Tartary - an Empire hidden in history. It was bigger than Russia once...

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,419
Likes
5,704
#1
"Tartary, a vast country in the northern parts of Asia, bounded by Siberia on the north and west: this is called Great Tartary. The Tartars who lie south of Muscovy and Siberia, are those of Astracan, Circassia, and Dagistan, situated north-west of the Caspian-sea; the Calmuc Tartars, who lie between Siberia and the Caspian-sea; the Usbec Tartars and Moguls, who lie north of Persia and India; and lastly, those of Tibet, who lie north-west of China." - Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. III, Edinburgh, 1771, p. 887.

Now compare to the description given by Wikipedia, "Tartary (Latin: Tartaria) or Great Tartary (Latin: Tartaria Magna) was a name used from the Middle Ages until the twentieth century to designate the great tract of northern and central Asia stretching from the Caspian Sea and the Ural Mountains to the Pacific Ocean, settled mostly by Turko-Mongol peoples after the Mongol invasion and the subsequent Turkic migrations."

Tartary was not a great tract. It was a country.

And to add some credibility (or to take away some) to the story, below you can find an excerpt from the CIA document declassified in 1998, and created in 1957.

CIA_tartar.png

Link to the document on the CIA website: NATIONAL CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT UNDER COMMUNISM

Though I do not think that Tartary was solely Muslim. It rather was multi-religious, and multi-cultural. One of the reasons I think so is the tremendous disparity between what leaders like Genghis Khan, Batu Khan, Timur aka Tamerlane looked like to the contemporary artists vs. the appearance attributed to them today.
Today: Genghis Khan - Batu Khan - Timur

YuanEmperorAlbumGenghisPortrait.jpg batu-khun.jpg Tamerlan.jpg

Here is how 17th, 18th century books saw these three

Genghis Khan
with wife here
ching_khun.jpg ching_khun_wife.jpg
ching_khun_1.jpg ching_khun_2.jpg ching_khun_3.jpg ching_khun_4.jpg ching_khun_5.jpg ching_khun_6.jpg

Timur - Tamerlane

timur_tartary.jpeg timur_tartary_0.jpg timur_tartary_0_1.jpg timur_tartary_1.jpg timur_tartary_1_1.jpg timur_tartary_2.png

Batu Khan
Well, I could not find any, but apparently in Turkey we have a few busts of the following Gentlemen. A few of them I do not know, but the ones I do look nothing like what I was taught at school. Also dates are super bizarre on those plaques. Do Turks know something we don't?

2_batu_khan.jpg 1_timur.jpg 3_bumin_kagan.jpg 4_erturgul.jpg
5_babur_suh.jpg 7_attila.jpg 8_BİLGE_KAĞAN_DÖNEMİ.JPG

The other reason why I think Tartary had to be multi-religious, and multi-cultural is its vastness during various moments in time. For example in 1652 Tartary appears to have control over the North America.

1652 Nova Totius Terrarum Orbis geographica ac hydrographica tabula_1.jpg

The Coverup

The official history is hiding a major world power which existed as late as the 19th century. Tartary was a country with its own flag, its own government and its own place on the map. Its territory was huge, but somehow quietly incorporated into Russia, and some other countries. This country you can find on the maps predating the second half of the 19th century.

Ngram by Google Books shows how Tartary was quietly put away.

Tartary_Ngram.png

Yet, some time in the 18th century Tartary Muskovite was the biggest country in the world: 3,050,000 square miles.

tartaria_book_1.jpg tartaria_book_3.jpg tartaria_book_2.jpg tartaria_book_5.jpg tartaria_book_4.jpg Tartary_HUGE_1.jpg Tartary_HUGE.jpg

Some of the maps showing Tartary

1584 - ortelius-russland-tartaren-reich-nordwesten-usa.jpg 1680 -Tartary-China-Russia-Japan-De-Wit.jpg 1684_tartary.jpg 1707 guillaume de l'ile.jpg 1714 Mappe-Monde ou Carte Universelle.jpg 1753 Mappa Mundi generalis.jpg 1754 I-e Carte de l’Asie.jpg 1806-Herisson-37-grand-tartary.jpg 1820_tartary.jpg great_tartarie_1.jpg great_tartarie_2.jpg great_tartarie_3.jpg great_tartarie.jpg great_tartarie_4.jpg great_tartarie_5.jpg tartaria_map_x_1.jpg tartaria_map_x_2.jpg tartaria_map_x_3.jpg tartaria_map_x_4.jpg tartaria_map_x_5.jpg


