"Tartaria" is a myth and didn't exist

[Safranek]

Are you being aggressive? Funny. Is there an Akasha Cronicle? Is there a record of the whole history in the vibrational energy that surrounds us? Some say it is. In my, and others perspective it is the most reliable source of information. You obviously say no. I do not want to convince you of anything. I present information. Take it or leave it. And don't be cocky with me, you don't know me. Adres me with respect, I answer as well.

I was not being disrespectful at all, I think you misinterpreted my statement. Your opinion is welcome as is everyone's which is why we have this forum.

However, when we make claims regarding historical events, we try to quote sources which are the most reliable we can find to back up the ideas being presented. It gives others the opportunity to read the researcher's sources and agree or disagree, also stating their own sources why they do so.

While most of us are aware of what the Akashic Records are, we do not use them for historical sources, and that is not because we don't believe that they may contain reliable information, but because the channel is a human being prone to errors and/or bias, and the influences attracted in a channeled state have been found to be unreliable for consistently true information.

Thus, after you read about what some may claim to have 'read' from said Records, try and verify that information through reliable historical, archeological, antropological, linguistic and genetic sources. What I was requesting are such sources.

 

[torgo]

If anything, Tartary should be understood as a symbol for forgotten knowledge - that's why we have the Tartary Griffin in our logo.

I think it's interesting that one of the flags of Mecklenburg-Rostock in this book is the same as the Tartary flag.

Could Tartary have been a German territory?

 

[Safranek]

Could Tartary have been a German territory?

Based on maps we have available, I would guess that its the other way around.

There are a few other flags in that collection that offer some clues also. For instance, for the year 1862, there is still an alarming number of similarities among distant nations' flags which go against our current version of history regarding who ruled those lands at that time.

 

[Blackdiamond]

Samoyed Sapmi Soumi-(Finnland) all the same folks?
Is this the reason why dna match all old civilizations through out the nothern lands from Ainu of hokkaido, blonde people found in todays china area, to scandinavia?
Tartaria could have been a union, or a great kingsdome, or something we cant comprahend these days. But what differentiated it, and got it occult, is probably it wasnt ruled by todays rulers.
Could it have been an umbrella for the invasion armies? A prequell for the soviet empire?

This is perhaps why finns are so confident, proud, stubborn and although they have been, they dont accept foreigners to rule. It was the last biblicated land on earth and they best the soviets in war.
It may have used to be the great northern land. Either the center or a region of it. Perhaps the original "indo-european" language as some here have suggested.
It is the reason why they have no official history. At all.

It is why we see strange and out of place symbology in sweden such as griffons. Churches in Norway resembles those of more asiatic designs. It is remnants of what was.
- Symbols in Russia portrays southern things, you cant find any spruce or moose or other native things. It's all roman / phonecian. Only southern depiction on ornaments.
Perhaps the mudflooders simply have stood so long uninhabitaded that they start to sink in to the ground. And how easy was it for a group of people who found a ruin, sunk in to the dessert, to claim it was built by their forefathers 6 million years ago? Quite easy since non was there to see it being built. Just write a paper, store it, and bring it forth when someone question you. And while were at it, why not make it a sin to question your holey story, since everyone have to follow that cult religion now. Anyway.
- The Czar's war ship had a yellow flag in the nordic war against sweden. Often croped out from oficial media because it wasnt a russian flag. It simply didnt exist yet as a unified land.
However, wether this st petersburg / novgorod russian nation was an army set out to destroy the last bit of the old north, (which was south at the time when looking at contemporary maps,) or if it was a tartarys last western front is hard to say. One would need to read in authentic old books. Probably only found in the few really inaccessible archives / homes today.
The true ending of Tartaria is, what i found most likely, the crimean war.
After that loss, european socialist movement gets traction in the west, culminating in the bolsjevik "revolution" which was largely funded by people in germany between the world wars, as they are greatly inaccurate named, "1" and "2".
I found the reason for it to have been to end the german independence in europe, and for some reason to set up a soviet, for the erasing of old traditions and self relience of their natives.

