Which came first - a handwritten book or a printed one? Why were people not happy with the scrolls? Why were books written all over the world, but painted in Russia? How to deal with a large-scale forgery? What is it, and what is its true purpose? …
The ability of academic science to cover up absurdities in official history is simply amazing. Wherever you dig, everywhere forgery. The same thing happened with the history of books. According to the official version, at first the books looked like clay tablets. Then papyrus scrolls were used. However, papyrus did not grow everywhere, and gradually papyrus scrolls were replaced by parchment (fine leather).
Already in ancient Rome, a modern form of the book appeared - "code" (translated from Latin means a tree trunk, log, block of wood). It continued to exist for 1.5 thousand years, along with the scrolls. All of this was naturally handwritten, before the advent of Gutenberg's printing press in the 15th century. At the same time, paper is becoming more widespread. Well, after the rapid development of the printing business, the scrolls finally became a thing of the past, and the books acquired the familiar form.
And what is the catch here? The catch is in the complete absence of a logical relationship. All of the above does not correspond at all with real life, with human capabilities and needs, and most importantly, with technology. And now we will see it.
Which is more convenient - a scroll or a book?
Today, almost everyone is convinced that the modern form of books is more convenient than a scroll. And this is a serious misconception. We are just used to the way it looks. If you look at it with an open mind, it is easy to see that the scroll takes up less space, protects the text more reliably, and is hundreds of times more technologically advanced than a book in terms of creating a base and writing handwritten text. Even today, truly stitching and cropping a book at home is a challenge.
It's easier with scrolls. Papyrus was woven from strips of reed fibers with a ribbon of any length. The parchment, of course, cannot be very long, but it was successfully sewn into scrolls. Our “beloved” torus is a good example.
Promotional video:
In general, all soft sheet materials naturally gravitate towards roll storage and transportation. Even if you take that very parchment, then in a free state it also gradually rolls up into a scroll. This is natural for the skin, because it consists of layers that shrink in different ways with changes in humidity and temperature.
That is why the sheets of old parchment books were bound into a massive wooden frame (hence the Latin translation of the word "code" - wooden). There were necessarily fasteners on the frame, but not at all for beauty, and not in order to lock the text from the uninitiated. Simply, if you do not fix the parchment sheets in the pressed state, they will begin to curl. That is, in the binding of the book, the parchment is not allowed to take its natural form (they are unwilling), which leads to the accumulation of internal stresses in the material. This is not great, as it inevitably leads to faster destruction of the material.
But ease of manufacture and storage is not the main advantage of a scroll over a book. More importantly, information can be obtained from the scroll in a continuous stream. The book gives it in pieces, breaks it up into fragments equal to the volume of the page. With each transition from one page to another, an additional loading of short-term memory occurs, with the retention of current information. It's annoying. After all, since childhood, we had to deal only with the book form, and we do not notice this. But back in the 18th century, the gap in the information flow was a serious problem for readers. Then it was decided to print the last word from the previous page at the beginning of the next one to help the reader not to lose his thought.
Why the scrolls fell out of use
I think it is quite obvious that the scroll is superior to the book format in every way. So why has humanity given up on comfortable scrolls in favor of awkward books? There is no clear official answer.
It's just that history falsifiers (hereinafter referred to as distortions) are not so strong in their mind and outlook. History was rewritten when books were already in circulation, and this was also a familiar format for distortions. Well, they didn't think that book printing technology has its limitations. How, interestingly, could Gutenberg replicate the scrolls on his press? Think for yourself: Gutenberg's printing press is a screw press.
The press has limitations on the power of pressure and the size of the working area. You can't put a roll of wallpaper in there and get the text along its entire length in one print.
The printing press allows you to set a cliché with text and print several dozen identical prints in a row. Then the cliché is changed and the next page is printed. In this case, each time, parchment or paper is placed on the same place. It is based strictly on the edges, otherwise everything will be printed crookedly. This requires you to have even, identical sheets corresponding to the power of the press. Moreover, immediately after the print, the sheet should go to drying. How to enter into this process, for example, fifty ten-meter scrolls, which each time must be pushed into the press zone and stacked in exactly the same way, having managed not to smudge the previous fragments of the seal?
