# 1492



## emperornorton (Jan 18, 2022)

No branch of world history has been supressed as energetically or effectively as the history of the Americas before the nineteenth-century. The global contest for mastery of the American continent that began centuries before Spanish colonization, interested nearly every nation in Europe and Asia and involved some of the biggest battles ever fought, has been reduced to an incoherent tale of conquistadors and Indians.

In fact, the familiar story of Columbus and his dealings with Ferdinand and Isabella, the "Catholic Monarchs," which is the supposed cornerstone of American history, is mostly a product of the early nineteenth-century. In vain will you search for records bearing on such events or personalities before that time. Presumably this revision of the written narrative, because it was contingent on more fundamental changes to the political and archaeological landscape itself, had to await Napoleon's cultural purge before it could be introduced. This was accordingly accomplished around the time of the War of 1812. Napoleon did this job with such perspicuity and thoroughness that I am satisfied that his achievements in this line--in an otherwise desultory string of inconclusive altercations--must have been the ends, rather than the means, of his whole mission.





*According to some prophetic traditions, Satan (or, the devil) will in the future be bound for 1000 years, a period called the millenium. According to other traditions, the 1000 years ended in 1492.  *​
The actual historical events behind the joke that constitutes "American history" in academia and popular culture have in some cases been erased from the narrative altogether and in other cases recategorized as fables or hoaxes. For the most part, however, these events remain on the record in one form or another but have been removed to a pretended geographic setting somewhere else. A lot of times there are duplicate records; these we can collate and compare in order to strip out the lies and deduce the truth.

Let me give you an example. The traditional Indian allies of the French in the area of the Atlantic seacoast, back in the 17th century, were the _Algonquins_, which name, if you can forget for a moment the traditional conceptual associations it conjures, has an Islamic ring to it. The chief Indian enemies ranged against the French at that point, meanwhile, were the_ Iroquois_, which name bears some similiarty to _Hungrois_, the French word for Hungarian. And it's more similar still to _Enhongrois_, the French word for Magyar(ian). Other names for the Iroquois Indians include _Magwas_, _Agniers_, and _Honos_.




*The first battle of Mohacs, in 1526, caught King Louis in a bind (between his Habsburg wife and Ottoman allegiance). The Hungarians were routed. *​
Thus the French-Indian war, so-called because the French and Indians were allies, is simply an equivocal way of referring to the Franco-Ottoman alliance in the Ottoman-Hungarian wars. There is an enduring mystery surrounding these wars, by the way--nobody is quite sure where they were fought. Archaeological investigations have been conducted at a number of conjectured sites, but no evidence has been uncovered. Hmmm.

These Indian tribes, the _Alconquin, Iroquis, Huron, Seneca, Walla-walla, Chowchilla, Me-wok, Me-tokaslowie, Megoapipi,_ and so forth, don't really mean much to us in terms of the narrative; they're just a succession of interchangeable forest-dwelling archery enthusiasts given the information we have. It would be almost impossible to differentiate these tribes in terms of their particular characteristics. We can't identify them by flags or uniforms--which officially they didn't have--and their tribal names, which ninety-nine percent of the time are barely-concealed puns spelled the stupidest way possible, change about every four minutes.*




*Ottoman Sultan Suleyman at the Battle of Mohacs. Note American Bison behind horse and obelisk. Though not visible above, the painting also depicts bald eagles in flight.*​
Anyway, I propose to reexamine the narrative starting with Christopher Columbus--even though he might not have existed--and his imperial sponsors, as well as other individuals at the center of the cultural cyclone in the significant year of 1492 A.D. (Note: I am pretty confident that the events associated with the year 1492 occurred 530 years ago, yet very doubtful that 1492 years separate those same events, in the other direction, from the beginning of the Christian epoch.)




*Martin Behaim's famous globe depicted an American landmass contiguous with Asia. Near right: Behaim's statue in Nuremberg ; far right: Columbus, with the same pumpkin-pie haircut. *​
According to the narrative, Columbus proposed and then made good on a long-shot bet that the royal advisors in four countries dismissed as an impossibility. He navigated across the ocean in both directions in the face of major adversity and violent dissension from his crew. It was a big success. His mercantile ventures in the Carribbean, on the other hand, based on the theory that the best way to maximize production volume in a gold mine is to cut off the miners' hands, was not as successful.




