into cold water three times (the Jews, as is well known, circumcise infants on the ninth day). It turns out, under the baptism the Slavs understood circumcision while that is a different baptism. Spring Naruz became the Easter with the same colored eggs and cakes. Only the name changed. And there are many similar examples. The Slavic culture was getting full of blind copies of the foreign ones. That was outright acquisitiveness. But that was the goal of Rome which was turning Rus into Russia With the new name another innovation came to the country. On the national emblem appeared a significant detail; it has not disappeared yet. It can be seen by those who take a loser look on the emblem of Slavic Russia. This is the third crown over the double eagle, the upper one; it appeared under Romanovs. Formerly, under Ivan III, each head of the eagle had one crown; there were two of them, which witnessed the unity of spiritual and secular power in the country. The appearance of the third crown and the absence of the head to which it belongs reflect what was happening in Moscow at that time: the Pope got power but did not dare
declare that. The new master who gave the new name to the country did not want to disclose himself! But he legalized himself on the emblem Heraldry is a very expressive science; much is read in its strict symbols. The official version of the appearance of the third crown on the Russian national emblem provides a different interpretation one that does not contain any sense. It is like a mockery. This description was made after the armistice of Andrusovo with Poland in 1667: The double eagle is the emblem of the Tsar and Grand Duke Alexei Mikhailovich, the absolute sovereign of the whole Great, Minor and White Russia, his royal highness of the Russian land, where there are three crowns symbolizing three great Kazan, Astrakhan and Siberian rules It is impossible to invent more. Total absurdity. Since two crowns of the double eagle existed long before Alexei Mikhailovich. The same as in the times of Ivan III when neither Kazan nor Siberia were parts of Russia. And the facts that the word crown (corona in Russian) in the aforementioned decree is given in Turkic transcription coruna requires special explanations. Changes in Russia were especially dynamic under Alexei Mikhailovich, the Patriarch Filarets grandson. He was being brought up in antagonism against the Turki, which was controlled by a secret Jesuit, the boyar Morozov. He did not let his fosterling move a step from his side; he was near day and night. No sooner than he became tsar, Alexei visited Poland where he recognized that he was a Catholic in spirit. However, they did not pay attention to the young tsars frolic; it became history as an oddity. Upon his return the tsar did not know what to do; his activity became vigorous. The first thing he ordered his confidants was to wear western clothes. Then he prohibited national cookery. Old (Turkic) dishes were called heathen and wrong for the Christians He started with the royal cooks all of them were either
dismissed or substituted. The new ones were invited from Poland and other western countries. But of course that was not enough to please the Pope. The tsars cares about legal implementation of the new state became the basis of the Regulations or the statute roll elaborated by the clerks Leontiev and Griboedov, modest ordinary civil servants. Who were they in reality? It is not known but their deep knowledge of the western legislation is striking. The document was professionally executed at the level of the Sorbonne graduates. Where did those two Russians get such deep knowledge? Everywhere they were known by their deeds Through the tsar Alexei the secret master of Russia introduced serfdom slavery without fetters and chains. Under the tsars order it was allowed to sell and starve the Christians (!) and to force them to work without paying them. Subdidit se jugo Christi, indeed; the baptism and slavery were close to each other. One followed the other. Although in appearance everything seemed proper: young Christians were simply ascribed to a church parish which they were not allowed to change. No violence, no mess, no cruelty They were becoming the landowners property. Their souls! Not people. Putting the Regulations together the modest tsar Alexei introduced the metropolitan Nikon into the political scene of the country that was an uneducated and conceited person. He was entrusted to carry out the delicate procedure the Church reform, i.e. correction of Church books and ceremonies. Having become the patriarch of the Russian Church Nikon got down to unknown business too vehemently. That mediocre person was a boon for Rome. Since not a single man of sense would have agreed for what had been suggested. Only an idiot could believe in presence of mistakes in sacred books on which belief in Heavenly God was based In the books on which the Bible and Koran were based; in the books
cited by Geser, Zoroaster, Buddha, Moses, Lao-tzu, Mani and other prophets. Those books were rewritten by highskilled people who regarded a blot in the text as a sin in their lives. And the correction initiated by Nikon was of a different character. The term God (Tengri) was being replaced by the term Jesus Christ, which was ordered by the Vicar of Christ. For that purpose they added phrases, replaced words and certain things were simply crossed out. In this connection it is necessary to provide the beginning of the Greek alphabet which the Greeks took, according to their legend, from the dragon the foreign tsar. Alpha, beta, gamma, delta These words are not translated from the Greek and in Turkic they are as follows: Alp biti gamag delte the holy scripture of the divine hero should be provided in full (without deletions). This is an instruction for a writer. The ancient Turkic alphabet begins from these words; later that tradition came to the Jewish and Arabic culture. That was the substitution of the philosophical conception of God and not the correction. God became a mistake for Russian Christians. Hence disputes concerning the spelling of the name in Russia the word Jesus starts with the letter pronounced as i and they were disputing whether one or two letters were to be written in the beginning. Of course not the number of letters was the main reason but the place of the prophet whom the Europeans regarded as God and were trying to do the same in Russia What has a letter got to do with it? It was not in question in the Holy Scripture but the dispute was about it. The Jesuits that started that correction did not even notice when they showed their Turkic roots and themselves as they were again. Heresy, order, Catholicism are Turkic words that became established in the West; everything is clear about them. But to an extent Jesus is a Turkic word too. It sounds strange but the letter j added to the word meant to follow
in the Turkic linguistic tradition. In the times of St. Augustine they used to write Esus but when Christianity was established it was changed by Jesus, which meant to follow Esus. This example shows again that the Turki that became Catholics could not invent something new This is the world where it is extremely difficult to invent something new. The Turkic books editing was controlled by the Greeks and Italians; those were not the Slavs. They were not allowed since they were not free in their Church. Hence slave. Nobody was embarrassed by the fact that the editors did not know the language in which ancient books were written. The Jesuits were using ready originals printed in a Genoese printing shop. They offered new books for the Slavs the books that were called corrected. And that was it. The Jesuits had done exactly the same in India, Armenia, Egypt; substitution was everywhere. Or, more precisely, that was forgery And it was started in the West in Jesuit universities. Mistakes were not being corrected; on the contrary they were introduced into the text. Perhaps the best description of the events of those years is given in The Travel of the Antiochian Patriarch Macarius to Russia in the Second Half of the XVII Century Described by his Son, the Archdeacon Paul from Aleppo. A very rare book. Three volumes are full of details worth considered analysis. And sighs. The facts mentioned by that important eyewitness are impressive; it should be mentioned that they differ from inventions of Russian historians. The Patriarch Macarius came to Moscow in the afternoon on the 2nd of February, 1655; on his way he was talking to Russian clergymen and marked the big number of priests that did know divine ceremonies at all. They were ordained not long before that. And that was done without teaching them the basics. Why? It turns out old clergymen died of plague. All of them
departed during that epidemic. Being unaware of the harsh treatment of patriarchs in the Russian Church, nonetheless, deep in his mind Macarius did not believe in natural death of old clergymen. He even had a thought that the epidemic was rather strange since it affected only the clergy. In Russia where sacred books were being corrected and people were being killed for belief his doubts were quite normal. The Slavs lacked the clergymen, especially in the countryside, and by their request the Greek was conferring orders to certain common people since parishes had existed without clergymen for years. In the times of Nikon the clergymen were dying in families. The epidemic affected those parishes where people did not want to change God for Jesus Christ. This is the way the Russian Church was being reformed and new orders which made even the infants turn gray were being introduced. This is a very far-reaching detail since it is known that till 1589, i.e. before Christianity was accepted in Russia the Greek clergymen were prohibited to serve in Russian temples let alone ordination. In the bishops oath of the Russian Church even in the times of Ivan the Terrible there was a promise not to accept the Greeks either to the metropolitans or to bishops chairs. In the times of Godunov these words were crossed out. Common Greeks were not previously allowed to Russian churches at all special Christian churches were built for them It is a significant fact, is it not? It makes the picture of the baptism of Russia by the Greeks in the X century clearer. Here it is, the missing stroke! By force the tsar Alexei was carrying out Christianization; on his order entire villages were herded into a river; some twenty thousand people were baptized a day. That lasted for months and years. They started
from Moscow and its suburbs That is a huge number; Nikon reported it to Macarius being unaware that he gave away a secret. In the country that officially accepted Christianity in the X century this number was impossible. Or the country was not Christian? Either one thing or the other. But they would really baptize thousands of people, which is seen from other sources. The baptized according to Christian traditions were declared the Slavs; they were given presents from the tsar cloth for a shirt or a coin. Those that belonged to middle classes could become civil servants in public offices. Not all the Russians understood that they were becoming the Slavs a different nation. They still had the same ceremonies in the same temples which were not changing with the acceptance of Christianity and coming of a new priest. Many regarded baptism as the royal whim. Those that could baptized several times. For presents, of course. Church statistics was not in question while it existed. Figures appeared not out of nowhere. Christian cares did not trouble the flock and affected only the clergy. The bishop Paul Kolomenskiy was among the first who suffered of royal despotism; that was a very noble and educated person the same as the elite of the old Russian clergy he did not recognize the changes of ordinances of belief and ceremonies. He called them deviation from God. And he doomed himself to death when he declared: From the time when we inherited the right belief of our pious fathers and grandfathers we have been adhering to their ceremonies and this belief and now we do not agree to change them. This meant his death. The bishop together with his nearest was exiled to a monastery formed for that purpose; nobody would return from there alive. That was the first concentration camp in Russia with orders of which the Inquisitors would have been envious. Later their number increased significantly.
The Christians will find it strange but the Greek patriarch was pleased with the tragedy of the bishop of Kolomna when he learnt about it. He liked the way Christ-loving tsar Alexei conducted a dialogue with his opponents. This is a perfect law, - the Greek wrote, the bishop is worth it Gods commandment Thou shalt do no murder was a mere name in Russia, which was getting clear for millions and millions of people. They were being killed for belief in God and their reluctance to betray it. Nikon also pleased the Greek Patriarch with his pious conduct when he brought cannibals to Moscow to eat the rivals of Christianity alive. It turns out such things were happening in Slavic Russia too. Macarius described his conversation with smiling LappsThis was marked in his travel notes! Of course without any estrangement. A stroke of life. Neither Paul Kolomenskiy nor other Russian people devoted to God were frightened of executions and they did not put three fingers together to cross themselves with a Greek cross. They were the Turki in their spirit and they were still faithful to Altaic two fingers that remained in Russia only on ancient icons made by Turkic craftsmen. It is interesting that the Patriarch Filaret also used to pray in a Turkic way putting two fingers middle finger and ringer finger together, which is shown on his seal. Nikon, by the will of the Antiochian Patriarch Macarius introduced Greek three fingers for praying and thus for the first time he affected the masses generations of which had been brought up with belief that two fingers was the sign of belonging to the Sky. The same as the accompanying word amen That is how it was in Altai. But everything was changing. The believers sacrificed their lives for the reason connected with putting fingers while praying. Three fingers in their opinion meant more betrayal of the belief of the pious fathers and grandfathers. The change of culture!.. That is what was being rejected by the people whose life philosophy was
being broken by the introduction of a new belief and the Slavic culture through Nikon and his subjects. They were against slavery; it was the only thing which the proud Russian people denied stirring up rebellions and raising revolts. Free Turki that gave the image of Heavenly God to the world were being turned into slaves for whom serfdom and a bureaucracy were suitable. That was all the quiet tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov gave them and Russia. Fetters and a whip for centuries. And prisons that had not previously existed. The Patriarch Nikon felt the taste of blood and like a furious bull was rushing forward. The Jesuits prepared a Service Book for him and later other liturgical books which he introduced into the Church everyday life by force. The Patriarch would prove his truth with his fists the same as the Greeks used to do it at Councils some time ago; the displeased were being beaten in temples. And somebodys careful lips were speaking of him as the leader of the Christian world and the peoples favorite. He was regarded as an heir to the Constantinople Chair. And the fool decided that he had had reached everything himself and broke off with the tsar, which meant with the Pope. That scandal was notorious but it did not last for long. It ended by a miracle; the Patriarch understood everything and made a declaration about the falseness of the royal sinful policy. That fell outside the limits of the rule of game, which meant new disturbance since Nikon officially denied Christianity, judged it and left for an old monastery with old traditions to pray for forgiveness of his sins God opened his eyes, - people thought. The Kremlin was agitated, Rome went berserk that was not expected by them. The rulers of Russia known and secret ones had nothing to do but convene a Council in 1666 and depose one more obstinate Patriarch. That was done by Greek
Catholics headed by Paisius Ligarid. At the same time the Council legalized violence with which Christianity was being propagated in Russia; the following was written in its decision: To execute those disobeying the Councils decisions violently: to put them to prisons, exile, beat with beef sinews, cut off their noses, ears, tongues and hands. Those that declared themselves sages were getting mad Russia became agitated; it was being chocked with blood running from its cut throat. The clergymen and the masses raised. In 1670 the rebellion of Stenka Razin began; its leader wanted to smash the boyars for betraying God. It turned into a peasant war; the insurgents had the same motto as Bolotnikov for Monotheism and against the Greek belief. The number of the Basurmans adherents was growing day after day It seems the appearance of a well-known Persian princess on board of Razins boat is not accidental; the ataman knew the way to Moslem countries. But from all appearances the princess was not from Persia otherwise Russia would not have followed Sunni it seems she was a Shia. Of course the influence of the Moslem East on the events in Russia cannot be denied. And it was coming through the Crimea that still remained the guardian of Islam. The question is what kind of influence was that. Unfortunately in literature there is no clarity in this connection. However, considering the fact that in 1670 in the West they were discussing Islam in Russia for the first time, it is fair to say that there is one more blank page in the history of Eastern Turki. That year was possibly the year of the official beginning of Islam in Russia!.. This is the time when Kazan became Moslem. But where can we read the peculiarities of those important events? Did anybody study them? Only the Jesuits for whom it was important to split the country and destroy its unity. In return the tsar Alexei showed cruelty that had never been seen before; he took the way made by the Popes Inquisition. There was nothing new in his actions and
there could not be something new. The tragedy of the European Turki of the medieval period was repeating. In Russia their belief was also being changed. And that was being done in the same manner by force. And lies. Villages and towns with their inhabitants were burning, especially east of Moscow. The earth was reddening of innocent blood. Thousands and thousands of people saw no more light; they were blinded and thrown to underground prisons; entire families were drowned in rivers and lakes And that was happening every day. Bloody days were forming bloody years which repeated the coming of Christianity to Bulgaria, but for some reason they also remain a blank page on the Russian road of Time and attract no researchers While a great many waywodes earned fame at that time; the tsar gave them generous privileges for killing their fellow citizens. The tsar gave serfs as reward together with appointments, estates and noble titles. The Slavic aristocracy was rising on blood and corpses - those were new nobles whose books of heraldry were opened in the XVII century. Any scoundrel could get a title and what went together with it souls. Hundreds and thousands of Christian souls At the same time other innovations appeared in Russia and among them were small offices that were opened in the streets of towns. They became well known very quickly. Day and night a gentle person was sitting there; any one could turn to him. One had to knock on the door, the leaf would open and without changing voice one could inform on any neighbor or priest that had violated the Christian rules. Every man except for the tsar at one stroke could be put to prison or killed. Such people were called informers; they became part of the new state. Its eyes and ears The punitive expedition in Russia lasted for centuries; the Popes expedition with its wretched fires in the trees in town squares was nothing compared with it.
The establishment of the Slavic culture glorified the families of Dolgorukiys, Lopukhins, Suvorovs heroes and military leaders that were granted orders and military ranks for killing their fellow citizens. Repressing the people they were sweeping away Cossack villages, Tatar, Bashkir, Nogai settlements. Ural mines were full of slaves that did not see the sky till they were dead The history of Bashkirs, Nogai and Tatars is about it but it has not been written since academic degrees and titles were not granted for it. This blood drama which filled the country was nudging the spiritually pure outskirts to Islam. The Basurmans were straining after the new religion like after a lifegiving source. Thousands of Russians accepted Islam. Of course they were changing not belief but divine ceremonies. To avoid becoming the Slavs! As the Greek Patriarch Macarius mentioned those were the people sincere in their belief He knew that but was not pleased with Islam establishment in the Volga region. The Patriarchs travel notes lift the veil from this important historical episode. And not only from this. It turns out people would convert into Islam not taking presents from the tsar! They did so according to their beliefs. By themselves. Those were the Tatars that in the middle of the XVII century (till 1654) worshipped One God as it is written in Macarius original manuscript and its English translation. It means they were Tengrians! Russian translators and editors distorted this fact. The words of the Turki of the Volga region that believed in One God (Tengri) were crossed out and instead it was written that they were Moslems. Why did they need to accept Islam once again then? Why did they need to stand against Church reforms carried out by the Patriarch Nikon? Why did they need to send their spiritual shepherd Germogen to Moscow and support him in hard times?.. No, they were not Moslems, which was marked by the Greek.
That forgery is very typical for the European historical science; it is also interesting for another reason. That was not by chance that the Greek Patriarch Macarius was attracted by the east of Russia; he knew that under the Christian statute approved by the Council of Chalcedon the Volga region, Kazakhstan, Altai, the Middle Asia and North China were part of the Antiochian eparchy of the Greek Church. And that statute was not abolished. Secretly Macarius had his eyes on those lands; that was possibly the explanation of the Greeks incredible activity in Russia and also for their arrogance with which they were silently looking at their overseas colony. The Greek Patriarch knew everything! He was perfectly aware that the Greeks had been preaching Christianity there from the IV century. He wrote: the whole north-east region (of the Antiochian eparchy) was inhabited by the Hanifs. In other words, by the Turki of Desht-I-Kipchak. The ancestors of those Tatars that still cannot find themselves either in Islam or in Christianity. Not much is known about them now people do not want to know that. They are foreigners and strangers for the Christian and Moslem clergymen. But that is not right. In the East the Hanifs were regarded as the saints from of old. Later with the Jesuits coming the information of the Turki disappeared However the Bible remained and the Old Testament. Remember the Book of Isaiah where it is said how the image of Heavenly God entered the culture of the Middle East: I will bring your tribe from the East [43 5] And in Koran the Hanifs are referred to only in a good way. It turns out everything is in its right place? In the XVII century Islam returned to the descendants of the Hanifs the Turki of the Volga region against whom Moscow was standing?.. As a matter of fact that was the reality. Proofs are not only in books; they are also in ancient mosques. These are irresistible proofs. On their walls in patterns and ornaments brickwork one can see equilateral crosses and eight-point stars; there are also six-point ones. These are
301 / 342
Muscovy and Russia
sacred signs of the Turkic history When a community was changing its ceremonies, that was shown by a sign according to Altaic traditions: two triangles one put on the other. An ascending (upper apex) and a descending (down apex) one. God gives by one his had and takes away by the other this is what this sign symbolizes. An eight-point star that came to Islam from the Turkic Hanifs is nothing but an equilateral cross made in a different way. So that no stranger could guess. The same can be also said about the six-point star which became the Star of David after the Jews were familiarized with the Turkic spiritual culture. Mosques where these stars can be met as a rule were built before the XVII century; they were called kilisa. After that they were called kilisa-mosque and then mosque. Another part of Russian society protested against Nikons innovations in a different way. It did not accept either Christianity or Islam; such people did not change their old belief and for its sake they would be voluntarily exiled, go underground or even die, which was regarded as the will of God and release from tortures on the earth. Those people were called Old Believers. This is a blank page of the Russian history although much is known about the Old Believers. There are even theses on this point. But it is only known what the Jesuits allowed to know. And not a word except for that Ancient books remained but people cannot understand them any longer. These people are perhaps the strangest thing in the Russian spiritual culture. Inside the communities of Old Believers there are its divisions which even they themselves cannot grasp; life made everything too complicated for these people. There is overt disaffection and enmity between communities For what? Why? This cannot be explained. They were skillfully
put at odds with each other and now they pray with a foreign cross, i.e. they recognize nobody except for themselves and their poor knowledge of religion and its history. They make a parade of what they have lost long ago the old belief! Dyrniks are the ones that are perhaps the nearest to Heavenly God; their small communities remained in the Siberia they are the most devoted people and they still pray putting two fingers together and looking into Eternal Blue Sky as it was in Ancient Altai. They left for Siberia themselves since they had a belief that somewhere in the East in certain countries there were ancient Orthodox priests that did not accept Nikons innovations These people left for the Siberian thickets and ran wild there in isolation from civilization and hearths of spiritual culture. For centuries they were struggling for survival. However without education it was very hard to save themselves and their descendants in this solitude. It is unlikely that it is possible even theoretically. Punitive expeditions did not break down those knights of spirit; they did not recognize Jesus Christ as God. Other Old Believers recognized, which made them the same as Cathars, Albigenses and other heretics which distinguished the Western Church some time ago. As a matter of fact heretic history of the West continued in Russia; the only difference was that the heretics had a different name there. However, ceremonies and philosophy were the same. The Slavic Russia was destroying the Old Believers that refused to kiss the Greek cross for two long centuries. They were frightened, exhausted and deprived of prosperity. Many things changed in their communities during two centuries. Early in the XIX century by order of the tsar Alexander I the Christians executed all their clergymen; in reply parishioners started to perform divine services by themselves and control the observance of ceremonies and fasts. Those were great people; it seemed impossible to break their spirit. Nevertheless
they also had inevitable times of oblivion and disorder; that was to happen the same as with the Cathars in the Western Europe exiled to villages: the Russians were also deprived of communication with their equals and finally they also faded in silence of oblivion while their fellow countrymen had no compassion for them. Only by the beginning of the XX centuries communities of the Old Believers understood the attenuation of the old belief and were silently recognizing Jesus Christ as God without any explanations. And the authorities allowed them to leave the underground and forget their offences. Those were different people they were born again the same as the whole Russia They think that they still say Esus and it sounds like Jesus. But who feels the difference now?
Christianization started later there. Moscow of Romanovs kept in mind the Tatars; they were notable for ethnic uncertainty, which was not suitable for Rome after the time of troubles. Because it was not clear who was in question. Which population. Recently the West could call any inhabitant of Moscow Russian even those that did not speak the Turkic language tatar for his Khanif devotion to belief in One God; in each Russian it saw Genghis Khans descendants. And with acceptance of Christianity everything was changing. Language, culture, appearance of the Russian people and their way of life and names were to be changed and become European. Not Turkic! That was the essence of the change of religion that was taking place in the country. The Christians were not allowed to speak the truth in their native language even between themselves; they were regarded as the Slavs, i.e. a new nation that was to have its own language. That was the tsars will. People were studying the new language together with belief in parochial schools which were opened by the temples. The new language was called Slavenska dialect; for the Russians that was a foreign language in which only certain words and phrases were clear. Today that language is called Polish. Its basics are set forth in a book published in 1638 in Krementz near Catholic Lvov; it was called Slavic Grammar and Written Language. That is a mixture of Latin, Greek, Turkic and some other linguistic rules. This book followed another one Grammar by Meletiy Smotritskiy written in 1618 in the heat of the time of troubles; it turned out to be more clear and acceptable for the Muscovites. As it is seen, with the help of the West the tsar was steadily leading the people away from their national roots. The name Turki was no longer suitable; it was becoming outdated. Appearance of the Slavic grammar is worth describing in a separate chapter or in a
From Russian To Slavic

