Foreword
On the basis of the new chronology and surviving old documents, we proposed a reconstruction of the Russian and world history of antiquity and the Middle Ages, which, as already mentioned, is very different from the point of view of modern historians. According to our reconstruction, the view of the “Tatar-Mongol” yoke is also radically changing. The "Tatar-Mongols" turn out to be not wild nomads who arrived in Russia thousands of miles away from modern Mongolia, but Russian people of the 13th-14th centuries. Always living on their ancestral land, and in the XIV century A. D. who began the great conquest of the world, which in later chronicles was called the "Mongol" conquest. The Great = "Mongol" conquest covered, in particular, Western Europe. Moreover, for the internal parts of Europe, remote from the waterways, this was not even a conquest, but rather colonization. Since the ancient - according to the new chronology - XIV century AD, the inner regions of Europe for the most part have not yet been inhabited and developed.
In this book, we continue the story of the "Tatar-Angolian" invasion from the point of view of our reconstruction, which began in the first book of this series - "Russia and the Horde". However, unlike the book "Rus and Horde", here we focus not on the internal Russian history, but on the relationship between Russia and Western Europe in the era of the great = "Mongol" conquest.
Eurasian capitals - Russian colonies
According to the New Chronology, most of the modern Eurasian capitals were founded after the Great. conquests of the XIV century as "Roman", that is, Russian colonies
It is believed that many modern cities, and, above all, the capitals of many modern states of Europe, arose on the site of the former colonial settlements founded by the "ancient" Roman Empire. This picture is quite natural and does not cause objections. In fact, let’s imagine: the imperial authorities, for the first time reaching distant, still undeveloped places, erected guard towns-settlements there. In which the imperial governors soon settled, the local authorities, the necessary military forces were concentrated. Over time, such a settlement naturally turns out to be the largest and most significant in the vicinity. Locals are getting used to his primacy. It is not surprising that later, after the fall of the Roman Empire, it was these imperial centers-colonies that most often became the capitals of the new, young states that emerged on the ruins of the Empire.
This, generally correct, picture should only be revised from the point of view of CHRONOLOGY. According to the New Chronology, the colonization of Europe actually began only from the time of the great = "Mongol" conquest of the XIV century. The center of the resulting Great Russian Empire was Vladimir-Suzdal Russia. The capitals of the Empire at different times were the Russian cities of Yaroslavl (aka Veliky Novgorod of the Russian chronicles), Kostroma, Vladimir, Suzdal. And only at the very end of the Empire's existence, in the second half of the 16th century, the current city of Moscow becomes the imperial world capital. Therefore, everything that historians say about the "ancient Roman" colonization of Eurasia and North Africa, from the point of view of New chronology, should be applied to the Russian colonization of the era of the great conquest of the XIV-XV centuries. Under the domination of the Great Medieval Russian Empire, a web of trade routes arose on the vast expanses of the Eurasian continent, connecting the center of the Empire - Vladimir-Suzdal Russia - with its most remote lands. Such as, for example, China, India, France, Spain, Egypt. Together with trade routes in the XIV-XV centuries, the Russian-Horde ("ancient Roman" in the terminology of historians) colonies were formed. Some of which later became the capitals of independent states. But this happened already in the 17th century, after the collapse of the Great Empire. Together with trade routes in the XIV-XV centuries, the Russian-Horde ("ancient Roman" in the terminology of historians) colonies were formed. Some of which later became the capitals of independent states. But this happened already in the 17th century, after the collapse of the Great Empire. Together with trade routes in the XIV-XV centuries, the Russian-Horde ("antique Roman" in the terminology of historians) colonies were formed. Some of which later became the capitals of independent states. But this happened already in the 17th century, after the collapse of the Great Empire.
Promotional video:
But if the Horde = "Roman" colonization of Europe, Asia and Africa took place so recently and, apparently, PLANOMALLY enough, then in the location of the imperial colonial centers - future capitals - certain patterns may appear. Let's put ourselves in the shoes of the imperial government, which is faced with the need to quickly establish, effective governance over the vast, newly conquered territories. Many of which WERE YET EVEN ONLY UNMASTERED. That can be seen, for example, from the book of Mavro Orbini. So, for example, Orbini argues that when the Slavic troops first arrived in Holland, IT WAS A STILL DESERT, UNHIVIDED COUNTRY.