*Columbus' claim that the Carribbean Indians were Cannibals is disputed. The cannibalistic Kwakawa Indians (as presented at the 1893 Columbian exposition, above left) served as the basis for the cannibals in the film Pirates of the Carribean. They share heraldic symbols with several Eastern European states. *​

Some spectators and researchers have been less than entirely convinced of Columbus' claimed achievement, however, at least for the first voyage, in virtue of several circumstances attending thereupon; to wit:

_The sailors on Columbus's three ships were continually glimpsing evidence of proximity to land, such as birds and floating trees. If they had been sailing directly west it is hard to account for these sightings. They do, however, comport with a voyage south along the African coast_
_Certain of the flora and fauna ostensibly observed by Columbus is considered not to be endemic to the American continents and at the time of his first voyage antecedent to its possible introduction (e.g. sugar cane). _
_The description of the natives encountered by the voyagers seems to correspond more closely with sub-Saharan Africans and Islanders of the Indian Ocean than to American Indians._
_None of the dozens of names Columbus gave to the landforms and islands he allegedly discovered in the Carribean have been retained, a circumstance that is hard to believe. _
_It is not known where Columbus first landed in the Americas; there is no map, no memorial, no marker, not even a local tradition attesting his presence. _
_The compass anomalies recorded in the journal are consistent with crossing the equator (north to south). _
_The reported mileage sailed by Columbus' ships westward and eastward doesn't tally with the actual distance. Supposedly Columbus kept phony records to reassure his sailors they weren't too far from shore. That doesn't say a lot for Columbus, if it's true, but it says even less for his crew._
_The papal decree delimiting Portuguese and Spanish territorial domains after Columbus's first voyage was either based on miscalculated distances that should have been radically revised had Columbus gone where he said he did, or was established on the basis of other events. _
_Many documents, maps, books on history and navigation and so forth from the 15th to the 18th century totally dropped the ball and don't even mention the ßworld's great sailor, and Admiral of the Ocean Sea Christopher Columbus (though this could all come down to envy). _



*One of the oldest chilvalric societies is the Order ot he Garter. Of course, a garter is also a snake. It has been alleged that this exclusive society practices cannibalism. Others argue that the garter has a more prosaic meaning: it simply secures one's tail to the side of his leg. In any case it's a lot different from the Bohemian Club. *​
But let's assume Columbus sailed to America and back. Up until the late 19th century, who should be entitled to claim priority for discovering America (within the narrow parameters of legitimacy entertained then) was still an open question, with a number of scholars and men like Benjamin Franklin strongly endorsing Behaim against Columbus. The contest was settled against Behaim for good, apparently, on the evidence of the letter of Jerome Munzer (latin: Hieronymous Monetarius) to the King of Portugal in 1493 in behalf of emperor Maximilian I, just enthroned, proposing a voyage across the Atlantic to Cathay and recommending Behaim for its leader. Munzer met with King Joao II of Portugal four times and once with the Catholic Monarchs of Castile and Aragon over the next two years to discuss such a project.




*It's sort of weird that the royal jewels were at Martin Behaim's house.*​

Behaim biographer E.J. Ravenstein argues against Behaim's priority on the ground that Munzer's "letter would of necessity have referred to Behaim's legendary discoveries in the Western Ocean, if such discoveries had [already] been made." Maybe so, or maybe Behaim was a secretive dude. And if Maximilian had in mind a voyage across the Atlantic to the West, one could argue along similar lines that the Emperor would not have proposed such a voyage had it already been accomplished and publicly disclosed by Columbus (per orthodox history) to whom neither Maximilian nor Munzer make any reference whatever. Indeed, we are supposed to believe that both of these men were utterly ignorant of the greatest maritime feat in world history several months after it happened.

It's also possible that Christopher Columbus and Martin Behaim (Martin of Bohemia) are one and the same person and that "Christopher Columbus" is a pseudonym. _Christopher_ is the most Christian name you could imagine (well, besides _Christian_) and _Columbus_ means "dove."




*Martin of Bohemia is usually depicted with scroll (far left). Near left: He is holding a rod that appears to be emitting smoke or steam. Near right: His rod appears to be inhaling, or sucking something; apparently--on the basis of the later portrayal as seen at far right--his youth. Inset: fat Columbus, a striking resemblence to the older Behaim.*​
But "Christian dove" is not the vibe I get from this guy. To me, he looks like somebody who would hide in the bathroom at _Hometown Buffet _after lunch in order to get free dinner. And is "Columbus" supposed to be interchangeable with "Colon," or what? "Colon" seems more like a scatalogical jeer at Christianity to me. Whether _Columbus_ is a legitimate or conventional variant of_ Colon_, I don't know; if it isn't, it's possible the former variation has to do with counterfeiting a pretextual foundation for an existing territorial label like _Columbia_ or something.