Tartary had its own flag, crest, its own emperor, and of course its own people.
The Kings of Tartary - (Genealogie Des Anciens Empereurs Tartares, Descendus De Genghiscan)

Kings_of_tartary.jpg

The people of Tartary.

tartary_people_1.jpg tartary_people_2.jpg tartary_people_3.jpg tartary_people_4.jpg tartary_people_5.jpg tartary_people_6.jpg tartary_people_7.jpg

The flag and crest of Tartary had an owl depicted on it. The emperor's flag contained a griffin on a yellow background.

tartary_flag_11.jpg
Tartary_flag_11.jpeg flag_country_1.jpg flag_country.jpg Flag_crest.jpg

And it was different from China

large_tartarychina.jpg
There were multiple publications listing the country of Tartary and its flag/crest. Some of those publications came out as late as 1865.


Flags_of_all_nations_1865.jpg tartary_flag_6.png
tartary_flag_4.jpg Flags_of_all_nations_1865_1.jpg 1276px-Bowles's_naval_flags_of_the_world,_1783.jpg tartary_flag_1.jpg tartary_flag_3.jpg


It is also worth mentioning that in the British Flag Table of 1783, there are three different flags listed as a flag of the Tsar of Moscow. There is also an Imperial Flag of Russia as well as multiple naval flags. And all of them are proceeded by a flag of the Viceroy of Russia.

Significance of the Viceroy is in the definition of the term. A viceroy is a regal official who runs a country, colony, city, province, or sub-national state, in the name of and as the representative of the monarch of the territory. Our official history will probably say that it was the Tsar of Russia who would appoint a viceroy of Moscow. I have reasons to doubt that.

Why is the flag of the Viceroy of Moscow positioned prior to any other Russian flag?

viceroymoscovie.jpg
large_moscovian.jpg large_russianimperial_copy.jpg large_russiamarine.jpg large_russiamarine1.jpg
There is a growing opinion in Russia that French invasion of Russia played out according to a different scenario. The one where Tsar Alexander I, and Napoleon were on the same side. Together they fought against Tartary. Essentially France and Saint Petersburg against Moscow (Tartary). And there is a strong circumstantial evidence to support such a theory.

1. The capitol of Russia was Saint Petersburg. Yet Napoleon chooses to attack Moscow. Why?

2. It appears that in 1912 there was a totally different recollection of the events of 1812. How else could you explain commemorative 1912 medals honoring Napoleon?

medal_1.gif medal_2.gif medal_4.gif medal_3.gif

And specifically the one with Alexander I, and Napoleon on the same medal. The below medal says something similar to, "Strength is in the unity: will of God, firmness of royalty, love for homeland and people"

Napoleon_Alexander_medal.jpg

I have hard time imagining the below two guys on the same medal.

hitler_stalin.jpg
3. Similarity between Russian and French uniforms. There are more different uniforms involved, but the idea remains, they were ridiculously similar.

How did they fight each other in the dark?
French - Russian
french_soldier_1812.jpg russian_soldier_1812.jpg

There was one additional combat asset officially available to Russians in the war of 1812. And that was the Militia.

It does appear that this so-called Militia, was in reality the army of Tartary fighting against Napoleon and Alexander I.

moscow_defender_9.gif moscow_defender_3.gif moscow_defender_10.gif moscow_defender_1.gif moscow_defender_2.gif moscow_defender_4.gif moscow_defender_5.jpg Moscow Militia 03.jpg
Moscow Militia 01.jpg Moscow Militia 04.jpg moscow_defender_11.gif Moscow Militia 02.jpg
4. Russian nobility in Saint Petersburg spoke French in the 18th/19th centuries. The general explanation was, that it was the trend of time and fashion. Google contains multiple opinions on the matter.