It is most likely that in such an environment the centers of the new governorships were located ALONG THE EMPIRE TRADING ROADS ESTABLISHED AT THIS TIME. And - not randomly, but most likely, after some SPECIFIC DISTANCE from each other. Let's say, through a THOUSAND VERSES. Naturally, the terrain did not always allow it to be done exactly, but something like that was most likely aimed at. How is it beneficial? At least the fact that the correct location of the cities brought a reasonable order to trade, post office, courier service. Sitting in the capital, it was easy to estimate how long it would take for a courier to deliver the tsar's order to one or another subordinate region. Since it was known that the distance to the nearest colonial centers, so to speak, of the “governorships of the first level,” was, say, one thousand versts. Until the next two thousand miles. Etc. Introducing such an order in the construction of colonies is a simple and natural idea for the Empire, which quickly expanded its borders towards underdeveloped lands. Where large cities did not exist yet and they had to be created from scratch. This is exactly what “ancient Rome” did according to the Scaligerian version of history. This is how the Great Medieval Empire was supposed to act according to our reconstruction. Incidentally, she was the true prototype of the Scaligerian "ancient Rome". The empire threw on the geographical map something like a spider's web, at the nodes of which, along the paths-radii emanating from the capital, local control centers arose, fig. 1. Of course, over time, some of them gave way to others that arose later and from other considerations. Besides,in this picture, if necessary, made their own amendments and features of the relief - the sea, mountains, rivers, swamps. It was far from always possible to create a perfectly correct web of roads on the terrain.
Figure: 1. Natural location of local centers formed after the Great Conquest. It is precisely this arrangement of local capitals - along trade routes, on several circles WITH A COMMON CENTER IN THE CAPITAL OF THE EMPIRE - naturally should have arisen during the rapid expansion of the borders of the Empire due to the rapid development of vast previously unpopulated spaces.
Nevertheless, it makes sense to see if today there are any, albeit faint, traces of this kind of regularity. If the hypothetical picture described above is correct, then many of the modern capitals of Europe and Asia should be arranged in a ring-like manner, that is, be near several circles with the same center, Fig. 1. If so, then it will be possible to calculate this center. The location of which, by the way, will show us exactly where that WORLD CAPITAL was located, from which Europe and Asia were once colonized. Maybe it will be Italian Rome? Then the Scaligerian version of history would finally receive some confirmation. But let's not rush. Only calculations can give the answer. However, we will not start with calculations.
An old list of distances from Moscow to the capitals of various states
In the book "Old engraved maps and plans of the 15th-18th centuries" our attention was attracted by an interesting chapter entitled "Table of the distances of various capitals from Moscow." This table “is associated with the name of Andrei Andreevich Vinius (1641-1717), a man who played a significant role in the transitional time for the history of Russia in the late 17th - early 18th centuries. His father, Andrei Vinius, DUTCH … appeared in Russia during the reign of Mikhail Fedorovich … Andrei Andreevich Vinius in his youth was taken as a translator from the Dutch language to the Ambassadorial Prikaz … Here he compiled and translated "Election from Holy, Divine and Royal Books", drew maps … Vinius was the ORGANIZER OF THE POSTAL OFFICE IN RUSSIA, THE FIRST POSTMASTER and corrected this,., Position … for more than a quarter of a century ", p. 167. Vinius was a high official. Under Peter I “Vinius was in charge of Ambassadorial, Pharmaceutical,and since 1697 also by the Siberian order”, p. 168.
Immediately, we note that Vinius's activity fell on the era that came soon after the split of the Great Medieval Empire. Vinius was one of those NEW people - usually foreigners - who in the new Romanov Russia replaced the dispersed tsarist officials of the old Russian Horde dynasty. He and others like him took matters in the destroyed institutions of the former Great Empire. Vinius got the Ambassadorial Order.
