Calendars are a very interesting invention. With their help, you can change the story as you like. And this, whatever one may say, is a very dangerous tool in the hands of progressors. And they use it without a twinge of conscience. More precisely used. Since the Gregorian calendar conquered the world, there have been no attempts to change the calendar, and this can only say one thing: - the goal of the progressors has been achieved, and does not need correction yet. True, there is one "but" here …
In Israel, they decided that they did not need this alien European calendar, and the Jews calmly continue to use their own, which is 3761 years older than the Gregorian one. Those. in the current 2017 year 5778 flaunts on the calendars of the Jews.
And in Vietnam, Kampuchea, China, Korea, Mongolia, Japan and some other Asian countries, it is generally not considered important to count time from a certain moment. Their time is divided into "sixty years". The circle of 60 years has ended, and that's it … They forgot and "passed", the next circle of 60 years began to count down.
In China and Japan, calendars were multilevel. The unified calendar began with the ascension to the throne of some famous emperor, and parallel to the entrance there was a calendar that began from the year of the beginning of the reign of the current emperor.
And the Indians were not at all lucky. To this day, they have their own calendar in each province, along with the calendars of neighboring provinces, but the Gregorian one is also officially in effect. And the most revered calendar Hindus consider Samvat, which is 57 years older than the Gregorian.
The Mayan calendar dates back to a specific date, from August 13, 3113 BC. Such a "beautiful" date from the European point of view could not but generate a lot of speculation and innuendo about this, but for the Maya the number 13 does not mean anything, and it is just a number, and does not mean anything else.
The Arabs began the countdown of their Muslim calendar from June 16, 622, and it seems to me much more "honest" than the Christian one, which is artificially extended by at least one thousand years.
Well, the closest calendar to us is, of course, From the Creation of the world, which is 5508 years longer than the Gregorian one. It is the oldest in existence, and was in circulation in parallel with the Julian until 1918. Not only in everyday life, but also when dating state publications, incl. documents.
Promotional video:
I consider all these systems of chronology to be quite understandable, explainable, and actually existed in the past, in contrast to some that historians introduced into textbooks retroactively. Such calendars as ancient Egyptian, ancient Greek, Byzantine, ancient Roman, and "From the creation of the world in a star temple" seem to me very doubtful. The latter does not fit into any gate at all.
And in Constantinople and Rome, most likely, a system of indications (15-year cycles) was used, which, together with Christianity, was brought to Russia. It's not just me who came to this conclusion. There are indirect indications of this even in the official historical literature. And in church books this system operated in parallel with the secular calendar, from the creation of the world. Its main drawback is that according to the indicated indicative, the real date had to be calculated. To get the indicative of the year in the era from the Nativity of Christ, add the number 3 to the desired year and divide the sum by 15. The remainder will give the indicative of the year. If the remainder is 0, then the indict is 15.
In general, no one, perhaps, will be able to object to the assertion that the basis of any of the generally accepted chronological systems is a religious trend. Christianity is the most widespread religion in the world, so it is not surprising that it is the Christian calendar that has become the same for the whole world. And here we are faced with an interesting fact. According to the official historical version, the Christian calendar appeared … Forty-five years before the birth of Jesus! Yes. Exactly.
We are assured that the Julian and the Gregorian calendars that replaced it counted the time from the birth of Christ. And this confirms the thesis that the world today lives exactly according to the Christian religious calendar. But how could the Julian calendar appear on January 1, 45 BC, i.e. before the birth of christ?
In fact, there are hundreds of such "blunders" in the official version of history. Now, in hindsight, we are given absurd explanations that do not clarify, but only confuse the situation. Take, for example, the etymology of the word "calendar". According to the official version, calend from Latin is the first day of the month. And our people claim that the calendar is "Kolyada gift". I have nothing against these versions, but I do not believe in either one or the other. So … I keep in mind, and nothing more.
It seems to me that all this is the fruit of a global falsification, which was carried out at the end of the eighteenth century. It was when the process of creating from scratch all history, national cultures, languages and states in their current understanding began. The main characters involved in this falsification are also clearly traced:
- Catherine II, created myths about Peter I and about Russia, - Voltaire created Europe, - Shakespeare created the Anglo-Saxon world.
It's not a mistake. When I speak of Shakespeare, I mean his (or rather their) plays, which at that time played the role of modern Hollywood.
One way or another, without widespread printing, it was impossible to get what we have today. And we have more or less reliable evidence that appeared no earlier than the second half of the eighteenth century. It was then that the whole world recognized the "ancient Greek" Plato, Herodotus and Archimedes. It was then that everyone learned the most popular myths today, including those about Alexander the Great and the Trojan War. Documents containing suspicious fragments also belong to the same period, for which scientists have to feverishly search for explanations.
Literally everything here delights. The main thing is that in the seventeenth century Russian was the official language at the court of the Prince (not the king !!!) in Stokolna (one hundred cols?). Further, the spelling of the month of November is shocking. This is not a november. This is the "new world". And the chronology of the "Swedes" for some reason was not from the birth of Christ, but from the incarnation of God the Word. And the Words, as many now know, is the very Primordial God among the Slavs, who was also called Rod. Now references to God the Word are carefully erased so that no one understands the meaning of the first lines of the Bible: - “In the beginning was the Word. And the Words was God. " Nevertheless, I managed to collect a whole collection of quotes from books and inscriptions on frescoes, and even on bells, where the God of Words is mentioned.