5. This one I just ran into: 19th-century fans were totally into a Napoleon/Alexander romance

Books and Publications

* * * * *

Summary: I think there is enough circumstantial evidence to justify a deeper look into who fought who, and why this Tartary country is so little known about.

And the main question out of this all should be what is the purpose of misleading generations of people? It appears there is something tremendously serious hidden in our recent history.
 
Last edited:

Cynocephalus

New member
Messages
4
Likes
15
#2
Summary: I think there is enough circumstantial evidence to justify a deeper look into who fought who, and why this Tartary country is so little known about.

And the main question out of this all should be what is the purpose of misleading generations of people? It appears there is something tremendously serious hidden in our recent history.
Oh, there definitely was something going on, and from what I've learned on a personal level and after some considerable amount of research; much of the history of Russia, except among the oral traditions of certain minorities in Russia, is not entirely correct. The Romanovs were lying, creating propaganda to glorify their reigns and distort or ignore the accomplishments of the previous Rurikid Dynasty. The Romanovs weren't even ethnic Russian, either, but the German Royal house of Holstein-Gottorp, a branch of the Oldenbourgs, and originally from Lubeck.. A town of the Hanseatic League.
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,419
Likes
5,704
#3
I believe at some point, a few years ago, I've read an opinion, that Rurik was a Varangian chieftain hired to provide military stability in Russia. Some sorts of a mercenary, I guess. And Varangians were somewhat similar to Vikings, as far as I can remember. His position was similar to that of a Military Commander, and not a ruler. Afterwards, historians turned everything inside out and backwards.

Not sure how much credibility can be attributed to any source nowadays.
 

Cynocephalus

New member
Messages
4
Likes
15
#4
I believe at some point, a few years ago, I've read an opinion, that Rurik was a Varangian chieftain hired to provide military stability in Russia. Some sorts of a mercenary, I guess. And Varangians were somewhat similar to Vikings, as far as I can remember. His position was similar to that of a Military Commander, and not a ruler. Afterwards, historians turned everything inside out and backwards.

Not sure how much credibility can be attributed to any source nowadays.

Well, as I said, the Germanic House of Holstein-Gottorp-Oldenbourg, which already had all the Scandinavian Kingdoms and were linked to England and other Germanic/Scandinavian Houses, were the Romanovs. So, they had an interest in saying that the Russians had not even a native royal family in their origins, but a royalty from some Germanic Warlord. There is increasing evidence that Rurik was actually a Slav like the people he ruled and the ''Northman Theory'' is increasingly doubted as to Rurik's origins.

The Varangians were a Military unit of the East Roman Empire in Constantinople which provided protection to the Emperor and came from Russia, Scandinavia, the Wends, and after 1066 AD, Anglo-Saxons fleeing England after William the Conqueror.

And yet as you say, sources can get muddied and obscured, especially when the Victors write the history books. I'm working on Russian history diligently and it's honestly a daunting task when you have a family like the Romanovs squatting over their Empire for so long... But I'll be posting my theories and conclusions soon.
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,419
Likes
5,704
#5
With Lomonosov being the last significant person to care about the history of Russia, locating any evidence which was not compromised is very hard. The other one with true honest intentions could be Tatishchev, but it appears he was not a match for the powers forcing the new agenda.

Müller and Schlözer did their part in virtually destroying 7208 years of Russian history. English version erroneously names this date as the Creation of the World. Supposedly, in Russian, it could be translated as some sort of a Peace Treaty. Apparently there was a tremendous war in the distant past, and 7208 years ago (in 1700) that war ended. And so significant was the event, that they started counting their years from it.

The truth could definitely be stranger than fiction.
 

Cynocephalus

New member
Messages
4
Likes
15
#6
Well, I'm writing as an Orthodox Christian, and the date 7208 A.M. is sacred to me as the year of Creation drawn from the Septuagint and the early fathers of the Church. The war you mention is indeed the Cosmic War, this is true I believe. And, you're absolutely right that the German Scholars of the so-called ''Russian'' Academy of Sciences (which in the entire history of Russia before 1917 rarely had any Russians working there!) absolutely did their work in destroying true Russian history, much of it. For example, the oldest tradition of Russia's acceptance of Orthodox Christianity of the people is that st. Andrew the brother of St. Peter baptized the Scythians/Sarmatians, the ancestors of the Slavs (hence the prevalence of st. Andrews cross in Russia as a flag/decoration)... Whereas the Romanov influenced chronicles speak incongruously of the Baptism of Rus in 988 AD by St. Prince Vladimir. Both Lomonosov and Tatischev ended under strange circumstances, along with the books they were working on.