It is clear that the scrolls could not be replicated on Gutenberg's printing equipment. They could only be handwritten. Well, since printed materials became cheaper and more accessible than handwritten ones, the scrolls fell out of use. Yes, handwritten scrolls were better, but printed books were cheaper. And aren't we seeing the same thing today, when cheap Chinese consumer goods flood the market …
Who invented the book and why?
Everything seems to be clear and logical. But this is where the fun begins. Since the book has no advantages over the scroll, the perverters had to invent some reason for its appearance. For general use, the following version is proposed: The papyrus was allegedly used for writing only on one side, and the sheets of parchment were denser on both sides. Therefore, they began to fold the parchment in half in the form of a notebook, and subsequently it grew into a full-fledged binding.
And, of course, they lied. There has never been such a reason as the one-sided use of papyrus and its unsuitability for books. Here is what they write about the papyrus: "When the main text was no longer needed, the reverse side could, for example, be used to write literary works (often, however, unnecessary text was simply washed off)." That is, they used it freely in different variations. Moreover, at a later time, papyrus was also successfully used in the book industry: "The sheets in their final form had the form of long ribbons and therefore were preserved in scrolls (and at a later time they were combined into books (lat. Codex)) …"
In my personal understanding, both papyrus and parchment in general have always existed at the same time. It's just that papyrus is a cheaper and more short-lived material for everyday writing, and parchment was used for more thorough work. This, of course, does not at all exclude the existence of serious significant texts on papyrus, as well as parchment notebooks for one-time notes. They say that Tchaikovsky, when inspiration came to him, wrote music even on table napkins. It is only the mass, targeted use that matters, but no one is talking about this. The availability of the material for different areas also affects. Trade links ensured the delivery of papyrus to Europe, but temporary shortages could occur.
That is, the official reason for the appearance of the book format is vague and untenable.
Then, who and why, in fact, could invent the book in its modern form? Isn't it the one who developed the printing technology itself? And if the fame of the invention of the printing press is attributed to Gutenberg, then this is the only person for whom it was vital to adapt individual rectangular printed sheets for more or less convenient reading and storage of long texts. It's just that his car had no other possibilities, although it really wanted to. To give his products acceptable consumer properties, Gutenberg came up with the idea of stitching the sheets into one book. Well, you already understand how the hardcover came about.
If the first printer could not come up with a decent binding, then his only products would have remained the one-page Papal indulgences, with which he, by the way, began. So it turns out that Gutenberg first invented the PRINT technology, and only then book printing (printing and binding).
If anyone else doubts this, then I will give a modern example. Everyone knows that men used to shave with straight razors. Some even now consider it a special chic. Indeed, this has several advantages. Even though this razor is eternal, you don't have to buy it again every week. But at one point, the technology was invented for cheap mass sharpening of sharp, thin metal plates. And they would never have shaved with these things if a convenient safe razor blade machine had not been invented. That is, the chain is like this: a new sharpening technology - disposable cheap blades - a safety razor. Technology dictates the shape of the product, and nothing else.
So what is it? Maybe hardworking blacksmiths centuries ago, during the long winter months, forged complex razors, and stern and patient men tried to shove all sorts of sharp objects in there, some a piece of a kitchen knife, and some a piece of grandfather's checker, and scraped their faces with them? And all this continued until the great pioneer freed everyone from their torment by inventing a standard disposable blade? Could this be? Hardly.
Or another fantasy. Imagine that the leading Ryazan milkmaid Agafya at the end of the 19th century suddenly wanted, for no reason, no reason, to pour milk into separate containers, accurately dosing it in liters, with the possibility of long-term storage. At the same time, she set herself the goal of creating such a container for her product so that it is convenient for transportation, does not spill and fit as tightly as possible in the volume of identical square boxes, which she conceived to put on a cart when transporting milk to the bazaar. For the first time, she decided to sell milk along with the container, making it disposable. The clay pot, of course, did not meet these high requirements.