This bolshevik movement, who removed (and still operates,) every possible piece and peace of the old world, sending groups of people here and there, killing, torture etc the non complyers, just how the story is of the how the church did in older times.
And the church also share its roots of bolshevism, abrahamitic.
- Growing up, the english and german battle still existed. Must have been the ol' divide and conquer. It looks like now both countrys is as diluted of their strong heritage as the other. The people who seem content with this world's direction is the various temple dwellers. It is without exeption. Because the rest of us wants peace, and you cant move people around in times of peace. Only possible in communist states. And on the other side of the coin you have capitalism, just as bad. The duality, two pillars.
Altough, why masons enjoy so much wearing egyptian aprons and muhammed / catholic hats i dont know.

- Feel free to shoot them ideas down if you think they are lacking. But if your counter argument is a quote from the bible or bible magazine I will haunt you if I die before you

 

[Jd755]

SH Archive - Tartar or Tatar?

 

[Oracle]

I don't think it was random lands. It was kingdoms after the fall of scythia. The maps we know were created by Westerners. They probaly invented the term Tartarians, and maybe it originally came from "Territory."

It makes sense because we see the territory divided among different political factions (Chinese Tartary, etc.).

But this doesn't necessarily mean that Tartary was only a region. It probably was just like what we see in the rest of the world of that time: scattered kingdoms and emperors. Those than got wiped out after the Russians and Chinese, etc. moved in.

Kind of like how Ireland got put under the heading of the British Isles though being a completely different language,culture, and history.

 

[HELLBOY]

Talking about old maps, have you seen the Fra Mauro 1450 map?
Composite map: Mappemonde Pl. 1-6

• I would like to start with the fact that Tartary seems to be concentrated near the Caspian Sea, between Dagistan, Circassia, Ukraine, surrounded by some Russias (White, Black).

• The text seems to say something important in Latin, if someone could translate it it would be great.

• Around the corner from Tartary we have this region called "The Horde of Organta, in what would be Independent Tartary in future maps, today Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, I seemed to understand that the text is related to Alexander the Macedonian.

• Passing the Russias, we have the area where the name Chataio (Catharos? Cathay?) predominates.

• It is near the city of Cambalu in Cathaio, there is another text referring to Alexander the Macedonian.

• Below Chataio we have the region called Serica, Mango, Thibet.

Serica:
Serica - Wikipedia

Pliny the Elder tells of the expedition of Annius Plocamo to Taprobane (perhaps Ceylon, Indonesia or even Tacloban in the Philippines). He tells that the father of a certain Raquias, an ambassador of Taprobane, had visited the country of the beings:

(...) Beyond the Emodio Mountains, there was the people of the beings, who were known for trade. The father of Rachias had come there and upon his arrival the beings had come to meet him. They were tall, blond-haired, blue-eyed individuals, they had a raucous voice and their language was not very suitable for trade.

• Urbano Monte's 1587 map seems to have the same composition as Fra Mauro's, although strangely he did add the Chinese wall, something that neither Fra Mauro nor Marco Polo mentioned. Composite: Tavola 1-60. (Map of the World) (with additional spheres and labels in the four corners). - David Rumsey Historical Map Collection

According to Marco Polo's book:
Is Mexico-Tenochtitlan in reality the mythic Quinsay as described by Marco Polo?
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/10636/10636-h/10636-h.htm
Who reigned over the Tartars and countless other peoples ("ruled over the three Indies") was the Prestor John and it was Genghis Khan who was the first to gather all the Tartars under his command.
His first objective was to ask for the hand of the daughter of the Prestor John and he considered the Tartars as inferior and the war was inevitable.
Pretor John had a lot of confidence in himself for not considering the Tartars as worthy enemies, in the end he lost his territories.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following thought I share from the KD thread on the Napoleonic Wars and year 1812: when did they happen?
Napoleonic Wars and Year 1812: when did they happen?

To be honest, I realize with each passing day that I understand less and less the mechanism used to falsify our history. I am past the point where I thought that simple manipulation could be the answer to historical shenanigans. I still don't know if some kind of matrix could explain the things we see. God's ways are definitely mysterious. Ultimately, I keep lying that I will be able to figure out the puzzle. We have a narrative superimposed on the existing historical evidence of physical nature, and these two do not come together. This article requires a serious stretch of perception, because without it, certain occurrences are not possible. Please watch the following video of Michelle Gibson. She is too smart for me, but her time loop hypothesis might be something to explore further. If the 1942 Philadelphia Experiment created some sort of time loop, altering everything in the process, we would have to improve our research tactics.
With this in mind, a critical analysis of the anachronistic issues pertaining to the so-called Napoleonic Wars, could be quite important in establishing an incorrect sequence of looping historical events.
Anachronistic: belonging to a different era than the one portrayed.
The identification of anachronistic patterns could help us to place various events in the timeline. Some of the events grouped using this approach are traditionally separated by hundreds and thousands of years. Could some of the events (and empires) be one and the same? You be the judge.