(I think Amerigo Vespucci, on the other hand, is a phantom entity entirely, conjured up in order to plug other holes in the narrative. Amerigo's published correspondence is a specimen of such unnatural, implausible, propaganda-saturated caca it makes the_ Histories of Herodotus _look like the golden sayings of Epictetus by comparison. Also, "Vespucci" means "evil spirit.")




Tha*t's the Bohemian royal seal (above left) on the expulsion ("Alhambra") decretal of 1492. Center: Contemporary depiction of the martyrdom of La Guardia; Right: the expulsion of the Moors at the port of *_*Deria.*_​
Now it is a singular coincidence of history that Columbus' voyage from Spain to the Americas coincided with expulsion of the Jews from Spain. Historians insist that Columbus' motive was just the well-known conquistador craving for discount spices, but Columbus himself, if we believe his supposed diary, cited the expulsion edict as the occasion for his expedition. The plan, he said, was to meet up with the great Khan in Cathay.




*When in doubt, the least prepossessing portraits are most likely to be closest to the truth (King and Queen, top right).*





What would you call a khan or a king, or even a queen, from a land by the name of Cathay?  A Cathinian, you say? What a terrible guess. No. You would call him (or her) a "Cathalic." If there were two of them and they were monarchs, you'd call them "catholic monarchs." Well, I would.

What I mean is I don't think that the "Catholic" qualifier attached to the Spanish king and queen is there to signify a species of Christianity. First, Catholic wasn't really a meaningful distinction in terms of religous speciation at the time. Second, if it were, it would be a circumstance that goes without saying. It's sort of like if Fernando were referred to as the _Male_ King. Well I wasn't questioning it before...




*As you can see, artistic portrayals of the Catholic Monarchs diverge widely; It's never Isabella, always Elisabet (or Helisabet) on the money. And that's the least of the numismatic issues. "Isabella of Aragon," (above, middle) is a narrative glitch someone forgot to clean up,  now stuck in mereological limbo. *​
In any case, the historical record, as it pertains to the Catholic Monarchs, is an enormous cluster of lies, dissimulation, and forgeries imposed on a plot of palace intrigues acted out by thirty-seven players who all have the same name. This is complicated by officious state powers outside of Spain, particularly the Eastern European kingdoms, and the _Reconquesta _on the Iberian peninsula.




*Sorry, The Alhambra didn't exist in 1492. Bottom left: Tomas de Torquemada at royal bench.*​
The Muslim colonization of Southern Spain dates back to the time of _Roderic,_ "the last Goth." Roderic assumed the Spanish throne on the death of_ Witiza _("the wicked"), an unpopular king who was hostile to the Church and who tried to legalize polygamy and open the doors of Souther Spain to the Moors of North Africa. The latter did find the frontier open to them at Witiza's death, as his three sons invited them into a coalition against Roderic. The sons cut a deal with the Muslim invaders, offering them free rein in the kingdom in exchange for a duchy entitlement for each of themselves to be held in perpetuity. (Their descendants, having adopted Arabic names, continued to hold power on the Peninulsa up to the reconquest.)

On the verge of annihilation by the Witiza-Moor coalition opposing him, Roderic fled the country. Tradition holds that he sailed across the ocean to the island of Antilla, where he and his loyal soldiers built the legendary (yet factually-attested) seven cities of Cibola. Such a civiilization would have brought them into contact with the Native Americans (whoever that may have been) and, supposing that Martin Behaim's theory of geography be true, the Scythian tribes of Eastern Asia like the Tartars and Huns as well as the Chinese.




*You'd be doing the hidden hand too. Red-and-white striped undergarments worn by ersatz Ottomans (right) illustrates Hungarian predilection for infiltration. *​
Now the rivalry between the Goths and the Huns was at one time a ferocious business and even inspired the epic ballad _Hlöðskviða_, which is an account of the night the Goths crossed the frontier and stole the Huns' vowels. (Just kidding.) At any rate, the two tribes not long after doing battle with each other decided to bury the hatchet (so to speak) and join forces against the Roman Empire.

The lines of allegiance and affiliation between the Huns and the Goths are thus somewhat murky. Nevertheless, the two tribes may be further supposed to be substantially kindred on the basis of the following transitive association: the Goths are a Germanic people (reputed to descend from the Getae) and the Germans, for the duration of World War I, on account of media propaganda guidelines (or something) were referred to as "Huns."

