Conquest of America

From Alternative Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Conquest of America by Russia-Horde and the Ottoman Empire - Atamania - in the 15th century. Biblical patriarch Noah is Christopher Columbus[edit | edit source]

In the XV century the second phase of the conquest began. The military navy of Russia-Horde = Israel and The Ottoman Empire-Ottomania(Atamania) = Judea crossed the Atlantic and disembarked in America. This event is known to us as the voyage of 'Christopher Columbus'. In the Bible all of this is described as the voyage of patriarch Noah crossing the 'mighty waters'. The other armies of Russia-Horde entered the American continent via the Bering Strait and colonized the Western coast of America and the North. Then they advanced to South America. In America the Horde and Ataman (Ottoman) colonizers have created cultures known to us today as the Indian civilisations of Maya, Aztec, Inca, Toltec and others (etc.) [6v2], ch.6.

In Spanish the discoverer of America was called Cristóbal Colón [797], p.603. It is not a name in a sense conventional today, but a nickname like Crusader Colón (Colonizer). The historians themselves recognise that the name Cristóbal originates from the word Christ, or Christian, or Crusader, and the word COLON meant: a colony, a colonizer, colonization. Today we do not know the actual name of this man. Only his nickname Crusader Colonizer. I.e. a person under the banner of Christ, who discovered a new continent and started its colonization. It was as a Crusader that Columbus was depicted on some of the old prints [6v2], ch.6.

In the Middle Ages there prevailed some legends (which perfectly support our reconstruction) that America was discovered and populated by the TRIBES OF ISRAEL, who arrived there by sea. This is in the spirit of a biblical description: a patriarch Noah crosses some vast ocean and his descendants populate the New Land, the New World.

The book of Mormon about the conquest of America by Noah/Columbus[edit | edit source]

The Mormons is a religious movement of American origin. Besides the conventional Bible they revere equally or possibly to a greater extent the Book Of Mormon (The Mormon Bible).

The Mormons claim that their Bible is the authentic ancient document. Many don't believe that, as up until the XIX century it was out of sight of the Biblical Studies. When analysing the Mormon Bible [6v2], ch.6, we discovered that the Mormons are in the right here. This text could not have been invented in the XIX century. If it was true, then the historical records included in the book would have been obtained from the Scaligerian textbooks of that time. However, VARIOUS PASSAGES FROM THE MORMON BIBLE COMPLETELY DON'T COMPLY WITH THE SCALIGERIAN VERSION AND CORRESPOND WELL WITH THE NEW CHRONOLOGY.

The Book of Mormon is, most likely, one of the versions of the Bible, but it differs greatly from the European version. The main body of the Book of Mormon narrates of the events which are not reflected in the conventional Bible. The Mormon tradition claims that the Book of Mormon describes the events in connection with the American continent. It also tells a lot about the past of the Mormons prior to their relocation to America. These parts resonate with the conventional Bible. The chronology of the events described in the Book of Mormons which are recognised today, i.e. namely from the year 600 BC to the year 421 AD relies entirely on the Scaligerian version. That is why it is incorrect. It turns out that this book tells us about the actual events of the XII-XVII cc. I.e. of the epoch which is also reflected in the conventional Bible.

The Book of Mormon describes the voyage of Nephi-Noah and his relatives in the Ark across the great waters, known to us from the European Book of Genesis. On the other hand the commentators of the Book of Mormon insist, moreover, in a plain language! - that this is a 'prophesy' of the 'foreseen' DISCOVERY OF AMERICA. Even in the Book of Mormon itself, in the subhead of The First Book of Nephi, ch.13, is clearly says: THE VISION OF... DISCOVERY (AND COLONIZING) OF AMERICA'. Indeed, it is difficult to disagree that here is the account of the first or one among the first voyages across the Atlantic. This was the voyage of Columbus at the end of the XV century.

Of course, the commentators of the Book of Mormon talk only about the PROPHECY of the discovery of America. Contrary to the clarity of the picture, they cannot say directly, that here is described the discovery of America in the XV century. Bound by the erroneous chronology, they shift the events into deep antiquity, allegedly 592-590 BC. See One Nephi, comments to chapters 16-18. This error has to be corrected and date it to the XV century. The shift of the dates upwards would comprise approximately 2100 years [6v2], ch.6.

When describing the voyage of Nephi-Noah (Columbus) the Book of Mormon refers to a compass, a globe, iron crossbows, firearms (described in a somewhat veiled way cannons, muskets and other objects of the XV-XVI cc. epoch.

The Book of Mormon proclaims that the voyage of Nephi-Noah (Columbus) and Jared-Horde was the voyage of one of the Twelve Tribes of the children of Israel who left the land of Egypt or the land of Jerusalem. It is all correct. The Twelve Tribes of Israel are the armies of the hetmans (Cossack chieftains, attamans), who marched from Russia-Horde in different directions to conquer the Promised Land in the XIV-XV cc. KOLENO (BRANCH or LINE) meant KOLONNA (military COLUMN or military LINE), i.e. a military detachment (unit). Russia-Horde = Israel set off for the conquest of Europe and faraway America.

Is Columbus' voyage connected with the Exodus of the Twelve Tribes of Israel, notably from Spain? IT IS THOUGHT THAT THE VOYAGE OF COLUMBUS STARTED AT THE MOMENT OF THE EXODUS OF THE JEWS FROM SPAIN.

It is all correct. They referred not to the expulsion of Jews from Spain, but to the next stage in the advancement of the tribes = columns of Israel, i.e. the Russian-Horde (Hordian) and Ottoman (Ataman) armies. One of the Cossack detachments arrived to Spain. It paused there for some time as they were building a fleet. Maybe, for several years, as the Book of Mormons claims. And moved further to the West across the ocean. Such a major event in Spain of the XV century was interpreted by the recent historians as allegedly the 'expulsion of Jews from Spain'. The fact, that actually did take place, was given an entirely different meaning, fogging and obscuring the true meaning. The distortion was manufactured when creating the Scaligerian history.

Thus, the 'moors' or the 'arabs' were 'driven out' from Spain not at all by the indigenous population of the Iberian Peninsula. The Imperial army forced the people out further to the West. The lines-columns arrived to Spain under the order of the khan of the 'Mongol' Empire originally for the quarantine cleansing of the infected territories, and then, further down the line to organise the relocation across the Ocean. The 'moors' or the 'arabs' who lived in Spain, were the descendants of the first great conquest of the XIV century. The new wave of the XV century was the second one.

Subsequently it turns out that the 'most ancient Babylonian and Sumerian documents call the Biblical Noah by the name of ZIUSUDRA (Zi-ud-sura or Xisuthros), i.e. Cristopher, and effectively describe him as Cristopher Coloumbus of the XV century [6v2], ch.6.

Presumably, in some of the regions of the 'Mongol' Empire, for example in the Middle East and Asia, they used to write on the clay tablets up until the XVII-XIII cc. Maybe there was very little paper and expensive parchment there. That is why the fragments of the Bible, which during that epoch was only just taking shape, were written down by the local scribes and priests onto the clay tablets. Later, when the writing paper was delivered to those regions, the clumsy tablets grew out of use and were soon forgotten. They were discovered in the ground 200-300 years later by the archaeologists of the XIX-XX cc. Brought up on the erroneous chronology, they declared their discovery to be the 'most ancient Sumerian' testimonies dating allegedly thousands of years BC.

Furthermore, we learnt that the 'most ancient' holy book Popol Vuh of the American Mayan people is another version of the Bible, which narrates about the events of the XIV-XVI cc.