Well, now the date … Compare how the number "one" is written at the bottom, and the capital letter "I" at the top of the page. They are identical. Historians say this is just for the sake of economy. In order not to cast the letter with the number 1, the printers replaced it with the letter "I". And everything would be fine, if not for the next "BUT" … Let's assume that the interpreters are right. But how then do they explain such variants of writing dates?
Everyone can find hundreds of such examples. Always before a three-digit number, either "J" or "I" is indicated. And most likely, by the first name of a person called Jesus - Iisus, or Jisus. Like this. So much for the "millennium of darkness of the Middle Ages", which historians never manage to fill with events. It just wasn't there. When Prince Karol died in Stokoln, the year was 697 from the incarnation of the Word (the birth of Christ). Those. seventh century, not seventeenth. And the Slavs are not slave's at all, but the Slavs who knew who the God of Words was. Who laughed at those who, out of their ignorance, translated from Russian literally, and the result was gibberish: “In the beginning there was a word. And the word was God."
But even from the European Bible recently many interesting things could be learned. For example, about who the evangelist John was. Here is an excerpt from the Ostromir Gospel:
I am translating the third line: “A man was sent from God. His name was Ivan. What is Ivan? Why is he the God of Words? Is it not the same Elder John who was the right hand of Genghis Khan?
Fragment of Danila Keller's 1590 map
Here is what official sources write about him: - “Prester John, in Russian literature also Tsar-priest Ivan is the legendary ruler of the powerful Christian state in Central Asia. The personality, era and location of Presbyter John and his kingdom are interpreted in different ways in numerous stories and testimonies in different languages, sometimes pointing to real and sometimes to fictional characters, and often with fantastic details."
Now adding up? It is clear whose bell tower stands in the Moscow Kremlin, and what "Tsar Bell" and "Tsar Cannon" mean. But Ivan-tea was also called Tsar-Tea. There is even a legend about Ivan-tea, according to which, Ivan the Great was sitting by the hearth with a cauldron in which water was boiling, and Veles dropped grass leaves from heaven directly into boiling water. Ivan tried what happened and began to drink this tea every day. Since then, the people call this herb Ivan-tea, or Tsar-tea.
It turns out that together with calendars, whole epochs are being replaced. It is extremely difficult to restore reliable information about them, but it is quite possible to guess something. A simple example: - We take the symbolic, "round" number in the calendar, 7000 years from the creation of the world. We translate into a modern calendar, and what do we see? And we see the year 1492, the same when the "New World" was allegedly opened. What kind of light has opened up? "Yes, everything is clear," historians say, "Columbus discovered America."
Oh, is it? Then why is the "new light" not called Christopheria? Maybe Columbus has nothing to do with it, given that his name is more like an operational pseudonym, or the position of a general staff officer? After all, Krishtobal De'Kolomne (in Russian, Christopher Columbus) literally means "The man who carries the light and sets the column." Those. “Colonizer bringing culture to savages”. And is it by chance, exactly in 7000?
Let's take a different date. Also "beautiful", but from the Julian calendar: - 1700. Why is the date famous? Yes, the fact that it was in this year that Russia abandoned 5508 years of its history. Refused or banned? And if the introduction of the Julian calendar in Russia is in fact the "merit" of Peter I, then why, until the beginning of the twentieth century, did we have two chronological systems in parallel?
Anyway … Peter is presented to us as a fierce Russophobe, and an admirer of everything Western. But why then did he fight all his life exclusively with the West? Under Catherine the opposite was true. She fought with Tartary, not with Europe. And everything that we know about the era of Peter, we draw from the sources of the times of Catherine the Great. And she, as I said above, is just the same is the ancestor of the "Russian world" in its current understanding. She even made her Prussian language a reference for all of Russia. Yes. We are now speaking in the Prussian dialect of the Russian language, which was native to Catherine, and which later, through the efforts of Derzhavin, Pushkin, Gogol, Chekhov, Dostoevsky and Tolstoy, became the only standard Russian language. And the Little Russian and Belarusian dialects set off on a "free float", while through the efforts of the Bolshevik ideologists,did not become separate national languages.
So it's not so simple with the Europhile Peter. It is very likely that he was made a Europhile already under Catherine, who was just the same ardent Europhile. And she blamed on him all the sins and all the deeds at the same time. And if so, then the thought inevitably suggests that as reliable information about history, we can only consider those that do not contain signs of editing, and those that have survived from the beginning of the era of mass distribution of printing.
Since then, the level of possibilities for fabricating falsifications has become extremely difficult. It is impossible to destroy or change at once tens of thousands of publications stored in closets and attics on a huge territory. Therefore, such a method of manipulating the mass consciousness, as a substitution of the calendar, has probably ceased to be relevant. New technologies have come to replace them, which are more efficient and effective. But … It's scary to even think about what will happen if the Internet suddenly disappears at one moment …
Imagine for a second that only printed editions remained, and the entire "electronic" mind remained in oblivion … That's all … Read the old issues of the Murzilka magazine … Reinvent the bicycle …
Author: kadykchanskiy