Indeed it is very hard to locate any non-compromised evidence, but now that Russia is free of the Romanovs there has been freedom to question and to examine. I don't agree entirely with any of them in totality, from N. Morozov to Fomenko to all the others since. However, as artificial as their structures may be (some even more artificial than the contrived Scaliger chronology they wish to replace), they all ask the right questions, and I believe that there are answers.
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,419
Likes
5,704
#7
It appears, the issue is more complicated than just Russian history. Looks like it spreads throughout everything related to the not so distant past. Judging by some of the older maps, Tartary was well into both Americas at one time or another.

I'm still trying to figure out the meaning of all the color coding present on those maps. It's amazing how those outlines of dominance change with time. Another strange fact is that we only have 3-4 different colors representing kingdoms, or whatever they were called.

For example, the below map from 1652 suggests that North America was ruled by the same power Tartary was. Moscow was governed by Europeans. It also shows that there were only 3 world powers at the time. What's your opinion on that?

1652 Nova Totius Terrarum Orbis geographica ac hydrographica tabula_1.jpg
 

Cynocephalus

New member
Messages
4
Likes
15
#8
It appears, the issue is more complicated than just Russian history. Looks like it spreads throughout everything related to the not so distant past. Judging by some of the older maps, Tartary was well into both Americas at one time or another.

I'm still trying to figure out the meaning of all the color coding present on those maps. It's amazing how those outlines of dominance change with time. Another strange fact is that we only have 3-4 different colors representing kingdoms, or whatever they were called.

For example, the below map from 1652 suggests that North America was ruled by the same power Tartary was. Moscow was governed by Europeans. It also shows that there were only 3 world powers at the time. What's your opinion on that?


I strongly suspect that from Old Believer stories, that there certainly was a much greater Old Russia presence in North America than what the history books are saying, and with tales of White tribes of Native Americans out there, etc... It's quite possible that it was very extensive. Plus, I look at people from Tuva and the Altai Mountains region of Siberia, etc, and at Native Americans-they're basically the same people, even culture and genetics.

The color coding and all that, even from a standard explanation, shows to me from what I can see three or four basic ''global'' powers; Spain, Portugal, the Turkish Empire and Great Tartary (btw, ''Moscovy'' (Great Tataria) was allied to the Turks from everything i've seen from back then).
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,419
Likes
5,704
#9
I strongly suspect that from Old Believer stories, that there certainly was a much greater Old Russia presence in North America than what the history books are saying, and with tales of White tribes of Native Americans out there, etc... It's quite possible that it was very extensive. Plus, I look at people from Tuva and the Altai Mountains region of Siberia, etc, and at Native Americans-they're basically the same people, even culture and genetics.
I'm prepping to write up a little article on a couple very interesting white tribes I found mentioned on the old maps. Some things are really fascinating.
 

humanoidlord

Well-known member
Messages
648
Likes
439
#10
note that theres an theory that genghis khan himself never existed and is the invention from an early 19nth century book
it doesnt help that his name when translated is "great king", sssssuuurrrrreeee, doesnt sounds made-up at all :p

"Tartary, a vast country in the northern parts of Asia, bounded by Siberia on the north and west: this is called Great Tartary. The Tartars who lie south of Muscovy and Siberia, are those of Astracan, Circassia, and Dagistan, situated north-west of the Caspian-sea; the Calmuc Tartars, who lie between Siberia and the Caspian-sea; the Usbec Tartars and Moguls, who lie north of Persia and India; and lastly, those of Tibet, who lie north-west of China." - Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. III, Edinburgh, 1771, p. 887.