If we continue to follow this lead, we discover the probable etymological link between Antilla the "island" (but actually, continent) of the Huns and Atilla the leader of the Huns. It is likewise asserted that St. Emeric (Hungariy;s sop saint) may be a relative of Roderic the last Gothic king. Emeric is also the most likely candidate as continental namesake.* Even the official narrative makes an oblique concession to this claim, allowing that "Amerigo" Vespucci might have been named for the Hungarian.

Furthermore, the seven cities founded by the Goths may have been administered by a constellation of judicial courts, or tribunals, also seven in number. Let's call them the Septentrion of America, or more simply, _America Septentrion_.




*American Gothic *​
Now if you look at maps from the sixteenth century, you'll see that although cartographers had a decent grasp of the outlines of continental geography in general, there was one particular spot they had a lot of trouble with. That spot was the Western coast of North America, where the sharp zig-zag border of the Pacific coast around the point of the 40th northern latitude, wanders off into a cloud of non-committal mumbles. Did something happen there? Is that why the coast is lined with continuous jagged cliffs?




*Hungarian flag, coat of arms, and battle outfit*​
The maps that predate the cartographic era described above, which I will refer to by the elegant acronym Fortieth Latitude Indeterminate Pacific (FLIP) maps, have not enjoyed a great deal of esteem, historically speaking. This is because such maps typically omit North and South America entirely (unless you count that weird protuberance off the corner of South East Asia and the several hundred fictitious islands ranged along it's eastern shore.) I mean, imagine trying to sail from New York to Rio de Jainero or something using a map like that. You'd be like, "this map sucks."

The ramifications of scandal from the year before also came to a head in 1492. A year earlier, Spain had been rocked by a political scandal involving the alleged ritual murder of a Christian child by Jews. On Good Friday in the year 1491 the alleged ritual crucifixion of the child known as "La Guardia"  took place in Toledo. Great excitement prevailed in the country and it is widely thought that the event gave the government a decisive nudge toward expelling the Jews after that. Torquemada, the head inquisitor, was one of the leading advocates of expulsion. He argued that the alleged murder obligated the monarchs to expel the Jews.

Although Torquemada is ordinarily cast in the role of anti-semitic archvillain, it seems more likely to me that he he was playing the false opposition to help a colonization scheme along--which could mean, for instance, that the murder was staged. (I happened to notice that the--officially fictitious--Assassins Creed videogame franchise biography was developed along similar lines.)




*Above: The LaGuardia Shrine.*​
Now what's very interesting is the shrine dedicated to the memory of the little matyr _La Guardia_. Notice the striking decorations on the hallway ceiling and again under the arch of the reliquary niche. It almost seems like Martin Boheim designed it.

* I know there are real Indian tribes; fake Indians should bother them the most.


----------



## alltheleaves (Jan 19, 2022)

There are secret Jews in the southwest of the US who still keep a low profile 500 years later.

Interesting essay but few citations, and dismissive of the religious persecution/civil war taking place throughout Europe at the time.

Were the Spanish monarchs Jewish?

Apparently there _was_ Jewish lineage.

FERDINAND AND ISABELLA - JewishEncyclopedia.com

"1981, while working as New Mexico State Historian, Stanley M. Hordes began to hear stories of Hispanos who lit candles on Friday night and abstained from eating pork...these practices might very well have been passed down through the centuries from early crypto-Jewish settlers in New Spain."

Library Genesis: Stanley M. Hordes - To the End of the Earth: A History of the Crypto-Jews of New Mexico

Library Genesis: Norman Simms - Marranos on the Moradas: Secret Jews and Penitentes in the Southwestern United States from 1590 to 1890

Library Genesis: Michael Alpert - Cryptojudaism and the Spanish Inquisition


----------



## SonofaBor (Jan 21, 2022)

One thing that strikes me immediately is that the (double) eagle motif is also found in native groups of the Pacific Northwest.


----------



## Safranek (Jan 22, 2022)

alltheleaves said:


> There are secret Jews in the southwest of the US who still keep a low profile 500 years later.
> 
> Interesting essay but few citations, and dismissive of the religious persecution/civil war taking place throughout Europe at the time.
> 
> ...



Would it be an overstretch to consider the possibility of the Jews of that time to foment the inquisitions in order to cause an exodus to new lands yet to be conquered, similar to what was accomplished in WW2 by the Zionists?




SonofaBor said:


> One thing that strikes me immediately is that the (double) eagle motif is also found in native groups of the Pacific Northwest.



I also noted that they had the OWL as one of their motifs in the picture spread you posted.