In order to realize her idea, the enterprising Agafya bought thin cardboard in the city, cut it according to templates, welded on pastes and glued identical rectangular boxes. Then she heated the wax and covered the container with it from the inside, making it waterproof. At the last stage, Agafya strengthened the competitive advantages of her invention by hand-painting each box under Khokhloma. After a strictly metered pouring of milk, the neck of the box was folded and warmed up with an iron blown over the coals to seal the joint with wax.
So the milkmaid Agafya invented the tetrapak and successfully used it, pushing her competitors out by as much as 2 counters. Then the invention spread, and the thrush continued on dark winter nights in the light of a torch to cut, glue and paint the boxes. Their torment lasted until 1946, when the Swedish engineer (first milkman) Harry Erund invented the packaging machine.
This, of course, is nonsense. It was specifically for the technology of machine packaging that the container shape and special cardboard were developed. But the technological difference between a scroll and a book (hardcover with locks, a clipped packet of sheets, numbered pages and a table of contents) is no less than between a milk jar and a tetra pack. However, you and I stubbornly believe in the nonsense that they tell us about the handwritten books of the pre-press period! Ashamed of us, we are so easily deceived. People say that other simplicity is worse than theft. Let's take a closer look.
What about samples of ancient handwritten books?
But what about hardworking scribes who rewrite one book for several years? It is a book, not a scroll. So Vasnetsov painted his picture "Nestor the Chronicler" - there is a scribe, an open book with blank sheets lies in front of him, these sheets are bristling, and, you know, he writes there. But what about the Roman "Codices", small such ancient books two thousand years ago? And most importantly, what about those "most reliable" handwritten books that date back to the 9th … 12th century, on which the official version of history is molded?
But in any way - it makes no sense. The meaning appears if you put everything in its place.
Of course, there could have been such a period of time when printed matter had already begun to displace scrolls, bookbinding had become widespread, but printing did not yet satisfy all needs. Then some handwritten books could be written using standard sheets or even bound "blanks". However, not as a rule, but as an exception. Or they were personal notes, as we do now in our notebooks, notebooks and diaries. Such books cannot be called the main product of information technologies of that time. It is a by-product of the transition period.
Roman codes, oddly enough, are the easiest to explain. Everything becomes clear if the Roman book lovers lived after the 15th century and used printed materials. There are plenty of proofs of this without our reasoning. Today this is unknown only to the lazy. So, just another iron hoop to rivet on a funeral deck with the official history of ancient Rome.
It is not difficult to deal with the shrine of Muslims - a huge book of the Koran. In general, it deserves a separate consideration, since all Arabic writing turns out to be Russian, if you take its original version and read it correctly - from left to right. The Arabs read from right to left N-A-R-O-K, and this narc really has the meaning of some kind of instruction.
But now we are only interested in the form of this document. It is a large-format handwritten parchment book containing over 300 sheets. It is believed that it was written in the 7th century, after the death of the prophet Mohammed (Magician-o-honey; magician healer).
And now if we compare the facts about Christ-Radomir of the 11th century and, accordingly, the later appearance of Islam (as a branch of Christianity), with the time of the appearance of book printing, then the form of the document becomes logical. What we are shown as the first copies of the Qur'an of the 7th century was not made until the 15th century. And this was done indeed, some time after the death of the prophet. As you can see, everything is going logical so far.
Its "voninka" is like a raspberry
It is especially interesting to consider our Russian handwritten books. Among them, the so-called Ostromir Gospel stands out:
It is called a masterpiece of ancient Russian book art. The gospel contains 294 parchment pages.
At the end of the book, a certain scribe Gregory says: “… Glory to Thee, O Lord, Heavenly King, for honoring me to write this Gospel. I began to write it in the year 6564 (1056), and graduated in 6565 (1057) … I am Deacon Gregory wrote this Gospel … (NN Rozov's translation).
As we can see, the "Scribe Gregory" in his handwritten masterpiece lied three times that it was he who wrote this Gospel. However, paleographers researchers found otherwise:
“In the“Consolidated catalog of Slavic-Russian manuscript books stored in the USSR. 11-13 centuries. " (M., 1984) published a scientific description of the Ostromir Gospel, which indicates that this text is written in four handwritings. This means that not only Deacon Gregory and the masters who created the miniatures took part in the creation of the manuscript … but also three more scribes …"
(S. M. Ermolenko; journal "Historical studies at school", 2007, No. 2 (5); quotation - IV Lyovochkin "Fundamentals of Russian paleography". - M.: Krug, 2003. S. 121).
