Adji Murad

The Turki and the World: The Secret Story

Contents

Part I

Aryana Vajeh – Aryan Vast

Forgotten Motherland

The Hindustan Peninsula and its Inhabitants

Persian Melodies of the Turkic Anthem

The Near East Foothold

“Hospitality” in New Europe

Literature (main sources)

Part II

Under the Canopy of Eternal Blue Sky

“Barbarians” of Wild Rome

Rich Harvest of Altai

About Catholicism, without Latin

“Second-Rate Religion for the Masses”

About Catholicism Again, this Time with Latin

Literature (main sources)

Part III

Under the Sign of the Cross and Crescent

Arian Europe

Bulgarian Slavdom

East Has its Face

Changing the West

Literature (main sources)

Part IV
Muscovy and Russia

“The Russian Card”

About the Bible and Koran Again

Christianity and Islam in the Russian Tsardom

How Rus Became Russia

From Russian to Slavic

Avid Khan is not Higher than a Farmhand

Literature (main sources)

Part I

Aryana Vajeh – Aryan Vast

FORGOTTEN 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 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 wasn’t
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 couldn’t 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, that’s 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-I-Kipchak.
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 – that’s how ancestors are now called in Russia.

Steppe nation has become a castaway at home; it hasn’t 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. That’s 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). That’s 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 don’t 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, Deshte-Lut), Pakistan
(Deshtestan) – sometime they were bloomy oases, and the Turkic speech prevailed there. It
hasn’t 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. That’s 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. That’s 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; that’s 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 didn’t
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.

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 didn’t 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 doesn’t 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 evil, verity
and falsity.

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 don’t 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 doesn’t 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. That’s 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 didn’t 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.

Only economic well-being, only 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 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.

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 haven’t 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 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 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 doesn’t 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! That’s
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 that’s 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. That’s not a mountain, that is a mountain chain stretching 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 shouldn’t 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” – that’s 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”. That’s 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 didn’t even occur to anyone to correct or rewrite them… Can the past be
changed? Certainly not.

The Indians don’t 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. That’s 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 that’s 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: Bongard-Levin 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 didn’t notice it either. Why
didn’t his heart stand still? Because it was empty… He didn’t 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 didn’t 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 “non-Arians”
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 wasn’t by chance that Buddhist pilgrims came there – to Altai, to the Central Asia
– on order to “make progress in belief and obtain sacred texts” – that’s 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 didn’t 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 – that’s 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 Tengri-Tedygech (predictor) that “wrote the teaching of
the belief and argued with people in his own way asserting that they shouldn’t 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 doesn’t 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 didn’t 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. That’s why he is still drawn with blue eyes, the same as all other Turki. They
don’t 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 aren’t 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 –
they’ve 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. That’s 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” – that’s 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 couldn’t 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 “Ai-Huuchin” 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 –
that’s 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 peace-enforcement,
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 don’t 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 hadn’t
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 haven’t 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 don’t 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 – that’s 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
didn’t. He could have killed them, but he didn’t. 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 doesn’t 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 didn’t 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 didn’t 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
that’s how the newcomers, i.e. the Turki, were called. Population was not called the Iranians
under Achemenids and Arshakids.

The aboriginals in Persia were fire-worshippers. 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 Aji-Dakhan 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 hadn’t 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. That’s 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!

That’s 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].

That’s 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 don’t 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.
That’s 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.
That’s 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. Doesn’t 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 Kosho-Tsaidam.

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 don’t 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 they’ve 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. That’s 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.
That’s 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 sea-borne 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 don’t 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.

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 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
north-west – 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 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. That’s 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. That’s 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 clear-sighted here. Maybe that’s 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 non-church 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 Sahidic-speaking 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.

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 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 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 haven’t 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.

“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 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 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 well-known.

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 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 don’t 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 new-born 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 Dura-Europos 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 T-shaped 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.

LITERATURE

(main sources)

Abai Gaeser-Khubun: The Epic. Part 1, 2. Ulan-Ude, 1961 – 1964.

Adji M. Europa's Asia. M., 1998, English translation, M., 2004.

Akishev K. A. Issyk Barrow: Art of the Sachs of Kazakhstan. M., 1978.

[Aleppo Paul] The Travel of the Antiochian Emperor Macarius to Russia in the
Second Half of the XVII Century Described by his Son, Archdeacon Aleppo Paul. Issue 1 – 3.
M., 1896 – 1898.

Aliev Igrar. Essays on Atropatene History. Baku, 1989.

Artamonov M.I. The Treasures of the Saks. The Treasure of Amu-Darya. Altaic
Barrows… M., 1973.

Artamonov M.I. The Treasures of Scythian Barrows… M.; Prague, 1966.

Bartold V.V. The Moslem World // Selected Works. Vol. VI. M., 1966.

Bekkert M. The World of Metal. M., 1980.

Beliaev L.A. Christian Antiquities. SPb., 2000.

Berzina S.Y. Ancient India and Africa // Ancient India. Historical and Cultural
Relations. M., 1982.

The Bible. Brussels, 1983.

[Biruni] Abu Reikhan Biruni. India. M., 1995.

Bichurin N.Y. (Jakinf). Collection of Information about the Nations which Lived in the
Middle Asia in Ancient Times. Vol. I. M.; L., 1950.

Bokschanin A.G. Parthia and Rome. Part I – II. M., 1960 – 1966.

Bonghard-Levin G.M., Grantovskiy E.A. From Scythia to India. Ancient Arians: Myths
and History. SPb., 2001.

Bonghard-Levin G.M., Ilyin G.F. India in Ancient Times. SPb., 2001.

 Bonghard-Levin G.M., Karpiuk S.G. Buddhism in Ancient and Early Christian
Literature // Ancient India. Historical and Cultural Relations. M., 1982.

[Buzand] The History of Armenia by Favstos Buzand. Yerevan., 1953.

Verbitskiy V.I. Altaic Foreigners. M., 1893. Reprint. Gorno-Altaisk, 1993.

Vertoradova V. V. Discovery of Inscription with Unknown letters on Kara-Tel //

Buddhist Monuments on Kara-Tel in the Old Termez. M., 1982.

Velinbakhov G.V. Flags as a Historical Source and their Place in the System of
Heraldic Monuments // Heraldry: Materials and Researches. L., 1983.

Velinbakhov G.V. The Cross of the Tsar Constantine in Medieval Military Heraldry of
Europe // Artistic Monuments and Problems of Eastern Culture. L., 1985.

Vipper R.Y. Appearance of Christian Literature. M.; L., 1946.

The History of Arts. Vol. I. M., 1956.

Gafurov B.G. 2500th Anniversary of the Iranian State // The History of the Iranian State
and Culture (2500th Anniversary of the Iranian State). M., 1971.

Gertsman E.V. Eminent Porphirius and his Collection of Ancient Musical Manuscripts.
SPb., 1996.

Geseriada: The Story of Gracious Geser Mergen-Khan, the Extirpator of Ten Evils in
Ten Countries of the World. M.; L., 1935.

Geyushev R.B. Christianity in the Caucasian Albania: According to Archeology and

Written Sources. Baku, 1984.

Gibbon E. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Parts I – VII.
SPb., 1997 – 2000.

Grantovskiy E.A. Early History of Iranian Tribes in Asia. M., 1970.

[Grigorovich-Barskiy V.G.] The Travel to the Sacred Places of the Traveler Basil
Grigorovich-Barskiy-Plaki-Albov… SPb., 1778.

Griaznevich P.A. Development of Historical Consciousness of the Arabs (VI – VIII

centuries) // Essays on the History of Arabic Culture of the V – XV Centuries. M., 1982.

Dandamaev A.M. The State of Achemenids and its Influence on the History of Ancient
East // The History of the Iranian State and Culture (2500th Anniversary of the Iranian State).
M., 1971.

Djafarov Y.R. The Huns and Azerbaijan. Baku. 1985.

Jones A. H. M. Death of Ancient World. Rostov-on-Don., 1997.

 Diringer D. The Alphabet. M., 1963.

Ancient Turkic Dictionary. L., 1969.