----------



## alltheleaves (Jan 22, 2022)

Safranek said:


> Would it be an overstretch to consider the possibility of the Jews of that time to foment the inquisitions in order to cause an exodus to new lands yet to be conquered, similar to what was accomplished in WW2 by the Zionists?


A reasonable hypothesis to consider.

Perhaps research why Vaticanites wear the yarmulke and proceed from there.

When "they" say "all is one", they're telling us.


----------



## Akanah (Jan 22, 2022)

Is here a connection between the ship of columbus and the sun barque of the egyptians with sirius as the northstar ?
There are also petroglyphs of ships with a star/sun above them.
The aspect of Jewish persecution is also interesting. Maybe 1492 is connected with 1942 ?
Was the Exodus from Egypt identical to the Exodus from Germany ?
I somehow don't think it was about the discovery of America, but something else entirely.


----------



## alltheleaves (Jan 23, 2022)

Akanah said:


> Is here a connection between the ship of columbus and the sun barque of the egyptians with sirius as the northstar ?
> There are also petroglyphs of ships with a star/sun above them.
> The aspect of Jewish persecution is also interesting. Maybe 1492 is connected with 1942 ?
> Was the Exodus from Egypt identical to the Exodus from Germany ?
> I somehow don't think it was about the discovery of America, but something else entirely.


Library Genesis: Francis Bacon - The New Atlantis

The New Atlantis...was Bacon the originator of this idea?

Exodus from Egypt. Moses was murdered?

Library Genesis: Flem-Ath, Rand;Flem-Ath, Rose - The murder of Moses: how an Egyptian magician assassinated Moses, stole his identity, and hijacked the Exodus

What flags did Columbus really fly?


----------



## TuranSilvanus (Jan 29, 2022)

here i made few clips [some of connected to 1492] - but dont expect from me to tell the exact story D - i just try to put togther some similarities

Chrono clips


----------



## ProfessorHotStuff (Mar 9, 2022)

I would recommend Richard Thornton, a somewhat renegade Creek Indian historian, for noticing a connection between Jews and North American Indians. He describes the interim Cherokee chief Charles Hicks:



> Charles Hicks was one-half Scottish-Jewish, one-fourth German and at most, one-fourth Itsate Creek. He had no ethnic Cherokee ancestry.  He always considered himself a Cherokee.



To paraphrase what he says in one of his articles, there were bands of self-designated "Cherokees" who had actually come up from South America and were Portuguese Jews who had mixed the so-called indigenous populations. There were also possibly "actual" Cherokees, who, during Indian Removal, were mixed in with the imposter Cherokees causing endless headaches for geneticists.

Here is his website, it's worth a look (I may have seen it posted here): The Americas Revealed I can't remember which article it is, unfortunately.

(As an aside, I am married into a part-Cherokee family and I do think it's interesting how they have the strongest political positioning and financial acumen of all the federally recognized tribes.)


----------



## Udjat (May 26, 2022)

I have a shirt that has a picture of Native Americans holding riffles and it reads underneath the picture, "fighting terrorism since 1492".  But what I really want to say is that I have been reading my state's history books written by (yes I know) the Green Mountain Boys.  The information it seems to start off with is around the time 1666 when colonialists were first traversing up the awesome Connecticut River and trudging through the rough and tough terrain of the green mountains of Vermont.  This book was written in the 1920's and is definitely a biased report of course.  If you didn't know, this is also the area where Bringham Young was birthed.  

My point is, is that in some of the description that is given about what the colonialists saw, they describe mounds that were present.  If anyone here has delved into the Cahokia Mounds information, you would see the relevance behind these findings.  We were never taught about these mounds in school even though they had been excavated enough to understand that there was a civilization that flourished here before the Younger Dryas.  

We obviously have been lied to about our recent past, and are continually subjected to scrutiny if we think outside of the realm of the regular narrative of our recent past.  We are mocked every day by our inability to fully remember what has transpired since the literal take over of this so called United States of America.  

I have said it before, Native Americans still do not have running water, or lands to grow crops or become the once hunter gatherers that they were.  I am very upset that these people have been pushed to the side like they are disposable, and have no relevance on this Earth.  Until this matter is taken care of, I believe we are just still stuck in the quagmire of the dark entity.  

Most of these people like Christopher Columbus, have been nothing but destructive, and detrimental to the true fabric of the human race.


----------



## TuranSilvanus (May 26, 2022)

the ''Rekonquista of HisPania lasted 800 years'' and as they liberated the land , jumped in Ocean and Counqered another land OVER AN OCEAN!; so they were some SuperMans guees - Los Formidables?


----------