The "ancient" book Popol Vuh' about the colonization of America in the 15th-16th centuries[edit | edit source]

Popol Vuh is a holy book of the American Indians Maya-K'iche. They were a powerful people inhabiting Central America. It is thought that the Mayan civilization blossomed in the XI century and was destroyed in the XV-XVI cc. during the invasion of the Europeans the Spanish conquistadors. But this hypothesis of the historians is incorrect. It turns out that the epoch of Columbus is not only reflected in Popol Vuh, but the book itself begins with its description. Even Columbus' name is mentioned. Relocation from the Old World to the New World is one of the central themes of the book. All of this was taking place in the XIV-XVI cc. [6v2], ch.6.

The historians are convinced that the 'very ancient' Popol Vuh reflects only the local American history and 'by no means'; could have described the Biblical and Christian events in the Old World. As, they said, the regular contacts with Europe started only in the late XV century. Consequently, the historians reason, all the obvious parallels of the 'ancient' Popol Vuh with the 'ancient' Old Testament can be attributed to this. Purportedly, in the XVI century some scribes of the American book inserted into it Christian and Biblical motives, brought into America only in the XV-XVI cc. I.e., they say, they falsified the text [1348], p.18.

Any thought of Popol Vuh being written as a Christian book in the XV-XVI cc. from the very beginning cannot cross a modern historian's mind as it would contradict the Scaligerian chronology.

A continuously expressed statement in Popol Vuh claiming the community alliance of the settlers in America is absolutely correct. Russia-Horde, which created the Empire, expanded in various directions from the collective center. Our point of view differs from the traditional one in that, that the historians refer the words of the American Bible Popol Vuh exclusively to the history of Central America. We, on the other hand, claim that here is presented a grandiose view of the resettlement of the peoples of Russia-Horde throughout the world at that time. One of the final countries of resettlement was Central America. But it was not the only one [5v], [6v2].

Having arrived in America, the people of Maya-K'iche 'found many cities' [1348], p.193. As Popol Vuh informs us, soon the question of the New Kingdom's establishment and Benediction came up. It was required to send back to the East across the ocean the embassy of Maya-K'iche to the great Quetzalcoatl to obtain the authority to govern [1348], p.206-210. This section of Popol Vuh is extremely interesting.

As soon as the suspension of the Scaligerian chronology lifted, in the name of the Mexican god Quetzalcoatl we recognise Caesar-Catholic. The sounds L and R could cross over: QuetzalCoatl = Caesar-Coatl = Caesar-Catholic. This immediately carries us over to Europe, where the Russian Christian church is still called the Orthodox CAPHOLIC, and in some countries the CATHOLIC faith is wide-spread.

Thus the embassy of Maya-K'iche from a faraway America, having crossed the ocean, appeared in front of the great Capholic (Catholic) King and received the powers and authority to rule over the territories discovered in America. This event reflected in the European sources as the return to Europe of the confederates of Columbus to receive from the king the authority to rule the discovered American lands. It is clear that such authority could have been given only by the emperor of the 'Mongol' Empire. Furthermore, it is possible, that QuetzalCoatl in the Indian texts is the Emperor Charles V. Whom the famous conquistador admiral Cortes did in fact report about the conquest of America [6v2], ch.6. In which case, QuetzalCoatl is known to us also as the Assyrian- Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar. Aka khan Ivan Vasilyevich IV Grozny (The Terrible).

The entire story with the respectful embassy of Maya-K'iche from America to the Eastern Czar-Capholic shows, that in the epoch of the XV-XVI cc. the hierarchical power structure in the Great Empire was clear. To come into the ownership rights of the discovered territories was possible only via the magnanimity of the Khan of Russia-Horde. He listened graciously and gave his permission. The members of the embassy breathed a sigh of relief. In Central America the civilizations of Maya and Toltec flourished.

There are strongly pronounced Evangelical storylines present in Popol Vuh. In particular, the appearance of the Star of Bethlehem in the sky, as on omen of the arrival of Christ and the Christophany (appearance of Christ) itself.

It would be more correct to call the Indian civilisations of Central America Maya, Aztec, etc. the HORDE-Indian. They appeared as a result of the Hordian-Ottoman (Ataman) conquest of America in the XIV-XV cc.

The close ties between "ancient" America and "ancient" Eurasia are well-known. But they began only in the 14th-15th century[edit | edit source]

Today a great number of impressive testimonies of the close ties between 'ancient' Maya and 'ancient' cultures of Europe and Asia have been amassed. [6v2], ch.6. However the historians and archeologists shift these ties back into the 'distant past'. The result they arrive at is, that long before the voyage of Columbus there was continuous relations between America and Eurasia, the level and intensity of which was so high, that corresponded to the state of the civilization only starting with the XV-XVI cc. For the historians there is an insuperable chronological contradiction at the bottom of it. That is why on one hand they are compelled to acknowledge the 'ancient', close and regular relations between America and Europe. And on the other hand, they constantly make stipulations that purportedly the connections were occasional and rare. And in general, they say, don't pay any attention to them. The main thing is, don't ask us any questions about the chronology.

These authors, being under the influence of the erroneous chronology, were compelled to concoct some artificial theories to explain the close 'ancient' connections between America and Eurasia. It is clear now, that there is no need in them. It is sufficient to say plain and clear: Yes, in fact the regular communications did exist. However, it was not at all in the 'deepest past', but only starting with the XIV-XV cc. As a result of the colonisation of America by Russia and The Ottoman Empire. After that all the baffling questions accrued by the commentators become irrelevant per se.

Mysterious centre which the waves of the global migrations were spreading from[edit | edit source]

Let us get back to the close ties between America and Eurasia in allegedly 'pre-Columbus' time'. 'A multitude of very specific parallels, - says Gordon Ekholm, - guards against any possibility of a random coincidence' [210], p.33.

And further: <<A famous Mexican ethnologist and art critic Miguel Covarrubias suggests that 'the great traditions of the Teotihuacan culture were brought to the Mexican Valley... by some MYSTERIOUS FOREIGN ELITE, WHOSE MOTHERLAND WAS SITUATED SOMEWHERE IN THE EAST... Having mastered the more primitive local tribes, the strangers, according to him, STOOD AT THE TOP OF THE NEW CIVILIZED SOCIETY, FORMED ON THE BASIS OF THE CULTURAL FUSION OF THE TWO CULTURAL STREAMS: LOCAL AND FOREIGN'>> [210], p.77.

And yet more: 'But, perhaps, the most extreme position in the debate about the origin of the Teotihuacan civilization was adopted by the Swiss explorer Sigvald Linne, who for many years conducted excavations on the territory of the city. He was arguing that ... the LOCAL POPULATION WAS ALTOGETHER DRIVEN OUT FROM THE BENIGN VALLEY BY SOME UNKNOWN ALIEN PEOPLE, WHO OVER TIME CREATED A BRILLIANT CIVILIZATION OF THE CLASSIC ERA. Thus, the majority of the experts on the Teotihuacan civilization, who worked for a long time at the town's site and were familiar with its culture better than anyone, concurred that the local civilization was imported either from the East, the West or the South, anything but originating in Teotihuacan itself' [210], p.78.

And also: <<Even in the late XIX early XX cc. the scientists- Americanologists Leonard Adam, Carl Gentze (\u041a\u0430\u0440\u043b \u0413\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0446\u0435), Paul Rivet, Hoze Imbellione (\u0425\u043e\Uffffffff\u0435 \u0418\u043c\u0431\u0435\u043b\u043b\u0438\u043e\u043d\u0438) and the others drew to attention the ASIAN-AMERICAN PARALLELS IN ART. The substantiatial works by L.Adam and C.Gentze pointed out some interesting similarities in the motives, ornamentation and stylized design of various articles of merchandise of the people of Eastern Asia on one hand, and North-West coast of America and Mexico on the other... The course of ancient history looked primitively simple according to this concept: 'THE GIVING' EAST AND 'THE RECEIVING' PROVINCES, WICH INCLUDED NEARLY ALL OF OUR PLANET... In this respect a considerable part was played by the works of German and Austrian ethnologists, the creators of the theory of The Kulturkreis ('culture circles' or 'cultural field')- F.Graebner, W.Schmidt, B.Ankerman, V.Coppers and the others, who tried to prove that THE CULTURES OF ALL THE PEOPLES IN THE WORLD ORIGINATE FROM SEVEN OR EIGHT WAVES OF CONSECUTIVE MIGRATIONS OF A GIGANTIC SCALE, EMANATING FROM A CERTAIN MYSTERIOUS CENTRE, WHICH SHOULD BE LOOKED FOR SOMWHERE IN THE SOUTH-EAST ASIA and regions of Oceania adjacent to it >> [210], p.20-21.