Diakonov M.M. Essay on the History of Ancient Iran. M., 1961.

[Eusebius] Church History of Eusebius Pamfilus. Vol. I. SPb., 1858.

Zeimal E.V. “Sino-Kharoshtian” Coins (Dating Khotanic Bilingual Coins) // Countries

and Nations of the East. Issue X. M., 1971.

Zelinskiy A.N. The Kushans and Mahayana // Central Asia in Kushan Epoch. Vol. 2.
M., 1975.

The History of Iran. M., 1977.

The History of Khakassia: From Ancient Times up to 1917. M., 1993.

[Kagankatvatsi] History of the Aguans by Moses Kagankatvatsi. SPb., 1861.

Kiselev S.V. Ancient History of South Siberia. M., 1951.

Kozlov P.K. Mongolia and Amdo and the Dead Town of Khara-Khoto. M.; Prague,
1923.

Cosambi D. Culture and Civilization of Ancient India. M., 1968.

Koshelenko G.A. Culture of Parthia. M., 1966.

Kryvelev I.A. The Bible: Historical and Critical Analysis. M., 1985.

Kryvelev I.A. The History of Religions. Vol. I. M., 1975.

Culture of Byzantium. IV – First Half of VII Centuries. M., 1984.

Kyzlasov L.R. To the Unknown Siberia for Mysterious Writings. Abakan, 1998.

Kyzlasov L.R. Ancient Khakassia. M., 1986.

Lebedev A.P. The Epoch of Persecutions against Christians. SPb., 1904.

Lelekov L.A. The Term “Arya” in Ancient Indian and Ancient Armenian Traditions //
Ancient India. Historical and Cultural Relations. M., 1982.

Lester R.C. Buddhism: The Route to Nirvana // Religious Traditions of the World. Vol.
2. M., 1996.

Mamedova F.D. About the Chronological System of “History of the Albans” by Moses
Kagankatvatsi // Byzantine Annals. Vol. VI. M., 1953.
 Marr N. The Baptism of the Armenians, the Georgians, the Abkhazians and the Alans
by Saint Gregory: Arabic Version. SPb., 1905.

Masson V.M., Sirianidi V.I. Kara Kum: The Dawn of Civilization. M., 1972.

Masson V.M., The Country of Thousand Towns. M., 1966.

Mahabharata / Translation, introduction and references by B.A. Smirnov. Vol. I – X.

Ashkhabad, 1955 – 1972.

Medvedev E.M. The Role of Geographical Factors in Historical Contacts of the Indian
Civilization with the Outside World // Ancient India. Historical and Cultural Relations. M.,
1982.

Mythological Dictionary. M., 1991.

Monheit A.L., Archeology of the Western Europe. The Bronze and Iron Age. M., 1974.

Murzaev E.M. Turkic Geographical Names. M., 1996.

Muller A. The History of Islam. Vol. 1. SPb., 1895.

Miall L. Certain Problems of Mahayana Appearance // Central Asia in the Kushan

Epoch. Vol. 2. M., 1975.

Nations of the World: Historical and Ethnographic Reference Book. M., 1988.

Neikhardt A.A. The Mystery of the “Holy Cross”. M., 1963.

Nizami. Iskander-Name. M., 1953.

Overmayer D.L. Religions of China: The World as a Living System // Religious

Traditions of the World. Vol. 2., 1996.

Okladnikov A. P., Zaporozhskaya V. D. Lena Writings. M.; L., 1959.

Posnov M.E. The History of the Christian Church: (Before the Division of Churches –
1054) Brussels, 1964. Reprint.: Brussels, 1988.

Pugachenkova G. A. Arts of Bactria of the Kushan Epoch. M., 1979.

Piankov I.V. Formation of the State of Achemenids according to Historical Sources //

The History of the Iranian State and Culture (2500th Anniversary of the Iranian State). M.,
1971.

Rudenko S. I. The Most Ancient Artistic Carpets and Cloths from Certain Barrows of
the Mountain Altai in the World. M., 1968.

Rudenko S.I. Arts of Altai and Asia. M., 1961.

 Rudenko S. I. Culture of the Mountain Altai Inhabitants in the Scythian Times. M.; L.,
1953.

Rudenko S. I. Culture of the Central Altai Inhabitants in the Scythian Times. M.; L.,
1960.

Rudenko S. I. Culture of the Huns and Noinulian Barrows. M.; L., 1962.

Sarianidi V.I. Afghanistan: Treasures of Nameless Tsars. M., 1983.

Sarianidi V.I. Bactria through the Mist of Centuries. M., 1984.

Sarianidi V.I. The Temple and Necropolis of Till-Tepe M., 1989.

Sarianidi V.I., Koshelenko G.A. Coins from Excavations of Necropolis in the Town of
Till-Tepe (North Afghanistan) // Ancient India. Historical and Cultural Relations. M., 1982.

Sventsitskaya I.S. Secret Writings of First Christians. M., 1980.

Skrzhinskaya E.C. Introduction, translation, comments. // Jordan. Jordan O. About the

Origin and Deeds of the Geths. Getica. SPb., 1995.

Stavinskiy B.Y. The Kushan Bactria: Problems of History and Culture. M., 1977.

Stavinskiy B.Y. To the South from the Iron Gates. M., 1977.

[Tacitus] Cornelius Tacitus. Annals. History // Selected Works in 2 Volumes. SPb.,

1993.

Trever K.V. Essays on the History and Culture of the Caucasian Albania (IV century
B.C. – IV century A.D.). M.; L., 1959.

Trever K.V. Essays on the History of Culture of Ancient Armenia (II century B.C. – IV
century A.D.). M.; L., 1953.

Tiuliaev S.I. Arts of India: III Millennium B.C. – VII Century A.D. M., 1988.

Firduosi. Shahname. Vol. I – V. M., 1957 – 1969.

Frye R. The Heritage of Iran. M., 1972.

Khara-Davan E. Chingis-khan as a Military Leader and his Heritage. Elista, 1991.

Khakas Heroic Epos: Ay-Huuchin. Novosibirsk, 1997.

[Khorenatsi] Moses Khorenatsi. The History of Armenia. Yerevan. 1990.

Khosroev A.L. From the History of Early Christianity in Egypt: According to Material
of the Coptic Library from Nag Hammadi. M., 1997.
 Christianity. Encyclopedia. Vol. 1 – 3. M., 1993 – 1995.

Tsibukidis D.I. Ancient Greece and East. Hellenistic Problems of the Greek
Historiography (1850 - 1974). M., 1981.

Tsybikov G.T. Buddhist Pilgrim near Tibetan Relics. Prague, 1919.

Shakarim Kudaiberdy-Uly. Family Trees of the Turki, Kazakhs, Kirghiz. Dynasties of

Khans. Alma-Ata, 1990.

Staerman E.M. Antique Culture Crisis. M., 1975.

Part II

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 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 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 Desht-I-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 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 simple-minded 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, knee-high 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 fair-haired
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 haven’t 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-I-Kipchak 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-I-Kipchak 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 “e-enn-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 so-called 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 Desht-I-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-I-Kipchak 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 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 don’t 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 Fox-
Matchmaker; the same words, the same deeds. The scarlet flower was called Ak-chechek – 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 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 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.

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. He sees
everything.

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 co-regent). 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 “fair-haired

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 “over-spiritual” 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 fiancé 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 ill-favored.
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 up-to-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-to-the-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 “Graeco–Barbarian” 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” (“Graeco-Barbarian” 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.

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 al-Azhari (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 long-term
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), twelve-year 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 – Minerva- Pallas – 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.

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. 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 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 Desht-I-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 Graeco-Barbarian
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.

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 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 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 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. 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-I-Kipchak,
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 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.
LITERATURE

(main sources)

Agathius Mirineyskiy. About Justinian's Reign. M., 1996.

Adji M. Europa's Asia. M., 1998, English translation, M., 2004.

[Aleppo Paul] The Travel of the Antiochian Emperor Macarius to Russia in the Second Half
of the XVII Century Described by his Son, Archdeacon Aleppo Paul. Issue 1 – 3. M., 1896 –
1898.