KD says for example:
I have mentioned it before and I have to repeat it. Everything about our history is more or less a lie. Any book you cite is nothing more than a reflection of the historical narrative they had at the time of publication.

I certainly understood those words when I remembered at the same time how this author John Ogilby in 1671, searching for the origin of the Americans from all the sources he could consult in his time (I will leave the list of sources below) went from Solomon, Romans, Phoenicians, Carthaginians, The Tribes of Israel, etc. To finally launch a final idea in which he believes it is more likely that Tartary is more related to America, but the way he describes both the Tartars and the Americans leaves no doubt as he is following the line of unprimitive and cannibalistic people.
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/59745/59745-h/59745-h.htm

 

[Deleted member 37]

Talking about old maps, have you seen the Fra Mauro 1450 map?
Composite map: Mappemonde Pl. 1-6

Here the transcription of the texts translated: http://www.myoldmaps.com/late-medie...auros-mappamundi/fra-mauro-transcriptions.pdf.

 

[Gabriel]

I agree that the few excerpts from books that I will share isn't proving much of anything, but at the same time, it seems like the references to a Tartarian people in numerous books (examples such as Travels in Tartary, Thibet and China by M. Huc and With Peter Fleming in Tartar by Gary Hogg) and its language below, is in dozens of books. And I am arguing for the existence of their culture.

Hogg argues that the reason why the Tartars never built was because they are masters of a desolate environment, and a cruel nomadic culture. (see below)

From what I have witnessed, it seems that all sorts of circumstantial evidence supports the argument that there was a Tartarian culture, and in one book, the screenshots below compare an alleged Tartarian language (image left), to the more well known Tangut script (center and right image):

Nord en Oost Tartarye, Nicholas Witsen

I would say it looks to me like a semitic language written right to left and most like arabic (modern reqaa or naskh script, image left). The image far right, middle box, shows "Crimean-Tartar" numbers. But certainly if one were to say it was "Romulan" from Star Trek, in the end I would be none wiser.

I think we have all come across this commentary either on this site or elsewhere pertaining to the Tartar language:

source - The General History of China, Du Halde.
​

At any rate I think after looking at these books, I favor that a Tartarian Culture existed. But I can't go any further and say that I can similarly show evidence of borders, architecture, etc...

Also, if Tartary lacks the circumstantial evidence to prove they are a distinct (vanished) culture, then I will have to critically examine some other ancient cultures.

Lastly, I would entertain any thoughts from the group: Is there an agreed upon archaeologic standard to satisfactorily prove the existence of a culture in the absence of native speakers (ie., a vanished race)?

​

 

[Conciousness_Arise]

Good to see it addressed here. It has long bothered me that the old united world should have been somewhere in Russia. It would be better if we found our own term for the old united world.

Would it be fair to say, that if there was an old united world, we need only look at the origins of the building styles? I believe the style was called Greco-Roman.

 

[HELLBOY]

I agree that the few excerpts from books that I will share isn't proving much of anything, but at the same time, it seems like the references to a Tartarian people in numerous books (examples such as Travels in Tartary, Thibet and China by M. Huc and With Peter Fleming in Tartar by Gary Hogg) and its language below, is in dozens of books. And I am arguing for the existence of their culture.

Hogg argues that the reason why the Tartars never built was because they are masters of a desolate environment, and a cruel nomadic culture. (see below)

View attachment 19157​

From what I have witnessed, it seems that all sorts of circumstantial evidence supports the argument that there was a Tartarian culture, and in one book, the screenshots below compare an alleged Tartarian language (image left), to the more well known Tangut script (center and right image):

View attachment 19154​

View attachment 19150​

View attachment 19152​

Nord en Oost Tartarye, Nicholas Witsen

I would say it looks to me like a semitic language written right to left and most like arabic (modern reqaa or naskh script, image left). The image far right, middle box, shows "Crimean-Tartar" numbers. But certainly if one were to say it was "Romulan" from Star Trek, in the end I would be none wiser.