Apparently, as the head of the Ambassadorial Prikaz, Vinius compiled a TABLE OF DISTANCES FROM MOSCOW TO VARIOUS CAPITALS. We give his table in Fig. 2. But one should not think that he himself first came up with such a table. Here is its title: “Description of the distance of the capitals of the deliberate cities of glorious states and lands, as well as of the noble islands and straits, by water and dry, by the BOOK's size, named water and other parts. Description of the Russian state from the First Throne in the alphabet of His Imperial Majesty to the cities of Moscow, only to which the city and the straits are miles away. And such in the sheet presented below it presents”, p. 166. By the way, this name immediately strikes the eye that it was written by a foreigner who does not know much Russian and Church Slavonic.
![Figure: 2. Table of distances from Moscow to various capitals and other important cities. Compiled by A. A. Vinius in the 17th century, probably on the model destroyed by the Romanovs of an older list of distances from the capital of the Great Russian Empire to the local capitals subordinate to it. Taken from [90], p. 167](https://i.greatplainsparanormal.com/images/024/image-71682-2-j.webp "Figure: 2. Table of distances from Moscow to various capitals and other important cities. Compiled by A. A. Vinius in the 17th century, probably on the model destroyed by the Romanovs of an older list of distances from the capital of the Great Russian Empire to the local capitals subordinate to it. Taken from [90], p. 167")
Figure: 2. Table of distances from Moscow to various capitals and other important cities. Compiled by A. A. Vinius in the 17th century, probably on the model destroyed by the Romanovs of an older list of distances from the capital of the Great Russian Empire to the local capitals subordinate to it. Taken from [90], p. 167.
The title of Vinius's table makes it abundantly clear that it was drawn from some old source (or sources). So, Vinius directly names as his primary source a certain OLD BOOK about the length of waterways ("books named for waterways"), apparently still in his time in the Ambassadorial Prikaz. Which, therefore, was used in Russia long before Vinius. Needless to say, THIS BOOK IS NO LONGER today. At least nothing is known about her, p. 166. Most likely, it was simply destroyed, like many other documents of the Great Medieval Russian Empire after the victory of the Reformation rebellion, the collapse of the Empire and the seizure of power in Moscow by the pro-Western proteges of the rebels - the Romanovs. The winners rewrote history and destroyed old authentic documents,replacing them with fakes in order to hide from their descendants the very existence of the Great Russian-Horde Empire, which they hate.
From this and other old Russian books of the Ambassador's Prikaz, Vinius, judging by the title of his table, and extracted the distance from Moscow to Paris, Baghdad, Vienna, Madrid, as well as to MEXICO, p. 167, 169. Should it be understood that the old Russian book considered Mexico as a part of the Russian Kingdom? From the point of view of modern Scaligerian-Romanov history, this, of course, is absurd. But from the point of view of the impudent reconstruction, there is nothing strange in this. On the contrary, the opposite would have been strange - if in the table of distances from Moscow to the capital cities of the provinces of the Empire, the path to Mexico had not been presented. After all, in Mexico, too, had to get and take there royal orders to governors and other important mail.
Incidentally, the mention of Mexico in the old Horde book clearly alarmed Vinius. How could American Mexico belong to the Russian Kingdom! What trade relations could there have been between distant Mexico and Russia in the 16th century? Such relations no longer had a place on the pages of the Scaligerian-Romanov version of history, which was just at that time created by the new rulers of the new states. And Vinius apparently decided to edit the text himself. Of course, the easiest way would be to delete Mexico altogether. But for some reason, he didn't. Mexico was left on the list. But the case was presented as if Mexico were the capital of the "Kingdom of Sweden", fig. 3. However, the Swedish kingdom actually had a different capital - STOCKHOLM, rice. 4. Naturally, in the old Horde book, it WAS ALSO BEING NAMED. Isn't that why TWO CAPITALS OF SWEDEN APPEARED in Vinius's table? One is Stockholm. The other is MEXICO! In our opinion, we come across here clear traces of forgery of old Horde documents by editors like Vinius. The Scaligerian editors did their best to eliminate the traces of the existence of the Great Empire. Sometimes it worked well, sometimes it didn't.