Ashmarin N.I. Chuvash Language Dictionary. Vol. 1 – 2. Cheboksary, 1994.

Bartold V.V. Twelve Lectures on the History of Turkish Nations of the Central Asia //
Collected Works. Vol. V. M., 1965.

[Bartold V.V.] The Book of my Grandfather Korkut: Oguz Heroic Epos. Baku, 1999.

Bartold V.V. The Moslem World // Selected Works. Vol. VI. M., 1966.

Badwell G. The History of the Church. M., 1996.

Belikov D. Christianity of the Goths. Issue 1. Kazan, 1887.

Beliaev L.A. Christian Antiquities. SPb., 2000.

Beowulf. The Elder Edda. The Song of Nibelungs. M., 1975.

The Bible. Brussels, 1983.

[Buzand] The History of Armenia by Favstos Buzand. Yerevan., 1953.

Butanaev V.Y. Khakas-Russian Historical and Ethnographical Dictionary. Abakan,

1999.

Veinstein O.L. West-European Medieval Historiography. M.; L., 1964.

Veber E. Runic Arts. SPb., 2002.

Verbitskiy V.I. Altaic Foreigners. M., 1893. Reprint. Gorno-Altaisk, 1993.

Violle-de-Duc E.E. Life and Entertainment in the Middle Ages. SPb., 1999.

Vipper R.Y. Appearance of Christian Literature. M.; L., 1946.

Gerasimov M.M. Reconstruction of a Face by a Skull. M., 1955.

Geyushev R.B. Christianity in the Caucasian Albania: According to Archeology and Written
Sources. Baku, 1984.

Gibbon E. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Parts I – VII. SPb., 1997
– 2000.

Golenischev-Kutuzov I.N. Medieval Latin Literature of Italy. Sretensk. 2000.

Gautier J.V. Iron Age in the Eastern Europe. M.; L., 1930.
 Grant M. The Fall of the Roman Empire. M., 1998.

Grant M. Roman Emperors. M., 1998.

[Grigorovich-Barskiy V.G.] The Travel to the Sacred Places of the Traveler Basil
Grigorovich-Barskiy-Plaki-Albov… SPb., 1778.

Griaznevich P.A. Development of Historical Consciousness of the Arabs (VI – VIII

centuries) // Essays on the History of Arabic Culture of the V – XV Centuries. M., 1982.

Guber A.A., Kolpinskiy Y.D. Arts of the Western and Central Europe in the Epoch of
Nations Migration and Appearance of “Barbarous” Kingdoms // General History of Arts. Vol.
II. Book 1. M., 1986.

Gurevich A.Y. “Edda” and Saga. M., 1979.

Guyonvarch C-J., Leru F. The Celtic Civilization. SPb.,; M., 2001.

Dante Alighieri. Divine Comedy. M.,1986.

Darkevich V.P. Works of Western Arts in the Eastern Europe. (X – XIV centuries). M.,
1966.

Darkevich V.P. Art Metal of the East (VIII – XIII centuries). M., 1976.

Dashkov S.B. The Emperors of Byzantium. M., 1997.

Jones A. H. M. Death of Ancient World. Rostov-on-Don., 1997.

Diringer D. The Alphabet. M., 1963.

Doblehoffer E. Signs and Miracles: Stories about how Forgotten Writings and
Languages were deciphered. M., 1953.

Ancient Turkic Dictionary. L., 1969.

[Eusebius] Church History of Eusebius Pamfilus. Vol. I. SPb., 1858.

Zhirmunskiy V.M. The History of the German Language. M., 1965.

Zhirmunskiy V.M. Folk Heroic Epos. Comparative and Historical Essays. M.; L.,
1962.

Zhirmunskiy V.M. The Story of Alpamysh and the Heroic Fairy Tale. M., 1960.

Zadvorniy V. The History of the Popes. Vol. I – II. M., 1995.

Zadneprovskiy Y.A. About the Ethnic Belonging of the Monuments of Nomads of

Semirechye of the Usun Period in the II century B.A. – V century A.D. // Countries and
Nations of the East. Issue X. M., 1971.
 Zasetskaya I.P. Culture of the Nomads of Southern Russian Steppes in the Hun Epoch
(end of the IV – V centuries). SPb., 1994.

Inostrantsev K.A. Hunnu and Huns. L., 1926.

Jordan. About the Origin and Deeds of the Geths. Getica. SPb., 1995.

Ismagulov O. Ethnic Gene Geography of Kazakhstan. Alma-Ata, 1977.

The History of China. M., 1998.

[Kagankatvatsi] History of the Aguans by Moses Kagankatvatsi. SPb., 1861.

Cardini F. The History of Medieval Knighthood. Sretensk, 2000.

[Carpini] John de Plano Carpini. The History of the Mongals. SPb., 1911.

Kerns E. By the Roads of Christianity. History of the Church. M., 1992.

Kin M. Knighthood. M., 2000.

Klimovich L.I. The Book about Koran, its Origin and Mythology. M., 1988.

The Book of the Ruler of Shan Region. M., 1993.

Kovalskiy Y.V. Popes and Papacy. M., 1991.

Koran / Translation by I.Y. Krachkovskiy. M., 1963.

Kryvelev I.A. The Bible: Historical and Critical Analysis. M., 1985.

Kryvelev I.A. The History of Religions. Vol. I. M., 1975.

Culture of Byzantium. IV – First Half of VII Centuries. M., 1984.

[Landyshev] Stephan Landyshev. Cosmology and Theogony of Altaic Pagans. Kazan,

1886.

Lebedev A.P. The Epoch of Persecution of the Christians. SPb., 1904.

Lebedev D. 19-years Cycle of Anatoly Laodicean (from the history of ancient Easter cycles) //
Byzantium Annals. Vol. XVIII. SPb., 1913.

Madol G., Albigene Drama and the Fates of France. M., 2000.

[Marcellinus] Ammianus Marcellinus. History. Issue 1 – 3. Kiev, 1906 – 1908.

II International Symposium on Armenian Arts. Yerevan, 1978.

 II International Symposium on Georgian Arts. Tbilisi, 1978.

IV International Symposium on Georgian Arts. Tbilisi, 1983.

Melnikova E.A. Sword and Lyre: Anglo-Saxon Society in History and Epos. M., 1987.

Mets A. Moslem Renaissance. M., 1996.

The Mythological Dictionary. M., 1991.

Montaigne M. Experiments. Books I – III. M., 1979 – 1980.

Murzaev E.M. Turkic Geographical Names. M., 1996.

Muller A. The History of Islam. Vol. 1. SPb., 1895.

The Nations of the World: Historical and Ethnographic Reference Book. M., 1988.

Neikhardt A.A. The Mystery of the “Holy Cross”. M., 1963.

Osokin N. The History of the Albigenses and their Time. M., 2000.

The Song of Roland. M.; L., 1964.

Polevoy V.M. The Arts of Byzantium // General History of Arts. Vol. II. Book 1. M.,
1960.

Polevoy V.M. The Arts of Greece: Ancient World. The Middle Ages. New Time. M.,
1984.

[Polo] Marco Polo. The Book. M., 1955.

Posnov M.E. The History of the Christian Church: (Before the Division of Churches –
1054) Brussels, 1964. Reprint.: Brussels, 1988.

Prisk. Roman Embassy to Attila. SPb., 1842.

[Procopius] Procopius from Caesarea. The War with the Goths. M., 1996.

[Rubruk] William de Rubruk. The Traveling to Eastern Countries. SPb., 1911.

Sventsitskaya I.S. Secret Writings of First Christians. M., 1980.

[Simokkata] Feofilact Simokkata. History. M., 1996.

[Syrian] Ephraim the Syrian. About the Days of Christmas Celebration. About the Foundation
of the First Churches in Jerusalem // Texts and Researches on Armenian and Georgian
Philology. SPb., 1900.
 Smirnov S. Philological Notes about the Old Testament Languages in their
Comparison with Classic Languages Reading the Letter of Paul to the Ephesians. M., 1873.