I think we have all come across this commentary either on this site or elsewhere pertaining to the Tartar language:

View attachment 19155​

source - The General History of China, Du Halde.
​

At any rate I think after looking at these books, I favor that a Tartarian Culture existed. But I can't go any further and say that I can similarly show evidence of borders, architecture, etc...

Also, if Tartary lacks the circumstantial evidence to prove they are a distinct (vanished) culture, then I will have to critically examine some other ancient cultures.

Lastly, I would entertain any thoughts from the group: Is there an agreed upon archaeologic standard to satisfactorily prove the existence of a culture in the absence of native speakers (ie., a vanished race)?

​

I have this image present, if we compare them with the actual map they look quite different.

I do not know if they can be added as circumstantial evidence:

I follow some men who are dedicated to looking for parallels between different cultures, parallels that exist between cultures such as Mesopotamian, Etruscan, Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Chinese, Indian, Peruvian, Mexican. Of course, these men consider that such parallels are because they are archetypes coming from a mother civilization, therefore they are mostly atheists seeing also parallels in terms of gods, they are faithful believers of continents like Atlantis, Lemuria, they do not believe in a phantom time like Fomenko, nor in something like the Great Tartary. But I am always checking their parallels because I find them quite curious, interesting, no doubt they keep a great secret so many similarities between all these cultures.

These are some threads where I have added images about these parallels, all of them are from Facebook and I can pass you link if you are interested.

Eagle versus Serpent - What does It Mean?
America's Discovery in Jewish Chronicles
The secret of the twins Quetzalcoatl and Xolotl
Proof of Dragons?

Here are some interesting parallels like the ones I mention:

Perhaps you know the theory of the earth reflected in the moon, this digitized map seems to show continents like Lemuria, Hyperborea, Atlantis and more.
Does the moon reflect the true map of the earth?

 

[Gabriel]

For the Inca and Egyptian parallel, I am a believer, and that is shown well by LePlongeon. A good summary here.

I think Jirazhbhoy and H. mertz too. Collectively these three have shown african, asian, and egytian parallels with central and south americans. Countless other people have also as you know.

For me, The question of who influenced who arises. This is where the common legends of creation begin to suggest that they didn’t influence each other, they are perhaps variations of some sort of tall, fair, cro-magnon, atlantean, race.

 

[HELLBOY]

Anatoli Fomenko
He and his colleagues created the theory of the New Chronology, an extreme revisionism of historical chronology that claims that the usual chronology of historical events is incorrect in general. According to them the written history of mankind began around 800 A.D., there being very little information about the events of the period between 800-1000 A.D., while most of the historical events we know as ancient and early medieval would have actually occurred between 1000-1500 A.D. Thus, all Biblical, Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Greco-Roman and Byzantine History was simultaneous with the second half of the Middle Ages, eliminating the High Middle Ages and the Ancient Ages. The rulers of Egypt, Assyria, Israel or Rome would be the same as the Byzantine emperors, the characters of the Bible, too, and the New Testament is prior to the Old. In the same way, historical characters of Western Europe, such as the Merovingian or Anglo-Saxon kings, would be considered in this version a copy of the rulers of Constantinople, head of the only empire in history, whose inheritance passed to the Russian Empire.
Anatoly Fomenko - Wikipedia


I remember this excellent thread about how many of our historical sources actually come from the Middle Ages.
SH Archive - The History of Rome has no Surviving Sources

The Roman Empire is the model of much of our modern democracies. Indeed, much of our beloved literary works model their moral themes on the foibles of famous Romans.

I'm not aware that anyone has actually gone through each of the major sources for their history, all at once, to see if any of them actually have any surviving sources. So i took it upon myself to try this out. Imagine my shock to find out that basically none of their works survive, and in fact what does survive are copies typically from the middle ages.

How on earth can you say that Bobby Joe wrote 14 volumes on the Punic Wars, that most of our knowledge of these Punic Wars comes from Bobby Joe, but that only a sentence or two of his works, quoted by others much later, exist to this day? You can't help but wonder then how we know Bobby Joe actually wrote about the Punic Wars at all? Worse, you start to wonder if the Punic Wars are just somehow made up?