Under such circumstances, of course, legitimate suspicions arise about the authenticity of this and other handwritten books dating back to the pre-press period. It is worth taking a closer look at what and how they could write all this. Therefore, we turn to specialists in old handwritten fonts.
There is a wonderful book, Handwritten Font; textbook for students of printing and art universities, author N. N. Taranov; Lvov, publishing house "Vysshaya Shkola" 1986 (hereinafter excerpts from this source).
It provides comprehensive information on the main 18 handwritten fonts, from Roman, European and ending with Slavic. The pens with which all this is written are described, for each font, the writing features, angles of the pen are given.
And that's not all - in each case, a sample of a real historical document written in this font is shown, a large texture is given, where all letters with peculiarities are carefully drawn, and a duct is necessarily given, i.e. a way of writing in which the order and direction of writing the lines in each letter are drawn.
After reading this book, I realized that creating handwritten text is a rather laborious, but well-developed process, which was formed for a reason. And under the influence of certain requirements. Handwritten text, first of all, must be readable. Therefore, the signs must be well recognizable, be located as evenly and with a rhythmic step as possible, so as not to disrupt the speed of perception of the text.
In order not to reinvent the wheel every time, fonts have been developed at different times that establish ways of writing letters. The font also has its own requirements. If it is handwritten, then it should be performed with the least effort on the part of the scribe, taking into account the capabilities of the writing instrument and material. At the same time, of course, it should look nice and easy to read.
For example, here is how a Rustic (Roman) handwritten font is shown.
Real sample font,
duct font and
its texture.
And here are excerpts from his description:
“A new kind of book writing emerged as a result of imitating the speedy typefaces used to write advertisements and signage. Under the influence of the speed of writing and the use of a wide-nib pen set at an angle of 45-90 degrees … A characteristic feature of the capital rustic font is the presence of thin vertical and wide horizontal strokes, which is due to the large writing angle …"
Everything is logical and reasonable. And so with all fonts, except for Slavic. How did they supposedly write in Russia? In our case, the Ostromir Gospel is written in a font called the "charter." The book shows its texture
and a historical example.
But there is no duct (way of writing) at all. Why, it becomes clear from the description:
“Ancient Slavic books are written in large print - a charter that looks very majestic on the page. In writing, it was a complex and heavy font … To draw the letter signs of the charter, the angle of the letter must be constantly changed, so one should talk not about writing letters, but about drawing them. Even the basic strokes of some letters have different widths.
The letters r, f, y have very thin basic strokes, for which you should turn the pen at an angle of 45-60 degrees. In the letters o, s, m, u and others, you need to change the angle of the pen when writing some elements. The charter is characterized by the presence of subtle serifs in the main and some additional strokes of the letters, which are performed by painting with the tip of the pen … (ie, by skillful artistic tinting of each letter).
The triangular endings of some letters can be done by painting with the tip of the pen or by turning the pen. Having drawn a stroke, the pen should be turned to the right or left, while one side of the pen remains motionless, and the other describes an arc … (interestingly, we do not see any arc in the patterns and texture of the charter, everywhere there are triangles with straight sides). Drawings of the letters H and I are very similar … The letter M is complex in outline … The text written by the charter is difficult to read …"
Well, what kind of duct can there be? The authors of the manual simply cannot graphically show with arrows how each letter was specifically written, because at the same time the hand did not have a constant tilt, but made complex turns and tilts, with periodic drawing.
This is some kind of obsession. Why, again, we are not like people? We all have handwritten fonts designed for writing, and only here for drawing. Again, they want to portray our ancestors as subhumans and masochists. But let's summarize, maybe the problem is not in us at all?
So, handwritten books of the pre-press period in Russia were written by a charter (later by a semi-charter, etc.). In writing, it was a complex and heavy font, namely:
- letters were not written, but drawn;
- serifs and triangular endings were done by drawing;
- the letter M was complex in outline;
- the text written by the charter is difficult to read;
- drawings of letters H and I are very poorly distinguishable.