And here is another trace of the former geography, brought to us by Vinius's list of distances. The Mediterranean Sea is called the WHITE SEA there. Namely, in the description of the Spanish city of Toledo it is said: “Toleta, the great city, where the OKIYAN SEA COLLECTES WITH THE WHITE SEA, between the Gishpansky land and the French”, p. 167. See fig. 5. That is: "Toledo, the great city where the ocean merges with the White Sea …". It follows directly from this that the modern Mediterranean Sea is called the White Sea. This identification is independently confirmed by other indications in Vinius's list of distances. For example, it clearly states that the island of Cyprus is located in the WHITE SEA. Interestingly, in our time, a part of the Mediterranean Sea - the Aegean Sea - in Bulgarian is called BYALO MORE, that is, the WHITE SEA.
The Mediterranean Sea was also called the WHITE Sea in some medieval sources. For example - in the "Notes of the Janissary", written, as it is believed, in the 15th century by the Janissary Konstantin Mikhailovich from Ostrovitsa. These notes are also called the "Turkish Chronicle".
Apparently, the former imperial-Horde geography of the XIV-XVI centuries differed significantly from the modern one, which came into use only in the XVII-XVIII centuries. By purposefully editing old documents, not only ancient history was “improved”. Geography was also not ignored.
And now the fun part. Vinius's list contains DISTANCES from Moscow to numerous cities and capitals of the world. Moreover, "directions are indicated by the OLD MOST IMPORTANT TRADING ROUTES", p. 168. Hence, it follows that all distances given in the list are calculated ALONG THE OLD TRADING ROADS. Which, of course, were not always straightforward, although, of course, they tried to choose them as short as possible. All distances in the list are given with an accuracy of hundreds of versts. For example, we see here distances of 4100, 6300, 2500, 2700, 2900 versts, etc. Consequently, with a random spread, the fraction of the distances, MULTIPLE THOUSAND THOUSANDS, should be approximately 1/10. In total, the list contains 56 distances. Consequently, with a random spread, there should be only 5_6 cities, the distances to which from Moscow are multiples of a thousand versts. What do we really see?
It turns out that in the table OF 56 DISTANCES 22 (TWENTY-TWO!) ARE EXACTLY MULTIPLE THOUSAND VERTS. This is almost half of the total distances listed. Which is UNEXPLAINABLE A LOT for random scatter. Already from this one striking circumstance, a certain interesting pattern emerges. It turns out that almost half of the old large cities and capitals of Europe and Asia are removed along the old trade routes from Moscow at a distance of MULTIPLE THOUSAND VERSES.
We list all those cities that are located in the Vinius table at distances that are multiples of a thousand versts from Moscow
1) ALEXANDRIA, 4000 versts.
2) AMSTERDAM, 3000 versts, through Arkhangelsk.
3) ANTWERP, 3000 versts, through Riga.
4) BAR, 3000 versts.
5) WARSAW, 1000 versts.
6) VIENNA, 3000 versts, through Riga. …
7) VENICE, 3000 versts, across Arkhangelsk by sea.
8) HAMBURG ("Anburok"), 2000 versts, across Riga.
9) GEORGIAN land, 3000 versts.
10) GENEVA ("Geneva"), 4000 versts.
11) JERUSALEM, 4000 versts. By the way, it is not clear why it was named the capital, since the name of the state of which it is the capital is not indicated.
12) KANDIAN island in the White, that is, the Mediterranean, sea, 2000 miles. By the way, the title of KANDIAN was included in the title of Russian tsars, p. VII, p. 239.
13) KENIGSBERG ("The Queen in the Land of Prussia"), 2000 miles, across Riga.
14) LAHOR in Pakistan, 5000 versts. By the way, the name Pakistan probably comes from PEGI STAN, that is, Stan of the Pied Horde, see our book "Empire".
15) LONDON, 3000 versts, through Arkhangelsk.
16) LYUBEK, 2000 versts, across Pskov.