The richness of our fuzzy collective memory of this ancient empire can't be ignored, however. It makes me feel like these works really are talking about something that happened, but makes me wonder if they happened much more recently than alleged.

Attempts to date historical events have existed since time immemorial. But early efforts were restricted mainly to events described in the Bible. There were also local chronologies (for small time periods and in small regions). But the first global chronology of Europe and the Middle East was not sketched until the 16th century. It was the work of Joseph Justus Scaliger, a French scholar who was fluent in 13 languages and therefore was able to study hundreds of documents from all over the world.
He was a philologist and wanted to understand the flow of ideas, who influenced whom in ancient and medieval literature. But in order to do this he needed to know when the different writers lived, since only an older author could influence the more recent ones. So he embarked on the task of establishing the first global chronology and trying to see when the events of antiquity took place. Up to that time, the determining events of history were known, but it was not known exactly when they had happened, nor what order they had in time. Despite furious opposition, he was able to successfully establish the foundations of historical chronology.

We have a narrative superimposed on the existing historical evidence of physical nature, and these two do not coalesce.
Everything about our history is more or less a lie. Any book you cite is nothing more than a reflection of the historical narrative they had at the time of publication.
We have already seen how there are multiple parallels between different civilizations. Some of the events are traditionally separated by hundreds and thousands of years.
Could some of the events (and empires) be one and the same?

For example, these threads can help as examples to note how there are many stories that are repeated between different characters spread over time. More specifically threads related to Napoleon and the War of 1812, a key date in both Europe and America.
Napoleonic Wars and Year 1812: when did they happen?
Napoléon, aka Nicholas, Brutus and Ali Bonaparte: what do we know?
Suvorov, Yermak, Pugachev, Razin and the Siberian War

If we accept the fact that much of our history comes from the Middle Ages, and that everything we know really comes together in a multitude of repeated empires, it leaves us without much to go on to prove the existence of a global, highly technological empire. It only leaves us with certain legends, inventors, developing devices ahead of their time.
SH Archive - Ancient and early 20th century Robots

We have these anomalies of symbols such as the Bicephalous Eagle that appears in the folklore of American peoples from before the conquest, the Swastika for example and many more.

 

[Deleted member 1432]

Anatoli Fomenko
He and his colleagues created the theory of the New Chronology, an extreme revisionism of historical chronology that claims that the usual chronology of historical events is incorrect in general. According to them the written history of mankind began around 800 A.D., there being very little information about the events of the period between 800-1000 A.D., while most of the historical events we know as ancient and early medieval would have actually occurred between 1000-1500 A.D. Thus, all Biblical, Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Greco-Roman and Byzantine History was simultaneous with the second half of the Middle Ages, eliminating the High Middle Ages and the Ancient Ages. The rulers of Egypt, Assyria, Israel or Rome would be the same as the Byzantine emperors, the characters of the Bible, too, and the New Testament is prior to the Old. In the same way, historical characters of Western Europe, such as the Merovingian or Anglo-Saxon kings, would be considered in this version a copy of the rulers of Constantinople, head of the only empire in history, whose inheritance passed to the Russian Empire.
Anatoly Fomenko - Wikipedia


I remember this excellent thread about how many of our historical sources actually come from the Middle Ages.
SH Archive - The History of Rome has no Surviving Sources



Attempts to date historical events have existed since time immemorial. But early efforts were restricted mainly to events described in the Bible. There were also local chronologies (for small time periods and in small regions). But the first global chronology of Europe and the Middle East was not sketched until the 16th century. It was the work of Joseph Justus Scaliger, a French scholar who was fluent in 13 languages and therefore was able to study hundreds of documents from all over the world.
He was a philologist and wanted to understand the flow of ideas, who influenced whom in ancient and medieval literature. But in order to do this he needed to know when the different writers lived, since only an older author could influence the more recent ones. So he embarked on the task of establishing the first global chronology and trying to see when the events of antiquity took place. Up to that time, the determining events of history were known, but it was not known exactly when they had happened, nor what order they had in time. Despite furious opposition, he was able to successfully establish the foundations of historical chronology.