Medieval Latin Novels XIII. L., 1989.

Tanzagi – the Father of Altaians: Altaic Fairy Tales. M., 1987.

[Taube E.] Fairy Tales and Legends of the Altaic Tuvins: Collected by Eric Taube. M.,
1994.

[Tacitus] Cornelius Tacitus. Annals. History // Selected Works in 2 Volumes. SPb.,

1993.

Tisengausen V.G. Collection of Materials Relating to the History of the Golden Horde:
Extracts from Arabic Works. Vol. I. SPb., 1884.

Tisengausen V.G. Collection of Materials Relating to the History of the Golden Horde.
Extracts from Arabic Works. Vol. II. M.; L., 1959.

Thomsen W. Deciphered Orchon and Yenisei Inscriptions / Translated by V. Radlov // Notes

of the Eastern Department of Russian Archeological Association. Vol. VIII. Issue III – IV.
1894.

Trever K.V. Essays on History and Culture of the Caucasian Albania (IV century B.C. – VII
century A.D.). M.; L., 1959.

Trever K.V. Essays on History and Culture of Ancient Armenia (II century B.C. – IV century
A.D.). M.; L., 1953.

Useinov M. The History of Architecture of Azerbaijan. M., 1963.

Uspenskiy F.I. The History of the Byzantine Empire of the VI – IX Centuries. M.,
1999.

Uspenskiy F.I. Church and Political Activity of the Pope Gregory I. Kazan, 1901.

Fisbein M. Religious Traditions of Judaism // Religious Traditions of the World. Vol.

1. M., 1996.

Khakas Heroic Epos: Ai-Huuchin // Folklore Monuments of the Nations of Siberia and
the Far East. Vol. 16. Novosibirsk, 1997.

[Khorenatsi] Moses Khorenatsi. The History of Armenia. Yerevan. 1990.

Khosroev A.L. From the History of Early Christianity in Egypt: According to Material
of the Coptic Library from Nag Hammadi. M., 1997.

Anthology of Latin Texts of Medieval Authors. M., 1956.

Christianity. Encyclopedia. Vol. 1 – 3. M., 1993 – 1995.

Chichurov I.S. Byzantine Historical Works: Theophan's “Chronography”, Nicephorus's
“Breviary”. M., 1980.

Chubinashvili G.N. Researches on the Armenian Architecture. Tbilisi, 1967.

Shebutin A. The Cufic Koran of Saint-Petersburg Public Library // Notes of the

Eastern Department of the Emperor's Russian Archeological Society. Issue 1 – 4. Vol. VI.
SPb., 1982.

Staerman E.M. Antique Culture Crisis. M., 1975.

The Epoch of the Crusades. SPb., 1999.

Jacobson A.L. Regularities in the Development of Medieval Architecture. 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 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 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 “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.

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 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 Charla-mag (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 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 “prince-
electors” 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 pre-Christian 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-I-Kipchak
that was taking place everywhere – geographical names were repeated rather often since they
were a cliché 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 25 th, 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-I-Kipchak 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-I-Kipchak; 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-I-Kipchak, 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-I-Kipchak 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 Desht-I-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 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
– Demir-Kapiya (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, Ostria-Chatal, 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 Proto-

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
slave-markets 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-I-Kipchak. 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 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 “Urus-bek, 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 others…But 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!

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 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.

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 well-being 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 slave-markets 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-tung-Ko (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 Khan’s 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
Khan’s 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 Khan’s 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 (Aga-khan).

● Details of those events are read in the “Collection of Chronicles” by Rashid-ad-Din

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 Syr-Darya 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 “blue-eyed”. 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 120-versts 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 I…Why? 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
Khan’s 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 Khan’s 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 Khan’s 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 Lu-aryk
(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 north-east 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. Anjero-Sudjensk, 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
Khan’s 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, doesn’t 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 well-known 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 Khan’s 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 Khan’s 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 Mangu-Timur 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 Khan’s 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 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-in-law, 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 naïve 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 self-destruction 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.

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
demonstrated the position of the East.

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 Khan’s 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 Khan’s 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”. Word-for-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 made it
more complex but failed to invent something new. It was just “modernizing” old methods of
interrogation replacing the trial with tortures.

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 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 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.

● 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 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 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.

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.

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 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 Sidra-Rabba (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 non-Nestorians 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

(main sources)

[Abu-l-Gazi] The Family Tree of the Turki // Works of Abul-Gazi, the Khan of Khiva.
Kazan, 1906.

Adji M. Europa's Asia. M., 1998, English translation, M., 2004.

[Alikbekov]. The Adats of Kumyks / Translated by T.-B. Beibulatov; Recorded by M.

Alibekov. Makhachkala, 1927.

Artamonov M.I. The history of Khazars. L., 1962.

Bartold V.V. Islam // Collected Works. Vol. VI. M., 1966.

Bartold V.V. <Islam on the Black Sea> // Ibid.

 Bartold V.V. About the Question of the Crescent as the Symbol of Islam // Ibid.

Bartold V.V. About the Sabians // Ibid.

[Bartold V.V.] The Book of my Grandfather Korkut: Oguz Heroic Epos. Baku, 1999.

Bartold V.V. Koran and the Sea // Collected Works. Vol. VI. M., 1966.

Bartold V.V. The Culture of Islam // Ibid.

Bartold V.V. The Moslem World // Ibid.

Bartold V.V. Sabians and Khanifs // Ibid.

Bartold V.V. Orientation of First Islamic Mosques // Ibid.

Baskakov N.A. Russian Family Names of the Turkic Origin. M., 1993.

Belikov D. Christianity of the Goths. Issue 1. Kazan, 1887.

Beliaev L.A. Christian Antiquities. SPb., 2000.

Beowulf. The Elder Edda. The Song of Nibelungs. M., 1975.

The Bible. Brussels, 1983.

[Biruni] Abu Reikhan Biruni. Collected Works. Vol. 1. Tashkent, 1957.

[Biruni] Abu Reikhan Biruni. India. M., 1995.

Bloc M. Apologia of History, or the Occupation of a Historian. M., 1986.

Butanaev V.Y. Khakas-Russian Historical and Ethnographical Dictionary. Abakan,

1999.

Veber E. Runic Arts. SPb., 2002.

“The Great Chronicle” of Poland, Rus and their Neighbors of the XI – XIII Centuries.
M., 1987.

Verbitskiy V.I. Altaic Foreigners. M., 1893. Reprint. Gorno-Altaisk, 1993.

Violle-de-Duc E.E. Life and Entertainment in the Middle Ages. SPb., 1999.

Violle-de-Duc E.E. The Russian Arts: Its Sources, Components, Higher Development
and Futurity. M., 1897.

Vodov V. The Birth of Russian Christianity: Conversion of Vladimir, the Prince of Kiev,
and its Consequences. XI – XII Centuries. (Conception Review) // Russia between East and
West: Culture and Society X – XVII centuries // For XVII International Congress of
Byzantium Explorers (Moscow, August 8-15th, 1991). Part I – III, M., 1991.

Gergei E. The History of Papacy. M., 1996.

Gibbon E. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Parts I – VII.
SPb., 1997 – 2000.

Golenischev-Kutuzov I.N. Medieval Latin Literature of Italy. Sretensk. 2000.

Grant M. Roman Emperors. M., 1998.

Gurevich A.Y. Culture and Society of Medieval Europe with the Eyes of
Contemporaries. M., 1989.

Gurevich A.Y. Campaigns of the Vikings. M., 1966.

Darkevich V.P. Art Metal of the East (VIII – XIII centuries). M., 1976.

Dashkov S.B. The Emperors of Byzantium. M., 1997.

Diringer D. The Alphabet. M., 1963.

Reports of the International Congress Dedicated to the Millennium of Christianity in

Russia and the Ukraine (Ravenna, 1988) // Russia between East and West: Culture and Society
X – XVII centuries // For XVII International Congress of Byzantium Explorers (Moscow,
August 8-15th, 1991). Part I – III, M., 1991.

Ancient Russian Tones in Ancient Scandinavian Writings: Texts, Translation,

Comments. M., 1987.