In the history of Russia the XVII century is known as the century of the time of troubles and split. The Jesuits troubled and conquered Russian society, they deprived it of stability and there was no former unity, i.e. threat for the West. That was the tragic result equal to a cruel military defeat although there was no war as such. That was the time of troubles rebellions, civil commotion according to official science. And nothing more. Although under Romanovs the Russians were still living in their country that was a different country. The same as they themselves. The names of the ancestors were being forgotten. People were ashamed of them It is unnatural religion was separating native people and making fathers and sons the aliens. The European tragedy was repeating but in Russia the scale of grief was different. It is indicative that the authorities let alone the culture of other nations; the Turki were the only ones they were breaking down since they were the most numerous and the most restless. For instance, the Mordovians, Mari, Komi retained their former belief;
detective story its history is so exciting. Becoming familiar with these grammar books it turns out that the ancient Russian language and ancient Russian literature as such have never existed since there were no linguistic rules. The enlightenment of the Slavs was started not by Cyril and Methodius sheltered by the Pope but by the Catholic Laurentius Zizanius that put together the first Slavic dictionary; the Pope was displeased with his work. The dictionary and the Slavic grammar invented by him were not clear to the Russian Slavs since the author did not know the peculiarities of the Russian speech. That ineffective grammar was remade by Meletiy Smotritskiy, a Jesuit that could not make a choice between the Greek and Roman Christianity all his life. The Polish Catholics told Rome about a schoolteacher, gifted writer, the Vilno Jesuit College graduate. From that grammar book started his rise to power of the Uniate Ukraine. Another word by this author Paranesis or A Reminder for the Russian People where he called on the Russians to accept the Popes power. That was one of the ideologists of the time of troubles. In the country everything was in accordance with the traditions of the Jesuit Christianity. The same as in Bulgaria, in the Balkans or in France where the new language had been introduced by that time. Everything was exactly the same. For example, a royal order prohibited the Slavs to dine together with the Moslems and the Old Believers who were regarded as dirty people. It was prohibited to shake their hands, talk to them and buy their goods. Let alone mixed marriages. The delinquent were strictly punished; they were deprived of property and sometimes of freedom What was the difference with the West? The country was living with madness and suffering; it was searching for a new mask instead of its face. It is hard to imagine what was happening in Russia then. Not terror but something worse People were obliged to have two tables at home one for the Turkic old men and another for their Slavic children. That was the split of the nation from the inside in families. Children
were becoming orphans while their parents were alive. Not much is known about those dark pages of the Russian history, but they existed they were written by informers in their denouncements and by civil servants from the tsars machinery when they were organizing their punitive expeditions. All their signals were controlled. Historians have not studied this unique information which is kept in huge Russian archives while this could be interesting reading. And rather veracious. The fear in the classes of Russian society did not appear by itself, did it? The tsar Alexander Mikhailovichs bureaucratic machinery did not only take bribes and steal; it was falling over itself inventing a great many new limitations and excuses so that native people would become alien and society would find the discontented. The idea of national unity that was being thoroughly designed by Boris Godunov was needless for Romanovs that were turning Russia into a Western colony. It was denied by Mikhail Romanov that gave Russian Christianity a different shape. They were doing everything so that the people would forget their family trees and start new ones. The same as in the Western Europe and in the Moslem East since the recipe of oblivion is the same everywhere. It was brought to Russia by the brothers John and Sophronius Likhuds, pupils of Jesuit colleges of Venice and Padua. They executed the order establishing the Russian Church and royal policy. In Moscow they opened their Theological Academy and Graeco-Latin schools where civil servants for new Russia were being prepared. A generation of first Russian scientists consisted of their pupils, the Christian Encyclopedia writes. This statements cannot even be called wrong; it is preconceived and provocative. To agree with it means to forget that great culture that preceded the appearance of Likhuds in Russia. To forget the monasteries where pilgrims from all over the world were accepted and taught Divine wisdom. To forget the books from the libraries of medieval world from which the Europeans
were learning the basics of science and spiritual culture. The Jesuits wanted the Russian Slavs to forget themselves and their ancestors and start a new history. Those were the most influential councilors of the throne! The tsar could not stir a finger without them. The power was fully taken by the Pope; his people saddled the Kremlin. But it was difficult for them to conduct the policy of split. They did not know how to distinguish the Tatars and the Slavs. This is the same anthropological type with the same historical roots. They even had similar crosses on their necks till the middle of the XVII century equilateral Altaic ones. They wore the same clothes, lived in the same houses and according to the same adats, did the same housekeeping and spoke the same language. That is why starting the split the Jesuits ordered to baptize some people and others were directed to the road of Islam; the Old Believers were annihilated. They acted with Molochs deftness; they needed more and more peoples souls and destinies. This is how Russia was being built. The Russian people were splitting themselves by fear. Those that wanted to keep their belief in One God turned to Islam and hastened to accept it before dealing with the servants of the Church accompanied by royal expeditionary forces. They were in haste since according to confessional rules the Moslems could not be baptized by force as against the bearers of other beliefs. This is a fine question; it requires caution in making conclusions. It seems here observations are more important than conclusions Moslem clothes, for instance, have not become a mark of distinction of the Tatars yet. Theyve always had just a tarboosh a small hat on their heads. A tarboosh and circumcision were the distinctive features of the Russian Moslems But that was not enough to be a true believer. The institute of religion needs
time, people, means, power, which the Tatars in Kazan did not have. As against the Crimea. A hat on the head which was more often called tafia is an interesting detail suitable for observations. According to Altaic rules men and women with hats on their heads were allowed to follow religious ceremonies since in ancient times the Turki used to pray in open area at the foot of hill and later in front of temples. In all weather. The Moslems retained that ancient ceremony as against the Christians that denied it and forgot to apply the prohibition to the clergymen that still keep on entering temples with their headdresses on. The Jews also retained that ceremony which they follow with hats on their heads from the time of the tsar Cyrus. Their hat is called skull-cap (kipa in Russian, from Turkic kip cover). As we can see the Jews escaped from the captivity not just with a new religion but also with a renewed language. A tafia was on the head of the killed tsarevitch Demetrius, the last of Ryurikoviches, when he prayed; he belonged to the Tengrian belief. His tafia decorated with sapphires and pearls is kept in the sacristy of Moscow Archangel Cathedral Its decoration is made in the form of an Altaic equilateral cross. The same as it was on a Moslem tarboosh So that He saw from above. In the XVII century a tarboosh (skullcap) became the distinctive feature between the Moslems and the Christians in Russia. People paid their attention to it in the first instance to determine to which belief, i.e. to which nationality a man belonged. Religion was dividing the Turki into nations and it made them invent distinction but not look for solidarity and relatives. For those that leave their native hearth only one rule of life is suitable: among the frogs you must become a frog too. And they followed it. In the Tatar Volga region Romanovs were sowing not good but eternal ignorance. And it was flourishing. The Moslems were prohibited to read and write and have writing items and books at home. Including Koran.
Children were being brought up knowing nothing about the world in which they lived. What else can be in question? What institute of religion? What Islamic culture and traditions? Slavic children did not have a better living; they were taught by an ignorant priest from a local church; children studied the basics of the new language and new belief using the book by Melentius Smotritskiy. The real Bible was not known even to the priests; its first translations appeared in Russia in the middle of the XIX century. The Slavs learned nursery rhymes invented by the West a primitive religion for the masses. In this respect experts have categorical opinions. Some insist on existence of Gennadius Bible that has been kept in Novgorod since the XV century and other sacred books translated into Russian in the times of Kievan Russia. Others are more restrained and refer only to the Ostrog Bible published in 1588, i.e. one year before Christianity was accepted in Russia. Both viewpoints are valid. But they lack the most important thing honesty. For instance, the Ostrog Bible had nothing to do with Russia; it was translated by the Poles into the Polish language or, more precisely, into its Ukrainian dialect, at that the foreword was written in verse by Gerasim, Melentius Smotritskiys father And besides it is not clear what Russian authors mean by the words Bible and sacred books? Strictly speaking, the Ostrog or Gennadius Bible cannon be called the Bibles; they are not full. And how can one take the Gennadius Bible seriously while it is known that Francisco Scorino translated it into the language that reminded him of the Slavic one? This is a quotation from the Christian Encyclopedia. Who is it for? Divided into splits, Russia, that had been notable for monastic wisdom, knowledge and high culture was immersing into the darkness of oblivion Russia is a different thing! That is not free Rus with its scientists and philosophers.
Not long before that Kazan had been the second largest eparchy of the Russian Church; it gave the world great metropolitans and spiritual activists of the Turkic world, the pride of the Horde and of Russia, and at that time there was nothing. Only remembrances remained from the former scientific eparchy. The Jesuits choked it; it was important for them to make the Tatars forget their previous belief, the teaching, its traditions and sacred books. Everything was forgotten accepting Islam about which everybody knew practically nothing But there were the aged, the bearers of old knowledge and experience; time was necessary for them to disappear. It seems the idea of making a break with Moscow was born among them. That is witnessed by the Patriarch Macarius observations; he came to Moscow from the South. In Kaluga he took a ship and went down the Oka river to Kolomna. To the right, at a distance of one month (to the Caucasus) was the country of the Tatars And later: On the boundary of the Tatar country which is to the right the tsar guarded by God (Alexei) built thirty fortresses This information is in accordance with Russian geography of the XVII century and the position of its southern boundaries, which witnesses of the influence of the Russian Church. The royal power ended behind Oka. And the Turkic country with its adats began there. Free Tataria, that split of freedom, attracted Kazan Moslems; they saw the future and support there. Their participation in Bolotnikovs and Razins rebellions is the best confirmation. However, from the tsars point of view, that was not the land of the Tatars beyond Oka but the land of the Old Believers The term Tatars in Moscow and Kazan was understood differently. So Christ-loving Russia became anxious about the Tatars from Kasimov, Tula, Belgorod, Don, Bryansk and from other places those Tatars that lived without Christ, i.e. without serfdom. They were living inclining to Islam. Moscow could not stay
306 / 342
Muscovy and Russia
calm and care about terminology; it started to prepare the Azov campaign. The Jesuit Possevinos plan was being implemented thirty fortresses on the southern boundary of the Moscow state referred to by the Antiochian Patriarch Macarius reflected the policy of the Russian tsar. His intentions. But this is only the outer reflection clear even for the aliens. While there were certain hidden things in the policy of the Kremlin Sayyid, the khan of Kasimov, a southern neighbor of the Russian tsar was invited by the latter together with his wife, mother and counselor (hodja (sheik)) to visit his place. During a heart talk the tsar was asking him to accept Christianity and promised to be his godfather and golden hills in addition. He agreed but the women dissuaded him. And the khan (a guest!) was put in irons and thrown to a dungeon, and the family together with the hodja was exiled to a cloistral concentration camp. For a long time the naked prisoner was suffering on the stony floor eating bread and water and at last, becoming sick and weak, he asked for baptism himself. Voluntarily! The Patriarch Nikon was his godfather. Thus Sayyid Burghan turned into a Russian prince Basil Burkhanov to whom the tsars sister was promised as a wife in reward This is a page from the history of the establishment of Russia and the family of Burkhanovs; it is not the only one. The Tatars would appear in Christian Moscow in different ways. Some of them suggested themselves as cogs in the bureaucratic machinery and became Tatar officers so as to do evil for the sake of power later. Others were nudged to this bargain by an opportunity of obtaining a title. At that time the titles of a prince and count were being established in the Slavic everyday life since the previous bei and bek referred to pagan Tatars and were of no importance and respect in Russia. The tsar abolished them. The Grade Office strictly controlled personal records of the citizens. For
motherland officers, i.e. for the Christians, it found positions in offices and boards, admission officers or hirelings also were not forgotten. To tell the truth, they did not enjoy considerable privileges but they had a life of ease serving to the tsar. Moscow could be regarded as a prosperous town if it had not been for the circumstances. Tataria with the Old Belief that bordered with the Moscow state along Oka troubled it. Millions of possible serfs. A lot of fertile lands How can one be quiet when the neighbor has it? Strictly speaking, Tataria belonged to the Crimean khan but due to discrepancies in belief and state system it had not been governed by it for a long time. There was Cossack freedom; people were leading reckless life finding time for everything but not for politics with which the Tatars have never been able to deal: they rise quickly and they fade out even quicker. Being aware of that feature the Russians were trying to find their way there. Under an agreement with the Crimean khan (as of the times of Ivan the Terrible) they were building their fortresses, buying agricultural products and recruiting soldiers for their army. They made reasonable investments anticipating fabulous profits. Under the tsar Alexei the Moscow host consisted of Don Tatars joined by the troops of the Cheremisses, Mordovians, Mongolians, Kalmucks that was the Russian army. Everything was exactly the same as in Byzantium some time before. For friendship with Don inhabitants Moscow paid the Crimea rent in the amount of eleven thousand golden coins and the built fortresses were being hastily inhabited by Christians or Chrestians (in Russian such pronunciation relates to the word meaning peasant). That was the beginning of Don colonization, which was not discussed in public. However Russian settlers could not take roots there; they would run away back to Russia. No threats and the tsars gifts could not help, which caused serious anxiety: there
was a threat of not implementing Possevinos plan. The colonization of Don, it should be mentioned, is a massive case that required considerable material and political capital; Moscow was not able to deal with it on its own. But Russian constant dropping was wearing away the Tatar stone with the help of the West; its capital helped Moscow to open secret doors. Getting rent big bunches of sables, golden treasury the Crimean khan saw no danger in the presence of Russians; he was borne away with the events in Europe and the Ottoman Empire upon which he depended. Moscow used that opportunity to strengthen its positions. Creating a massive espionage ring in Istanbul the Jesuits were skillfully distracting the Crimean khan and making obstacles for him and thus they were moving Russians to Don, closer to the Crimea. That was a well designed policy of unheard-of importance which was leading Moscow to the East and to the western world. Even if the tsar did not want that the lot of the country was determined. However here it is necessary to interrupt the story, otherwise it will not be possible to understand how and by what means Moscow was being nudged to the war at first with Don and then with the Crimea and Turkey? And did Moscow need those unnecessary wars? These are fine questions; it seems in Russian history they have never been asked in this connection No, that was not the access to the sea that imposed that political issue. The reason of the Azov campaign is connected with the Great Nations Migration; for more than a thousand years it was engrossing the minds of the most powerful people. Not Russia or the Crimea are in question here but the leadership in the Turkic world that was allegedly destroyed. In reality the Turki remembered themselves even becoming Christians and Moslems. Rivalry cannot be neglected speaking about the Turki. One would think, new nations came out of uluses these nations forgot the past and were living with a different culture. That is right. But people remained the Turki! And
they showed that by their conduct. The civil strife that was taking place after Attilas murder has never stopped. The sources have been forgotten as against the enemies which kept on appearing. Attila was the last tsar of all the Turki. In the place of his country appeared new countries where the rulers regarded themselves as Attilas heirs and wanted to have the titles of the tsars. But there was only one royal crown. So it was being divided. That crown is the reason of hundreds of wars and thousands of conflicts. Since the nation scattered to the four winds of heaven by the Great Nations Migration was living with a proverb: Every poor man wants to be a bai and every bai wants to be Khodai (i.e. God). And nothing can be done with it the Turki. This is their essence and blood. No matter which name they are given, no matter which clothes they wear it is all the same. In Europe, in Africa and in Asia they were born like that: rivalry was the root of their essence. They would fight, squabble and do harm to their neighbors to the last gasp. It is not by chance that competitions, races and wrestling are the centre of any Turkic feast. They can heat their ardor. Unfortunately, the Jesuits were perfectly aware of that; their head Ignatius Loyola was finishing pulling about these secret strings of a Turkic soul. And as is well known Loyola was a native of the knightly area that was living under the laws of the Horde; he knew well what to advise the Church order. The Church refused the European Turki to give them the right to fight for the royal crown. Giving the titles of riga (regis) or kral (king) the Pope was deliberately extinguishing the ardor of rivalry in his vassals Riga was the synonym of the word bei (a small estate was called riga and a large one was called kral). The title was sanctified by the crown that was protecting its owner. In dukedoms and principalities of the Western Europe that appeared from the estates of gentlemen in
the IV V centuries there were no kings or dukes; beis and beks, khans and chagans were running them those that were dreaming to become Khodai, i.e. rise. And they were made krals. Not to harass the reader with details let us mention that privately the Turkish sultan was deemed to be the tsar of all the Turki. And before that was the Austrian Caesar sitting in Attilas capital; he was the first who put on his royal crown. The second tsar was called the ruler of Spain (Catalonia?), the third France (Savoy or Provence?), the fourth Iran (Kizilbashi), the fifth India (Pakistan, the North India), the sixth China (Uiguria, the North China), the seventh the Crimea and Tataria, the ninth the Ottoman Empire, the tenth Georgia and the eleventh Moscow bei (he was the latest to become tsar). Here it is the geography of the Great Nations Migration. It is clear. Nothing has disappeared! They said there was a Siberian tsar but there is no reliable information about him. They also called Altun-Padishah, the sultan of the Golden Horde. That was possibly the ruler of Altai. Or of Khakassia. It is possible that that was another country Sakha (Yakutia) or, for instance, Dzungaria. To tell the truth, it is not clear what spiritual institute provided service to temporal power. There is a reasonable question why was the royal title changing only in Turkic countries? Here is its own story connected with Altaic culture and belief in Heavenly God again. One thing was the continuation of another; nothing happened by chance. That was impossible! Although the word tsar is considered to be of Latin origin, in Rome such title did not exist, which has been already stated. However, one can agree with its Roman origin but In Altai the word sir meant the most important; it has not been forgotten in the countries born by the Great Nations Migration. Sometimes it was uttered as serdar and from ancient times it was reflected in the titles of the rulers of the North
India and the Middle East. This is confirmed by inscriptions on ancient coins and by certain texts At that time Rome did not exist. The title Caesar (csr) has the same root as sir. It could be the title of a ruler in Ancient Altai since it is connected with the name of Geser, son of God sent by the Most High three thousand years ago. Coming to the world as an ugly infant with teeth as small as those of a nit Geser grew up as a beautiful hero; he gathered tribes into a nation and gave them the ceremonies of worshipping Heavenly God. From that time he has been the prophet of all the Turki, which is reported by Sura 108 of Koran if of course one does not neglect djakhilia and reads it being aware of the past. Then Tengri took Geser to the Sky and left his vicar on the earth he was called Caesar. That gave the Turki the ceremony of chrismation performed by the higher clergy when a society man ascended to the throne It is evident that the title tsar reflected peoples culture and their history. Not the word is in question but what is behind it. The history of Aragon allows confirming what has been said; that is a region in the north-east of Spain. Or Catalonia. Their source is the same IV century, the coming of the Turki to the Western Europe, which has been described above. The toponym Aragon is connected with the Turkic aryg which, apart from river has another meaning saint, pure. That is what that region of the Eastern Spain was; for a long time it worshipped Monotheism Its Turkic past is confirmed by archeology, ethnography, linguistics. But heraldry is perhaps the best witness it is the same as that of Kushans. The same birds, the same wings that became symbols of the dynasty of the Spanish kings. An emblem is a serious thing for the Spanish court. But the example of Austria is even more significant. Or Austuria, to put it more
precisely. In the times of Attila that region of the Alps was called Austrohunnia (AusturHun), Asturica. History connects it with Aragon; some time ago both regions were parts of the state called Austrasia where famous Brunhilde was the ruler in the VI century. And the toponym os-tur also comes from the Turki and their language brought up by the Turki, - this is the meaning of this expression. And it can be seen in the heraldic symbol of the dynasty; it also comes from Kushan symbols. From what has been said one can make a conclusion that Europe was divided into the North and South parts. Catholic and Arian. In the north the family of Balts was reigning; the South was run by Amals. This assertion is certainly disputable and requires clarification. But it means that judging by known personalities of the reigning dynasty of Austrohunnia that was later divided into three states Neustria (Western France), Austrasia (East France) and Burgundy one royal family of the Turki was reigning there. For instance, Neistria was run by Clotarius II, Austrasia by Childebert and Burgundy by their uncle . In these names and toponyms there is a clear Turkic source although they were given European form. The royal list set forth above is not full since it reflected the results of the fight for Attilas crown. The rulers were not likely to remember the crown itself calling themselves the tsars: they inherited that fight from their parents. The same as they inherited enemies and allies This is the way trade and dynastic connections and military unions in the West were being established. The Patriarch Macarius this information is taken from his book explained the domination of the Turki by the fact that defeating seven tsars Byzantine, Egyptian, Bulgarian, Serbian, Arnavut, Trebizond and the tsar of the Crimea and Tatria he conquered their lands. Apart from that among the Turkish tsars possessions there was the Holy Sepulcher, a Christian relic, which raised the Turki in the eyes of Christian nations This is certainly a simplified explanation but it shows that the reasons of high politics were often hidden in peoples