The mysterious centre was sought for a long time. But they failed to find it. We can point it out. The scientists, not knowing it themselves, discovered the outcomes of the Horde-Ottomania's (Atamania's) conquest-resettlement which was expanding in every direction, resulting in the birth of the Great Empire. Hindered by an incorrect chronology, the historians looked for the centre in the 'distant' past'. They didn't find it there. Because it is in Russia and The Ottoman Empire of the XIV-XVI cc.

It was the erroneous chronology which literally at every step of the way was preventing the historians to arrive at our conclusion. They write this way: <<Unfortunately, nearly all the parallels presented here are of a purely superficial nature, AND THE CHRONOLOGICAL GAP BETWEEN THEM SPANS EVERY TIME OVER A GREAT MANY CENTURIES. If, let's say, the lotus relief from Amaravati (India) date to the II century AD, then their Mexican 'doubles' from Chichen Itza were created at best circa the XII century AD. In Cambodia the step pyramids for the first time appear only in the X century AD, whereas in Mesoamerica in the early I century BC >>[210], p.30.

Take away the wrong dates from here, lift all these parallels into the epoch of the XIV-XVI cc., and everything will fall into place. The mysterious mass parallels will transform into a bright picture of intercommunication between CONCURRENT civilizations of the XIV-XVI cc.


The colossal division of the world between "Castile" and "Portugal"[edit | edit source]

Fig. 56

There is an incredible fact well-known in the XV century history. Castile, as a part of Spain, and Portugal divided the world between themselves! One of the major documents consolidating the division of the world is called quite openly: The Treaty of Tordesillas between the Kings of Spain and Castile REGARDING THE DIVISION OF THE WORLD. 7 June 1494." [707], p.375. This very division of the world is ratified in the papal bull of the 4 May 1493 [707], p.240. Also the papal bulls of 1452, 1455 and 1481 speak of the distribution of the spheres of influence worldwide between Castile and Portugal [707], p.246-247.

The crux of the matter is as follows. Castile and Portugal divided the world between themselves by drawing a line of demarcation along the meridian in the Atlantic from North to South, fig.56. A part of the world to the East of the line was granted to Portugal. The rest of the world to the West of the meridian was granted to Castile. The division was accompanied by the debates: the division line would shift one way or the other. In fig.56 can be seen the demarcation lines of the years 1481, 1493 and 1494 [707], p.248. The main border of the division of the world was the meridian passing through the Atlantic [6v2], ch.6.

It is reported: <<That is how appeared the famous papal bulls of Pope Alexander VI ... placing the kings of Castile INTO POSSESSION OF THE MASSIVE BODIES OF WATER AND LAND TERRITORIES... It is believed that Alexander VI was the conciliator in the Castile-Portugal dispute and that he, wishing to reconcile the litigant sides', 'divided the world' between both of the Iberian powers>> [707], p.247-248.

So in the late XV early XVI cc. the entire world was divided between Castile and Portugal. Notably with much éclat and on a large scale. A straight division line was drawn rather simply along a meridian across the Atlantic. The seas and the lands to the right of the meridian would belong to Portugal. Those to the left to Castile [707], p.248-249, 376.

Today this treaty is perceived by the historians as something 'rather strange'. They could not have failed noticing a surprising inconsistency between a massive scale of the affair and an apparent insignificance of the two 'rival countries' Castile and Portugal. Have a look at the map. Find a small country which is called Portugal today. Then find a small region in Spain called Castile. The population of both of these countries is numerically insignificant. These countries were not particular wealthy or rich in natural resources in the Middle Ages. The historians themselves write: 'WEEK, TORN BY THE FEUDAL WARS, UNSUCCESSFULY TRIED to compete with Portugal in the waters of the Atlantic ocean. THE CASTILIAN PEOPLE WITH GREAT EFFORT MANAGED TO KEEP POSESSION OF THE CANARY ISLANDS' [707], P.245. In regards to Portugal's status up until the end of the XIV century they write: 'IT WAS ONLY A REMOTE EUROPEAN BACKWOODS' [707], P.244.

So, 'week Castile' and 'remote European backwoods' Portugal allegedly divide the world between themselves. And what is most surprising, they do not encounter any opposition. They had disputes only between themselves. And only in regards to where to draw the demarcation line. And the Roman pope approves of this division! It is strangeisn't it?

The role of the pope also surprises the historians: 'It is relevant... to pose a question, on which grounds did the pope take charge of the seas and lands which did not belong to him and what could these privileges mean?' [707], p.245.

But all the oddities appear because the historians look through the prism of the Scaligerian history. Our reconstruction puts everything in its place.

In the late XV early XVI cc. the only two mighty superpowers of that time Russia-Horde (Castile) and The Ottoman Empire=Ottomania (Atamania) (Potugal) come to an agreement about the division of the world. Both of these states were a part of the 'Mongol' Empire. That is why they agreed quickly and with no particular problems. The purpose of the agreement is clear. To regulate the actions of the Russian and Ottomanian administration in the vast territories colonized by the Empire in the XV-XVI cc. I.e. they have divided between themselves the Biblical Promised Land. This way it was easier to control the distant provinces and to organize normal life there. It is difficult to do so from one centre in view of the sheer size of the Empire which has expanded incredibly.

The reason, why it is Porte-Head, i.e. 'Portugal' ('gal' = 'golova' = 'glavny' meaning Head or Main in Russian \u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c. \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0432\u043e\u0434\u0447\u0438\u043a\u0430) (The Ottoman Empire), that a part of the world east of the Atlantic meridian went to, is clear. The fact is that during that epoch the Ataman (Ottoman) navy ruled exactly in the Mediterranean and in the Eastern part of the Atlantic. And Russia-Horde colonized a significant part of the North-Asian continent situated to the West of the demarcation line, fig.56. Russia-Horde was advancing into America not only with the Ataman (Ottoman) fleet, but also from Siberia, via the Bering Strait and then across Alaska into inland America.

The pope's role in the division of the world also becomes clear. A treaty of such importance should be sanctioned by the spiritual authority of the Great Empire. I.e. the Pope. As was done.

The treaty between Russia and Ottomania (Atamania) remained in force up until the XVII century. Only after the victory of the rebellious Reformation and the breakup of the 'Mongol' Empire the Treaty became a subject of attack from the reformists. 'By the XVII century, when the initiative of the colonial expansion passes to England, France and Holland, and Spain (in fact Russia-Horde Author's note) and Portugal (in fact The Ottoman Empire=Ottomania (Atamania) Author's note) lose the significant part of their West-Indian and East-Indian domain in the crippling battle, the clauses of the Treaty in Tordesillas sound like an anachronism. However UP UNTIL THE END OF THE XVIII CENTURY The Treaty of Tordesillas preserved its legal validity in resolving the boundary disputes in the South-American domains of Spain and Portugal' [707], p.379.