Now compare to the description given by Wikipedia, "Tartary (Latin: Tartaria) or Great Tartary (Latin: Tartaria Magna) was a name used from the Middle Ages until the twentieth century to designate the great tract of northern and central Asia stretching from the Caspian Sea and the Ural Mountains to the Pacific Ocean, settled mostly by Turko-Mongol peoples after the Mongol invasion and the subsequent Turkic migrations."

Tartary was not a great tract. It was a country.

And to add some credibility (or to take away some) to the story, below you can find an excerpt from the CIA document declassified in 1998, and created in 1957.


Though I do not think that Tartary was solely Muslim. It rather was multi-religious, and multi-cultural. One of the reasons I think so is the tremendous disparity between what leaders like Genghis Khan, Batu Khan, Timur aka Tamerlane looked like to the contemporary artists vs. the appearance attributed to them today.
Today: Genghis Khan - Batu Khan - Timur

View attachment 1580 View attachment 1578 View attachment 1579

Here is how 17th, 18th century books saw these three

Well, I could not find any, but apparently in Turkey we have a few busts of the following Gentlemen. A few of them I do not know, but the ones I do look nothing like what I was taught at school. Also dates are super bizarre on those plaques. Do Turks know something we don't?

The other reason why I think Tartary had to be multi-religious, and multi-cultural is its vastness during various moments in time. For example in 1652 Tartary appears to have control over the North America.


Link to the document on the CIA website: NATIONAL CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT UNDER COMMUNISM

The Coverup

The official history is hiding a major world power which existed as late as the 19th century. Tartary was a country with its own flag, its own government and its own place on the map. Its territory was huge, but somehow quietly incorporated into Russia, and some other countries. This country you can find on the maps predating the second half of the 19th century.

Ngram by Google Books shows how Tartary was quietly put away.

View attachment 1516

Yet, some time in the 18th century Tartary Muskovite was the biggest country in the world: 3,050,000 square miles.




Tartary had its own flag, crest, its own emperor, and of course its own people.
The Kings of Tartary - (Genealogie Des Anciens Empereurs Tartares, Descendus De Genghiscan)


The people of Tartary.


The flag and crest of Tartary had an owl depicted on it. The emperor's flag contained a griffin on a yellow background.

And it was different from China

There were multiple publications listing the country of Tartary and its flag/crest. Some of those publications came out as late as 1865.


It is also worth mentioning that in the British Flag Table of 1783, there are three different flags listed as a flag of the Tsar of Moscow. There is also an Imperial Flag of Russia as well as multiple naval flags. And all of them are proceeded by a flag of the Viceroy of Russia.

Significance of the Viceroy is in the definition of the term. A viceroy is a regal official who runs a country, colony, city, province, or sub-national state, in the name of and as the representative of the monarch of the territory. Our official history will probably say that it was the Tsar of Russia who would appoint a viceroy of Moscow. I have reasons to doubt that.

Why is the flag of the Viceroy of Moscow positioned prior to any other Russian flag?

There is a growing opinion in Russia that French invasion of Russia played out according to a different scenario. The one where Tsar Alexander I, and Napoleon were on the same side. Together they fought against Tartary. Essentially France and Saint Petersburg against Moscow (Tartary). And there is a strong circumstantial evidence to support such a theory.

1. The capitol of Russia was Saint Petersburg. Yet Napoleon chooses to attack Moscow. Why?

2. It appears that in 1912 there was a totally different recollection of the events of 1812. How else could you explain commemorative 1912 medals honoring Napoleon?


And specifically the one with Alexander I, and Napoleon on the same medal. The below medal says something similar to, "Strength is in the unity: will of God, firmness of royalty, love for homeland and people"

I have hard time imagining the below two guys on the same medal.

3. Similarity between Russian and French uniforms. There are more different uniforms involved, but the idea remains, they were ridiculously similar.

How did they fight each other in the dark?
French - Russian
View attachment 1462 View attachment 1463

There was one additional combat asset officially available to Russians in the war of 1812. And that was the Militia.

It does appear that this so-called Militia, was in reality the army of Tartary fighting against Napoleon and Alexander I.

4. Russian nobility in Saint Petersburg spoke French in the 18th/19th centuries. The general explanation was, that it was the trend of time and fashion. Google contains multiple opinions on the matter.