vanity. In jealousy. Such reasons can impel and inspire even the puniest ruler if of course that is a Turki by birth. Unfortunately, the Moscow tsar was one of them. Having neither the army nor power from the last place in that private table of ranks he managed to rise in the eyes of the world ruling elite. To be respected in Europe and in Asia. Is it not a stimulus for a young royal dynasty? Of course it is. The West suggested that the ruler of the Kremlin should remove an obstacle on its way to high society the remaining parts of Tataria and the Crimea. Everything. A step south of Oka was necessary to start climbing the mountain of greatness and defeat the Turkish tsar. By the way, the Antiochian Patriarch Macarius was nudging the Moscow tsar in the same direction; he came to Moscow to disciple the Russian Patriarch. To tell the truth, the leader of the Greek Church had his own ambitious plans What can be done Russian tsars Romanovs really were the Turki. Bad Turki, but still. Vehemence of the leader was living in them; that is why the Pope relied on them. The first tsar of the dynasty, Mikhail, had no royal spirit; this man ascended the throne by the will of Destiny. And his son Alexei was being brought up like a tsar; vanity was doing the young man no harm This quality was better seen in the next generation, in Peter. This is the one that tasted honeyed power. Being a young man he put out of his way two rivals in the fight for the throne his sister and brother; at that it is a secret how died his elder brother, Ivan, having recovered after a serious disease. For the sake of the stability of power the tsar Peter executed his only son, his heir, when he turned against his fathers depravity Alas, that was something that not everybody would dare do. Peter I is perhaps the most unknown character of the Russian history although he is the one about whom it has been written more than about anyone else. Cruel and
cowardly, active and passive All the contrasts were in his face, which made the tsar too contradictory. One can keep disputing about him on and on. The obscurity of Peter is explained by the fact that historians paid special attention of political character to him. Russia that had broken with the Turkic past needed a hero. A new symbol, young and successful one. And they chose Peter, a tall handsome man although any observant eye will not see any great deeds in his reign. That tsar did not cut through a window to Europe; on the contrary, Europe did it itself. And it had done it earlier than Romanovs ascended the throne. Peter was an unhealthy person: falling-sickness and low passions were torturing him all his life (by the way that passion was subject to death sentence). The ailment affected his health, hence his anger, rancor, thinking slowness these are the symptoms of a disease but not of a character. He was not a good company and the people would avoid the tsar. Here are the western aristocrats opinions about Peter provided by S.M. Soloviev; they are neutral: I imagined his grimaces worse than they are in reality, and he cant refrain from some of them. Another eyewitness is categorical: This tsar is very good and at the same time he is bad; in terms of morals he is typical for his country. If he had got a better upbringing, he would have been a perfect man This is a strange or even offensive opinion! marks the master of the Russian history. But these are the opinions of independent people. At least those people were not connected with the Jesuits. His policy, the same as that of his father, was fully controlled by foreign counselors standing behind the Russian throne What was the greatness of that ruler? Was it not the myth invented by the Jesuits?
It is fair to recognize that the fleet of the Russian Federation was created by Franz Lefort, the first Russian admiral. That tireless Swiss it is not known how he appeared near the Russian tsar had enormous influence, for instance, in 1697 he took Peter to the West heading the Great Russian Embassy The whole early Peter is Lefort his undertakings and plans. Franz Lefort was an extraordinary person; he was not notable for deep knowledge or good education but for other things unusual kindliness. Thus the sociable Swiss showed an example of the Jesuit conduct; he was always gay, dexterous and nice. He was a very good company. Friendship with him allured Peter who was deprived of these qualities because of his diseases and vice. In Lefort the tsar saw an example, a desired ideal for imitation. And he followed him loosing his caution which is so necessary for a politician of this range. Lefortovo, the same as the German village opened in Moscow at that time became the center of Peters politics; they were thinking about Russia and not about Rus and its people. The Slavs were not interesting for the West. The Jesuits and secret knights templar were executing orders of their Roman masters who had their own plans. The foreigners that were playing comical battles before the young tsar in the proper and figurative sense by the river Yauza formed the Russian army and Russian politics. That is right, Russian! Here it is important to feel the nuance of the word invented by the Popes legate Possevino. The soldiers interested the West In this connection it is useful to remember again the name of a groom Sergey Bukhvostov since the Russian army or, more precisely, the Preobrazhenskiy regiment created by the foreigners began from him. He was the first Russian soldier and he came from Lefortovo. Who was that dare-devil? Whom did he serve? It is not known. Peter was being controlled. In politics
he showed initiative to the extent allowed by the Jesuits and knights templar that had a specific face a name and surname. For instance, the Belgian Franz Timmerman in whose hands were the Russian army and fleet; he controlled the army and rear financing. Modern Minister of Defence would have envied his power The Scotch Patrick Gordon ran the general staff; he served the Russian throne from 1661 and knew Russia better than any Russian Jacob Bruce, general field marshal, the main ideologist of the throne, his past is only western The cohort of the Jesuits and knights templar formed Peters nest; they entrusted to the Slavs only controlled deeds. In this connection a famous Peters saying obtains a different meaning: do not take the red-haired and the cross-eyed to serve the tsar. The red-haired he called the noble Turki that remained true to their old belief. They aroused the tsars irritation and hatred. Of course, there was no place for them in the bureaucratic machinery created by the tsar. These people were unnecessary for Russia. If this is not legalized usurpation of power in Russia by the West, what is it? The young Russian tsar was nothing; he spent days and nights in the German village where he would be on the drink for days on end. Thus he was learning and hence his upbringing or, more precisely, its lack, which was mentioned perhaps by all the foreigners that would communicate with him. From his childhood the tsar would spend a lot of time on his own as against his sister Sophia that had teachers and tutors. In a letter to Apraksin to Holland Peter wrote in an uneven handwriting: Buy me some lemons, dont forget Rhine wine. I dont need anything else, or if they bring mathematical instruments, buy them. Peters education left much to be desired, he was a semiliterate man although he wrote many orders and instructions. He was not assiduous during his studies and showed thinking slowness, which was determined by his inborn disease.
With this diagnosis he could not behave in a different way. It was impossible. It is clear that he was not a hero. The tsar did not become a carpenter just because he held a hatchet in his hands. And he did not become the tsar just because he was sitting on the throne, no matter how he was praised. All his life he pined for exorbitant vanity with which they were playing like with guitar strings. And such music was presented as Russian. Those were the chords of a fading eastern melody His folly became more and more maniacal from year to year: delusion of grandeur did not leave him day and night. This is perhaps the best means to overwhelm a dynasty and a country. Perhaps the first royal matter (the Azov campaign) was lost by Peter. His inexperienced army was defeated in the battle with a Turkish garrison. The win on which relied the authors of that military campaign was different from the campaign of Azov they started the conquest of Tataria of the Old Believers. In a document of 1695 it is said: The tsar moved to the other bank of the river That was about Oka. The defeat of Azov was a designed victory! Or, more precisely, a maneuver distracting the rival. Having no military contact with the Turki Russia achieved the victory it invaded Don without a fight using the Cossacks that joined Peters army. That was the main thing! Starting the war the Russians imposed an oppressive union on the Don Tatars. That was the political victory after a military defeat. The war with Turkey brought relations between two countries Tataria and Turkey to a new level. Don, an ownerless constituent territory of the Crimean khanate communicated with Moscow through the royal Embassy office; under wartime conditions it was sort of becoming native, Russian. Its affairs were transferred to internal Moscow offices. Thus the Cossacks de jure recognized the Russian tsar as their ataman and their leader. The Russian bureaucracy led by the
312 / 342
Muscovy and Russia
Jesuits obtained a country without a fight. The small town of Azov was not interesting for it; it was just a small town in that country Nevertheless to finish everything they needed another Azov campaign, otherwise a military union with Don Tataria would have broken up. Rome insisted on that; it created a powerful coalition against the Turki in the West However the details of the second campaign remained a historical secret. Its impenetrable mystery. The official version according to which the Russians surrounded the town with a high earth mound and shot the Turkish garrison with their cannons is for credulous people. The military history knows similar examples of siege, but it is a long method. It is unlikely that it is possible to build an earth mound during a week being shot by the enemy. Thousands of shovels and hundreds of men, an input and planks are necessary. Considering that in summer nights are shorter and in the afternoon the earth in the steppe clinks like a stone a great many picks are necessary. Where could the soldiers get them they were not diggers. A huge engineering structure is in question; many months are necessary to raise it even in time of peace. By the way, where has that handmade mound disappear after the war? It seems something was wrong. Because there is another version with the same set of arguments. It shows Russia and its young tsar whom the Turks seduced and whom they gave the town without a fight after the pleasures and also gave him a nice cock as a present Vice helped Peter conquer Azov; vice with which he was living all his life. But victory is victory. Even if it is like this. Since then towns of Tataria obtained new names. Birinchi became Bryansk, Buruninezh Voronezh, Kipenzai Penza, Kursyk Kursk, Tulu Tula The tsar Peter possessed Tataria of the Old Believers with its disquiet Don. Moscow and its master used to name people and towns at their discretion. The boundaries of Russia expanded and moved closer to the Caucasus and
Turkey The capital met the hero solemnly. The ceremony was run by the tsars counselor Andrew Vinius, a shadow like all the Jesuits. Moscow inhabitants were astonishingly looking at the procession they had never seen before; the most striking thing for them was that the tsar was decently following Leforts cart, - historians wrote about that celebration. And that is right, everything was new and strange for the Russians; the winner was following his subjects cart; he was afraid of the announcement about his feat. As a matter of fact, his deed was not new, it was in the tradition of the Roman history: the emperor Julius Caesar had the same victories; people also used to shout empress to him. It is hard to add anything here the fact shows the political situation of those years. And those were inexplicable things happening. The Slaws were waging a war in a different way; they would leave their positions, as though on purpose, so as to remain in the background in their own country and humbly follow Leforts cart. Those that distinguished themselves in that Azov battle were granted ancestral lands with thousands of peasant courts by Peter. He awarded them for silence. Christians living in those estates were becoming property and capital which could be dealt with, pledged and gambled away. By the same order the tsar legalized slavery of the Slavs in Russia that lasted till 1861 and, on the contrary, he raised the foreigners to the level of the nobles. Calling themselves the Russians, the Catholics were turning into Russian aristocrats, owners of estates; they were striking the moral keynote in new society. Any foreigner could easily buy himself a Slav at a give-away price. Those Russians whose grandfathers were brought to the tops of power by the time
of troubles were not standing apart either; they choke with rich slices of a pie with which the tsar was lavish. From Peter many noble families started their family trees, which is reported by books of heraldry of the Russian nobility. New grandees that came to reaches from the rags of the time of troubles were not afraid to try foreign clothes. That was another reconstruction of Russian society; there had been so many of them. And the old nobility, even its part that accepted Christianity, was falling back into the shadow. The Kremlin no longer needed its advices. The boyars were not oppressed, no, they were simply neglected. They were not taking advice any longer. The old patriarchal nobility with the cruel truth on their lips irritated the tsar with their estimation of the Azov military campaign which peculiarities were being discussed in Moscow for a long time. The highly experienced nobility saw that the success at Azov had not opened the way to the Black Sea for the Russians; the Turkish fleet still dominated there. Why did they need that shameful war? they asked. And the victory of Azov had another unknown! feature not of military and strategic or trade character; it was not within the Turkic frames in terms of a victory. It showed the sprout not of Rus but of Russian politics the empire that would be the vicar of Rome in the East would conquer the neighboring nations and establish the Western culture there for its sake. After all, there was Possevinos secret plan of which the Russian aristocracy was certainly unaware. But it existed. The Third Rome was establishing the Popes will. Staking on Romanovs the West was not mistaken. Their efforts were successive on the Russian Don where the Christianization of population commenced all at once. Or it is better to say those were punitive expeditions In a word, everything was repeating the same as in Mother Russia the image of Heavenly God was being replaced by other images. The plan was the same and the directors were the same too. Cossack villages were growing silent one after another: it was
too late when they understood whom they had brought to Azov and whom they helped. Events were like an inevitable course. The ataman Bulava was the first to wake up from his illusions; in 1707 he raised the Don Tatars against the new masters of Don. Another peasant war commenced and it was of an obvious religious character but it became history as Bulavas rebellion or, more precisely, a conflict between the Cossacks and the peasants But what has it got to do with this? And how did they distinguish the Cossacks and the peasants then? The result of that Chrestian war was predetermined from its first day; the Jesuits agents were standing close to the ataman and so they killed the self-willed rebel after he had started the rebellion. And punitive expeditions were worse than flood for Don, they were more terrible than locust; they were invading village after village, yurt after yurt establishing the symbols of the Greek belief and the power of the Russian tsar. The prince V.V. Dolgorukiy was accurately executing Peters orders: the opposing were being slashed. Rebellious villages were being burnt down and children of tender years were taken to a cart and if the childs head was higher than the wheel the tsars order told to behead the child. Chrestians with which the Cossacks were at enmity were the orphans tutors. The infants grew up as the captive Slavs Even the famous Russian historian S.M. Soloviev knew those dreadful tragedies but he described them carefully using allusions. It is possible that his greatgrandfather was among those infants that had a narrow escape Peter also changed the flag the guarding spirit of the Cossacks of Don the same as belief without any doubts. On their new flag there was a drunk Cossack sitting on an empty wine cask. Since then it has been the symbol of the land that had been free some time ago; the land where they used to say to the young: Do not drink wine and do not tamper with troubles; these two vices destroy palaces and fortresses The
Cossacks did not listen to the old proverb. And they drank everything away, even their childrens freedom. And formerly Don had been famous for a elen (sunny deer), the sign of God and Ancient Altai which was on the flags of Don Tatars; it was their guarding spirit They do not remember it now. What for? The victories at Don made Russia more important; the state grew and became stronger. And the Pope was taking it further on the way of the empire. Don seemed to be a sort of criterion for Romanovs abilities Giving letters of credence Moscow ambassadors were liberal at assurances of the ancient friendship between Russia and Western powers of Europe so as to adjust the way of weakening the enemies of the Holy Cross the Turkish sultan, the Crimean khan and all the Basurman hordes. The Russians did not dare say that earlier; their rank was lower. That change was certainly brought by Christianization. By it! Russia became an eastern region of the Latin Empire although it never recognized its position and settled for the role of an ally. That is why in the world table of ranks the Russian tsar was being taken higher and higher. Peters tours abroad and his military successes awakened his morbid vanity and begot the desire to become an emperor and conquer not only the neighboring countries but also the Russian Church. This turning point was very advantageous for the West since it was moving Russia away from the old Rus. As a matter of fact, that was the idea of the Third Rome that had been established in the Kremlin for decades And the seeds braided. Only those that did not like the new role of Russia the backyards of the Latin West were initially standing against Peters imperial ambitions. Among the opponents was the tsarina Sophia, a pious and imperious woman that was thinking about Russia. She was respected by the Russian people; she was considered to be Peters antipode and the victims of the tsars injustice
were trying to stay closer to her. And their number was increasing rapidly. In Moscow after the colonization of Don the archers were suffering since they loved patriarchal character too much. Their relatives, Don Tatars, were being annihilated and turned into serfs. The archers that enjoyed privileges were oppressed too; they were being inclined to a new belief. For instance, they were prohibited to conduct trade and be engaged in crafts until they became Christians The Kremlin was gradually instigating the archers rebellion. It was the reason. It was playing on the desperate situation of the army consisting of hirelings for which Moscow and its archers village became their motherland. They had no money and no rights and they had nothing to do: they were the aliens at Don and they were not the natives in Moscow. The archers rebellion was important for the Jesuits in the first instance; they intended to create a new Russian army not destroying the old one, which was practically impossible: after all, those were the archers that had weapons. Those Tatar hirelings that were to be paid were not necessary for the tsar. He was explained that the soldiers were to be recruited from among the Slavs since that did not cost anything. That simple truth is the reason of the archers rebellion. The archers were being raised so as to destroy them. Since the Jesuits regarded Russia as a supplier of cannon fodder for Europe. That was their interest. That was the moment of the lost Truth that changed the policy of Muscovy dramatically. The independent state of Ivan the Terrible, the heiress of the Golden Horde and Desht-I-Kipchak was being turned into European barracks. That is perhaps the threshold of the Russian Empire, the future result of the outlined changes. Instigating the archers the tsar Peter did not understand that he could not give orders for the army to execute. Having thinking slowness he did not comprehend
what was happening around well. In the country bureaucracy was rising; in order to execute the tsars orders it was given access to the army. That was a fundamentally new thing. The foreigners became heads of offices and they obtained control not only over the Slavs but also over their army! Of course it was not hard for the archers to conquer Moscow in 1698 but they would not dare carry out a revolution, and the Jesuits understood that perfectly. Not because among the archers were their agents but because the hirelings were chained by an ancient Turkic tradition; the royal power was unshakable and sacred for them. The archers wanted to make their life better but they had no idea what to do. Only when they were deprived of their allowance, only when they were starving they started the rebellion. But not against the tsar but against the boyars and foreigners That day under the tsars order hundreds of people were arrested and tortured. Denunciations and detections affected basically the rivals of the West. Orthodox people were terrified in Moscow: public executions were being performed day and night. Streams of blood, dying creaming of the convicts were heard in the city silence gallows were not taken away for five months; executioners had no rest. For the Kremlin it was important to crush the Slavs, to establish the idea of the omnipotent emperor in their consciousness and to make them think that everybody was to serve him selflessly. That was the bloody policy of fear and it could not have failed to lead to the moral lapse of the Slavs and their spiritual impoverishment, which happened in 1721. And it could not have happened otherwise. The archers rebellion and the establishment of the Holy Synod that controlled the Russian Church and declared the tsar the emperor were divided by two decades. But what decades they were! During those years the country became
different it remembered the executions and punitive expeditions; it was afraid to call down the wrath not of God but of the emperor. That was the nation that had lost its belief. Service of God on which the morals of society were based receded into the background. Fear troubled people. The fear that turns people into a horde. This only fact is worth paying attention and there were other more significant ones which characterized the reign of Peter the Great Is there anything surprising here and what can be discussed if the Church affairs were transferred to Synod headed by Stephen Yavorsky, a Pole and Catholic. By his first decision the head of the new Theological Office abolished the title of the patriarch. It was not necessary! Since there was the Pope. The biography of Yavorsky is more expressive than any words. He was born in a Polish town called Yavor in 1658. .He studied in the Kiev-Mogiliansk Jesuit College where Latin was spoken. In 1684 he became an official member of the order under the name of Stanislav Sumon. He also studied in higher Jesuit schools of Lvov, Lyublin, Vilno. In 1700 he came to Moscow where Peter I ordered to consecrate Stephen Yavorsky as an eparch in any Russian eparchy not too far away from Moscow Ryazan was the place where the Russian career of that Jesuit began; soon he became the head of the Russian Church. Church estates (property) were given to the boyar Ivan Alexeevich MusinPushkin who was a thief; he would cut the proceeds of eparchies and tamper with their way of life. A bureaucrat whose ancestors were among the initiators of the time of troubles was arrogantly instructing the clergymen. And that was normal! For the tsar the Russian Church was the refuge of the idlers that avoided state service These words fully characterize the great emperor of Russia. They characterize him entirely. There were rumors that Peter was secretly baptized according to the Latin procedure (Latinism) and these rumors were not groundless. How can one explain the emperors conduct, especially in 1723, when he prohibited to admit to the veils without the
approval of Synod?.. How can one explain that monasteries that used to be educational centers of Russia were turned into hospitals and alms-houses and shelters into prisons?.. All this was done to exterminate Altaic rules of monkhood that nourished the spiritual culture of the Russian people. Under Stephan Yavorskys order old monks were being annihilated systematically and very quietly. They would burn down libraries and persecute the aged and the youth There was no reform of the monasteries as such but under Peter I the Church was changed again the same as under his father, Alexei Mikhailovich. During one hundred years belief in Russia was changed three times; that had never happened before. Not much remained of the past. Politics dissolved the Church in the State; it mixed the earth and the sky. Power wanted to create a man that would regard his ruler as God and wait for mercy and punishment from him. Those terrible events are described by S.M. Soloviev but with estimations which are improper here. Monks and nuns were registered; guardians were standing at the gates of monasteries and they did not allow anybody to enter and leave them A monk could put his pen to the paper only by assent of the authorities It is hard even to list all these wild innovations. Nothing remained for history, even no last records. And there is only one result: monasteries were starving. They were living in poverty deprived of all their property. They had no firewood. Monks were starving to death and dying of cold. The loss of spiritual freedom is Slavdom; it leaves only one thing for a man apostasy. Obedience was made a law so that even praying people would address not to God but to the emperor Peter prohibited courtiers to utter the word church and replaced it with Orthodox belief department. And that was happening in a Christian country?! In Russia In reply to reproaches of the deposed emperor and the boyars in his indulgence towards German ceremonies the tsar simply
shaved them and made them change their traditional clothes for German ones: I have no beard and it is shaggy. That was not a whim and not the ill tsars freak; he suffered not only epilepsy. It is worse. For the Turki having a beard was obligatory for those representing their families at meetings, which showed the nobility and antiquity of the family. Aksakals, the whitebearded in Turkic, were especially respected people. The longer a beard was, the more respect was shown to a person with it. In them the people saw the connection with the ancestors. That is why during the days of mourning it was prohibited to shave beards for everybody, even for young men. Shaving the aksakals Peter deprived them of everything. That was akin to beheading them. In the XVI century for spoiling ones beard people had to pay considerable penalties in Russia, which is written, for example, in the Pskov deed. The example of Boris Godunov is indicative. Boasting of their mercy he abolished the death sentence to the boyar Belskiy and ordered to pluck his long thick beard, which was hundredfold worse than death. Beards shaving in Russia initiated by Peter was a chain of state policy in terms of destroying the Turkic past. That was a stab in the heart of the old aristocracy that was simply being taken off stage. It should be mentioned that shortening of caftans was also of political character and resulted from the policy of the Kremlin that was destroying the Turkic culture at the will of Rome. A caftan and cap were the items of ancient way of life; those were marks of distinction. The Turki that wore them were prohibited to work physically; such clothes emphasized special caste of these people. A noble man, a boyar, did not have the right to lift a finger; that was humiliating for the servants that were to help them in their everyday life As is seen class relations in Ancient Altai were simple; there was no humiliation or offence in assisting the senior. On the contrary, people were proud of that. For example, the same was about the