In fact, PORTUGAL is PORTE-GALIA, i.e. Porte-Glava (porte=gates, glava=head) or Porte Glavnaya (glavnaya=main). Or Porte Helios, i.e. Porte Sunny or Porte Sublime. We would like to remind you that 'PORTE... (Ottoman Porte, High Porte, SUBLIME Porte) are the names of the domains of the Ottoman Empire... recognised in the European documents and literature'[797], p.1038. Thus, Portu-Gal was one of the names of the Ottoman Empire.

So what is CASTILE of the XV-XVI cc.? It is possible that CASTILLA originates from the word CASTLE, i.e. a tower, a fortified manor-place or a city. It is quite possible that Cas-Tile is a distorted Cazy-Itil, i.e. meaning Cossacks from Volga. We would like to remind you that in the Middle Ages Volga river was called Itil (Or Atil). In other words, Cas-Tile could have been one of the old names for Russia-Horde or the Volga Cossacks.

In the XVII-XVIII cc. the history was re-written. The famous names of Cas-Tile and Portu-Gal survived in the Iberian Peninsula only as the names of the two small regions which were a part of the Great Empire. And today we were taught to think that these two names always referred just to contemporary Castile in Spain and to contemporary Portugal. Which is wrong.

How and when the history of America was falsified[edit | edit source]

To falsify the history of the discovery and colonization of America is far easier than to falsify the European History. The history of Europe needed a lot of work. It was necessary to break down the strong-minded resistance of the entire social strata of European society, who still remembered its recent history well. It was hard work to introduce the Scaligerian version [5v2]. Predominantly it was done by the military force. On the other hand the events in distant America troubled the Europeans far less. They were separated from America by the Atlantic. The scant information about America would reach Europe only with the ships which occasionally crossed the ocean.

The chronicle writing of America was in the hands of just a small number of Europeans. It was easy to negotiate. It was quickly explained to them what they should write, and what they shouldn't. While the authentic Hordian-Indian chronicles were burning on fires. Having ruthlessly destroyed heaps of American manuscripts, the cynics like Diego de Landa, would then pick up a quill and write the 'correct history of the Native Americans'), shedding crocodile tears [6v2], ch.6.

The 'Spanish Conquista' of the early XVI century was, in fact, one of the waves of the Hordian conquest which reached America. The first wave is the conquest by Columbus of the late XV century, and the second wave of the early XVI century is known to us as the Spanish Conquista (La Conquista). See our book <<\u0417\u0430\u0432\u043e\u0435\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0435 \Uffffffff\u043c\u0435\u0440\u0438\u043a\u0438 \u0415\u0440\u043c\u0430\u043a\u043e\u043c-\u041a\u043e\u0440\u0442\u0435\Uffffffff\u043e\u043c \u0438 \u043c\Uffffffff\u0442\u0435\u0436 \u0420\u0435\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0438 \u0433\u043b\u0430\u0437\u0430\u043c\u0438 "\u0434\u0440\u0435\u0432\u043d\u0438\u0445" \u0433\u0440\u0435\u043a\u043e\u0432>>. ('The conquest of America by Yermak-Cortes and the Reformation revolt through the eyes (as seen, viewed by) the 'Ancient' Greeks'.)

But then a question arises. Is it correct that the destruction of the flourishing Hordian-Indian civilizations of America by the Europeans dates exactly to the early XVI century? Did it not take place later, in the XVII-XVIII cc.? In the epoch of the Reformation in Europe. When the victorious rebels, having split from Horde-Ottomania (Atamania), with fire and sword spread their 'reformist ideas' into Central America as well. In the XVII century the troops of the West European Reformists finally made an incursion on the territory of America. In a grueling fight they broke down the culture of Maya, Aztek and Toltecs, which had developed over the preceeding 150-200 years. The wars were bloody. The sovereign rulers of Central America remained at most true to the idea of the 'Mongol' Empire. They warded off the attacks of the navy of the rebellious Western European governors for a long time. But in the very end the American Hordians were defeated.

After the victory of the Reformation it was decided to re-write the American history and to offload all the horrors of the XVII-XVIII cc. war onto the Hordian-Ottoman (Ataman) colonization of America of the XV-XVI cc. They killed two birds with one stone. Firstly, the Reformists white washed themselves. Secondly, in the face of Spain, they blamed the weakened Horde-Ottomania(Atamania) for their own atrocities on the territory of America. They said, they had split open the skulls of the Indian babies, etc.

Similar propaganda, blaming the Spanish conquistadors, allegedly of the XV-XVI cc., of the atrocities, spread over West Europe starting in the XVII cc. It is hardly accidental, that practically all the prints in the book of Bartolomé de las Casas were executed in the spirit of the 'information war'. Here are just a few of the gravures' engravings' names: 'The conquistadors setting the dogs on the Indians', 'Roasting over a slow fire', 'Mass torture of the Indians by the Spanish', etc. [6v2], ch.6.This is the competent and enduring way that the history of America was falsified.

The destruction of the American Indians[edit | edit source]

The majority of the North American Indians were mercilessly annihilated during the US wars as well as those Native Americans killed in the epoch of the XVIII century. It is considered that Holland, France, England and then the USA, in severe battles and in violent disputes among themselves, were seizing the former 'Spanish territories' in America [336], v.2. In fact, the conquered lands were the vast American domains of Russia-Horde and Atamania (Ottoman Empire) which suddenly 'became no one's' after Moscow Tartaria fell apart circa 1775 [4v1], ch.11. The founding of the USA in 1776 was accompanied by other distinguished events, which are now becoming clear. For example: 'In 1774 there was announced the freedom of the trade exchange between the colonial provinces... In 1778 a FULL REFORM OF THE CROSS-ATLANTIC TRADE took place'[336], v.2, p.417

'Even Washington for a long time had to lead the wars with the Native Americans, in which the success was reached only by the merciless use of power and was connected with multiple heavy losses' [336], v.2, p.484.

A small number of Native Americans who survived, were forced into reservations where they, on the whole, remain until present day. A myth was created and forcefully introduced into the mass consciousness, alleging that the 'Indians are themselves to be blamed'. Purportedly, the well-mannered European settlers in America of the XVII-XVIII cc. were forced to defend themselves from the attacks of the proud Native Americans, who for some reason were protecting their lands. In the end the Europeans' patience came to an end and they had to shoot all the Native Americans with the cannons. In order to save the remaining ones from hunger and cold, they were honourably and altruistically provided with infected blankets. Many, for some reason, died. The surviving ones were freely inebriated with alcohol. They were recommended not to step outside the gates of the reservation. However they were savage, uneducated, not suited to a new life. So on the whole everything ended for them quite well. Now the descendants of the Native Americans, which are few and far between, are invited to share, as they say, in the fruits of European civilization.

Thus was the story of the employees of the Museum of Ethnography at the University of British Columbia in the Canadian city of Vancouver and the Vancouver Centre of the Native American Culture, heard by A.T.Fomenko and T.N.Fomenko in 1991.

It is interesting that on the maps of the West and North West of America of the XVI-XVII cc. there was an enormous 'white spot' [6v2], ch.6. As we have demonstrated, these territories even then were under the rule of Moscow Tartaria. The Europeans were not allowed there. In any case, up until 1775. Only from this moment, after the defeat of 'Pugachev', Moscow Tartaria started to fall apart, and the USA emerged. It is curious to see when exactly the USA populated, for example, the territories of San Francisco, one of the most fruitful regions of the West Coast of America. These territories to the North of the Californian Peninsula, constituted the 'white spot' on the maps up until the second half of the XVIII century. Here are the three images, two of which are very rare.

Fig. 57

The first - is an engraving with a view of San Francisco in 1848, fig.57. Its coastline is practically empty. There are only four ships docked in the bay. There are just a few small houses in the valley. There are surrounding thick woods on the hillsides. There is obviously very few people there. The region is not developed yet. Everything is clear. The USA came here comparatively recently. The old Hordian-Indian settlements are already destroyed, and the new city has not yet been built.