17) MADRID, 4000 versts.
18) PARIS, 4000 versts.
19) STRAITS hail, probably COPENHAGEN, standing right on the straits, 3000 versts.
20) STOCKHOLM, 2000 versts.
21) TSAR-GRAD, 2000 versts.
22) SCHECIN ("STETIN") on the Oder, 2000 versts.
Around which geographic point are the European capitals lined up in circles?
But - we will be told - all these tables of Vinius and his predecessors are hopelessly outdated. Today, of course, no such amazing patterns can be seen on a geographic map. In general, the old trade routes have long been forgotten. What they were in antiquity, no one knows for sure. It is impossible to check Vinius, let alone his ancient source. Moreover, Vinius was clearly editing something. For example, he placed Mexico in Sweden … What to take from him.
Okay, now let's take the MODERN GLOBE. Moreover, it is a globe, and not a flat map that distorts the true distances. We will note on it the modern European and Asian capitals, as well as the famous capitals of the Middle Ages, such as, for example, Istanbul. This list is: Amman, Amsterdam, Ankara, Athens, Baghdad, Beirut, Belgrade, Berlin, Bern, Bratislava, Brussels, Budapest, Bucharest, Warsaw, Vienna, Damascus, Dublin, Geneva, Jerusalem, Kabul, Copenhagen, Lisbon, London, Luxembourg, Madrid, Moscow, Nicosia, Oslo, Paris, Prague, Rome, Sofia, Istanbul, Stockholm, Tehran, Tirana, Helsinki. Now let's take an arbitrary point on the globe, which we will then change, and calculate the distance from it to all these 37 capitals. There are 37 numbers. We emphasize that we measured distances on a globe, that is, on the earth's surface, and not on a flat distorting map.
Let's see if the point we have chosen is the center of several circles along which all, or almost all of the indicated cities are located, Fig. 1. Then we take another point. And so let's sort out, with a small step, all the points of the globe. It is quite clear that if capitals were scattered around the globe chaotically, that is, they would arise independently of each other (as follows from the Scaligerian version of history), then we would not find any COMMON CENTRAL POINT for them. But if the capitals did appear as described in our reconstruction, then the COMMON CENTRAL POINT may appear. It will be very curious to see exactly where she is. In Italian Rome? Which would, in principle, be explainable from the point of view of the Scaligerian history. Or maybe in Istanbul? What would mean what exactly
The Roman kingdom with its capital in the Bosphorus Tsar Grad once mastered and populated Europe and Asia. Or will the center end up in Vladimir-Suzdal Rus? This is what our reconstruction clearly says.
It remains to carry out, in principle, simple, although cumbersome calculations.
We will immediately report the answer. THE CENTRAL POINT ON THE GLOBE, COMMON FOR THE CAPITALS OF EURASIA, DOES REALLY EXIST. Moreover, it is very pronounced. It is in relation to it that almost all the capitals listed above are best aligned in circles. This point is the Russian city VLADIMIR, the ancient capital of Vladimir-Suzdal Rus. And immediately a natural thought arises: is not such a loud name of the city connected with this vivid circumstance: Vladimir = THE RULER OF THE WORLD?
The work on calculating the distances between cities was carried out by Alexey Yuryevich Ryabtsev, a professional cartographer from Moscow. He also drew our attention for the first time to such curious patterns in the mutual disposition of European capitals. Note that A. Yu. Ryabtsev faced this during his career, which had nothing to do with ancient history and chronology.
Let us tell you more about the results of the calculations performed. In fig. 6 shows a geographical map of Europe, in a special projection, which does not distort the distances from the central point of the map to all its other points. Vladimir was taken as the central point, since, as the calculations showed, it is he who is the center relative to which almost all European capitals are lined up in circles. Particularly impressive is the FIRST CIRCLE shown in fig. 6. Oslo, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Bratislava, Belgrade, Sofia, Istanbul and Ankara almost exactly fit on it. Budapest and Copenhagen are located close to it. The SECOND CIRCLE is no less spectacular, although it already largely passes through the seas. On it, or close to it, are located London, Paris, Amsterdam, Brussels, Luxembourg, Bern, Geneva, Rome, Athens, Nicosia,Beirut, Damascus, Baghdad, Tehran.