tsar. Why was that exploiter financially supported and called the Savior? Why did everybody in Altai obey him without any questions? Why did they present him expensive clothes? Because the tsar was the first to be sacrificed in case of any trouble. He was a living pledge to the Most High and he accepted death voluntarily. That was the price of a mistake. His mistake! The Turkic tsar could only win, that was the condition of his prosperity. Hence a lot of sense and colors in the word tsar. And khan. Close to the tsar there was higher aristocracy that helped him rule. Such people wore caps and caftans. Clothes emphasized that aristocrats and clergymen were closer to the tsar and to God and that they had different responsibility to society as compared with common people. They were the honor of the people, their conscience and advisors. This peculiarity was shown by the clothes. If an aristocrat made a mistake or gave a wrong advice to the tsar they took a cap off him, which meant moral death. The most dreadful death Peters councilors were perfectly aware of all these things; by their orders they hit one target and destroyed the image of the old aristocracy and discredited it. People in German clothes in powder wigs were playing the first fiddle here too. They called their innovations the fight with antiquity. Those that came from Europe were astonished by savage lack of education starting from clothes and beard and ending with the language of the Slavs. They were possibly right in something: the patriarchal moth really eat the old-fashioned clothes of the Russians. Their clothes needed mending, which is indisputable. But mending and not throwing away And in this connection can one regard as the fight with antiquity the fact that Peter was no longer interested in his wife, tsarina Eudoxia Petrovna? After the Azov experience he left for Europe and upon his return he spent nights
either in the German village or in the Preobrazhenskoe settlement; the tsar was interested in Alexander Menshikov from the Preobrazhenskiy regiment, the would-be star on the Russian horizon And another shameless rumor appeared in Moscow, which was described by S.M. Soloviev referring to Yuri Krizhanich, an eyewitness of events. Yuri Krizhanich is a famous representative of scientific, social and political though of the Slavs of the XVII century, an ideologist of the Slavic unity. In his book he wrote that in Russia the sin of Sodom was becoming perhaps a cheerful joke of the court which was not even hidden. Everybody knew about the tsars weakness. It is possible that the tsar Alexei Mkhailovich also suffered it. In public they asserted that it was certainly necessary to be more shameful concerning bestiality, but in reality nothing was being done. Since the tsar was the reason of that trouble. The tsarina went berserk because of shame; she was crying. And under Peters order she was expelled to the Pokrovsky Monastery by force where she took the veil and was given a new name of Helen. They tsar made his wife silent; he knew how to do it. And getting rid of her he took his favorite Danilych closer to the court and ordered to take only young and healthy men into bedrooms. Changes were pressing on Russia from all sides and it was fighting with antiquity having no mercy for itself. That is its old passion to look for something new in it. In 1700 the Russians established the Latin calendar although previously they had been getting along with their Altaic one. It started from the day of world creation from Adam, the first man, and it was as accurate as the western calendar. As is known, Russia was living according to the sun and moon calendar simultaneously; hence perfection of its ancient life: the sun predicted their life for seasons and the moon for weeks. People were glad with the young crescent on the sky and were sad when an old month ended during the last days of the moon one had to be careful in all undertakings.
But these patriarchal features were being abolished. Peter met the year 1700 among the soldiers; handsome bold fellows were seeking his attention all night long. And Peter gave them a new year present: on the 6th of January he ordered the courtiers to wear new caftans and to shave. He ordered to punish those disobeying. This rule did not cover common people; in villages and settlements remained old national clothes that were certainly called Russian. Let it be so. That year grandees were looking at each other with astonishment they were Europeans. Indeed! Bearded, pompous and a little bit slow dignitaries in high hats that would tell the truth to the tsar without fear were not among them. They remained in the last century, in antecedent The novelty of clothes also affected women that were obliged to wear German clothes with robe ronds and hoops at court and in public. They could not stay at home, in womens area, as it had formerly been; they were to show themselves to the guests. New clothes were sold at extremely high prices in the German village of course. That was good business. There they also taught beautiful Russian young ladies good manners and dancing so that they would become more affable with the foreigners discarding their modesty. During the same fatal year of 1700 the tsar received the plan of Neva outfall; a new capital of Russia was being designed. That was an unfavorable region: in a morass and on islands with impassability and absence of people around. However that inconvenience did not perplex. It rather inspired. The tsar ordered to move thousands and thousands of Tatars from Don and then from Dnepr to those mires. New Russian capital was being raised on their bones. It was important for the Kremlin to annihilate as much dangerous people as possible; and building a town in a morass was perhaps the best way to do it. Only crusades could be better Nobody has ever counted even approximately how many people died there.
That would have equaled millions of stubborn men that were not willing to betray their belief in Heavenly God. They were being taken there every day. In entire villages The Jesuits showed resourcefulness of their demonian mind again. In Russia they managed to do everything, even the unlikeliest things; they set a hazy goal for the builders of Petersburg: to build the new town without the Kremlin and with no signs of the former architectural tradition. A gloomy place for the north capital was also suitable because the town was moving away from the borders of the Turkic world and the history of Russia. In the town image European architects were trying to repeat the silhouette of Europe and thus they were fighting with ignorance, deep-rooted prejudices and depravity of the Slavs. Not a town was designed but a museum of Italian architecture among rotten morasses of Neva. Russia did not need a different capital. From Europe to Russia they brought new fonts for book printing; Jacob Bruce was dealing with that. Due to him in 1708 the Russians saw their ancient writings Cyrillic for the first time. It was invented by Peter I (or Bruce standing behind him) or, more precisely, he chose from three types of alphabet brought from Holland and corrected certain letters in it himself. His correction is kept in a museum; that is a little bit changed Latin alphabet; it was not like the Greek alphabet but its Turkic foundation is evident. That was the repeating of the rule known by the Greek, Arab and other alphabets invented by the Turki: alpha, beta, gamma They had: az, buki, vediIn Turkic that means az (yaz) write, buki grieve, vedi knowledge. That was followed by the same edification: glagol teach, dobro honestly. It seems there is nothing to comment here! The alphabet was officially called
newly invented Russian letters. And the first book printed in new letters was Geometry, Slavic Surveying. Among the following books was Three Languages Lexicon of Slavic, Hellenic, Greek and Latin Words and Expressions; it was very successful in the country that was changing its language. That was a phrase-book allowing the foreigners to communicate with the Slavs. It seems today historians relate that Peters alphabet to the work of Cyril and Methodius trying to make the Russian literature look more ancient. And thus they do it an ill turn since the brothers were related to distribution of the Latin alphabet among the Slavs but not of Cyrillic which was not known when they were alive. In the Eastern Europe the Glagolitic alphabet was used The question of the appearance of the Russian written language is certainly a fine question but, all the same, it appeared under Peter I. More precisely, in 1708. Not a century earlier! The brothers enlighteners of the Slavs are a careless work of the Jesuits. They are perhaps the most meaningless heroes in history; maybe Demetrius Donskoy is the only one who is more meaningless? They have not done anything but they became saints. That is comparable with the baptism of Russia by the Greeks, which has never happened either! Everything written about Cyrils and Methodius educating activity is even theoretically impossible since the Cyrillic alphabet was established only under Peter I he was the one that introduced it and the Slavic grammar appeared a century earlier. Consequently there could be no Slavic translation of the Bible and no Slavic divine services performed by the brothers in the X century. They do not exist. And they have never existed. Cyril and Methodius are saints of the Catholic Church. Not of the Greek! That is not accidental. In the list of saints of the Russian and Bulgarian Churches their names appeared much later under the Jesuits Cyrils remains rest in Rome in St. Clement basilica. It is not known where Methodius is buried. What did those brothers have in
common with the Russian Slavs? It is a secret. Introducing the new written language in Russia Jacob Bruce had only one goal to prevent the Slavic youth reading ancient Turkic books written in the Glagolitic alphabet and make them incomprehensible. That was another attempt to create a gap between generations and eliminate the former culture and make the people forget it. Russia used such tactics more than once or twice when in the interests of politics it was necessary to make fathers and sons alien for each other. That happened in the Volga region, At Don, in the Caucasus. Everywhere. Jacob Bruce, the tsars ideologist, understood the main thing the Slavs would never want to know the truth about themselves; it did not interest them. They are the enemies of the truth and adherents of heroic lies. That is the basis of the Russian national ideology built by the Jesuit; he allowed to write about the past everything except for the truth. Distortion became a tradition that lasted till the end of the XX century, i.e. till the censorship was officially abolished. In the times of Peter I new books were published and printed in the West in Italy. As a rule at first those were church books. And to read them the tsar ordered to send the children of the clergymen to Graeco-Latin schools and those that were not willing to study could not be conferred orders and engaged anywhere, as it was written in the tsars order This is the way the new language of divine services was being established among the clergymen. The Russians studied Slavdom according to a Roman program where Christianity and Europe were the centre of the universe and were derived from Greek or Latin roots. Of course they were not told that Byzantium and Rome were paying levy some time ago and that they studied the basics of the spiritual life from Altaic teachers The new school program contained nothing undue. That was unnecessary. Jacob Bruce was taking fatherly care
about the correctness of his subjects. Unfortunately, in the Russian Academy created in 1724 the western viewpoint on the world history was dominating from the very first day. As a matter of fact, that is why the Academy of Sciences was created; it did not publish any book or any article without the ominous Censored seal. That was in accordance with the traditions of the Roman Church that was living with censorship from the times of the Pope Gelasius from 495 and could not imagine a different life. Freedom of thought was initially strange for it. Russia was always living under an invisible eye of a censor. It published what Mr. Bruce considered to be correct. It was telling what he allowed In this connection History written by M.V. Lomonosov is indicative; that was possible a unique work that has never seen the light of day. The manuscript was read to tatters. Its text contradicted with what had been stated by the Jesuits from 1722, The West wrote the history of Russia itself, and Bruce was among the first there. To make everything look truthful he ordered to collect the chronicles from monasteries and departments and invited scientists from abroad. And he proceeded to work. To tell the truth, it is not clear how those invited Catholics managed to deal with Glagolitic texts written in the Turkic language? If they opened them at all?.. However, this is not the most interesting thing here. And the most interesting thing is the thing to which a Russian academician A.A. Shakhmatov paid humble attention in the XIX century. It turns out, the foreigners were rewriting ancient chronicles. Simply stated it means they were being replaced. Falsifiers faking the Time were working at well adjusted conveyors. That was their common everyday work; in the same manner they were plundering the past of Europe replacing the Turkic pages and adding new ones Forgery is evident; for this purpose books were taken from monasteries and they have never been returned there. For example, Nestors Russian
Primary Chronicle was rewritten almost in full; only the title and several simple chapters were left At the same time appeared the socalled Cabinet Chronicle that nobody had seen before and from which the first Russian historian V.N. Tatischev started in the XVIII century his epochal work controlled by Jacob Bruce, the protector of sciences and piety. Karamzin, Kliuchevskiy, Soloviev, Grekov, Rybakov were bound by History written by Tatischev. The same as those that were less significant. And so that they would not disperse in the Time censors were always standing behind them. In 1735 another book saw the light of day; that was New and Brief Way to Put Russian Verses Together that explained how to make verses in Russian. That was a handbook for poets. A very interesting book. Its author V. Trediakovskiy was born in Astrakhan and studied in the Graeco-Latin academy dealing with the Slavic grammar and verses. He visited Sorbonne. That was a great author of merit verses. His book is unique because against the authors will it shows: formerly the Russians used to put verses together in the Turkic way and saw nothing reprehensible in it. They could not do otherwise. There was no other literary language in Russia! Our literature begins with poetry, asserted Trediakovskiy. He was one of the first Russian academicians and a competitor of Lomonosov in literature; he wrote: Grammar opens understanding and cognition of writings and for this purpose everybody should know the grammar of the Slavic dialect... That was about the Slavic dialect that was being polished in Russia at that time. The basis was the language the Slavic Bulgaria spoke where the Turkic language was considerably mixed up with that of the Wends and Greeks. It was called Protobulgarian. And all the rest was a matter of taste. That is what the academician Trediakovskiy was dealing with he was the first Russian poet and he wrote the first Russian novel and the first Russian ode. He invented the literary language and he was the
first one who used it! That was certainly a gifted man in his own way. Here are his verses, the earliest ones; the Russian poetry started from them they are the first muses of the golden age: The spring is coming, The winter is being overthrown, And a leave is rustling on a tree. Birds are singing Titmice are singing, Foxes are waving their tails. Furrows are dug, Clusters are in bloom, A goldfinch is calling, thrushes are whistling, Waters flow, And weathers, Our campaigns are eminent Forget the wretch, Forget sea bore, Be rougher but dont forget a joke: If you stand silently And humbly, You will not hear the waves. The second Russian poet (that was not his rank number of course) was Antioch Kantemir; he had a different manner of writing:
You bound me by your lips and your hand, You praised me more than I deserve and protected me An old man should not forget that, Because ingratitude is blasphemed by a tube. No! But to ****** As a token of gratitude alas! they prohibit. ****, and although the gifts do not glisten With elegance, the signs of *** are true.
The same school was opened in Astrakhan. And Kantemir was also a Tatar; he had a Turkic surname from iron khan. It has not been forgotten in Moldavia where they were the rulers of Valahia and than betrayed their people. And his absurd name Antioch witnesses that the poets father that escaped to Moscow wanted to be a Christian and get a title. And he got them and became a Russian prince Peters councilor and his son became a Russian diplomat. The reader is to judge how gifted were those poets. But poetry in Russia began from them, from those royal courtiers that could write in the Slavic dialect. Lomonosov was the third in that list And here a fine question appears: what about The Lay of the Host of Igor? An ancient Russian literary monument? There was a real collision about The Lay. An insoluble contradiction. Too many people were disputing on this point. Researchers, really ambitious people, as a rule search for copyists mistakes in the poem and correct them at their discretion. In an unclear context they choose certain sounds that seemed clear to them and connect them in words and the words make phrases. Being unaware of the sense of the poem they keep on searching for its new sense. And they find it. Hence a hundred of translations from Russian into Russian, which is an example of absurdity. Certain translators could not control their thoughts and gave rise to absurd. And nobody asked themselves had ancient Russian poetry existed at all? Nobody wondered why was the poem written according to the Turkic poetic rules? Nobody had doubts about the presence of mistakes there. And there is good Turkic literary language with words and expressions that later appeared in Russian? Hence the impression of being unrecognizable. We have already forgotten that in the Russian language at least one half of the words are Turkic or are derived from the Turkic language. And that is natural. That is how it should be: Russia was to continue the
One can treat the verses differently; some people are in rapture because of them and some are not. They are interesting since their authors are serving Tatars that became Slavs. An Astrakhan Tatar took a pseudonym of Trediakovskiy; in his new name a Turkic phrase is clearly heard: words (speech) collector or scholar. That is how he signed his work on grammar Latin school pupil.
linguistic traditions of Rus. After all, those were the Turki exiled by Baty that founded Moscow Russia. Those servants of Ryurikoviches that became the Slavs. And it should be mentioned that the Turkic language has a unique peculiarity; it can be altered since it is light and movable in terms of grammar. But in combination with other languages it always dominates! That is marked by all the experts. Maybe that is why it was called divine in antiquity? More than that, no matter how it is changed it remains understandable to the former native speakers, those that believe in its divine origin. Belief makes foreign speech clear for them. If Attilas or Genghis Khans associates recovered, they would speak like Kazakhs or Khakasses, Tatars or Bashkirs. And a Kumyk speaking his native language badly would not have been standing apart from that conversation with Time. And the ancient Russian language, the same as Protobulgarian, is not clear for the Slavs that have no memory. And that is witnessed by a famous example from The Lay of the Host of Igor, its line Oh, Russian land that made the poem heroic. If only that was true In the text found by A.I. MusinPushkin that phrase is as follows rskzmljzshlmnms: in the ancient Turkic language they wrote only in consonants in one word; vowels were added in case of discrepancies. Later, in about the X century, the European Turki changed the writing direction and started to write from left to right and again in one word. But the rules of dividing written signs remained; at that they added vowels and superscript signs titlos to consonants. It is impossible that that was happening by chance, like in a multiplication table. Twice two always makes four. And the required phrase from The Lay became even longer Oruskayazemliauzhezasholomianeme si (***). But it could be translated from the Turkic langue. Word for word.
Or-us-kayaz-emlia-uzh-ez-ash-olomyan-em-es-i, where or means to rise, us vulture, kaizy ashes, bones In a word, the literary translation is as follows: Rise, vulture, eat the ashes, tear the skin. Multiply death, frighten. Follow food and prey. At that that line is in accordance with previous phrases where eagles (vultures! M.A.) call the animals to the bones by squawking; foxes *** shields. From the text it is seen that the author treated the Russian bek Ingvar ironically. That was not the prince Igor! The hero of the poem is a Varangian who was made the prince Igor and a Slav by the Jesuits later. Musin-Pushkin was the first who wrote about the poem; he known the text, that is clear. Alas, varnished tale can't be round; not the Russian land and not a vulture are in question there. The Turki had a sign at whom a vulture hisses, that one is going to die. It was used by the author of the poem in the aforementioned line Unfortunately, there are hundreds of similar free translations. However, what wonder when the poem was being translated slavery was prospering in Russia that was serfdom. In villages and in towns. And the main thing in peoples minds. That was the time of the Slavophils. It has been written about The Lay perhaps more than about any other writing. And Musin-Pushkins assistants A.F. Malinovskiy, N.N. Bantysh-Kamenskiy and N.M. Karamzin that helped him analyze the text were perhaps the closest to the truth. In cooperation with their friends they buried the poem giving it Slavic features that they considered to be necessary. Hence the absence of the original. Hence hundreds of translations from Russian into Russian and rare permissiveness with which they would alter and add phrases, words and letters so as to give sense to their work What was unnecessary was being crossed out endlessly. Is this the way for a poem to be translated?
However, it is not possible to talk about its most famous researchers and translators; they were all walking along the road made by the Jesuits and they thought they were not allowed to make a step to the left or to the right. If at least one of them opened the ancient Turkic dictionary, he would consider that writing in an absolutely different way And one would not have to prove anything and argue. Everyone would be delighted. The history with The Lay witnesses again: the truth cannot be destroyed since it is given by God. Like life The Turkic poetry existed two thousands years ago and at that time it stroke by perfection of its sound and image. After all, a pencil was invented by the Turki; with that black stone the verses were being written. Russia needed decades after Trediakovskiy to hear the voice of another Slavic poet Alexander Pushkin who managed to write verses in Russian. Between those poets were Derzhavin, Zhukovskiy; they would write in Turkic since there was no other literary language in the times of their studying. Remember, I was singing, I am singing and I will be singing them, I will tell the people about them, I will tell about the Tatar songs to the people it is Derzhavin. His verses are a sort of translation into the foreign Russian literary language; hence visible clumsiness of the verses, their rusticity. The Turkic literature is a mystery of the Russian history; it is better to be proud of it than to conceal it. It is known that books were very valuable in Russia; they were taken care of and kept in libraries, which was mentioned by many foreigners. Where have those treasures of Russia disappeared? And have the old believers kept them?
expeditions deep down Russia, another new undertaking that did not look simple either. That was another initiative of Jacob Bruce an open reconnaissance action. Other definitions are wrong here. They were discovering new things which were formerly inaccessible for the West mineral wealth, people, culture To a great extent that reminded of registering warehouses and barns in a conquered town and assortment of its property and population. The expedition was certainly prepared by the foreigners (Miller, Pallas, Guldenstedt, Falk, Georgi, etc) serving the Russian tsar; they were engaged researching and adjusting the geography of Russia. That seemed to be the right thing to do. But for whose sake were they trying? One cannot answer on the spot. For instance, for some reason Falk delivered a report called Travelers Notes in the Swedish, German and Latin languages. For some reason his expedition, judging by the report, was interested not only in natural landscapes but rather in towns bastions and approaches to them, roads and river crossings. And Georgi, judging by his report entitled Description of all the Nations Living in Russia was interested in the reasons of conflicts between the natives These are strange interests, arent they? It is evident that choosing the subjects in the first instance researchers were thinking about the interests of the Russian crown, that third (!) crown that needed information. That is why only in the XIX century in Petersburg collected works of those travelers were published in Russian. And those were not all their works. But even an outdated publication showed what was interesting for the Jesuits and why the East attracted them. Formerly the West had no information about Russian towns, resources and nations. It is interesting that field data of the expeditions were being analyzed too far away from Russia, in Western universities One of those expeditions was called Orenburg; it was created in 1734 so as to explore and develop the eastern outskirts of
Avid Khan is not Higher than a Farmhand