5. This one I just ran into: 19th-century fans were totally into a Napoleon/Alexander romance

Books and Publications

* * * * *

Summary: I think there is enough circumstantial evidence to justify a deeper look into who fought who, and why this Tartary country is so little known about.

And the main question out of this all should be what is the purpose of misleading generations of people? It appears there is something tremendously serious hidden in our recent history.
i agree with everthing else ,that CIA document is very eye raising
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,419
Likes
5,704
#11
There is another theory out there, that Genghis Khan represents one of the Russian leaders from the same time frame. Yaroslav, or something like that. Go figure now.
 

ellakoby

New member
Messages
3
Likes
8
#13
"Tartary, a vast country in the northern parts of Asia, bounded by Siberia on the north and west: this is called Great Tartary. The Tartars who lie south of Muscovy and Siberia, are those of Astracan, Circassia, and Dagistan, situated north-west of the Caspian-sea; the Calmuc Tartars, who lie between Siberia and the Caspian-sea; the Usbec Tartars and Moguls, who lie north of Persia and India; and lastly, those of Tibet, who lie north-west of China." - Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. III, Edinburgh, 1771, p. 887.

Now compare to the description given by Wikipedia, "Tartary (Latin: Tartaria) or Great Tartary (Latin: Tartaria Magna) was a name used from the Middle Ages until the twentieth century to designate the great tract of northern and central Asia stretching from the Caspian Sea and the Ural Mountains to the Pacific Ocean, settled mostly by Turko-Mongol peoples after the Mongol invasion and the subsequent Turkic migrations."

Tartary was not a great tract. It was a country.

And to add some credibility (or to take away some) to the story, below you can find an excerpt from the CIA document declassified in 1998, and created in 1957.
Grand Tartaria empire name, from the words name of gods Tart and Aria of today Rus people, Rasia (Asia) Ra Se ya (that literally means: this is god(s)
Antique Map: Russia - Tartaria history "failed" on purpose to name Russia as Mother of the civilization, it is inconvenient to many who want to feel superior in their own inferiority Antique Map: Russia - Tartaria - Asia... rest of lands were just states, including North America.
now understandable why Arian people just a "myth" and so much unreasonable hate to Russia

(ps: The eulogy of the Swedish King Charles XI is written in Russ language (with new created latin letters) (attached). history, also true dates of Ra )

karl.jpg monument in russia tartaria and its age.jpg peter 1.jpg tomb.jpg page from the book dated not as history states.jpg
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,419
Likes
5,704
#14
Grand Tartaria empire name, from the words name of gods Tart and Aria of today Rus people, Rasia (Asia) Ra Se ya (that literally means: this is god(s)
Antique Map: Russia - Tartaria history "failed" on purpose to name Russia as Mother of the civilization, it is inconvenient to many who want to feel superior in their own inferiority Antique Map: Russia - Tartaria - Asia... rest of lands were just states, including North America.
Now understandable why Arian people just a "myth" and so much unreasonable hate to Russia

(ps: The eulogy of the Swedish King Charles XI is written in Russ language (with new created latin letters) (attached). history, also true dates of Ra )
Well, I think while the territorial fact is definitely there, we cannot be 100% positive that Russia and Tartary is one and the same. If anything, Russia was a part of Tartary, just like many others were as well.
 

ellakoby

New member
Messages
3
Likes
8
#15
Understand your concern, yet when evidence showed Tartaria spoke a Rus language, not another way around it's not only proving the fact that Tartaria is Ra Se Ya...all writing that dated over 7000 written in Russian (old russian, yet still russian). but I wont argue
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,419
Likes
5,704
#16
Understand your concern, yet when evidence showed Tartaria spoke a Rus language, not another way around it's not only proving the fact that Tartaria is Ra Se Ya...all writing that dated over 7000 written in Russian (old russian, yet still russian). but I wont argue
I’m opened for any version, as long as it is substantiated by physical evidence. The problem that I see is that we do not really know what evidence is real, and what not.

Clearly Tartary was on the maps even before its revival in recent years. Yet, multiple sources of the dogmatic science were hiding its importance in history. As a matter of fact they still do.