Fig. 58

The second image was made only ten years later, in 1858, fig.58. It is astounding that in ten years a big city had time to grow!

The bay is literally clogged with vessels. Young San Francisco has grown rapidly on the territories which were recently seized from the the Hordians-Indians.

TelegraphHill1890.jpg

The last image is a photograph of the end of the XIX century. There is already a big city depicted on it.






The conquest of Central America by Ataman (Cossack leader) Yermak = Conquistador Cortes[edit | edit source]

It appears that Yuri Vasilievich, the brother of Ivan the Terrible, is described by Herodotus as 'ancient' Dorieus. Herodotus gives a detailed account of him as a brother of Cleomenes. Thus we were lucky to come across an old document containing the most interesting facts of the mysterious story of Ivan IV the Terrible's brother Yuri Vasilievich, the son of Solomonia Saburova, the first wife of Vasili III [163], p.250-251. 'Ancient' Herodotus unexpectedly lifts the veil off an important page in Russian history hitherto obscured by the Romanovs. It is for a good reason that the historians still ardently dispute whether Yuri Vasilievich, brother of Ivan the Terrible, ever existed at all. It turns out that not only he existed, but also accomplished remarkable deeds.

We discovered that the famous Cossack ataman Yermak Timofeev of the second half of the XVI century was described by Herodotus as Spartan Dorieus, the brother of king Cleomenes, i.e. Ivan the Terrible. Herodotus informs us about Dorieus' campaign, his conquest of the city of Sybaris and his death [ZA], ch.7. It was the second campaign, following the one in the early XIV century, being the colonization of Siberia and its subjection to the metropoly of Russia-Horde.

According to the Romanov sources at first the relationship between Ivan the Terrible and ataman Yermak-Vasili was hostile. The chronicles accuse Yermak of robbery, looting and insubordination to authority. Herodotus says something similar about Dorieus. Dorieus is also resentful, clashes with his brother and refutes his brother's authority.

According to Herodotus the confrontation between the Spartan king Cleomenes and his brother Dorieus resulted in Dorieus, at the head of the army, LEAVING THE KINGDOM AND ESTABLISHING COLONIES OR SETTLEMENTS IN DISTANT COUNTRIES. The two Spartan kings could not coexist in the same country. One of them had to leave. A plausible excuse was concocted to conquer the far off territories. That is where Dorieus set off to.

According to the Romanov chronicles, following the animosity between Ivan the Terrible and the Cossack Ataman Yermak-Vasili, the latter sets off to conquer Siberia at the head of the Cossack army equipped with the firearms. Not only did Yermak conquer the cities, but founded new settlements. A vast and wealthy country is being colonized. It is probable, that Yermak-Vasili was purposefully 'pushed out' of Moscow as far as possible, when an honourable, but dangerous occasion turned up. Something in terms of: Let him fight! And if he is killed, as it did happen in the end, we will glorify him, proclaim him a great conqueror.

We will repeat that Herodotus unexpectedly illuminated the dark Romanov version of Ivan the Terrible's reign. Herodotus has got the details of Yuri Vasilievich = Dorieus, the brother of Ivan the Terrible = king Cleomenes. Moreover, we discovered an astonishing fact: in essence Herodotus claims, that Ivan the Terrible's brother was that very same famous Yermak-Vasili, whose name was so popular in the Russian history of the XVI century.

Where did this 'classic' name DORIEUS originate from? As it points to Yermak, it could have been connected with his great campaign to the East. Immediately the name 'DAURIA' springs to mind, which was very well known in the Far East: 'DAURIA is a country stretching from the Yablonoi Mountains to the East up to the river valley of Arguni. THIS NAME OCCURS SINCE THE RUSSIANS EMERGENCE THERE and originates from the Tungus tribe inhabiting it' [988:00], 'Dauria'.

The facts that we discovered about Dorieus-Yermak are interesting and unexpected. Notably it would be impossible to uncover them without the New Chronology. Hence it is clear how vital it is to have the correct dates at your disposal.

Furthermore, the core of the narrative of Yermak's conquest of Siberia is the colonization of America by Russia-Horde and Ottoman (Ataman) Empire in the XV-XVI cc. In the Western sources all of this is described as the conquest of America by the Conquistador Cortes.

In [6] we showed that the voyage of Columbus is the reflection in the Western chronicles of the conquest of America in the XV-XVI cc. carried out by Russia and the Ottoman Empire, where the troops of Russia-Horde invaded the American continent not only from the East, having crossed the Atlantic, but also from the West, having made it through Siberia, via the Pacific Ocean. The Cossacks entered America also via Alaska. Having colonized a continent, little populated at that point, the Cossacks and Ottomans-Atamans created here the civilization of Maya, Aztec, Inca and Toltec... These civilizations perished during the epoch of the Reformation of the XVII-XVIII cc., when the troops of the Western European armies who were crushing the 'Mongol' Empire, arrived to America. Including its distant American colonies. Later the atrocities of the 'progressive reformers' were attributed to the Horde colonists of the XV-XVI cc.

Was the colonization of America reflected in the RUSSIAN CHRONICLES? At first glance it wasn't. However, it turns out that the conquest of America is nonetheless described in the Russian sources. Only these descriptions are included as a part of the stories about the famous voyage of Yermak and his conquest of the 'vast Siberia'.

The Romanov editors GREATLY BELITTLED THE SCALE OF YERMAK'S CONQUEST AND NARROWED DOWN ITS GEOGRAPHICAL FRAME. Today we are led to believe that allegedly only several hundreds of Cossacks set off for the campaign. And they succeeded in conquering a huge country. Besides, in order not to insult the colleagues-reformers across the ocean, the Romanovs did their best to erase from the chronicles any mention of the fact that the Cossack army, having crossed Siberia, invaded America and founded their prospering civilizations ones which later on were declared by the historians to be 'terribly ancient'. Following the emerging of the USA in the XVIII century in place of the former territories of Russia-Horde the true history of America was, by coordinated efforts, plunged into darkness.

The traces of the true events surface even in Karamzin's work one of the most faithful of the Romanov historians. Karamzin himself, without our prompting, compared Yermak's voyage with the conquest of Central America by Cortes [362], v.9, ch.6, column 226-228. And it is correct. To a far greater degree than Karamzin believed himself. Correct - not figuratively, but literally.

It is for or a reason that the old depictions of Yermak's voyage show him navigating large rivers [ZA], ch.7. Of course some Siberian rivers are very wide. However, earlier the seas and the oceans were depicted on the geographical maps as rivers [1v], [2v]. That is why some old images of Yermak's voyage could have been describing the crossing of the ocean by the large Cossack ships.

Likewise Herodotus' account of Dorieus' army sailing across the sea to a faraway 'island of Sicily' could have reflected the crossing of the Atlantic or the Pacific Ocean by the Russian-Horde troops on their way to America.

When the historians radically minimized the scale of the events, it appeared that sailing from Greece to the nearby island of Sicily had begun to be considered 'very far-off'. What actually happened is that in the old original an account was given of the crossing of the Atlantic and the Pacific Oceans. I.e. about truly long-distance expeditions. The cunning editors of recent times started to assure us that the 'ancient' settlers of Dorieus were sailing not to America, but merely to the 'island of Sicily'. Purporting that it was 'too far and dangerous'.

Let us take a look at the name of khan KUCHUM who Yermak fights with. The name KUCHUM pointed not only to the ruler, but to the entire kingdom, which was sometimes called the 'Kuchum's Domain'. If the conquest of America is reflected here, then will we find KUCHUM and his kingdom there? Yes, we will. In [6v] we showed that during the colonization of America the name of the people of MAYA KICHE or KICHE MAYA emerges. It is plausible, that KUCHUM is a variant of the pronunciation KICHE MAYA which appeared in the Russian chronicles.