Ancient Turkic Dictionary. L., 1969.

Eger O. World History: in 4 Volumes. The Middle Ages. SPb., 1904. Reprint. M.,
1999.

Zaborov M.A. The History of the Crusades in Documents and Materials. M., 1977.

Zaborov M.A. Crusaders in the East. M., 1960.

Zadvorniy V. The History of the Popes. Vol. I – II. M., 1995.

Ingstad H. At the Wake of Leib the Happy. L., 1969.

Inostrantsev K.A. On History of pre-Moslem Culture of the Middle Asia. Pg., 1917.

Jordan. About the Origin and Deeds of the Geths. Getica. M., 1960.
 Icelandic Sagas. L., 1956.

Icelandic Sagas. Irish Epos. M., 1973.

The History of China. M., 1998.

Cardini F. The History of Medieval Knighthood. Sretensk, 2000.

Karamzin N.M. The History of the Russian State. Vol. I-XII. SPb., 1842-1844. Reprint.
M., 1988.

Carger M.I. Ancient Kiev. Vol.1-2. M.; L., 1958; 1961.

[Carpini] John de Plano Carpini. The History of the Mongals. SPb., 1911.

Keen M. Chivalry. M., 2000.

Kirpichnikov A.I. Saint George and George the Brave. SPb., 1879

Klimovich L.I. The Book about Koran, its Origin and Mythology. M., 1988.

Kovalskiy Y.V. Popes and Papacy. M., 1991.

The Conception of the History of Ancient Russia in Synthesizing Works by German

Historians Named “Handbook on the Russian History” // Russia between East and West:
Culture and Society X – XVII centuries // For XVII International Congress of Byzantium
Explorers (Moscow, August 8-15th, 1991). Part I – III, M., 1991.

Koran / Translation by I.Y. Krachkovskiy. M., 1963.

Kryvelev I.A. The History of Religions. Vol. I. M., 1975.

[Landyshev] Stephan Landyshev. Cosmology and Theogony of Altaic Pagans. Kazan,

1886.

Lebedev A.P. The History of Split of Churches in the IX, X and XI Centuries. SPb.,
1999.

Madol G., Albigene Drama and the Fates of France. M., 2000.

Matuzova V.I. English Medieval Sources of the IX – XIII Centuries: Texts, Translation,
Comments. M., 1979.

Melnikova E.A. Sword and Lyre: Anglo-Saxon Society in History and Epos. M., 1987.

Melnikova E.A. Ancient Scandinavian Geographical Works. M., 1986.

Mets A. Moslem Renaissance. M., 1996.

 The Mythological Dictionary. M., 1991.

Murzaev E.M. Turkic Geographical Names. M., 1996.

Muller L. The Baptism of Russia. The Early History of Christianity before 9888.
Fragmentary Translation // Russia between East and West: Culture and Society X – XVII
centuries // For XVII International Congress of Byzantium Explorers (Moscow, August 8-15th,
1991). Part I – III, M., 1991.

Nations of the World: Historical and Ethnographic Reference Book. M., 1988.

Nikitin A.B. Christianity in the Central Asia (Antiquity and the Middle Ages) // Eastern
Turkestan and the Central Asia. M., 1984.

Osokin N. The History of the Albigenses and their Time. M., 2000.

Pipes R. Russia under the Old Regime. M., 1993.

Pigulevskaya N. The Middle East. Byzantium. The Slavs L., 1976.

Pigulevskaya N. Syrian Culture in the Middle Ages. M., 1979.

Podskalskiy G. Christianity and Theological Literature in Kievan Russia (988 – 1237):

Dedicated to the Millennium (988 – 1988) of the Baptism of Russia Performed by St.
Vladimir: (Conception Analysis) // Russia between East and West: Culture and Society X –
XVII centuries // For XVII International Congress of Byzantium Explorers (Moscow, August
8-15th, 1991). Part I – III, M., 1991.

[Polo] Marco Polo. The Book. M., 1955.

Poppe A. The Rise of the Cult of Boris and Gleb: Fragmentary Translation // Russia
between East and West: Culture and Society X – XVII centuries // For XVII International
Congress of Byzantium Explorers (Moscow, August 8-15th, 1991). Part I – III, M., 1991.

Poppe A. Political reasons of the Baptism of Russia. Byzantine – Russian Relations:

Fragmentary Translation // Russia between East and West: Culture and Society X – XVII
centuries // For XVII International Congress of Byzantium Explorers (Moscow, August 8-15th,
1991). Part I – III, M., 1991.

[Prelovskiy] Poetry of the Ancient Turki of VI – XII centuries. M.,1993.

[Prelovskiy] Shamanistic Singing of the Siberian Turki / Translated by A. Prelovskiy.

M., 1996.

Petit-Dutaillis C. Feudal Monarchy in France and England of the X – XIII Centuries.

SPb., 2001.

Wright W. A Short History of Syriac Literature. SPb., 1902.

 [Rubruk] William de Rubruk. The Traveling to Eastern Countries. SPb., 1911.

Russia and “The Steppe”: Review of Works by C. J. Galperin “George Vernadskiy and
Eurasia”, “Russia and the Golden Horde: Mongolian Influence on the Russian Medieval
History” // Russia between East and West: Culture and Society X – XVII centuries // For XVII
International Congress of Byzantium Explorers (Moscow, August 8-15th, 1991). Part I – III,
M., 1991.

Smirnova O.I. Places of Pre-Moslem Cults in the Central Asia (According to

Toponymy Materials) // Countries and Nations of the East. Issue X. M., 1971.

Steblin-KAmenskiy M.I. The World and the Sagas. M., 1971.

Steblin-KAmenskiy M.I. Scaldic Poetry // The Poetry of the Scalds. L., 1979.

[Sturluson] Snorri Sturluson. Heimskringla. M., 1980.

Tatischev V.N. Collected Works: 8 Volumes (5 Books): Vol. 4: The Russian History. M.,
1964. Reprint. M., 1995.

[Tacitus] Cornelius Tacitus. Annals. History // Selected Works in 2 Volumes. Vol. I.

SPb., 1993.

Tisengausen V.G. Collection of Materials Relating to the History of the Golden Horde:
Extracts from Arabic Works. Vol. I. SPb., 1884.

Tisengausen V.G. Collection of Materials Relating to the History of the Golden Horde.
Extracts from Arabic Works. Vol. II. M.; L., 1959.

The Millennium of the Baptism of Russia: Dedicated to the Millennium of the Baptism
of Kievan Russia: (According to the Materials of the International Symposium in Tutsingen,
May 7th – 10th, 1987) // Russia between East and West: Culture and Society X – XVII
centuries // For XVII International Congress of Byzantium Explorers (Moscow, August 8-15th,
1991). Part I – III, M., 1991.

The Millennium of the Baptism of Russia: International Church Conference:

“Theology and Spirituality”. Moscow, May 11th – 18th, 1987. Vol. 1 – 2. M., 1989.

Uspenskiy F.I. The History of the Byzantine Empire of the VI – IX Centuries. M.,
1999.

Uspenskiy F.I. The History of the Byzantine Empire: the Period of the Macedonian
Dynasty (867 – 1057). M., 1997.

Khara-Davan E. Genghis Khan as a Military Leader and his Heritage. Elista, 1991.

Khesh E. Culture of the Eastern Slavs: Fragmentary Translation // Russia between East
and West: Culture and Society X – XVII centuries // For XVII International Congress of
Byzantium Explorers (Moscow, August 8-15th, 1991). Part I – III, M., 1991.

Christianity. Encyclopedia. Vol. 1 – 3. M., 1993 – 1995.

Tsultem N.-O. The Arts of Mongolia from the Ancient Times till the Beginning of the XX
Century. M., 1986.

Chichurov I.S. Byzantine Historical Works: Theophan's “Chronography”, Nicephorus's

“Breviary”. M., 1980.

Shakhmatov A.A. Researches on the Ancient Russian Chronicles. SPb., 1908.

Shakhmatov A.A. Ancient Fates of Russian Nation. Pg., 1919.