We have a narrative superimposed on the existing historical evidence of physical nature, and these two do not coalesce.
Everything about our history is more or less a lie. Any book you cite is nothing more than a reflection of the historical narrative they had at the time of publication.
We have already seen how there are multiple parallels between different civilizations. Some of the events are traditionally separated by hundreds and thousands of years.
Could some of the events (and empires) be one and the same?

For example, these threads can help as examples to note how there are many stories that are repeated between different characters spread over time. More specifically threads related to Napoleon and the War of 1812, a key date in both Europe and America.
Napoleonic Wars and Year 1812: when did they happen?
Napoléon, aka Nicholas, Brutus and Ali Bonaparte: what do we know?
Suvorov, Yermak, Pugachev, Razin and the Siberian War

If we accept the fact that much of our history comes from the Middle Ages, and that everything we know really comes together in a multitude of repeated empires, it leaves us without much to go on to prove the existence of a global, highly technological empire. It only leaves us with certain legends, inventors, developing devices ahead of their time.
SH Archive - Ancient and early 20th century Robots

We have these anomalies of symbols such as the Bicephalous Eagle that appears in the folklore of American peoples from before the conquest, the Swastika for example and many more.

I thought this thread was about Tartaria being a myth rather than chronology... ?

 

[HELLBOY]

I thought this thread was about Tartaria being a myth rather than chronology... ?

You are absolutely right I thought I went a little off topic, but I think I also read that it is questioned that it has been a global empire, global technological (etheric), global architectural, it is taken for granted that it existed but not that it has been related precisely with the development of other areas of the planet.

I do believe there was once a unified civilization, with a unified architecture. But "Tartary" is a misnomer for it.

The myth arose when Russians began to realize that before their country was called Russia, it was called "Tartary" on ancient maps. And it encompassed not only Russia, but most of Asia.

And this is where things started to go in the wrong direction. In reality, Tartary was simply a geographical area in Asia, and some of those Tartars also influenced American culture.

There was nothing more to it. It was part of the "Old World," but it was not exclusively the Old World.

So using the term Tartary every time you talk about this Old World cements a misleading view of a Slavic-centric world, where for some reason Russian culture dominated everything else.

To date, not a single piece of evidence has been presented as to why this geographically limited region of Asia called "Tartary" was global.

Now it is simply a meme, and in my opinion it is a dangerous meme, because it limits our possibilities of what the Old World really was.

That's when I thought that chronology is of great importance because it narrows down time and even lets us see a lot of lies and overlapping narrative, a very obvious example would be the case of the Wild West and yet we have this incredible information about Fousang and the strange urban fires, especially in San Francisco. No one even imagined such architecture in the wild west and gold rush times.
SH Archive - Fou-Sang & 1870s board game: Voyage from New York to San Francisco upon the Union Pacific Railroad
SH Archive - Who nuked San Francisco in 1906?
SH Archive - 1878 San Francisco: abandoned and ready for re-population...
That's why I put up KD threads with those curious characters that seem to represent a single individual.

By the way, I have read Fomenko and I have even seen videos and they always avoid calling this civilization Tartary before Russia (Russia-Mongolian Horde), I also know that he speaks that Russia was in fact the real Rome, and that these Romas were divided along the history in different points like 1-Egypt, 2-Turkey, 3-Novgorod, 4-Turkey, 5-Moscu, in each one of these points in which it was it happened to have different names according to the official chronology, as giving to understand that many empires were only one.