From Peter began so-called scientific
Russia. New masters of the country were giving names to new Russian towns, which is usual for colonization as far as we known. As a matter of fact, that was the colonization of the Russian East. In German Orenburg means Eastern town. From there started the conquest of the Kirghiz-Kaisak (Kazakh) steppe that at that time had its ancient name Desht-I-Kipchak. That was the last bulwark of the Turki. Everything that remained of Attilas state by the XVIII century. The remotest outskirts. The Jesuits were moving there. Their actions were directed by Rome; later its name title became Igelstroms reform. Russian and Kazakh historians do not write a lot about that reform trying to neglect it. That is wrong. It contains the goal of Peters expeditions from which researches of the Russian Academy of Sciences began. Although O.A. Igelstrom was not an Orisntalist; he was born in Sweden in a noble family for which there was no enough space in Europe. Crowds of these people were moving to Russia its yesterdays enemies, children and grandsons of those that started the times of troubles and were becoming the masters of life. Peter I relied on them; he introduced him in high society and replaced the old aristocracy with them in the regions. There, to the remote regions, were moving expeditions or, more precisely, people of the West, trying to establish the Christian ideology there That was very well shown by the Orenburg expedition. From 1756 Otto Igelstrom was serving in Russia; he was the head of the Kabardian regiment, he distinguished himself in the Russian Turkish war, captivated the Crimean khan Shagin-Girei, for which he was marked by the throne and was appointed general governor in the Volga region. That was a born connoisseur of peoples souls, perhaps the best expert in that field in Russia at that time. He had animal instincts and devilish mind. He calmed the Volga region at one stroke he extinguished the conflict of the Christians and Moslems, which the army had failed to do. And he did that quietly and delicately. The Russian Swede did a simple thing as a general governor. Being aware that
the khans were the reason of the disturbance in his government, he started to support all the local khans simultaneously, even the weakest and the most intimidated ones. A thoughtless thing? No, the knowledge of Turkic character. The khans were proud because of attention paid to them; they lifted their heads and all of them were feeling themselves the most important and irreplaceable ones. They began to choke each other with their own hands. Since then hidden hatred of the Tatars and Bashkirs has covered the Volga region and become the pain of the Turkic people, a wound streaming blood that still has not healed And a shame! The name of Otto Ingelstrom has been forgotten but the enmity started by him still lives. The khans prestige was rapidly lowering; they were getting exhausted even more rapidly and at that time the governor remembered those that showed themselves as faithful subjects of Russia. He began to nourish only them. It did not matter whether those were Christians or Moslems the Russian tsar was no longer an enemy for them. Their neighbors were the enemies. Thus potential allies of Turkey in the Volga region were neutralized, which allowed Russia to start a new Russian-Turkish war. Devilish mind helped Ingelstrom in his affairs holding the office of the Orenburg governor dealing with Karakaisak (Kazakh) khans. In delicate policy and playing with feelings consisted his reform that led to the loss of independence of Desht-I-Kipchak and its voluntary joining Russia. The Turki defeated themselves again. In steppes lying north-west of Altai to the Caspian region time stopped when Attila was alive. Because of remoteness and inaccessibility life there was in accordance with ancient quiet Altaic rules. There were no attempts to violate the traditions. That was the kingdom untouched by the Time where the khan was elected and after the elections he was raised on a white felt carpet. Such things were forgotten everywhere in the
world; all the rest were leading different lives. People there worshipped Eternal Blue Sky, the discords of the East and West did not trouble the steppe; Christians and Moslems were known by repute there although the ideas of Islam were familiar. Several families came there when Islam was accepted in the Middle Asia. Those were the families that considered themselves to be adherents of the Old Belief; they were called nomad Uzbeks? And there was a long way to Christianity: Astrakhan became the eastern outpost of the West not long ago but steppe inhabitants had been avoiding it from the times of Ivan the Terrible. A dangerous town. It was not living in accordance with the Eastern rules and thus it was alien. An unfriendly town that was. That purely Turkic culture with which the West was fighting was living in the forgotten steppe; in illimitable spaces it had no enemies. Of course that was an oasis of the gray antiquity that chose a nomad way of life, which saved from invasions and made the people inaccessible for any rival Loosing the army and letting its best sons go it is hard to rely on rebellions. They would accept everyone believing in Tengri and this is the way they were living. They were leading simple lives. The same as in Ancient Altai, they reveled in freedom and joy. They liked to ride a horse very quickly so as to listen to the music of the wind Kishi Khaky directed their life commandments, simple and clear, like day and night, are as follows: Three divine commandments:
- believe in Heavenly God, in Tengri, since there are no other gods; - do not invent idols, there is one belief in God; - rely only on yourself and His help;
Nine commandments of bliss:

- believe in the Trial by Ordeal; - do not be afraid of tears caring for the nearest; - respect the adats of your nation; - look for the truth and do not be afraid of it; - keep kind feelings towards all the people; - be pure in your heart and in your deeds; - do not let altercations happen and try to reach peace; - help those suffering for the truth; - your belief must be in your soul but not in your mind.
Compliance with three first commandments made one a believer. And with other six ones made one humane. And compliance with the last nine ones made one a Turki for which spirit and freedom were top of priorities in their lives. This is the way the steppe inhabitants were living worshipping Tengri From there, from the centre of Asia the idea of Monotheism came to the world together with the people that early in the Middle Ages were the honor and glory of Europe and the rest of the world. Those were the Turki that started the Great Nations Migration. Like a kind mother, the steppe gave the world rulers, military leaders, scientists and it itself has never had much. That is a Turkic tradition what is better is given to a friend. That is what was happening long before Attila, from the beginning of the Great Nations Migration. And it lasted for centuries. Thus appeared the Russian word steppe (isitep) burn-out. Yurts, flocks and eternal roaming are all that the Sky left for the steppe. And also the way of life and worship of traditions that allowed cattle-lifting, brides kidnapping and many other things that helped build up mans character, prowess and outsight Poems and songs were born in a saddle. They did not need more. Mans food is in the steppe, - they used to say there. And they were absolutely right. These free Turki were not surprised at the coming of the brothers that settled in the lands of Yaik (Ural) the river that crosses the steppe from south to north like a ribbon. Those newcomers were called Yaik Cossacks
Six human commandments:

- respect your father and mother; God gave you life through them; - do not kill without necessity; - do not debauch; - do not steal; - do not tell lies; - do not envy.
326 / 342
Muscovy and Russia
but it is more precisely to call them Don Tatars. They came to Yaik early in the XVIII century from Don Tataria which was being colonized by Moscow destroying the old belief and the old way of life. Of course those newcomers spoke the Turkic language, but its different dialect. According to a legend, Yaik Cossacks were old believers and they were led by a Tatar woman, grandmother Gugnikha; she found shelter for them in the lands controlled by Russia, in the free lands of steppe nomads free from the Astrakhan waywode. People there always accepted everybody believing in Heavenly God. Don Tatars settled there. They were living peacefully. They had one belief with the locals but there was no relation; however they did not try to reach it considering each other aliens. They were making away and they were acting too carefullyand pompously They were the Turki! The steppe seemed vast and free only to the profanes but as a matter of fact those were the lands divided between the zhuzes (unions of families); however its borders were not constant. They were changing to the advantage of this or that party reflecting the correlation of forces in society at a given historical moment. That is what was happening under Attila; that is what was happening in the XVIII century: the boundaries of Desht-I-Kipchak were moving. They were fixed by the strongest khan. That was a tradition of the Turkic world where the dignified and the strong were living steadily. The lands of the elder zhuz were lying in the south, closer to the mountains where the most ancient families lived; it seems they were the first that left Altai for the steppe. They believed in Tengri that was their white Altaic belief Desht-I-Kipchak began from them. That was their belief that gathered them into a horde and called them Nestorians!.. Those Turki came there two or three centuries before the Common Era, but they certainly did not know the word Kazakh; it has been established by the XVIII century. A wrong word. It is offensive.
In ancient times steppe inhabitants were simply called the Turki; they were divided into families and hordes and they were notable for their quality of life which it is impossible to recover one can only remember it. The same as the fact that the eastern steppe was called Semirechye (the land between seven rivers) and the western steppe was called Oguz steppe since it was under control of Oguz khans. It is interesting that Semirechye became the history of the East as Nestorians lands that was perhaps their basic spiritual centre that was the closest to Altai both geographically and ideologically. The etymology of the word Kazakh (Cossack) is not simple as it might seem; it cannot be called indisputable: much has been said but there is nothing. The most popular version is vagrant, separated from the nation and army, runaway. The ethnicon becomes clearer if one considers that when Islam was being established in the Middle Asia part of subjected Uzbek khans escaped to the north in inaccessible steppes It is possible that the Jesuits wanted to convey that meaning establishing the ethnicon in the XVIII century since in the West that was the name of cattle straying away from the horde. And also for some reason they believed that the Turki calling themselves Cossacks began to despise other people It is hard to judge what was right in those explanations. There are possibly other more convincing versions but they have not taken acknowledgement while the word Kazakh remained. The elder Zhuz are those Nestorians, the pride of the East. Their ancient families were very famous and their glory was eternal. In the first instance it is about the family of Albans; long before the Common Era it was living in the Chuya Valley and then it sent its best representatives to the West together with the Great Nations Migration and they founded the Caucasian Albania the first Turkic state in the western world! It was situated near the borders of the Roman Empire. The riders of the elder zhuz were fighting among those that defeated the Roman army under the walls of Rome in
327 / 342
Muscovy and Russia
312 In Derbent the Albans were teaching the Europeans to believe in Heavenly God Tengri That horde gave the world great people; they glorified both the Oguz and the Kipchaks: some of them founded Italian Ravenna, Spanish Barcelona, others took part in Anglo-Saxon campaigns or watered their horses in Nile. This is what history says: the descendants of Albans became the most important persons of the West; they are still in good health the gentle aristocracy. These words are confirmed by the images of the tamgas of Alban, Botbai, Sikym and other families of the elder zhuz which are present on certain buildings and monuments of the Caucasian Albania, Europe and the Middle East; the sign of Botbai family stands out it is cultic and sacred. The sign of the ancestor! The Eastern symbols are not accidental in the Western heraldry. Tamgas remained as the mystery of the ancient Turki and the sign of their time. And no Jesuit orders, no Pope can erase what the Most High has written. Especially if one considers that the tamga of the Kirei family, as though that is the irony of fate, became the sign of the Malthusian Order, todays main rival of the Turki Unfortunately, the history of tamga and its geography has not been investigated seriously. It has been pronouncedly neglected. Or the tamga does not have a master any more? But it was present on coins and seal rings of the aristocrats of West and East; it was absolutely the same everywhere! Even in signatures made in the European manner. Here it is, the Secret History from the capital letter. It has not been read. The middle zhuz was no less famous. That family union was notable for rare firmness against difficulties of life; people were very strong spiritually. They found themselves in the outlet of the peoples river that was flowing somewhere from Altai to the west through lifeless steppes to Europe. The core of Attilas army consisted of these representatives of Altaic tribes; and they were
the ones that developed the steppe and raised towns and built roads there. They had the labor burden but they managed to stand it and they moved the border of the Turkic world far to the west Indeed, God has not given intolerable burden to anybody. Families of the middle zhuz were not notable for the unity of belief; they were united perhaps only in the ancient times. When Islam came to the Middle Asia, the people that were dissatisfied with it escaped from the south to the lands of this zhuz. Those runaway Uzbeks, as they were called, certainly were not the strangers; they did not have many differences with steppe inhabitants and accepted the local khans power but did not change their belief as such they were considered to be Moslems and Tengri followers simultaneously, which was quite normal and natural. Religious terminology was the same Altaic terminology: a priest was called nabiy (nabyz), winged heavenly horse was called burak (bura) and so on. All of them would always hail each other saying Esen-salam. The zhuz was notable for tolerance, which later became a distinctive feature of the whole Kazakhstan that was considered to be Moslem in Russia while nobody knows when it accepted Islam. There is no exact date. Under reservations it could be possible to agree with the year 705 the beginning of the Arabic invasion to the lands of the South Kazakhstan. But that is a conventional date since that was the war for the rich Middle Asia but not for the steppe; the Arabs were not interested in a not numerous population of Desht-I-Kipchak. Their invasions continued later, for instance Nasr ibn Seyars campaign of 737 738, but they were also common military invasions. Only small southern and north-western regions of Desht-I-Kipchak became parts of the Caliphate, but they certainly had not religious impact on the rest of the steppe population. The people living there did not accept Islam and did not build mosques It
is sufficient to say that the Jami of Almata was built late in the XX century What acceptance of a new religion can be in question? In what does it consist? Especially considering that early Islam did not have its ceremonies and did not considerably differ from the white belief of the Turki. From Altaic Monotheism. During the hard time of the Great Nations Migration the family of Kanly was standing apart. It seems that it left Uigur lands of Altai because of blood revenge and escaped to vast steppes in carts to find respect and glory there. Of course, the founders of the Ottoman Empire belonged to that family. Its rivals were other families of the middle zhuz Kypchaks, Konrats, Kereis, Naimans, etc. And there was the reason: nobody wanted to loose; they were all fighting for respect and glory of the steppe, for its best lands that is the Turkic world. Everywhere it is the same; it has always been and it will always be fighting with itself. It respects only the strongest. Indeed, could the Kypchaks lose when they gave the name to the Great Steppe Country Desht-I-Kipchak? And were the Kereis weaker? According to one version, Attilas wife belonged to them A book is not enough to describe the advantages and glory of every Turkic family. And all the disadvantages of other Turkic families. This is a subject for a table-talk and a meeting; it began in the Ancient Altai and has not ended yet. Until the last but one Turki goes aloft the dispute between the remaining two about who is better will continue. Rivalry was to the detriment of the free nation but it was for the welfare of mankind. That happened in the middle zhuz when the younger zhuz detached. Impatient like a young stallion it wanted to determine the destiny of its herd. Such a decision is normal for a Turki. But how did that happen? When? It is unlikely that somebody can tell. And again there are versions and legends which seem to be contradictory: such events never happen during one year; they are maturing for a long time. But how?
Someones aspiration is necessary for a union of families to split Or circumstances. It is possible that everything began in the XVIII century just before the Dzungarian invasion when Desht-I-Kipchak was run by Tauke-Khan, Genghis Khans descendant in the sixteenth degree. People were listening to that sage for thirty years; avoiding difficulties and skillfully maneuvering he was defending the steppe country Unfortunately, the history of that khan was being distorted by politicians of different ranks that would erase or add certain pages of his family tree more than once. That is why certain generations of the Turki knew his name very well and some of them have never heard it. And that was the last ruler of Desht-IKipchak that left this world worthily! In 1718 Tauke-Khan found eternal refuge With his departure troubles came; dusty clouds closed the sky and the dark year of 1723 came; it remained in peoples memory as the year of the great trouble for the first time in centuries the steppe was mourning because of the strength of the enemys army. The Dzungarian invasion began. Much has been written about that event but everything is so vague, as though for somebodys sake the most important details drowned in verbal husk. In the words. What brought the enemies there? And who were those enemies? It is not clear. This subject is like a military path; in Kazakhstan people take it only furtively and looking about. It is akin to the Mongol Tatar yoke in Russia: too far from the truth. That was a strange war if it can be called a war at all. The parties waging war had no political or economic disputes. They both led poor nomadic lives in terms of European standards; they were content with not much. They did not have weapons in quantities necessary to wage a war! At that before those parties had been living close to each other for centuries and had no secrets; a sheep and good relations between each other had been the standard of their value. The same as one
329 / 342
Muscovy and Russia
thousand years ago. And then the cruel war came And those events have no meaning in isolation from Peters Russia that swallowed the Don Steppe in 1696. There is an opinion that the Dzungars which are used by the Kazakhs to scare disobedient children came to Desht-I-Kipchat not by themselves; they were led by the white people. A lot of white people. Since after the Russians conquered Astrakhan the steppe East was in the Western orbit; it was no longer inaccessible outskirts and could not be free. In politics there is no vacuum; everything is interrelated there. And that is right. If one runs the time back it is seen that from 1715 Russia was taking stock of Desht-I-Kipchak and the Middle Asia; it sent ambassadors, merchants and emissary expeditions there. It was solving clear military and strategic problems determined by the Jesuit Possevino and did not conceal that. In the expedition of 1717, for instance, seven thousand Russian soldiers with twenty two cannons took part; that was a developing attack. One of its leaders was Kurlyk Mamet Mamashev that was later called Alexei Ivanovich Tevkelev; that was the would-be Russian ambassador in Kazakhstan. It is possible to name another dozen of people that were engaged preparing the invasion of the Dzungars to this or that extent. For instance, I.K. Kirillov that served in the Secret Police Department known as one of the initiators of the military invasion to DeshtI-Kipchak and the Middle Asia that was his idea to build the Orenburg fortress. He and his people knew more about the Dzungars than anyone else. All these things tell much to those that are acquainted with Peters diplomacy at least a little bit. In 1713 a certain Turkmen came to Astrakhan with the news that on the banks of Amu-Darya they had discovered gold
deposits. He suggested a plan according to which the Turkmen and Russians were to conquer khanates located along the river and also turn Amu-Darya to the old outlet leading to the Caspian region. As a matter of fact, that was the beginning of the active Russian information policy in the East. Jesuits messengers were coming there as merchants and diplomats to collect necessary data. One of the first to launch the innovation was a descendant of the Crimean khans Gireis (the Russian prince Cherkasskiy) that was sent to the Middle Asia so that he would put an amiable khan on the throne. He failed the next expedition was headed by the Italian named Florio Benevini; it was more successful but still its results did not allow to base the policy of colonization on them. The East resisted and it should be mentioned that in doing so it relied on the Dzungars; their troops defeated a Russian colonel Bukhgoltz. And thus the Jesuits had an idea of a military union with the Dzungars those keepers of the justice. The Dzungars were excellent warriors, which explains their soon appearance in Desht-I-Kipchak. It was not by chance when during those years on the eastern border of the Astrakhan government, as though by themselves, appeared strengthened lines outposts, redoubts that had never existed before. Was their building connected with anything?.. But steppe inhabitants did not know that. The patriarchs of the steppe were very bad strategists; they considered all the people to be the same as them Indeed, their time had stopped one thousand years ago. And if there are no enemies, there is no strategy. What is it for? Everything was complicated by the absence of the allies since Desht-I-Kipchak inhabitants had never been notable for reliability in relationships with their neighbors: poverty, eternal movements and hunger made them stingy people. Nobody would communicate with them neither Siberian waywodes, neither khans from the Middle Asia, nor Chinese rulers.
Steppe inhabitants were living in themselves remaining alone with troubles that they would face from time to time. In that war mythical Dzungars were not a nation but a union of nations subject to Russia, its vassals the Kalmucks, Bashkirs, Cossacks, Khakasses, etc. And the vassals of their vassals Oirats, Uigurs and others. In a word, those deceived whose only difference was their name It is not a mistake to compare the coming troops with the Huns that had an ability of creating and overmastering military unions. And the main thing was giving them their name. The Turkic folk epos is certainly more free than politicized Kazakh historians; it shows the Dzungars in an absolutely different way fabulous heroes, swords of justice and requital. It will be clear and certainly interesting for an attentive reader. Dzungar (Dzangar), according to a legend, is an orphan, the lonely whose image is derived from the ancient Turkic conceptions of an epic hero. That is an image of an ancestor, the first Turki that left Altai. The same as Altaic At-syz he struggled with monsters and betrayers and protected the offended; he was the royal counselor and an unsurpassed singer and poet. Legends about Dzungar are almost an exact copy of the pages of life of another Turkic hero Geser (Djoru). That was possibly one and the same person. Another image of justice and revenge; the consonance of names is not accidental. Dzungarkhan became history as the king of India. As a hero (or heroes) the people depicted the pages of their ancient history; they are read with the Kalmucks, Buryats, Mongols and Tibetans, in a word, with the neighbors of the Turki that were also aware of those events but as against the Kazakhs were the followers of Buddhism, its northern branch, and for that reason they saw the world differently. The geography of Dzungar is vast; it covers the Central Asia, Tibet and has a very deep sense. That is not something accidental and feudal as it may seem to certain
Kazakhs The Dzungars coming to Desht-IKipchak meant the triumph of requital. Bur for what? It is worth thinking about quietly. What invasion or, more precisely, what correlation of forces can be in question at all if on a map Dzungaria can be covered by a fingernail while Desht-I-Kipchal cannot be covered by a palm? On a geographical map it is better to look at it through a magnifying glass; it lies in mountain glens of the Ancient Altai, in the south-west. The army of Dzungars consisted possibly of one thousand riders that were not thinking about an invasion to the steppe But statistics means nothing here. The strength of the Dzungars was not in their number but in their name. In it a tradition was heard; the Russians understood that quickly. By all appearances in Dzungaria the tsar Cyrus descendants were the rulers; from ancient times their power was considered to be absolute for the Turki and worshipping them was obligatory. That was the power of the White King, the keeper of the white belief All these things are likely to be true since they explain, for instance, certain blank pages of the history of Khakasses, Kirghiz, Uzbeks, Kazakhs. It clarifies many lines of the Manasa epos. It also becomes clear why in the valleys of Kirghizia there are people of non-Kirghiz appearance blue-eyed, fair haired. The same as the tsar Cyrus himself. People have always called them real Kirghizes and all the rest their subjects. This fact is not clear today but it had not given rise to doubts before. According to the rules of the ancient Turkic grammar the -ghiz ending means your, consequently there is obviously an expression your highness. In a word, your Cyrus. In Syria (Cyria), for instance, the word cyr is still present meaning master. And for the Jews cyr is higher power, sun. Hence highnesses; everything is like the ancient Turki had it. This is a very deep and not obvious subject; there are no reliable researches on this point; scientific generals have prohibited to touch this fine question. The history of the royal Turkic dynasty origin those real Kirghizes has never even been discussed.
What has been written is rather confusing that explicative. It seems the tsar Cyrus subjects have in centuries assumed their masters name; but how?.. That is not clear. Here Khakassia from where the royal dynasty of Achemenids the tsar Cyrus people originated must approve itself. What if that family are those real Kirghizes? Or, more precisley, Khakasses that were called real Kirghizes? Everything was happening in the territory of the Ancietn Altai, in one country, with one nation. In the XVIII century the Russians equaled the Khakass nobility the Kirghizes with the black people That is a historical fact and it mixes up usual conceptions turning an aristocratic title into an ethnic term. Unfortunately. But in a famous poem Iskander-name Nizami Gyandzevi described the blessed country Khirkhiz in the headwaters of Yenisei. It was very well known in the Middle Ages Thus oen can turn an aristicratic title into an ethnic term, but it does not change the truth! Dzungaria, Abakan, Anasu (Yenisei) and the Minusinsk hollow conceal their basic secrets. However, the names of Anasu (mother river), Abakan (father khan) and known archeological findings in the Minusinsk hollow allow to believe in success and hope for the appearance of the whole truth about the past of the royal dynasty of the Turki. The Dzungars invasion to the steppe symbolized another action of the policy of Peter I; events were growing as though under a conspiracy. And that was a real conspiracy. A stage of Possevinos plan was beign implemented. The plan of colonization of Desht-I-Kipchak. But steppe inhabitants had not heard about the Catholics and their desire of world domination. The enemy from Dzungaria was more clear and closer to them and the fear added everything else. There is no doubt about it the fears were beign created very skillfully: in the Dzungars headquarters white people were in charge; one of them Gustavus Renat later became their chief military counselor. The Dzungars were waging a war with Russian guns and Russian cannons What
can be added here? Only one thing they themselves, the northern Buddhists thought that they were fighting against the dissent. That is, against the Old Believers Their counselors made them think so. That trouble split Desht-I-Kipchak and raised the khan Abulkhair that headed the young zhuz; with the help of external forces it gained a foothold on top of the social pyramide. How? That is the unread secret. That was something similar to the Time of Troubles, the same that defeated the Great Bulgaria and Moscow Russia in centuries. The old aristocracy lost itself there too; it was removed to the background in the state. New people of not noble origin supported by the West appeared on the scene. Everything was happening according to the European scenario. And the director was the same with a tiara on his head. The Dzungars invasion ended unexpectedly the same as it had begun. The Russian embassy headed by a serving Tatar A.I. Tevkelev appeared near the northern borders of Desht-I-Kipchak; the ambassador declared that for the sake of peace in the steppe region the Russian tsar decided to create a military foothold the Eastern town on the Russian border. That is what they were waiting for. Certain frightened steppe inhabitants were being pulled to Orenburg closer to Russia as though by a magnet. The same as the Polish Russians were some time ago being pulled to Poland, to the West. That interest finally split the middle zhuz; its unity cracked. From outside it seemed that that was common human curiosity that attracted to the Russians. Complying with it and with the local etiquette, steppe inhabitants were searching for friendship with the newcomers. Without them the steppe seemed to be narrow and joy was insignificant Astonishment was another reason. The newcomers understood the Turkic language but talking to each other their speech was different. Steppe inhabitants were attracted by the way of life of the Russians solid houses, mysterious items
that they used. They were astonished by their army wearing bright clothes; it was regular and not temporary Orenburg concealed many things. That was not just a town but a new philosophy, new culture that came to endless Desht-I-Kipchak and made it narrow. Another way of life. Modern way of life. It couldnt but attrackt them. The conduct of Desht-I-Kipchak inhabitants was really akin to that of the first Russians that came to Europe. They were also feeling suppressed under new conditions; they would also look at everything with their mouths and eyes widely open. Their former life seemed imperfect. Astonishment was replaced by hopes after the Russians offered rich lands lying within the limits of Russia so that steppe inhabitants would stop pasture wars between the familes owning large herds but poor lands. Ingenuous khans of the younger zhuz were happily taking their herds to Astrakhan and Orenburg steppes, their wealth was growing, especially after fairies in Orenburg and its neighborhood. Dozens and hundreds of Russian merchants would come there to change the cattle for the items that the Kipchaks liked. Sheeps heads were base coins. At first the nobility and its confidants were getting rich; at that time Russia declared Desht-I-Kipchak the main supplier of cattle to the Russian market. Droves of horses were beign purchased for the army together with flocks of sheep and herds of cattle A real economic boom was taking place in the steppe. Distrust to the Russians was melting like snow in spring. Prosperity besotted the people and certain khans of not noble origin were listening to foreign prayers. They were no longer asking Tengri not to give poverty and wealth, as it was suitable for the Turki, but on the countrary they were asking being fed up: Who is God? Poverty is a terrible thing. And wealth is even more terrible. Poverty makes people steal and wealth makes them hardened. And that is the disease of spirit. Blind force is worse than thirst The steppe nobility was being ashamed of itself seeing luxury and
prosperity of Orenburg; in its consciousness appeared a thought that herds and lands were the signs of opulence and nobility. Not deeds and everyday actions as their ancestors had it. Inevitable changes were coming; the rich considered themselves the aristocrats. The number of self-constituted khans of the younger zhuz was rapidly increasing. Friendship with the Russians gave what the steppe was against domination of material values over spiritual ones Of course it all requires a long story and detailed analysis and maybe a separate book, but on October 10th, 1731 events in Desht-I-Kipchak reached their logical ending; Abulkhair khan signed the act of subjection to Russia. Addressing to the Russian Empress he wrote: I, Abulkhair khan, bow down to You and we are Your servants and will be Your subjects. After those words he was no longer a Turki and a ruler; he divested himself of authorities since he was no longer able to act as a ruler. This is the weakness of the selfconstituted aristocracy: it acquiesces after the first failure. An avid khan made Desht-IKipchak a Russian colony under the name of the yurts of Kirghiz-Cossacks (KyrgizKaisaks) Kazakstan. That name appeared on a geographical map of the East. In it was opened craftiness that also showed that the aristocracy of the country was deprived of titles. Calling the colony Kazakstan with a stroke of the pen the Empress Ann turned the Great Steppe into the lands of the masses. The Kaisak horde was not in question in her order. That was about the masses straying from their herd. In this connection the fate of the sultan Aryngazy is very indicative; in 1821 he left for Petersburg with a secret hope to attain recognition of his title and family tree. He went there to search for justice of the masses that were brough to the tops of the Russian power by the time of troubles. There is no bigger absurdity but it shows the essence of the Turkic history of that period. That is the apotheosis, its final chord. Aryngazy, the
Arians descendant (!), was trying to prove that he did not belong to the masses Should it be added that on his way to Petersburg the sultan was arrested and exiled to Kaluga where he died soon. Equalizing steppe society Petersburg was tearing threads connecting families and thus it was breaking the steppe way of life so that the masses and secondrate khans could sweep to power and the rustle of money would cloud the consciousness and the look of the Kazakhs and steppe inhabitants would fight with each other not for offence but for a place at a market and for every lost kopeck. Hereditary stock-breeders wanted to trade in Orenburg, but a condition was made for them: Abulkhair khan was to become a Russian national and accept Christianity. Otherwise the fairs would be closed. Learning that the khans counselor, batyr Bukenbai, was the first to become a Russian national. And he was nudging the khan. That is what was preliminary to the events of 1731 Again everything was adjusted accurately and correctly since the Jusuits staked on peoples vices again on avarice and envy. They knew: vices lead a man to death, to the loss of freedom and spiritual poverty. And they were liberally staking on them. There was perhaps only one new element in that scheme: in Orenburg appeared the Seitov village where pocket Tatars were living that was the name of those that were brought to Kazan. They were brought there deliberately so that, playing parts of sellers and interpreters for the bargains of Russian merchants, they would deceive the Kazakhs, for which they received a certaign share of proceeds The anger of the deceived Kazakhs was directed not on the Russians but on the Tatars! Orenburg was debauching the Kazakh nobility and thus was increasing the number of the younger zhuz by means of beis of not noble origin. It understtod: the wealth that suddenly appeared would burden khans; money and luxury would cloud their
consciousness and tie them to Russia. They let the Kazakhz grow fat and enjoy themselves in indleness for some time. They were waiting until the market finally divided the Steppe into the Russian and nonRussian halves. Because not all the steppe inhabitants wanted to stay in Orenburg; not all of them wanted to be fat Kazakhs. Discontent with changes was growing in honest men of the steppe. Yaitsk Cossacks were the first to resent; they were living closer to Orenburg and because of forced hospitality their lands became public thoroughfare. Finally that discontent resulted in Pugachevs rebellion that was supported by the Kazakhs of the middle and elder zhuzes popular uprising, peasant war But the rebellion called SrymBatyrs movement was the best characteristic of peoples feelings. They had not seen anything of the kind before. SrymBatyr was acting not against the khans power but for depriving Abulkhairs descendants of the khans rights since they were debauched by the wealth. Having no conscience at all they would take money from their relatives even for carrying the cattle over the rivers. Relationships in Kazakhstan were measured with money, which looked disgustingly. That rebellion was the confrontation of the former spirit and originating avarice. That was the conflict of conscience that would have taken place sooner or later. Spirit is too high and avarice is too low not to collide. That terrible contradiction has become a wedge in Kazakh society and its essence forever: some people there seek the truth and justice and others seek other people's money; they can clean out even a guest without stirring an eyelid. The ruling khan Nurali hearing about Srym-Batyr was frightened, but the Russians suppressed the rebellion. Elated by success, the khan was trying to settle everything with other offenders The result was that on July 21st, 1785 Nurali wrote in a letter to the Orenbudg governor Igelstrom: Here in the zhurt of Kirghiz-Kazakhs I have lost confidence. They say I am a Russian khan
and our hearts are not in him; saying so they turned away from me and left me. And I have no refuge in any country. The avid khan was caught in a trap left by Igelstrom himself. The reforms were working! Without his power nobody cared about the khan any longer. Catherine the Great that was the ruler at that time wrote to Igelstrom: Try to increase their number (khans) so that each of them will not be strong in a horde and will depend on You the same as Your other subject governments and districts. Hence that astonishing numerosity of the younger zhuz that beats all the conceivable and inconceivable records. Hence untalented legends and khans family trees of which the history of Kazakhstan is full. The Russians have always been staking on weak rulers there. And they have always been winning. The vice led the younger zhuz into a stalemate from which there was no way out: its property did not belong to it since it pastured on foreign territories and depended upon the merchants wishes they could buy the cattle and they could refuse to buy it. The wealth hanging on a thread crushed the khans dignity. And there was no power at all. The disorder commenced This is the way the Jesuits fight, this is the way they win. By reforms. In the south of Kazakhstan the khans power was fading out in a different way. The ruler Ablaikhan did not make advances with the Russians publicly, although he was looking at Orenburg. He would catch every word flying from there. As though that was by chance, the routes of wandering were lying suspiciously close to Yaik. But they did not reach Orenburg. Only on the eve of his death he overcame himself and entered the beckoning Eastern town; that cost great efforts. Ablaikhan moved forward during the fight with the Dzungars; as a matter of fact he was the only legal khan of the Steppe the ruler with whom the Dzungars were fighting and who was betrayed by his natives. He was one of the few that understood what was
standing behind those troubled times. This understanding is seen in his policy that left space for manoeuvring; he did not hasten in making decisions and those that avoided relationships with the Russians and wanted independence of their motherland were close to that ruler. In 1741 the Dzungars captivated Ablaikhan but wisdom saved that ruler of the elder zhuz doomed to death. After all, East is East. Here we have an entire poem with a real plot The captivated Ablaikhan won by a word, by a wise word. And by nobility, of course. He conquered the Dzungars by his intellect. When they set him free they asked him three questions that can be only called prophetic. That was a worthy answer to a worthy interlocutor. The first question was: do you have a lot of sheep? The khan answered that he had a lot. And they explained: it means your shepherd is a liar and your sheep are thieves, i.e. they eat foreign grass. You will not do away with dissension and squabbles. The second question was: do you have a lot of cows and horses? Yes, a lot. They explained again: if your people drink milk and koumiss and eat meat without any pains it means the children grow up in ignorance. The third question was: do your people sow seeds? No. So they explained again: the people not sowing anything will be rounded up and scattered before they find their motherland. These three explanations were the answer to the previous Ablaikhans wisdom. Everything happened as the Dzungars denounced: the Kazakhs reconciled with the nomadic way of life. But the earth was moving under their feet; the wheel of History was truning inexorably. There was no state as such in the steppe; it was divided into the Russian and non-Russian halves. Avarice was standing against spirit. Each decision of the Orenburg authorities hit the planned target and entailed popular frustration that the Kazakhs even
failed to express. The only thing they could do was turn to the Chinese. However in Beijing, judging by the Emperors order of 1755, they did not even know where Kazakh settlements were located and what interests China had there. Nevertheless the Chinese embassy came to Kazakhstan; a response embassy to Beijing followed. That was the beginning of a humble policy stretching for decades and finally a big war appeared on the horizon However, Igelstroms instincts were right again; he was ahead of the events and did what actually had been already done he abolished khans power in Kazakhstan: the foremens meeting of 1786 accepted Catherine the Greats rescript. And there was nobody to communicate with China. Igelstrom made no secret of his gladness he won. If it had not been for the events in Europe it is hard to say what would have been the results of the Orenburg expedition; the Jesuits could no longer impose their will with impunity. The disturbance in France undermined the Popes power and made him the rebels prisoner. The Jesuits were hit where they did not expect at home. Soon their actions became more benevolent: in 1791, for instance, Orenburg approved of the Kazakh khan elections. That meant that they left ethnic sovereignty to the Kazakhs. Elections took place in the Orsk fortress but nobody knew what to do with the elected khan. People accepted him with disgust Hatred to the Russian khan was so strong that the soldiers of the Russian army guarding him failed to save him. The khan Esim was killed. In return Igelstrom appointed the khans council to elect a new khan. That was Aichuvak, a helpless elder not able for any activity. His powerlessness was so great that even the most ardent adherents of khans power were taking thought. They seemed to understand that the Kazakhs would never again have a strong khan. Only marionettes. As a matter of fact Igelstroms reform was nudging them to this thought.
However another thing was paradoxal in this situation: Kirghiz-Kazakhs were unnecessary for the Russian tsar with or without a khan. Ballast giving the treasury nothing except for troubles. They could not be Christianized, i.e. made serfs! They could not be sold and bought. What were they for? Formally they remained Moslems, the Uzbek khans runaways, but according to confessional rules nobody could touch them. No, they did not have mosques, they did not have clergymen but their spirit was alive; it saved the hapless steppe inhabitants from slavery. They did not become new Slavs. And there were no new serfs. They remained the Turki although they were deprived of dignity and they were ingratiating but still they remained the Turki. Which certainly stands to their credit a little bit Up to the XX century Kazakhstan kept the belief in Tengri and guarded its monasteries and temples; many things continued there in an old way. Secretly. By good fortune Igelstroms people did not reach the outskirts; they had different troubles to care for. The echo of the French revolution was being heard in Russia at that time in its districts, although it is unlikely that people there knew about the revolution in Europe. The Jesuits whose order was prohibited moved to Petersburg and Moscow; their headquarters moved there to gather their army beaten by the French. At that they would still control the Rusian tsars conscience and policies. That was felt even stronger than before. They made the tsar Paul I master of the Malthusian Order, the holy of holies of the Western Church, and they were acting in his name. It is unclear how they managed to do that. To make the head of an Orthodox country the head of a Catholic order. That is nonsense, that is absolutely impossible. But that is what happened then. Under those conditions Kazakhstan with its problems moved to the background by itself On December 16th, 1798 the Russian tsar put on a red cloak of a master of the Malthusian Order. However, the highest force
in the Western Church, its top, remained the Jesuits, around which events were happening. Their order appeared in the XVI century and became very influential; it was abandoned but that was done only formally. Other Pope orders, the Malthusian Order included, were still subject to it. Rome performed a castling of forces: the Pope was taken prisoner by the French and his army was getting ready for the decisive battle with Napoleon in faraway Russia. And not many people were aware of that. The Jesuits had a deeply conspiratorial organization with strict discipline; they were notable for fanaticism, full obedience to their generals and clothes black caftans, vestments and top hats with brim a little bent on each side Everything remained. By the way, those clothes became fashionable in Petersburg early in the XIX century; perhaps the whole Russian nobility used to wear them. Why? By the royal order of October 18th, 1800 the Jesuits were given St. Catherines Church in Petersburg and many town buildings The slogan of the order the end justifies the means dominated in Russia. Princes Golitsins were usual protectors of the order; from the time of troubles they were its confidants in Russian affairs. And besides they were handling the matters of Russian spiritual life the Church, science, culture. Thus Basil Golitsin that betrayed Boris Godunov was in 1606 the False Demetrius alternate, number two of the time of troubles. Boris Golitsin brought up Peter I. Alexander Golitsin headed the Church Synod and later was national enlightenment and spiritual affairs minister Here we have the history of personalities. Russia became Jesuit not at once; only under Catherine the Great (more precisely, the German Princess Sophia Friederica Augusta of Anhalt-Zerbst) it publicly declared of its adherence to the ideas of the order. The Empress expanded its rights and made it closer to the court Russia and Prussia were the only countries that sheltered the Popes servants of which Europe was
cleaning after the French revolution. This fact does not even require estimation. It should be simply considered speaking about the following events in Kazakhstan. Alexander I favored the Jesuits because with their help he hoped to bring the retrograde Russian population to civilization. He was the Malthusian Order protector. It is indicative that the order was granted special authorities in souther governments of Russia Saratov, Astrakhan and other ones that is, where the Turkic speech had not become silent and the former culture had not died. More than two million people from Europe were moved there; steppe inhabitants used to call them stundists, sectaries they would propagate Christianity It turns out German colonies in Kazakhstan appeared not of their own accord. Those were the Jesuits that brought Napoleon Bonapart to Moscow; alas, the Patriotic War of 1812 did not have other reasons. That war was another stage of the fight between the Pope and the monarchs for power over Europe. That was a play according to the scenario of the Russian time of troubles but with different characters The director remained the same but he had a different title; the Pope himself obeyed him and he was made to reestablish the order: Society of Jesus was born again. And Nepoleon that was no longer necessary, the same as False Demetrius, left the historical scene In 1802 Gruber became the Society of Jesus general in Russia; he was substituted by Berezovskiy. Their people (in hats with edges a little bent) were everywhere where they thought it necessary to be. They still controlled the tsar and his bureaucrats. Nevertheless it is too bold to assert that the golden age of Russia was connected only with the Jesuits. Certianly not. But how can one distinguish members of the order from others? The Jesuits created secret societies and groups with which the aristocracy was living. They introduced and supported the ideas that nourished the Russian creativity
Beign aware of that, one reads Puskin, that was nicknamed Cricket, without delight as it had formerly been; he became famous in one of such groups: his fairy tales were written under order (they are Turkic fairy tales), and Boris Godunov, Poltava, The Song of Oleg the Wise and other poems were skillfully distorting the Russian history. Realizing that the poet was looking for his death himselft. Decembrists are also seen differently; they were also the Jesuits victims. It turns out the tsar suppressed their rebellion in a couple of minutes by a single hollo: On your knees, and they were standing on their knees. And after that another cleansing of higher society began. Under the Jesuits impact even the Slavophils turned into prisoners of imposed ideas If you have an enemy, take care for your body and this is the most important thing for your soul, - Ancient Altai taught. They failed to do that! Only in 1854 the Russians established the Verniy fortress (modern Almaty) in Kazakhstan where their army came. The contingent consisted of exiled Don Cossacks. Later a powerful defense system grew there; it included fortifications, military posts and barier lines. Kazakhstan was in its field of vision. In a military and political sense the Verniy fortress is another Orenburg the base for an invasion to the Middle Asia and Altai. Russian troops there were headed by a colonel Zimmermann. In 1860, as though to prevent aggression, he made an inroad into neighboring khanates of the Middle Asia. He started the war. That was the invasion of Russia to the Islam world 1854 was notable for another event: Christianization of Altai began. It was beign performed by the missionaries from Russia headed by Basil Verbitskiy. No doubt, those were honest people that were sure that they were doing the right thing but, judging by Verbitskiys and Landyshevs notes, they were really astonished that Altaic strangers used to cross themselves invertedly from left to right. That they were perfectly aware of certain plots of the Old Testament and spoke
about Adam, Eve, the immortality of soul, angels, gates of Hades with confidence. As though they read the Bible or Divine Comedy by Dante Russian missionaries did not even suppose that they were in the lands that were called Eden Heaven on Earth in Europe. Religion and the knowledge of Heavenly God came from there. Everythign was in its right place. The Great Nations Migration that started in Altai in the V century B.C. was over in the XIX century by the transformation of Altai itself; its ancient monasteries collapsed. Together with them ended the history of Desht-I-Kipchak and the Middle Ages the time of knights and knighthood, nobility and horror were over Western religion that would correct sacred Altaic books at its discretion finally turned into politics. The power over the world changed hands. On the ruins of the Turkic power Russia was raising; it was created by the Jesuits making a buffer between two worlds East and West. It was living neglecting the serfs, heads of departments and weird poverty around. The Jesuits supplied the court retinue and ruling bureaucracy from Europe; these people were rotting slowly: the revolution of 1917 was the result of its weakness. That was a logical result predicted by a French marquis Astolph de Quistine that visited Russia of the XIX century and wrote two volumes entitled Russia in 1839; the whole enlightened Europe was discussing them for a long time. The book was translated into Russian but it was not published in full. The Russians saw themselves as they were for the first time. De Quistines traveling notes revealed the essence: Russia consisted of dark huts and poor slaves with beautiful faces; they were the fruits of its new spiritual culture. People were things that were dying while they were alive, they were getting rotten trying to survive and for that reason they stole and drank. And afer that was the conclusion, terrible because of its unexpected truth: To put it more precisely, there is no Russian
nation there are emperors, serfs owners, courtiers that also own serfs but they are not the nation. For a civilized European Russia was an example of wildness that the Russians themselves did not mention. These are perhaps the most precise words about Russia of those times. N.V. Gogol and M.E. Saltykov-Schedrin are possibly the ones who said the same. The truth caused shock but that was not the whole truth. De Quistine did not know the Turkic history of France and Russia, he did not know about the Great Nations Migration; his book was notable for the spirit of perception and emotions. It could not have been otherwise sicne he was an exemplary Catholic. However, the passion for actions was alive in his blood; it is from his ancestors, the owners of an ancient barbaric estate. This is why this book is so interesting: a Turki civilized by the West was judging about what he did not understand about the East. About the motherland of his ancestors and their religion. His judgements are handsome, precise, harsh but they are absolutely helpless. The same as the West itself that was rising humiliating the East. This is the way its grandeur was growing! I regret I have failed to unravel one mystery minor influence of religion Where is the reason of the Russian Church nothingness the French asked navely beingn unaware of all the consequences of the inquisition. And he himself, as though by the will of God, answered his question: the Russian Emperor being aware that antiquity is respected wants the Church established yesterday to be respected as the old one; he says it is old and it is becoming so who doubts that is a rebel. Why? De Quistine did not understand that. He suggested that the readers should find an answer but the readers were also unaware that Rus called Russia was made helpless and wretched by the West. Hidign its history the Jesuits were trying to invent their own new one But they would fail! People were unwilling to forget their past;
they would hand it down like a sacred mystery. How can one forget about a prediction of the ancient: The Sky knows, the Earth knows, you know, I know who says that nobody knows?
Literature Part IV (main sources)