The Epos of the North Europe; Ways of Evolution / Edited by N.S. Chemodanov. M.,
1989.

The Epoch of the Crusades. 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 façade 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… Loyola’s mother, Donna Marianna 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 Khan’s 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 Khan’s 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 Nevsky’s 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 chagan’s 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 khan’s 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
Khan’s 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 khan’s 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
Cyrus’s 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 Pope’s 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 one’s eyes on a lot of things
connected with those occasional events. It explains a lot. Sophia, the Pope’s 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 protégés 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 prince’s 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 Koji’s 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 Horde’s 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 Khan’s 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 Pope’s 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 Khan’s 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.
 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 prince’s family in the family ownership. Appanages were run by a
member of the Grand Prince’s 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 “histories” at the
direction of the Jesuits.

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 self-preservation – 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 couldn’t 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 Pope’s 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 Prince’s 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 Khan’s
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 fiancé 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 fiancés’ 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 Pope’s back by the bride and fiancé. 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 Pope’s 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 Pope’s 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 fiancé? 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 Emperor’s 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 Prince’s 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
Pope’s 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 Prince’s grandson (his elder son’s
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
Paleologo’s 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 Pope’s
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 Prince’s 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 Pope’s 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 Metropolitan’s 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 виолле-ле-
дюк; 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 naïve, 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 (Tengri’s 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 father’s 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.

Basil’s 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 khan’s 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 Baty’s 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 Pope’s power. Long ago religion had become politics and its game in the West.
That was not concealed. In the East the Pope’s 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 khan’s
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.
Constantine’s 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 Church’s first messengers to the East of Europe were the Pope’s 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 Pope’s 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 Pope’s 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 Pope’s 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 Pope’s
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 Nestor’s 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 Pope’s 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 Pope’s
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
Pope’s 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
Pope’s 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
Rubruk’s comment on Baty’s 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 Pope’s 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 Pope’s 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 merchant’s 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, Dan’iry!

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 беги* 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 Allah’s 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 Pope’s 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 don’t 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 Pope’s 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 Khan’s 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, Loyola’s (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.

Xavier’s 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 order’s 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 can’t 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 Pope’s protégés, 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 Peter’s
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 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 Nestor’s 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 Tatischev’s work is nothing more than an invention in five volumes
written by the tsar’s 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. Tatischev’s “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
Tengri’s 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 Pope’s 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 God’s 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 somebody’s 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 God’s help. They knew
that they could not kill without God’s 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:
“Tengri’s 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 one’s “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 one’s 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 self-respect 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 Tengri’s 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 God’s commandments had
existed a thousand years before Christ the Church prohibited mentioning the Turki that had
given those commandments to it.

. The Jesuits, the Pope’s 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 Baty’s
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. Baty’s campaign was an episode, an insignificant
stroke. The war waged by the Pope’s 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 destiny’s 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-I-Kipchak, 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 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 khan’s 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 Devlet-Girei. 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 Pope’s 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 Khan’s 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 менли-гирей behind whom the Greeks were standing after they had brought up that
offspring. The Turki also took part in the intrigues; two девлет-гире’s sons were being
brought up at the sultan’s 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 sultan’s 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 sultan’s 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 Horde’s 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 sultan’s 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 khan’s 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. 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 as-Sahra 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 Allah’s 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 Allah’s 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 Ferdowsi’s “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 Caliph’s 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 Pope’s 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 khan’s
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 Tengri’s 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” (“Khazar-Aphsana”) 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 Caliph’s 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
scientist’s 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, Tengri’s 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. Isn’t 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 Khan’s 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-I-Kipchak!

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 Khan’s 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. Slave-trade
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 slave-trade 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 Horde’s 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 “Horde’s” equipment and the Turkic adats were in order, the Khan’s 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 Imam-Caliph (The Prophet’s 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 – “God’s 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 one’s” lands that stretched from Perekop beyond Ural a great
trouble was to occur; power was rolling in the mud. No one’s. 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 Paleologo’s 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 Prince’s 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 tsar’s 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-I-Kipchak and its capital instead of
Moslem Bakhchisarai. And that became the reality!

The tsar simply denied Scandinavian symbols and “Odin’s 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 father’s 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 (Adji-Tarkhan) 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 Attila’s times; it was on
its way out… Those khanates were certain elements of the broken antique vase; the khan
Muhammed-Girei 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 Khan’s 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 Khan’s 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 Desht-I-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 tsar’s 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 self-
affected, 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 Terrible’s 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 one’s” 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
ruler’s 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. Gibbon’s 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 Crimea’s 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 Safa-Girei died and his
two-year old son Utamysh-Girei 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 Utamysh-Girei and his mother, Suumbike, that became
Shakh-Ali’s wife, away to the Russian tsar. Shakespeare’s 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 Horde’s 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 Khan’s great-grandson, the Horde’s
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 Pope’s 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 Pope’s 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 Pope’s 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 Pope’s 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 Pope’s 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 Saryk-Azman 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 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 Pope’s 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-I-Kipchak 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 feeble-minded 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, tsar’s wife’s 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 Terrible’s 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 Pope’s 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
Baty’s 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 Khan’s 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 Pope’s 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 Godunov’s 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 Believer’s 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, Isadore’s 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 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-I-Kipchak. 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 Kremlin’s 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 Khan’s 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 Patriarch’s 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.

● Speakign 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 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 chagan’s
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 editor’s 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 ad-Dakhhan 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 Allah’s 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 Caliph’s 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? It’s 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-I-Kipchak 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 Caliph’s
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 khan’s 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.

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 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 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 protégés. Believers
were tired of the Pope’s 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 Pope’s 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
tsar’s 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 Godunov’s 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 Nikon’s
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-I-Kipchak 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 Pope’s 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 everybody’s 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
Pope’s 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 rival’s 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 fiancé 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 protégés! 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 Filaret’s 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 Pope’s 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 patriarch’s 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 Bolotnikov’s 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
protégés. 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 Luther’s 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 Pope’s 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 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 Ibrahim-Yurt 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?.. Bolotnikov’s 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 prince’s surname was Bozhir and
his ancestors were engaged in metallurgy and blacksmithing, which is reflected by the
symbols on the emblem.

And Minin’s 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 Patriarch’s
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 Germogen’s 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 protégé 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
“impostor’s 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 Pope’s 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 Pope’s emblem on which a
dragon is depicted. The ancient sign of his family is exactly the same as on the emblem of
Kazan… The Pope’s 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 Pope’s
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 Pope’s 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 Pope’s 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” (somebody’s
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 Job’s 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 tsar’s
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 tsarina’s 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 Possevino’s 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 Jesuit’s 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 Patriarch’s 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 candidate’s 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 Filaret’s 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 Council’s 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 Germogen’s 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 somebody’s 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 Theophan’s 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 Pope’s
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 Patriarch’s
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 Patriarch’s 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 Patriarch’s 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 Tengri’s 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
Filaret’s 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 tsar’s 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 tsar’s 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 tsar’s
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 high-skilled 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 bishop’s 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 metropolitan’s or
to bishop’s 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”… God’s 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 Lapps…
This 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 somebody’s 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 Council’s 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 Razin’s 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 Pope’s 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 Pope’s 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 life-giving 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 Patriarch’s 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 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 Nikon’s 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 Nikon’s 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?

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; 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 Khan’s 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 tsar’s 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 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 Pope’s 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 tsar’s
“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 Mikhailovich’s 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 Moloch’s 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. They’ve 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 (skull-cap) 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 Smotritskiy’s 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 Bolotnikov’s and Razin’s rebellions is the best
confirmation. However, from the tsar’s 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 calm and care
about terminology; it started to prepare the Azov campaign.

The Jesuit Possevino’s 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 tsar’s 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 tsar’s gifts could not help, which caused serious anxiety: there was
a threat of not implementing Possevino’s 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 Attila’s 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 Attila’s 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
Attila’s 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 (Austur-Hun),
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 гунтрамн. 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
Attila’s 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 tsar’s 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 father’s 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 can’t 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 Peter’s 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 Pope’s 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 “Peter’s nest”; they entrusted to the Slavs only controlled deeds.