As mentioned above, the oldest kingdom, of which only the vaguest records survive, is The Ancient First Rome or Old Rome in the Nile Valley. In Scaliger's version of history, which was created in the 17th century, there was a kingdom in the Nile Valley called Egypt. This appears to be incorrect. The original biblical Egypt has no relation to this kingdom. The Egypt of the Pentateuch of the Old Testament is, in fact, the Rus'-Horda (the Rus'-Horda Empire) of XIV-XVI cc. But henceforth, the Biblical name Egypt = Gypt = Kipchak was attributed to Africa and attributed to a truly ancient Kingdom in the Nile Valley. This resulted in confusion.
In the X-XI cc. the capital of this Kingdom is moved to the city of Yoros on the Asian coast of the Bosporus. We will provisionally call it The Second Rome. Aka Jerusalem of the Gospels, also known as "ancient" Troy. Then the capital moved to Rus', to Yaroslavl - Veliky Novgorod, also known as 'ancient Rome'. This in total was the Third Rome, which most "ancient authors" consider to be the first to ignore the previous incarnations. After a while, the capital of the Empire returned to the Bosporus, but not to its former location, it moved to the other side of the Bosporus, to its European shore, not to its Asian shore. It was there that emerged medieval Constantinople, also known as medieval Tsar-Grad of the late XIV-XV cc., Later - Turkish (Ottoman) Istanbul. In general, it was The Fourth Rome, or on a shorter account, the second. As we know, Moscow was later called the Third Rome (according to the short count). In some ancient texts, Tsar-Grad was known as Kiev. That is why some of the significant historical events in 'Kiev' took place in Tsar-Grad on the Bosporus. To summarize, 1st Rome: the Nile Valley (Alexandria, Cairo); 2nd Rome: Yoros = Jerusalem = Troy; 3rd Rome: Vladimir-Suzdal Rus' = Veliky Novgorod (Yaroslavl, Vladimir) = Rome of Enei-Rurik; 4th Rome; Constantinople; 5th Rome: Moscow. But when in the 16th century the Roma were counted, where Moscow was counted as the Third Rome (and not the Fifth), they clearly started counting not from the deep antiquity of Egypt-African, but from the Rome of Enei-Rurik, i.e., from Yaroslavl. Then, on the basis of the new Chronology, we generally describe the reconstruction of history up to and including the 18th century. It was followed by the next stage. They began to ask us: then, what did the famous 'classical' authors actually tell us? Herodotus, Thucydides, Titus Livy, Homer and the others? In answering the question, we analyzed virtually all the major 'classical' and medieval sources that form the basis of the Scaligerian history of antiquity, the construction of which, as we discovered, was rather late, in the 17th-18th centuries cc. In particular, we thoroughly investigated the following texts: the Bible (both Old and New Testaments), the Talmud, the Torah, the New and Old Testament 'Apocrypha', the Koran, the Book of Mormon, the Popol Vuh (the Sacred Book of the American K'iche Mayan People, Herodotus, Titus Livy, Claudius Ptolemy, Homer, Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, Publius Cornelius Tacitus, Marcus Tullius Cicero, Plutarch, Thucydides, Xenophon, Plato, Aristophanes, Ovid, Polybius, Pausanius, Diodorus Siculus, Ammianus Marcellinus, Josephus Flavius, The Aggadah (Aramaic Tales), Appian of Alexandria, Apollodorus, Eutropius, Sextus Aurelius Victor, Aelius Spartianus, Iulius Capitolinus, Aelius Lampridius, Paulus Orosius, John Malalas, John Marcolas, Louis Marco del Carpine, the epic of 'ancient' India 'Mahabharata', the epic of 'ancient' Persia 'Shahnameh' (Ferdowsi), the 'ancient' Germanic heroic verse, the 'ancient' Old Norse Edda 'Elder Edda', Geoffrey of Monmouth, Nennius, the Anglo-Saxon Saxon Chronicle, Raphael Holinshed, Saxo Grammaticus, The Legend of King Arthur, The Legends of Alexander the Great, The Legend of Troy, the ancient French legends, some important Muslim sources, going further. Niketas Choniates, Anna Komnene, Procopius of Caesarea (and some other Byzantine authors), Geoffrey de Villehardouin, Robert deClari, 'The Primary Chronicle' (or 'Tale of Bygone Years') and the other important Russian chronicles (including the Siberian chronicles), the Russian epic multivolume 'The Russian Epic Multivolume The Illustrated Chronicle of Ivan the Terrible' (Litsevoy Svod) (not long ago finally published by Akteon Publishing House, Moscow), Mavro Orbini, Philostratus (Life of Apollonius of Tyana), Iamblichus Chalcidensis, Diogenes Laertius, Porphyry of Tyana, Bartholomew de las Casas, Bernal Diaz del Castillo, the works of some of the Church Fathers, the ancient chronological works and tables (Joseph Juste Scaliger, Dionysius Petavius, Matthew Blastares and many others) . .. We will stop this list here.