Conclusion: the charter, unlike all other (non-Slavic) fonts, does not at all meet the requirements for handwritten fonts, since it is difficult to write and at the same time difficult to read. With such shortcomings, it is completely indifferent how majestic it all looks. It is unsuitable for handwriting technology.
Is it incomprehensible the difference between technical writing and skillful drawing? If the correspondence of the Gospel in Gothic script takes 1-1.5 months, then drawing in the charter is 10-12 months. You can grind out several books with such a font, but in your common mind you cannot use it for centuries.
The charter font is not a majestic masterpiece, but simply a mediocre antique fake. All books written by him are also fakes.
The need for and ways to counterfeit handwritten fonts
Just a couple of years ago, State Duma deputy from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation Viktor Ilyukhin (his blessed memory) pulled out into the light of day a dirty story about forging documents of the Second World War. In particular, they talked about Katyn and the executed Polish officers, but in general, about a whole laboratory in which work was in full swing for decades to create a false history of the USSR in the form of letters, orders, orders, etc.
The specialists of the state scale worked, with the provision of the highest quality. However, and now, most likely, they work. Apparently, we have a poor idea of the scale of the activities of this laboratory, because just a few months after the hint of its exposure, Viktor Ivanovich Ilyukhin died suddenly.
As soon as the occupation power begins to reshape history for itself, the emergence of such a laboratory is inevitable. After all, people just won't believe it, they need proof. And the simplest and most effective proof of non-existent events is a forged document.
It's the same with our handwritten books. There was an occupation power under Peter 1. There was an order to rewrite history. There were invited experts Bayer, Schlözer, Mayer. At this time (18th century), in various complex and intricate ways, many supposedly ancient written sources were thrown to the public, on which a fake history was built. The Ostrom World Gospel is just one of them. How can one doubt the existence of a laboratory for the forgery of historical documents at the then Academy of Sciences?
The question arises: why then invent a non-existent font? Isn't it enough just to distort or falsify existing old documents? But everything is quite rational here.
The scale of the forgery is strictly consistent with the scale of the distortion of history, and we are not even fully aware of it yet. Probably everything was changed so radically that the original ancient documents were easier to destroy completely than to change. This actually happened (the massive seizure and destruction of books under Peter 1).
It was necessary to hide the fact of the recent unity of world culture (speech, writing), and the fact that it was Russian culture that lay at its foundation. The more ancient the original texts, the more similarities an inquisitive researcher will find. Therefore, real fonts were not suitable for counterfeiting. Remember how many times the Chinese altered their hieroglyphs until they ceased to look like our runes.
How do you create a fake handwritten font? How do fonts differ in general?
Significant differences are the angle of inclination of the pen, which gives different line thicknesses, and the shape of the serifs. In the picture, you can see 30 different types of serifs.
This is a font decoration. All of them are obtained with a short, unambiguous movement of a broad-nib pen. Interestingly, among them you will not find the triangular "charter" serifs.
After all, as we already understood, such serifs cannot be obtained with a simple movement of the pen. Why did the counterfeiters use just such an element?
The fact is that in our native ornamental art (for example, stone carving), lettering was used.
Complex, elegant, rich in information, like modern puzzles, it simply delights.
These triangular serifs are taken from there, so that our ancestral memory responds at least a little when reading a fake font. But whole books were not written in ligature, so such an element is quite acceptable there, but in a handwritten font it is absurd.
Also, ligature is characterized by an arbitrary change in the thickness of the lines, because this is one of the ways to fill the pattern. And imitating this, the "charter" introduced a variable line thickness of letters, which is terribly inconvenient for a handwritten font. In general, they didn't bother for a long time, they just ripped off some of the elements from our ornaments and called it “charter”. And then they drew as many "ancient" books as they could. Apparently, already drawing forgeries with their charter, the forgers realized what an inconvenience they had created. And they gradually switched to a simplified semi-charter.