The name of the American people Maya Kiche is the marking of the Slavic conquest reaching America and engulfing it in the XIV-XVI cc. The first Hordian settlers could have appeared here in the epoch of the XIV-XVI cc. under the 'Mongolian' conquest. After two hundred years, in the XV century, the Cossack czar Yermak-Vasili meets the descendants of this first wave of the Horde-Cossacks. They called themselves Kiche Maya = Kuchum. We would also like to note, that KICHE is close to the word KOCHevnik (NOMAD in Russian Tr. note), meaning the horse cavalry of the Horde.

The great significance attributed by the Russian chronicles to Yermak's voyage becomes clear. In the XVI century it was not Siberia at all that they conquered: there was no need to do so. As it is, Siberia was already a part of the Great Empire for a long time, since the early XIV century, when the 'Mongol' invasion swept through Eurasia. The second 'conquest of Siberia' by Yermak in the XVI century could have of course meant the suppression of the small rebellions or separatist tendencies on his way. But such a voyage clearly wouldn't 'cut it' to play such an outstanding role attributed to it by the chroniclers. But if the matter at hand concerned the COLONIZATION OF AMERICA, then the picture would be altered. The campaign in fact becomes a grandiose event.

Supposedly Yermak's troops crossed Siberia and the Far East quite fast. As they were HOME lands. But the main events began later. The Cossacks continued their journey across the Bering Strait and the Pacific Ocean towards the distant America. Called by Herodotus a 'distant ISLAND of Sicily'. Where the king Dorieus (Dauria=Horde?, Dal, Dalnii meaning 'Distance' and 'Distant' in Russian) had to sail his ships to. It is clear why the old Russian texts, wrongly ridiculed by Karamzin, claimed that not hundreds of Cossacks, but THOUSANDS of them were marching with Yermak. Obviously, in order to conquer a vast transoceanic continent, large numbers of the soldiers-crusaders were needed.

Aside from Russian Alaska, Russian Oregon and Russian California, the emergence of the entire Great Tartaria also becomes clear = Moscow Tartaria spanning Siberia as well as the significant part of the American continent [6v].

It is clear why the name of the Cossack czar YERMAK in a form of AMERICA began to apply to the entire continent. The conqueror named the country after himself. Besides, the name AMERICA or AME-RICA could have originated from MAYA-RICA, i.e. (meaning) MAYA-STATE, THE STATE OF MAYA, MY STATE. In the Middle Ages the word RICA meant STATE (for example, Costa Rica, etc.).

The stories about the famous conquistador Hernan Cortes came down to us from the Western European, mainly Spanish chronicles. In a nutshell the essence of the conquest of Central America by Cortes sounds like this. It turns out that it is necessary to repeat almost word for word the accounts of the Russian chronicles about Yermak. This will result in the following.

A great conqueror at the head of a small naval brigade, equipped with firearms, conquered a distant vast country, the inhabitants of which were brave warriors. Cannons and muskets, thus far unfamiliar to the locals, crushed their resistance.

It turns out that the surviving documents about Yermak's voyage emerged not earlier than the middle of the XVII century or even later. Most likely they were based on the old testimonies of Yermak's contemporaries [ZA], ch.8. However these texts didn't survive. Yermak died in 1584. It means that today we view his voyage based on the texts written at least 20-30 years later, and more likely half a century later. Or even later. The old testimonials were edited by the Romanovs' censors. They 'corrected the history' adapting it to the newly created version. The main purpose was to erase from the chronicles any traces of the fact that having crossed all of the Siberia and Far East, Yermak's army made an intrusion into the territory of Central America. It was there where the MAIN EVENTS unfolded. Also it is not impossible that Yermak set out to America either from the shores of Kamchatka or from the east, from the island of Cuba in the Atlantic Ocean.

The Siberian chronicles became accessible to the public only after the final division of the spheres of interest between the Romanov Russia and the USA in the second half of the XIX century. Since 1867 the Romanovs gave Alaska away to the Americans [4v]. After that the Russian sources were edited once again and in 1880 it was kindly allowed to publish the Kungur Chronicle.

What do we know about the documents giving us an account of the conquest of Mexico and Central America by Cortes allegedly in the first half of the XVI century? The picture is similar to the one in the Russian historiography. The surviving Western-European texts on this topic surface not earlier than in the XVII century. It is thought that the conquest of Central America was described mainly by the Spanish. This being said they mean the people who lived on the territory of modern Spain.

But most likely the 'Spanish conquest' is the Ottoman conquest. To recap, the famous division of the world in the XV-XVI cc. between Spain-Castile and Portugal was in fact the division of the world between Ottoman (Ataman) Empire and Russia-Horde. Certainly, some parts of the Ottoman and Horde troops could have consisted of the inhabitants of the Iberian Peninsula, where present-day Spain is situated. But at that time all of these lands as well as many others were part of the Great Empire. That is why when reading today about the SPANISH conquest of America one ought to understand that at the bottom of it is the OTTOMAN and HORDIAN colonization of the continent in the XV-XVI cc.

There survives information in the Russian Siberian chronicles informing us that Yermak was buried near some volcanos [RI], ch.4. So where were they situated? There are no volcanos on the territory of present-day Siberia. Hence Yermak was not buried in Siberia. But where? The answer is simplified by the fact that WE HAVE ALREADY FOUND OUT THE TRUE SETTING OF THESE EVENTS. They unfolded in Central America. Near the city of Meshiko (Mexico) there are indeed situated the two huge volcanos Popocatepetl and Istasiuatl, more than 5 thousand meters high [ZA]. They are probably presented in the Russian Kungur Chronicle. Later on the Romanov historians 'dragged' (on paper) Yermak's voyage from America to the Asiatic Siberia and edited the old texts. But, luckily, they didn't pay attention to the volcanos described and even depicted in the drawings in the Kungur chronicle. Thus we yet again catch the falsifiers red-handed.

The mysterious phrase in the Kungur Chronicle becomes clear: FIERY COLUMNS CAN BE SEEN BY THE TATARS AND MUSSULMEN, BUT NOT BY THE RUSSIANS. Indeed, it is very far from the European and Siberian Russia to Mexico across the ocean. It is in fact impossible to see the columns of fire and smoke above the Mexican volcanos. But the American inhabitants Meshikas-Mexicans, Aztecs = Ostyaks, could see these 'great burning candles' really well.

Yermak's voyage and Cortes' campaign correspondence scheme[edit | edit source]