● In this connection a famous Peter’s 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 tsar’s 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, don’t forget Rhine wine. I don’t need anything else, or if they bring
mathematical instruments, buy them”. Peter’s 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 Peter’s 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 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 tsar’s 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 Lefort’s
cart”, - historians wrote about that celebration. And that is right, everything was new and
strange for the Russians; the winner was following his subject’s 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 “Lefort’s 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 Possevino’s secret plan of which the Russian aristocracy
was certainly unaware. But it existed.

“The Third Rome” was establishing the Pope’s 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 Bulava’s 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 Peter’s 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 child’s
head was higher than the wheel the tsar’s 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 great-grandfather 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 children’s 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.

Peter’s 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 Peter’s 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 Peter’s antipode and the victims of
the tsar’s 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 tsar’s
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 tsar’s 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 Musin-Pushkin
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 emperor’s
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 Yavorsky’s 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 tsar’s 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 “white-
bearded” 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 one’s 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… Peter’s 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 tsar’s 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 Peter’s 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 women’s 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, vedi…In 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 Peter’s 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 Cyril’s 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… Cyril’s 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 tsar’s 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 tsar’s 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, Nestor’s “Russian Primary Chronicle” was rewritten almost in full; only
the title and several simple chapters were left…

At the same time appeared the so-called “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 author’s 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 don’t 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.

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”. 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 poet’s father that escaped to Moscow
wanted to be a Christian and get a title. And he got them and became a Russian prince –
Peter’s 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 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 Attila’s or Genghis Khan’s 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. Musin-Pushkin 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 –

Oruskayazemliauzhezasholomianemesi (***).
 But it could be translated from the Turkic langue. Word for word.

Or-us-kayaz-emlia-uzh-ez-ash-olom-yan-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-Pushkin’s 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?

Avid Khan is not Higher than a Farmhand

From Peter began so-called “scientific 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 “Traveler’s 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, aren’t 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 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 Attila’s state by the XVIII century. The remotest outskirts. The
Jesuits were moving there. Their actions were directed by Rome; later its name title became
“Igelstrom’s 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 Peter’s 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;

 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.

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.

“Man’s 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 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 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, today’s 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 Attila’s 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 khan’s 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 Seyar’s 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, Attila’s
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?

Someone’s 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 Khan’s 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-I-Kipchak 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 enemy’s army. The Dzungarian invasion began.

Much has been written about that event but everything is so vague, as though for
somebody’s 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 thousand years ago. And
then the cruel war came…
 And those events have no meaning in isolation from Peter’s 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 Desht-I-
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 Peter’s 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-I-Kipchak 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 master’s 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 Possevino’s 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 couldn’t 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 self-
constituted aristocracy: it acquiesces after the first failure. An avid khan made Desht-I-
Kipchak a Russian colony under the name of the yurts of Kirghiz-Cossacks (Kyrgiz-Kaisaks)
– 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 second-rate 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 khan’s 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
“non-Russian” 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 Pugachev’s rebellion that was supported by the Kazakhs of the middle and elder
zhuzes – popular uprising, peasant war… But the rebellion called “Srym-Batyr’s movement”
was the best characteristic of peoples feelings. They had not seen anything of the kind before.
Srym-Batyr was acting not against the khan’s power but for depriving Abulkhair’s
descendants of the khan’s 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 khan’s 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 Ablaikhan’s 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 Emperor’s 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, Igelstrom’s instincts were right again; he was ahead
of the events and did what actually had been already done – he abolished khan’s power in
Kazakhstan: the foremen’s meeting of 1786 accepted Catherine the Great’s 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 Pope’s 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 khan’s 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 khan’s 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 Igelstrom’s 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 Igelstrom’s 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 tsar’s 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. Catherine’s 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 Pope’s 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 Verbitskiy’s
and Landyshev’s 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 Quistine’s 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 naïvely 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

(main sources)
Abai Gaeser-Khubun: The Epic. Part 1, 2. Ulan-Ude, 1961 – 1964.

Abu Muhammad Ahmad ibn Asam Al-Cufi. The Book of Conquests: (Extracts on the
History of Azerbaijan of the VII – IX Centuries). Baku, 1981.

Agadzanov S.G. Oguz Tribes of the Middle Asia of the IX – XIII Centuries.
(Historical and Ethnographic Essay) // Countries and Nations of the East. Issue X. M., 1971.

Adji M. Europa's Asia. M., 1998, English translation, M., 2004.

Alekseev V.P., Gokhman V.P. USSR Asian Regions Anthropology. M., 1984.

Alekseeva T.I., Alekseev V.P. Slavic Nations Ethnogeny according to Anthropological

Data // Slavic Nations History, Culture, Ethnography and Formation. M., 1973.

[Aleppo Paul] The Travel of the Antiochian Emperor Macarius to Russia in the Second Half
of the XVII Century Described by his Son, Archdeacon Aleppo Paul. Issue 1 – 3. M., 1896 –
1898.

Akhunov A.M. Sami ad-Dakhan – Arabic Researcher of “Risale” by Ibn Fadlan //

Dialogue of Cultures of Eurasia. Issue 2. Kazan, 2001.

Barbaro and Contarini about Russia. M., 1971.

Barsov E.V. The Lay of Igor's Warfare as an Arts Monument of Kievan Retinue
Russia. Vol. I – III. M., 1887 – 1889.

Bartold V.V. Collected Works. Vol. I – IX. M., 1963 – 1977.

Baskakov N.A. Russian Family Names of the Turkic Origin. M., 1993.

Beliaev E.A. Arabs, Islam and Arabic Caliphate in the Early Middle Ages. Issue 2. M., 1966.

Beliaev L.A. Christian Antiquities. SPb., 2000.

The Bible. Brussels, 1983.

[Biruni] Abu Reikhan Biruni. Collected Works. Vol. 1. Tashkent, 1957.

[Biruni] Abu Reikhan Biruni. India. M., 1995.

Bichurin N.Y. (Jakinf). Collection of Information about the Nations which Lived in the
Middle Asia in Ancient Times. Vol. I. M.; L., 1950.

Bolshakov O.G. Medieval Arabic Towns // Essays on the History of Arabic Culture (C
– XV Centuries). M., 1982.

Buzurg ibn Shakhiyar. The Miracles of India. M., 1959.

 Butanaev V.Y. Khakas-Russian Historical and Ethnographical Dictionary. Abakan,
1999.

“The Great Chronicle” of Poland, Rus and their Neighbors in the XI – XIII Centuries.
M., 1987.

Veliyaminov-Zernov V.V. Historical Information of Kirghiz-Kaisaks and Relationship

between Russian and the Middle Asia after Abulkhair Khan’s Death. Issue I – II. Ufa., 1853 –
1855.

Verbitskiy V.I. Altaic Foreigners. M., 1893. Reprint. Gorno-Altaisk, 1993.

Winkler P.P. Russian Heraldry. The History and Description of Russian Emblems with
the Images of all the Noble Emblems of the General Book of Heraldry of the Russian Empire.
Issues 1 – 3. SPb., 1892 – 1894.

Violle-de-Duc E.E. The Russian Arts: Its Sources, Components, Higher Development
and Futurity. M., 1879.

Vozgrin V.E. Historical Fate of the Crimean Tatars. M., 1992.

Viatkin M.P. Batyr Srym. M.; L., 1947.

Garkavets A. Kypchak Written Heritage: Armenian Writings Catalogue and Texts. Vol.
1. Almaty, 2002.

Gergei E. The History of Papacy. M., 1996.

Geseriada: The Story of Gracious Geser Mergen-Khan, the Extirpator of Ten Evils in Ten
Countries of the World. M.; L., 1935.

Gibbon E. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Parts I – VII. SPb., 1997
– 2000.

Gorsei D. The Notes on Muscovy of the XVI Century. SPb., 1909.

Grizinger T. The Jesuits. SPb., 1999.

Griaznevich P.A. Development of Historical Consciousness of the Arabs (VI – VIII

centuries) // Essays on the History of Arabic Culture of the V – XV Centuries. M., 1982.