1.AbaiGaeserKhubun:TheEpic.Part1,2. UlanUde,19611964. 2.AbuMuhammadAhmadibnAsamAlCufi. TheBookofConquests:(ExtractsontheHistory ofAzerbaijanoftheVIIIXCenturies).Baku, 1981. 3.AgadzanovS.G.OguzTribesoftheMiddle AsiaoftheIXXIIICenturies.(Historicaland EthnographicEssay)//CountriesandNations oftheEast.IssueX.M.,1971. 4.AdjiM.Europa'sAsia.M.,1998,English translation,M.,2004. 5.AlekseevV.P.,GokhmanV.P.USSRAsian RegionsAnthropology.M.,1984. 6.AlekseevaT.I.,AlekseevV.P.SlavicNations EthnogenyaccordingtoAnthropological Data//SlavicNationsHistory,Culture, EthnographyandFormation.M.,1973. 7.[AleppoPaul]TheTraveloftheAntiochian EmperorMacariustoRussiaintheSecondHalf oftheXVIICenturyDescribedbyhisSon, ArchdeaconAleppoPaul.Issue13.M.,1896 1898. 8.AkhunovA.M.SamiadDakhanArabic ResearcherofRisalebyIbnFadlan// DialogueofCulturesofEurasia.Issue2.Kazan, 2001. 9.BarbaroandContariniaboutRussia.M., 1971. 10.BarsovE.V.TheLayofIgor'sWarfareasan ArtsMonumentofKievanRetinueRussia.Vol.I III.M.,18871889. 11.BartoldV.V.CollectedWorks.Vol.IIX. M.,19631977. 12.BaskakovN.A.RussianFamilyNamesof theTurkicOrigin.M.,1993. 13.BeliaevE.A.Arabs,IslamandArabic CaliphateintheEarlyMiddleAges.Issue2.M., 1966. 14.BeliaevL.A.ChristianAntiquities.SPb., 2000. 15.TheBible.Brussels,1983. 16.[Biruni]AbuReikhanBiruni.Collected Works.Vol.1.Tashkent,1957. 17.[Biruni]AbuReikhanBiruni.India.M., 1995. 18.BichurinN.Y.(Jakinf).Collectionof
InformationabouttheNationswhichLivedin theMiddleAsiainAncientTimes.Vol.I.M.;L., 1950. 19.BolshakovO.G.MedievalArabicTowns// EssaysontheHistoryofArabicCulture(CXV Centuries).M.,1982. 20.BuzurgibnShakhiyar.TheMiraclesof India.M.,1959. 21.ButanaevV.Y.KhakasRussianHistorical andEthnographicalDictionary.Abakan,1999. 22.TheGreatChronicleofPoland,Rusand theirNeighborsintheXIXIIICenturies.M., 1987. 23.VeliyaminovZernovV.V.Historical InformationofKirghizKaisaksand RelationshipbetweenRussianandtheMiddle AsiaafterAbulkhairKhansDeath.IssueIII. Ufa.,18531855. 24.VerbitskiyV.I.AltaicForeigners.M.,1893. Reprint.GornoAltaisk,1993. 25.WinklerP.P.RussianHeraldry.TheHistory andDescriptionofRussianEmblemswiththe ImagesofalltheNobleEmblemsoftheGeneral BookofHeraldryoftheRussianEmpire.Issues 13.SPb.,18921894. 26.ViolledeDucE.E.TheRussianArts:Its Sources,Components,HigherDevelopmentand Futurity.M.,1879. 27.VozgrinV.E.HistoricalFateoftheCrimean Tatars.M.,1992. 28.ViatkinM.P.BatyrSrym.M.;L.,1947. 29.GarkavetsA.KypchakWrittenHeritage: ArmenianWritingsCatalogueandTexts.Vol.1. Almaty,2002. 30.GergeiE.TheHistoryofPapacy.M.,1996. 31.Geseriada:TheStoryofGraciousGeser MergenKhan,theExtirpatorofTenEvilsin TenCountriesoftheWorld.M.;L.,1935. 32.GibbonE.TheHistoryoftheDeclineand FalloftheRomanEmpire.PartsIVII.SPb., 19972000. 33.GorseiD.TheNotesonMuscovyoftheXVI Century.SPb.,1909. 34.GrizingerT.TheJesuits.SPb.,1999. 35.GriaznevichP.A.DevelopmentofHistorical ConsciousnessoftheArabs(VIVIII centuries)//EssaysontheHistoryofArabic CultureoftheVXVCenturies.M.,1982. 36.DavletshinG.M.TheVolgaBulgaria: SpiritualCulture.Kazan,1990.
37.DarkevichV.P.ArtMetaloftheEast(VIII XIIIcenturies).M.,1976. 38.DashkovS.B.TheEmperorsofByzantium. M.,1997. 39.DenniF.M.IslamandMoslem Community//ReligiousTraditionsofthe World.Vol.2.M.,1996. 40.Dzangar:KalmykHeroicEpos.M.,1990. 41.DiringerD.TheAlphabet.M.,1963. 42.DonnelliA.S.RussianConquestof Bashkiriain15521740:PagesoftheHistory ofImperialism.1995. 43.AncientTurkicDictionary.L.,1969. 44.EgerO.WorldHistory:in4Volumes. ModernHistory.SPb.,1904.Reprint.M.,1999. 45.EgerO.WorldHistory:in4Volumes.The MiddleAges.SPb.,1904.Reprint.M.,1999. 46.[ZizaniusL.]GrammarSlovenskaVilno, 1596.Reprint.M.,2000. 47.[IbnFadlan].IbnFadlansTraveltoVolga. M.;L.,1939. 48.InostrantsevK.A.OnHistoryofpreMoslem CultureoftheMiddleAsia.Pg.,1917. 49.TheHistoryofKazakhSovietSocialist RepublicfromAncienttoModernTimes.Alma Ata,1943. 50.TheHistoryofChina.M.,1998. 51.TheHistoryofKhakassia:FromAncient Timesupto1917.M.,1993. 52.KamentsevaE.I.,UstiugovN.V.Russian SphragisticsandHeraldry.M.,1974. 53.KaramzinN.M.TheHistoryoftheRussian State.Vol.IXII.SPb.,18421844.Reprint.M., 1988. 54.[Carpini]JohndePlanoCarpini.The HistoryoftheMongals.SPb.,1911. 55.KlimovichL.I.TheBookaboutKoran,its OriginandMythology.M.,1988. 56.KovalskiyY.V.PopesandPapacy.M.,1991. 57.Koran/TranslationbyI.Y.Krachkovskiy. M.,1963. 58.Koran:TranslationofSensesand Commentaries.3rdEdition,Revisedand Enlarged/TranslationbyV.Prokhorova. 1997. 59.Koran/TranslationbyG.S.Sablukov, 1907.Reprint.M.,1992. 60.KrachkovskiyI.Y.SelectedWorks.Vol.I VI.M.;L.,19551960. 61.KryvelevI.A.TheHistoryofReligions.Vol.
I.M.,1975. 62.KrymskiyA.E.TheHistoryofArabsand ArabicSecularandSpiritualLiterature.Parts 13.M.,19111913. 63.KumekovB.E.TheCountryofKimakson thealIdrisiMap//CountriesandNationsof theEast.IssueX.M.,1971. 64.KyzalsovL.R.TotheUnknownSiberiafor MysteriousWritings.Abakan,1998. 65.[Quistine]AltolphDeQuistine.Russiain 1839.Vol.III.M.,1996. 66.[Landyshev]StephanLandyshev. CosmologyandTheogonyofAltaicPagans. Kazan,1886. 67.LevshinA.I.DescriptionofKirghiz CossackorKirghizKaisakHordesand Steppes.PartIIII.SPb.,1832. 68.Manas:KirghizHeroicEpos.M.,1984. 69.MaterialsontheHistoryofKazakhSoviet SocialistRepublic.Vol.IV.M.;L.,1941. 70.MeyerL.KirghizSteppeoftheOrenburg Government//MaterialsfortheGeography andStatisticsofRussiaCollectedbythe GeneralStaffOfficers.SPb.,1985. 71.MetsA.MoslemRenaissance.M.,1996. 72.TheMythologicalDictionary.M.,1991. 73.MikhalonLitvin.AbouttheCustomsofthe Tatars,LithuaniansandMuscovites.M.,1994. 74.MurzaevE.M.TurkicGeographicalNames. M.,1996. 75.MullerA.TheHistoryofIslam.Vol.12. SPb.,1895. 76.TheNationsoftheWorld:Historicaland EthnographicReferenceBook.M.,1988. 77.NarshakhiM.TheHistoryofBukhara. Tashkent,1897. 78.Nizami.IskanderName.M.,1953. 79.[Nikitin].TheTraveloverThreeSeasof AthanasiusNikitinin14661472.M.;L., 1948. 80.[Nikitin].TheTraveloverThreeSeasof AthanasiusNikitinin14661472.L.,1986. 81.NikitinA.B.ChristianityintheCentral Asia(AntiquityandtheMiddleAges)// EasternTurkestanandtheCentralAsia.M., 1984. 82.NovoselskiyA.A.TheFightoftheMoscow StateagainsttheTatarsintheFirstHalfofthe XVIICentury.M.;L.,1948.
83.PersianProverbsandSayings.M.,1973. 84.PigulevskayaN.ArabsbytheBordersof ByzantiumandIranintheIVVICenturies. M.;L.,1964. 85.PigulevskayaN.TheMiddleEast. Byzantium.TheSlavsL.,1976. 86.PigulevskayaN.ByzantiumontheWaysto India.M.;L.,1951. 87.PigulevskayaN.SyrianCultureinthe MiddleAges.M.,1979. 88.[Polo]MarcoPolo.TheBook.M.,1955. 89.ProverbsandSayingsofEasternNations. M.,1961. 90.PossevinoA.HistoricalWorksabout MuscovyoftheXVICentury.M.,1983. 91.WrightW.AShortHistoryofSyriac Literature.SPb.,1902. 92.Russia:Encyclopedia.SPb.,1898.Reprint. L.,1991. 93.[Rubruk]WilliamdeRubruk.TheTraveling toEasternCountries.SPb.,1911. 94.SkrynnikovR.G.BorisGodunov.M.,1978. 95.SkrynnikovR.G.TheKingdomofTerror. SPb.,1992. 96.TheLayofIgor'sWarfare.M.;L.,1950. 97.SmirnovaO.I.PlacesofPreMoslemCults intheCentralAsia(AccordingtoToponymy Materials):Sogdianbgntempleandbg godintheMiddleAsiaToponymy// CountriesandNationsoftheEast.IssueX.M., 1971. 98.[SmotritskiyM.]GrammarsSlovenska Evye,1619.Reprint.M.,2000. 99.SolovievS.M.TheHistoryofRussiafrom AncientTimes:in15Books.M.,19591966. SreznevskiyI.I.MaterialsfortheAncient RussianDictionaryonWrittenMonuments.Vol. 13.SPb.,18931912.Reprint.M.,1989. 100.TatischevV.N.CollectedWorks:8Volumes (5Books):Vol.4:TheRussianHistory.M., 1964.Reprint.M.,1995.
101.TisengausenV.G.CollectionofMaterials RelatingtotheHistoryoftheGoldenHorde: ExtractsfromArabicWorks.Vol.I.SPb.,1884. 102.TisengausenV.G.CollectionofMaterials RelatingtotheHistoryoftheGoldenHorde. ExtractsfromArabicWorks.Vol.II.M.;L., 1959. 103.TrediakovskiyV.K.CompleteWorksby RussianAuthors:WorksbyTrediakovskiy.Vol. I.SPb.,1849. 104.WattU.M.TheInfluenceofIslamon MedievalEurope.M.,1976. 105.UspenskiyF.I.TheHistoryofthe ByzantineEmpireoftheXIXVCenturies.The EasternEpos.M.,1997. 106.FerroM.HowChildrenAreTaught HistoryinDifferentCountriesoftheWorld.M., 1982. 107.[FletcherG.]AbouttheRussianState. FletchersWorks.SPb.,1905. 108.KhalidovA.B.TheArabicLanguage// EssaysontheHistoryofArabicCulture(VXV Centuries).M.,1982. 109.KhalidovA.B.BookCulture//Ibid 110.KharaDavanE.GenghisKhanasa MilitaryLeaderandhisHeritage.Elista,1991. 111.Christianity.Encyclopedia.Vol.13.M., 19931995. 112.KhudiakovM.G.EssaysontheHistoryof KazanKhanate.Kazan,1923. 113.ShakhmatovA.A.Researchesonthe AncientRussianChronicles.SPb.,1908. 114.ShakhmatovA.A.AncientFatesofRussian Nation.Pg.,1919. 115.ShakhmatovA.A.EssayontheModern RussianLiteraryLanguage.L.,1925. 116.SchapovA.P.RussianSplitoftheOld BelieversinConnectionwithInternalStateof theRussianChurchandCivicConsciousnessin theXVIIandFirstHalfoftheXVIIICenturies. Kazan,1858.
342 / 342
Muscovy and Russia

Turks and The World - The Secret Story Vol 2 Murad Adji

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Turks and The World - The Secret Story Vol 2 Murad Adji

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

TheTurkiandtheWorld,TheSecretStory

Adji Murad Moscow, 2007

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Aryana Vajeh Aryan Vast

Only economic well-being, only

The Hindustan Peninsula and Its Inhabitants

Aryana Vajeh Aryan Vast

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Persian Melodies Of The Turkic Anthem

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

The Near East Foothold

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Hospitality In New Europe

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Aryana Vajeh Aryan Vast

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Aryana Vajeh Aryan Vast

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Litareture Part I (main sources)

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

Barbarians Of Wild Rome

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Rich Harvest of Altai

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

About Catholicism, without Latin

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

Second-Rate Religion for the Masses

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

About Catholicism Again, this time with Latin

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Literature Part II (main sources)

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Under the Sign of the Cross and Crescent

Under the Sign of the Cross and Crescent

Under the Sign of the Cross and Crescent

Under the Sign of the Cross and Crescent

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Under the Sign of the Cross and Crescent

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

East Changes Its Face

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22

Turki and the World - The Secret Story.22