  • The Conquistador Hernan Cortes is the Cossack ataman Herman-Yermak Timofeyevich.
  • Diego Velazquez, the governor-sovereign's vicegerent of the emperor Charles V in Cuba is Stroganov or the Stroganovs, the sovereign's vicegerent of Ivan the Terrible allegedly in the Urals. Or perhaps in Cuba not far from America.
  • Emperor Charles V is czar-khan Ivan IV the Terrible [6v].
  • The clash between Cortes and Charles V's authorities is the conflict between ataman Yermak and the authorities of Ivan the Terrible. However the authorities flirt with Yermak-Cortes, invite him to serve and declare a major campaign.
  • The ships sail off. The sudden fury of Diego Velazquez in the beginning of Cortes' campaign is the reflection of Ivan the Terrible's sudden wrathful decree at the start of Yermak's expedition.
  • The campaign of the allegedly small crew of Hernan Cortes to Central America is the voyage of the allegedly small crew of ataman Yermak to the Siberian Czardom.
  • The true historical event was the voyage of Herman-Yermak from Russia via Siberia to Central America, to Mexico. The Western chroniclers described this campaign as the voyage of Hernan Cortes from the island of Cuba to Mexico. I.e. they described only the last stage of Yermak's conquest, omitting his voyage through Siberia, The Far East and The Pacific Ocean.
  • The accounts of the both campaigns emphasized the fact that the colonizers were equipped with the firearms which the locals did not possess. Due to this in particular, victory was gained, despite the high courage of those on the defensive side.
  • The American Azteks are described in the Russian chronicles as the 'Siberian Ostyaks'.
  • King Moteuczoma or Motecuhzoma, who was later killed and who fought against Cortes in Mexico, is the czar-khan Kuchum, who was also later killed and fought against Yermak in the 'Siberian Czardom'.
  • The seizure of the city of Meshiko, the capital of Mexico by Cortes is reflected as the seizure of the Asiatic city of Siberia, the capital of the Siberian Czardom by Yermak. Both the American capital and the Czardom itself were called the same name MESHIKO.
  • The Spanish conquistadors of the epoch of the 1519-1524 years are the Russian-Horde Cossacks and Ottomans-Atamans, i.e. also the Cossacks of the epoch of the 1581-1584 years.
  • The well-known 'La Noche Triste' ('the night of sorrows') is the severe defeat of the conquistadors and Cortes' wounding is the well-known night attack of khan Kuchum on Yermak's crew and the death of the famous ataman.
  • Cortes' letters to the Emperor Charles V are Yermak's messages to the czar Ivan the Terrible.
  • The temporary setback of the conquistadors is the temporary retreat of the Cossacks after Yermak's death. They soon regrouped with fresh reinforcements. Following which the wave of the colonization ultimately overwhelmed the vanquished country.
  • The name MEXICO or MESHIKO is a slight distortion of the name MOSOCH-MESHECH or MOSCOW. Thus was also called the vast MOSCOW Tartaria, spanning not only over the Asiatic Siberia at that time, but also the greater part of America. The word MESHECH itself could have originated from sMESHAYU ('I will mix' translated from Russian), sMESHEniye ('medley, mixture' translated from Russian), i.e. a mix of races. Hence the word MUZHIK (a man, a peasant). The word MOSOCH entered the Bible as the name of one of the biblical patriarchs. That is why in some old chronicles the word MESHIKI could have been understood as meaning MUZHIKI (MEN).
  • Why is it still not possible to trace the Ostyak capital Isker-Siberia in the Asiatic Siberia? The answer: because it was situated in America. It is the Atzec city Meshiko = Mexico.
  • The confusion in the description of Yermak's voyage by the Western chroniclers is clear. Yermak-Herman went from Russia to the East, via Siberia to America. But the Western chroniclers decided that he Hernan Cortes sailed from the island of Cuba to the West, to America. The fact is that it is indeed as early as at the end of the XV century that the Hordian and Ataman troops appeared in America, having crossed the Atlantic ocean. It was the Columbus expedition [6v2]. Since then the Western chroniclers confused the directions of the Horde or the Ottoman invasions. As Russia and Ottoman (Ataman) Empire entered America from both directions from the West and from the East. Or in fact Yermak's army set out to Mexico from the island of Cuba in the Atlantic Ocean.
  • Cortes' voyage in 1519-1524 was dated by the chronologists approximately sixty years earlier than the voyage of Yermak: 1579-1584. As we understand now, Yermak's expedition is in its correct chronological place. But the Western Europeans were noticeably mistaken and shifted the dates approximately 60 years down the line. The duration of both campaigns roughly coincide.
  • Ataman Yermak's death at the end of his campaign and the serious wound of the conquistador Cortes at the end of the voyage to Mexico. The Romanov historians deceived us when assuring that Yermak purportedly died in Asiatic Siberia. There are surviving testimonials in the Russian chronicles that Yermak was buried in Mexico, close to the two large volcanos in the Meshiko valleys.

The chronicler of the voyage of Yermak-Cortes[edit | edit source]

According to the commentators the book by Bernal Diaz 'The True History of the Conquest of New Spain' is the most authentic and the most colourful among the conquest chronicles, the most valuable material on the conquest history of America'[64:3], p.320.

At the same time 'the most complete Siberian chronicle was written by SAVA YEFIMOV, who finished his book on the 1st September 7145 {1636}. The aforementioned Yefimov declares in it that HE COMES FROM AMONG THE YERMAK'S COMPANIONS AND THAT HE WAS AN EYEWITNESS TO EVRYTHING DESCRIBED BY HIM' [876:3], 306-307.

Thus emerges before us the name of the Cossack, a participant of Yermak's expedition, who left behind a whole book describing the voyage. It provided the basis for the chronicles known to us today. Sava Yefimov's accounts correspond well with another edited version of his work known today as the 'book of Bernal Diaz de Castillo'. Presumably in the XVII century there were several editions made of the book by Cossack Sava Yefimov = Bernal Diaz. It was rewritten both in Russia, in Siberia and in Western Europe, in Spain. Some things were changed, in particular characters' names, however the core of the matter remained the remained the same. That is why we managed to restore the true facts, having detected a striking correspondence between the Siberian Chronicles and the Spanish = Ottoman book by Bernal Diaz. That is why in the history of Russia there remained a version which was later called the 'book by Sava Yefimov', and in the history of Ottoman Empire its other version under the name of the 'book of Bernal Diaz'.

The chronicle of Bernal Diaz is considered to have been published in 1632, and Sava Yefimov's chronicle was completed in 1636. These dates are close. As we understand now it is not a coincidence. We speak here about the same remarkable piece of work.

In the both versions the same kind of contemptuous sneer of the later historians towards Sava Yefimov = Bernal Diaz can be felt. Purporting that an 'inelegant' 'swashbuckler' wrote a bulky chronicle. It is of course important for history, but the author was just an 'uneducated bandit'. He has shed much more blood than ink. And thus, we are told, was just spinning a good yarn.

The conclusion. The comrade-in-arms of Yermak-Cortes described the campaign of 1581-1584. In Russia he became known under the name of Sava Yefimov. In Spain he is already famous as Bernal Diaz del Castillo = the Castilian. His work is at the heart of the modern perception of the conquest of Central America. The Romanov historians edited the chronicle, having shifted the place of action exclusively to Siberia. They pretended that Yermak's army had never been to America. In general they did their best to distort the story in such a way, that the mere notion of the Horde Cossacks conquering America at the end of the XVI century began to seem absurd.

Apparently, the story of Yermak is reflected on the pages of the 'ancient' Roman classics, Cornelius Tacitus and Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, for example. The general Germanicus, the nephew of the Emperor Tiberius (= the reflection of Ivan the Terrible), is the Cossack ataman-conquistador Yermak-Cortes, who conquered Central America [RI], ch.4.

To conclude, the pages of Tacitus, Suetonius, Herodotus, etc. give us a detailed account of the ataman-conquistador Yermak-Cortes. Where a lot of information which survived in the works of the 'ancient classics' is described in the Russian and Spanish (Ottoman) chronicles either more sparsely or is not reflected at all. Now we write a completely new and much more detailed history of the conquest of Central America. The picture becomes richer and more colorful.

Why the Amazon river was named the Amazon. The elephants in America[edit | edit source]

Let us turn to the Western-European version of the discovery of the Amazon river in South America. These documents colourfully illustrate the 'relocation of the names' which we detected. In the epoch of the great conquest and then during its second wave in the XV-XVI cc., which in the Bible was called the 'conquest of the promised land', the colonizers brought with them their recollections of their Motherland. I.e. of Russia-Horde and the Ottoman (Ataman) Empire. There were some special people in the Cossack army responsible for the written documents, military and diplomatic correspondence and the archives. The notes of a journey were written, the maps were compiled and reports were prepared for the Imperial administration in the metropoly of the Great Empire. The Horde and the Ottoman armies conquered the vast territories and founded settlements and cities. The people settled down there for a long time and even for good. They carried over here the customs, names and the geographical names from their distant Motherland. They called some of the American settlements the same names as their native European and Asiatic cities which they had left behind forever. The military and battle archives of the conquerors formed the basis of the future American libraries and archives. The chronicles giving us accounts of the events in the Old World also found their way here. The first settlers still remembered their true content, but their descendants were forgetting about the roots of the old texts passed on to them by their fathers and grandfathers. And after a couple of generations they started to think that these dusty chronicles purportedly described the events in the New World. Thus some important events and names of the Old World 'migrated' (on paper) into the New World.