Davletshin G.M. The Volga Bulgaria: Spiritual Culture. Kazan, 1990.

Darkevich V.P. Art Metal of the East (VIII – XIII centuries). M., 1976.

Dashkov S.B. The Emperors of Byzantium. M., 1997.

Denni F.M. Islam and Moslem Community // Religious Traditions of the World. Vol.
2. M., 1996.
 Dzangar: Kalmyk Heroic Epos. M., 1990.

Diringer D. The Alphabet. M., 1963.

Donnelli A.S. Russian Conquest of Bashkiria in 1552 – 1740: Pages of the History of
Imperialism. 1995.

Ancient Turkic Dictionary. L., 1969.

Eger O. World History: in 4 Volumes. Modern History. SPb., 1904. Reprint. M., 1999.

Eger O. World History: in 4 Volumes. The Middle Ages. SPb., 1904. Reprint. M.,
1999.

[Zizanius L.] Grammar Slovenska… Vilno, 1596. Reprint. M., 2000.

[Ibn Fadlan]. Ibn-Fadlan’s Travel to Volga. M.; L., 1939.

Inostrantsev K.A. On History of pre-Moslem Culture of the Middle Asia. Pg., 1917.

The History of Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic from Ancient to Modern Times.
Alma-Ata, 1943.

The History of China. M., 1998.

The History of Khakassia: From Ancient Times up to 1917. M., 1993.

Kamentseva E.I., Ustiugov N.V. Russian Sphragistics and Heraldry. M., 1974.

Karamzin N.M. The History of the Russian State. Vol. I-XII. SPb., 1842-1844.
Reprint. M., 1988.

[Carpini] John de Plano Carpini. The History of the Mongals. SPb., 1911.

Klimovich L.I. The Book about Koran, its Origin and Mythology. M., 1988.

Kovalskiy Y.V. Popes and Papacy. M., 1991.

Koran / Translation by I.Y. Krachkovskiy. M., 1963.

Koran: Translation of Senses and Commentaries. 3rd Edition, Revised and Enlarged /
Translation by V. Prokhorova. 1997.

Koran / Translation by G.S. Sablukov, 1907. Reprint. M., 1992.

Krachkovskiy I.Y. Selected Works. Vol. I – VI. M.; L., 1955 – 1960.

Kryvelev I.A. The History of Religions. Vol. I. M., 1975.

 Krymskiy A.E. The History of Arabs and Arabic Secular and Spiritual Literature. Parts
1 – 3. M., 1911 – 1913.

Kumekov B.E. The Country of Kimaks on the al-Idrisi Map // Countries and Nations
of the East. Issue X. M., 1971.

Kyzalsov L.R. To the Unknown Siberia for Mysterious Writings. Abakan, 1998.

[Quistine] Altolph De Quistine. Russia in 1839. Vol. I – II. M., 1996.

[Landyshev] Stephan Landyshev. Cosmology and Theogony of Altaic Pagans. Kazan,

1886.

Levshin A.I. Description of Kirghiz – Cossack or Kirghiz – Kaisak Hordes and

Steppes. Part I – III. SPb., 1832.

Manas: Kirghiz Heroic Epos. M., 1984.

Materials on the History of Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic. Vol. IV. M.;L., 1941.

Meyer L. Kirghiz Steppe of the Orenburg Government // Materials for the Geography
and Statistics of Russia Collected by the General Staff Officers. SPb., 1985.

Mets A. Moslem Renaissance. M., 1996.

The Mythological Dictionary. M., 1991.

Mikhalon Litvin. About the Customs of the Tatars, Lithuanians and Muscovites. M.,
1994.

Murzaev E.M. Turkic Geographical Names. M., 1996.

Muller A. The History of Islam. Vol. 1 – 2. SPb., 1895.

The Nations of the World: Historical and Ethnographic Reference Book. M., 1988.

Narshakhi M. The History of Bukhara. Tashkent, 1897.

Nizami. Iskander-Name. M., 1953.

[Nikitin]. The Travel over Three Seas of Athanasius Nikitin in 1466 – 1472. M.; L.,
1948.

[Nikitin]. The Travel over Three Seas of Athanasius Nikitin in 1466 – 1472. L., 1986.

Nikitin A.B. Christianity in the Central Asia (Antiquity and the Middle Ages) //
Eastern Turkestan and the Central Asia. M., 1984.

Novoselskiy A.A. The Fight of the Moscow State against the Tatars in the First Half of
the XVII Century. M.; L., 1948.
Persian Proverbs and Sayings. M., 1973.

Pigulevskaya N. Arabs by the Borders of Byzantium and Iran in the IV – VI Centuries. M.; L.,
1964.

Pigulevskaya N. The Middle East. Byzantium. The Slavs L., 1976.

Pigulevskaya N. Byzantium on the Ways to India. M.; L., 1951.

Pigulevskaya N. Syrian Culture in the Middle Ages. M., 1979.

[Polo] Marco Polo. The Book. M., 1955.

Proverbs and Sayings of Eastern Nations. M., 1961.

Possevino A. Historical Works about Muscovy of the XVI Century. M., 1983.

Wright W. A Short History of Syriac Literature. SPb., 1902.

Russia: Encyclopedia. SPb., 1898. Reprint. L., 1991.

[Rubruk] William de Rubruk. The Traveling to Eastern Countries. SPb., 1911.

Skrynnikov R.G. Boris Godunov. M., 1978.

Skrynnikov R.G. The Kingdom of Terror. SPb., 1992.

The Lay of Igor's Warfare. M.; L., 1950.

Smirnova O.I. Places of Pre-Moslem Cults in the Central Asia (According to

Toponymy Materials): Sogdian bgn – “temple” and bg – “god” in the Middle Asia Toponymy
// Countries and Nations of the East. Issue X. M., 1971.

[Smotritskiy M.] Grammars Slovenska… Evye, 1619. Reprint. M., 2000.

Soloviev S.M. The History of Russia from Ancient Times: in 15 Books. M., 1959 –
1966. Sreznevskiy I.I. Materials for the Ancient Russian Dictionary on Written Monuments.
Vol. 1 – 3. SPb., 1893 – 1912. Reprint. M., 1989.

Tatischev V.N. Collected Works: 8 Volumes (5 Books): Vol. 4: The Russian History.
M., 1964. Reprint. M., 1995.

Tisengausen V.G. Collection of Materials Relating to the History of the Golden Horde:
Extracts from Arabic Works. Vol. I. SPb., 1884.

Tisengausen V.G. Collection of Materials Relating to the History of the Golden Horde.
Extracts from Arabic Works. Vol. II. M.; L., 1959.
 Trediakovskiy V.K. Complete Works by Russian Authors: Works by Trediakovskiy.
Vol. I. SPb., 1849.

Watt U.M. The Influence of Islam on Medieval Europe. M., 1976.

Uspenskiy F.I. The History of the Byzantine Empire of the XI – XV Centuries. The
Eastern Epos. M., 1997.

Ferro M. How Children Are Taught History in Different Countries of the World. M.,
1982.

[Fletcher G.] About the Russian State. Fletcher’s Works. SPb., 1905.

Khalidov A.B. The Arabic Language // Essays on the History of Arabic Culture (V –
XV Centuries). M., 1982.

Khalidov A.B. Book Culture // Ibid

Khara-Davan E. Genghis Khan as a Military Leader and his Heritage. Elista, 1991.

Christianity. Encyclopedia. Vol. 1 – 3. M., 1993 – 1995.

Khudiakov M.G. Essays on the History of Kazan Khanate. Kazan, 1923.

Shakhmatov A.A. Researches on the Ancient Russian Chronicles. SPb., 1908.

Shakhmatov A.A. Ancient Fates of Russian Nation. Pg., 1919.

Shakhmatov A.A. Essay on the Modern Russian Literary Language. L., 1925.

Schapov A.P. Russian Split of the Old Believers in Connection with Internal State of
the Russian Church and Civic Consciousness in the XVII and First Half of the XVIII
Centuries. Kazan, 1858.