Handwritten books are written for the last page
The technique of fraud has not fundamentally changed over the past centuries. Both then and now, magicians and fraudsters work on the same principle - distraction. So it is here. A whole book has been written. Its content is attractive, but has no practical value, it is just colorfully designed excerpts from the gospel. And the most important thing is written in a small but very informative postscript on the last page of the book:
“I started writing it in the year 6564. and graduated in 6565. I wrote the Gospel for the servant of God, named Joseph in baptism, and according to the worldly Ostromir, who was a relative of Prince Izyaslav. Prince Izyaslav then owned both regions - his father Yaroslav and his brother Vladimir. Prince Izyaslav himself ruled the throne of his father Yaroslav in Kiev, and he entrusted his brother-in-law Ostromir to govern the throne of his brother in Novgorod … (Translation by NN Rozov)
This is called a brief history with accurate dating of events. Moreover, this information was given not in the present tense, on behalf of an eyewitness of these events, but in the past, namely, as a historical reference (we are counting on the adequacy of N. N. Rozov's translation). And this is not at all an isolated case of the enthusiasm of an individual scribe:
“It is noteworthy that all the earliest dated Slavic manuscripts were created by the Eastern Slavs. In addition to the Ostromir Gospel 1056-1057. these are Izbornik Svyatoslav 1073, Izbornik 1076, Archangel Gospel 1092, Service Menaion 1095-1097. The fact itself is remarkable. It was the ancient Eastern Slavs who sought to capture the time of the creation of a large monument, and this is, of course, connected with the historical organization of thinking, with a special sense of time … the lowest request to the reader to forgive the copyist for mistakes and correct them …"
(Doctor of Philology, Professor of Novosibirsk State University, teacher of literature at the Orthodox Gymnasium in the name of St. Sergius of Radonezh L. G. Panin; journal "Historical Studies in School", 2007, No. 2 (5)).
Like this. Traditionally, it was required to praise the customer of the book, that is, to perpetuate his memory (in vain did he pay money), and to apologize for inaccuracies. And that's all. But "our scribes" are amicably and strikingly different from scribes all over the world. Not only do they like to draw letters instead of the usual writing for years, they are also bursting with "historical organization of thinking" and "a special sense of time."
Of course, our ancestors did not suffer from strange mental disorders, and could not behave so inadequately. Otherwise, our state would no longer exist on the world map for a long time. It is obvious that all these historical references that are not related to the text of the book are the essence of the forgery organized by the laboratory for forgery of documents at the Petrovsk Academy of Sciences.
Conclusion
Let's summarize. All of humanity has once again been deceived by talking about the widespread practice of rewriting books by hand for a millennium before the invention of book printing technology. In fact, the book form itself was not invented until after the invention of printing technology.
The storytellers are forced to tell such tales, since some real fragments of our past are attributed by them to the past almost a millennium. However, recognized written evidence of these events is in the form of books, such as the Koran.
We, the Russians, were deceived especially insolently, almost completely hiding the developed system of writing that existed in our pre-press period, which consisted of symbols of various purposes and writing, and, moreover, fonts. Thus, they hid the fact that our runes became the basis of Egyptian and Chinese writing.
For example, the Chinese Book of Changes is written in mysterious hexagrams, which in reality are nothing more than a special system of notation with lines and cuts that existed in Russia. And we are told that features and cuts are when an unlucky Slav scratches the wall with a nail. Instead of all this wealth, they came up with a flawed handwritten type “charter”, which was used to draw our “ancient past” in the amount of a couple of dozen books.
This outrage happened not earlier than the 18th century, when the substitution of our past with the use of forged texts was put on a scientific basis and organized on a state scale. Parasites act in their usual ways.
We faced the same large-scale approach to the substitution of our past a couple of years ago, when there was a leak of information about a special laboratory dealing with forgery of documents during the Second World War. State Duma deputy Viktor Ivanovich Ilyukhin then paid with his life for making this information public.
The scandal was hushed up, and we do not know what is happening there today. Therefore, it is too early for us to relax. It is very possible that soon we will see new "genuine" documents concerning the times of perestroika and even the two thousandth years, according to which we are again flawed and owe someone a lifetime.
Author: Alexey Artemiev