How do you know, for example, that what we consider an old version of the Russian language is not a planetary scale proto-language? My understanding is that its traces exist all over the planet.
 

ellakoby

New member
Messages
3
Likes
8
#17
how do we know France is real? as far as we know it was Gaul. Tart-aria exists for thousands of years, and the fact that was concealed from the history, and Russia does not have a history at all, (red flag) . "historians" faked up as Mongolo-Tatar while not even one shred of evidence that there was Mongols on/in (r)Asia territory, Russia or even part of Europe, yet you call this "evidence" :) Only Russians "decoded" Etruscan (eto Ruska) writing or even Rosetta stone. Lacota has 90% of Russian alphabet, not Chinese as "history" claims they were 1st in America, they have Ra Se Ya alphabet.
The old Russian language was planetary scale language, and still is, didn't school teaches that all languages came from indo Slavic? etymology present who has language birth rights...ain't English, mandarin or german....simly name as (London) Lono ((river))bed ) Don (Russian River)..and London right on the river.... neither pharaoh would call himself Russian name Pta (Hatka) bird (ouse/nest). do you know what Rim (today Rom) means? a world, still in Russian. Italy (eta Lelya) and so on and so forth...
.. - i can give you millions of examples. point is, people, how do people who "of 6th century" speak and write most ancient language that exists thousands of years? (no monks didn't teach Russian to write)why would only Russian remember tart arian language .. ..bcz it's their Mother Land, their Mother language, They are the 1st who were called gods and all described as blond bearded-blue eyed gods from Ra. see this stone god? (pic) it's in Brooklyn beach, do you know anything about this artifact? hell no, it buried under the sands, and you know why? its written in Russian, and it is no way "historians" would allow to "discover it"...they would have to give history back to Russia, they won't allow, at least not now, yet Putin
stepped up and start pushing back bs that was created in the 19th-century
ps: Slavs name/ word is a pseudonym that literally means worshiped, that's bringing back Ra land, land of Tart and Aria :)

brooklyn gods.jpg 170233.jpg
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,419
Likes
5,704
#18
I am not questioning what you are saying. I merely try to point out an opinion, that there could have been a global civilization covering the entire map. And if that civilization had a unified language, it could have been the same language they spoke in Tartaria. But then we have a question, does Russia speak Russian, or modified Tartarian? I know that you mentioned some evidence showing that it's the other way around, but I am yet to see that evidence. I might as well be wrong on that one. For example this 1492 map has Tartaria on there, Russia not so much.

As far as the artifacts you pointed out go. The reason for the cover up could be well beyond just Russia. It makes more sense to hide that the world was technologically educated, and global before. And if your artifacts belonged to that global advanced civilization (which could have spoken Tartarian), it makes just as much sense to prevent the info from being public. Sorry, I just do not see any direct benefit received from hiding the age of Russian heritage alone.

On a separate note, as maps and flags/crests show, there simultaneously existed Tartaria and Russia. And from what I understand, Russia played its part in today's non-existence of Tartaria.
 

gregory5564

Active member
Messages
36
Likes
123
#19
The pictures of the militiamen, regardless of whether they were Russians or Tartars, depict many of them as being armed with only spears, suggesting that they were rather poor. At the same time, the uniforms have more of a modern appearance, as if they came from WW1. Besides the militiamen, the groups with the most modern-looking uniforms during the Napoleonic Wars were the Prussian Landwehr and Freikorps, which also resembled WW1 soldiers.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,419
Likes
5,704
#20
Great point about the uniforms. There is an opinion out there that the 1812 event, in reality, took place between 1840-1860 time frame. Yet it still would not explain the appearance of the Militia uniforms. They do look more WWI-ish.

As far as weapons go, it's hard to say what the true equipment they might have had. It appears that we end up seeing what was allowed to go through censorship. A few things slip through here and there of course, but we will definitely not see any bazookas.

1812_Militia_1.jpg 1812_Militia_2.jpg 1812_Militia_3.jpg 1812_Militia_4.jpg 1812_Militia_7.png 1812_Militia_5.jpg
 

Similar threads

Top