Stockholm, Helsinki, Warsaw, Tirana, Bucharest, Dublin, Jerusalem did not lie on these circles. The capitals farthest from Vladimir - Madrid and Kabul, apparently fall on the circle of the next level.
Here is a histogram of the frequencies of the distances of the listed capitals from Vladimir. Namely, we put on the horizontal axis the value of the distance in kilometers, and on the vertical axis - the frequency with which such a value occurs in our list. To calculate the frequencies, we divided the distance scale into segments of 50 kilometers, and then smoothed the histogram by averaging it over three neighboring values, including the current one (in other words, we took a moving average over three points). The resulting graph is shown in Fig. 7.
TWO BRIGHT HISTOGRAM PEAKS CLEARLY SHOW THAT ARE TWO TYPICAL DISTANCES BETWEEN THE CITY OF VLADIMIR AND THE EUROPEAN CAPITALS. They are approximately 1800 and 2400 kilometers. In other words, the distance from Vladimir to European capitals is very likely close to either 1800 or 2400 kilometers. Of course, there are exceptions, but this is usually the case.
But maybe a similar picture will turn out in other cases, if instead of Vladimir we take another capital as the center? For example - Italian Rome. Or Greek Athens. No, nothing of the kind is even close. In fig. 8 and 9 show the histograms constructed according to the same rules as for Vladimir, but as the center all the above capitals are enumerated one by one. It is clearly seen that the only histogram approaching the histogram of Vladimir is the histogram of the city of Moscow. But there is nothing surprising in this - Moscow is just geographically very close to Vladimir. And nevertheless, its peaks, in comparison with the two peaks of the Vladimir histogram, are already noticeably smoothed. The Moscow histogram is slightly worse than the Vladimir one. The rest are MUCH WORSE.
The result obtained clearly shows that the GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION OF THE EUROPEAN AND ASIAN CAPITALS BEARS INSIDE THE TRACKS OF SOME ANCIENT ORDER. It manifests itself in the concentric arrangement of most of the capitals around a single center. And this center is the Russian city of Vladimir. That is, the Owner of the World.
We will be told that this arrangement could have arisen by chance. Perhaps, although it is difficult to agree with this. One way or another, we emphasize that our reconstruction perfectly explains the similar location of local capitals around a common world center. It could arise naturally, simply due to the fact that vast areas of Europe and Asia were rapidly developed and populated during the Great Conquest of the XIV century. In a fairly short time, trade routes were laid on the newly developed lands, and local control centers were established along these routes. Probably, all this happened so quickly that the centralization of the Empire had not yet had time to "shake" (which happened later due to the huge distances and insufficiently developed means of communication at that time). At first, the development of new lands had to take place in a fairly orderly manner and according to a single plan. The center of the rapidly expanding Empire was, according to our reconstruction, Vladimir-Suzdal Russia. Future local capitals began to emerge along the equidistant from the city of Vladimir, in the nodes of the Empire's communications network, created according to a single plan.
It must be said that before the Great Conquest of the XIV century, the Empire, according to our reconstruction, far from covered such vast land areas that were swept over during the Great Equestrian conquest of the XIV century. Prior to that, the lands of the Empire were located mainly along the WATER - sea and river - routes. The great conquest of the XIV century ended with the creation of a huge Eurasian and North African LAND state, equipped with both water and gigantic LAND (caravan) communication routes. As a result, in the XIV century the Great = "Mongolian" Empire of the Middle Ages emerged with its center in Vladimir-Suzdal Rus. In Russian it was called the RUSSIAN KINGDOM or simply - GREAT RUSSIA. And only later, already in Romanov's time, the meaning of the loud name “Great Rus” was slyly narrowed down to Russia today. Which, by the way,has its own old name "Muscovy".
From the book "Tatar-Mongol yoke: who conquered whom". G. V. Nosovsky, A. T. Fomenko