Russia - Horde was in fact biblical Israel and the Ottoman Empire was Judea. He makes a parallel between Solomon and Suleiman the Magnificent taking into account that he takes the Old Testament as more recent than the New Testament.

Source:
PDF
By GALINA LIKOSOVA
Associate Professor
National University of Colombia
Medellin Branch
January 2000
It can be downloaded here but it comes in Spanish, actually it is a summary of Fomenko's work.
Zaloguj się do Facebooka

 

[Deleted member 1432]

I think I also read that it is questioned that it has been a global empire, global technological (etheric), global architectural, it is taken for granted that it existed but not that it has been related precisely with the development of other areas of the planet.

That's a very awkward sentence to understand, but it is only "taken for granted that it existed" by the disciples of the Tartaria meme and in fact that is the point - there are so many things that have been spawned from the Tartaria mantra, as you have illustrated, that the basic tenet gets "taken for granted."

 

[HELLBOY]

That's a very awkward sentence to understand, but it is only "taken for granted that it existed" by the disciples of the Tartaria meme and in fact that is the point - there are so many things that have been spawned from the Tartaria mantra, as you have illustrated, that the basic tenet gets "taken for granted."

Okay, I understand what you're saying. It only remains to try to look for evidence if there is any, scratching among what we have.
Regarding what Dreamtime says about how youtubers use the name Tartaria, I think it is based on the fact that Tartaria is a keyword for the search, just put the keyword Tartaria in the Youtube search engine and you will see a variety of related videos unlike any other name.
You Tube is an algorithm that recommends you videos according to what you are watching, that's why using the name Tartaria is giving more visibility to your video, I have heard that they themselves (youtubers) say that this way of naming Tartaria is wrong, but well, it is a name that most people are looking for and are assured views. Unless you are an established youtuber you can use any name because you already have a large audience.

 

[luchin001]

The worst thing about a site like this is making blunt statements and believing that you own the truth with the arrogance with which the author of the article does it. There is nothing worse than starting to look over your shoulder and feel superior.
if we are in this place it is because something does not add up to us, there is something that is out of place in this world and because you feel that they are deceiving you no matter how much they try to make things fit by force or they have convinced you of "their truth "You know something's not right

 

[OBRYprojekt]

It's root can also be found in OBRY (Hebrew sans Masorah) as TAR (Strong's H8388-9), being translated as "drawn; mark" concerning geography, and "full form" concerning objects or people. A double root in OBRY/Hebrew is an augmentation: ShOShO "great salvation" compared to ShO "salvation". In English (from PIE) "tar" is more from a verb root "spread out" than referring to a specific substance. And "tere-" was a PIE prefix denoting "crossing over", thus space. "Territory" is an appropriate English descendant.

 

[Blackdiamond]

It's root can also be found in OBRY (Hebrew sans Masorah) as TAR (Strong's H8388-9), being translated as "drawn; mark" concerning geography, and "full form" concerning objects or people. A double root in OBRY/Hebrew is an augmentation: ShOShO "great salvation" compared to ShO "salvation". In English (from PIE) "tar" is more from a verb root "spread out" than referring to a specific substance. And "tere-" was a PIE prefix denoting "crossing over", thus space. "Territory" is an appropriate English descendant.

As I understand it: The Church created what we know as Moscow, knocking out the real Russia. The Khazars, who had already appropriated Judaism, took over in Novgorod with their trading skills and the wealth later gathered in Moscow to finance the erode of history and people to the east of the Moscow empire. What was distinguished as the Tartariet on the maps. And, instead of uniting the two Christians who over time became sparred in the different approaches of east and west. So the Moscow Kingdom/Church fought the "Turk-Mongols" Mongols in the South(!) and, according to wiki, in the east against savages living in the Siberian forest, without cities or society. Does anyone have an idea of what and what black Russia, Red Russia and White Russia were like before today's nations became? "At least if we now have a significant proportion of the "Hebrew" population in the leading strata of Moscow, it is possible that your interpretation of the language may be correct. But who were these people they called Tartars?

Was it the case that timur's kingdom was not at all a collection of tent villages, but a fully functioning society from the Azarov Sea to the Tartar Strait in the Far East? War is something that lies bricklayers and other ecclesiastical organizations seem to prefer. Why destroy an entire civilization? Takeaway or expantion like today's Israel?