We have repeatedly given the examples of such 'paper relocation' [STKR]. For example, the battle of Kulikovo 'was relocated on paper' from Moscow to the remote India during its colonization by Russia-Horde in the XIV-XV cc. And the battle of Kulikovo was erroneously considered to be the local Indian 'battle in the field of Kurus'. Even the suitable 'battleground' was picked out. It was drawn on the map near the city of Delhi. Since then 'this battle' is considered to be one of the most important events in the history of India.

A similar thing was happening in America. For example, a country Amazonia from Russia-Horde has 'relocated' here too (see above). And appeared on the map as a name of the South American Amazon river, although no Amazon women were ever there.

Let us clarify. In the Horde chronicles which emerged in America, there appeared some accounts of the great Volga river flowing in the meridian north-south direction. Later, when the European origin of the chronicles was forgotten, the descendants of the pioneers decided, that in them there was a description of the great South American Amazon river. As though the magnificent Volga transferred on paper its properties to the magnificent Amazon. And for some time, looking into the Russian chronicles, the confused chroniclers were mistakenly convinced that Amazon was allegedly flowing ALONG THE MERIDIAN [ZA], ch.8. In time they of course got things straight and realized the correct direction of the Amazon (it flows approximately along the parallel of latitude). But the old texts, like those of the chronicles of Oviedo, survive in the archives. And raise the commentators' eyebrows. Purporting that he was a wonderful geographer, but was so oddly mistaken.

The documents of the conquistadors contain accounts that allegedly there were CAMELS, ELEPHANTS AND TIGERS in America. However there were never such animals in America and there are none of them now. All such fragments found their way into the chronicles of the Spanish conquest on the territory of America as a result of transporting here the European and Asian chronicles during the colonization of the XV-XVI cc. The Horde Cossacks and Cossack-Amazons remembered Eurasia and Africa, where they saw, of course, the camels, the elephants and the tigers.

On the whole the theme of the 'elephants in America' have been irritating the historians for a long time [6v2], ch.6:27:2. There are a lot of references to the elephants that survive in the American Indian culture [336], v.1, p.206. It is clear now, that, for instance, the American burial mounds in the shape of elephants, were erected in the epoch of the XIV-XVII cc. by the Hordians, who had arrived there recently from Eurasia, where there are plenty of elephants. The elephants were also depicted on smoking pipes. On reflection, the historians declared unfoundedly, that purportedly the American burial mounds and pipes were 'unbelievably ancient', that they were made by the 'primitive people' in a distant epoch, when there were prehistoric elephants and mastodon wandering around America, which later became extinct [336], v.1, p.206. Thus the Hordian-Ottoman constructions of the XIV-XVII cc. were shifted to the 'stone age'. The historians emitted a sigh of relief, having mistakenly thought that they had solved the problem.

The conclusions. Cossack - Conquistador Yermak-Cortes[edit | edit source]

  • The Russian sources identified the CORRECT dates of Yermak's campaign, specifically 1581-1584. The Spanish = Ottoman sources were MISTAKEN by approximately 60 years. They decided that allegedly Cortes'-Yermak's voyage took place earlier in 1519-1521.
  • On the other hand the Romanov historians WRONGLY professed that the main events allegedly developed exclusively in Asiatic Siberia. Most likely it was a deliberate deception. In fact there was no war between Yermak and the Siberians. The main voyage of Yermak-Cortes developed in Central America. Here the Spanish = Ottoman chronicles are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. Yermak's troops could have set off to America from the shores of the Far East or from the Atlantic island of Cuba.
  • The Romanov historians MISTAKENLY thought that Yermak allegedly died on an island in the middle of the large Siberian river Irtysh, and then was resurrected. In reality Yermak-Cortes was badly wounded on an island in the middle of the lake Lago de Texcoco in Mexico during the battle for the capital Meshico. Here the Spanish = Ottoman version is CORRECT, and the Romanov version is ERRONEOUS.

On the whole the Russian-Horde descriptions of Yermak's expedition despite all the distortions of the editors perfectly correspond with the Spanish = Ottoman chronicles telling us about the voyage of Cortes.

  • Yermak-Cortes was Yuri, the brother of the czar-khan Ivan IV the Terrible. There are some vague stories that survive in the Romanov version of history. Herodotus also mentions him as the brother of the great king, calling him the 'ancient' Spartan king Dorieus.
  • 'Ancient' Herodotus gives a brief description of the voyage of Yermak-Cortes and the conquest of Mexico as the expedition of 'ancient Dorieus' to conquer Sybaris-Siberia.
  • There survive some sources, for example, a work by Isaac Massa, in which the development of the Asiatic Siberia is described as a peaceful colonization, except it was carried out not by Yermak, but by other people. It is all correct: Yermak was fighting in completely different territories. And Asiatic Siberia already belonged to Russia-Horde for a long time and there was no need to conquer it by force.
  • Most likely, Yermak-Cortes didn't die in 1584, though he was badly wounded during the siege of Meshico, the capital of Mexico. The Spanish = Ottoman version quite rightfully claims that for some time the ataman-conquistador was alive, took part in the conquest of Central America, and then died in disgrace. The Russian chroniclers didn't know anything about the burial place of Yermak = Cortes. The Western chroniclers also flounder here. Most likely Yermak-Cortes was at first buried in Meshico, not far from the two Mexican volcanos. Maybe in one of the Mexican pyramids. Later his body was re-interred.
  • When wiping out from the chronicles the very fact of the existence of the vast American domains owned by Russia and the Ottoman Empire up until the XVIII century (until the victory over 'Pugachev'), the historians fulfilled an order striving for geopolitical goals. Following the division in the XVIII century of the territories formerly belonging to Horde in America between the recently emerged USA and Romanov Russia, it was necessary to cast a veil over the true story of these 'Mongol' lands so that Russia could not demand the return of its overseas domains after it became more powerful. In the XVII-XVIII cc. the feeble Romanovs being at first the pro-Western minions, more or less toed the line of their masters. But later, in the XIX century, having partially forgotten the core of the matter, they altogether gave away to the USA the last remaining scraps of the former Hordian domains: vast Alaska, huge states of Oregon, California, etc. [6].

The rough scheme of the correspondence between the plots of the Spanish Conquista in America and the fragments of the Ottoman history of the conquest of Europe, looks like this:* The Spanish-conquistadors are the reflection of the Ottomans-atamans, and in some cases the Oprichniki of Russia-Horde of the second half of the XVI century.

  • Sometimes the 'American Indians' are the reflections of the Western Europeans, and sometimes = the people of Russia-Horde during the epoch of the Oprichnina.
  • In some narratives the conquest of the Indian lands in America by the Spanish is the reflection of the Ottoman conquest of Europe. I.e. the Promised land.
  • Occasionally the description of the torments of the American Indians is the description of the torments suffered by the Western Europeans during the Ottoman conquest, and also the suffering of the population of Russia-Horde in the epoch of the Oprichnina.
  • The Spanish conquistadors shocked the American Indians with firearms which were hitherto unknown to them. Similarly the Ottomans-Atamans were largely victorious in Europe due to their more powerful artillery. It is true that the Western Europeans of the XV-XVI cc. were already familiar with the firearms, but were not as skilful in using them.
  • The atrocities of the conquistadors in America are in some cases the reflection of the quarantine 'cleansing' of Western Europe by the Ottomans-Atamans of the diseased as a result of the epidemics.