Tengri, Khuday, Deos and God
Crescent and Star in Islam and Türkic world
Drozdov Yu. On Christianity
|Tengriizm and Christianity|
Murad Adji's books are about Kipchaks, their culture and history. Murad Adji is opening the pages lost from the annals, stained by falsifications, and simply ignored at point blank. I cite excerpts from his works, the full version of the “Europe...” in the author's translation is available on the Web. Murad Adji penned the book “Kipchaks” , a chapter of which about Tengriism is also in this site.
Schisms and Secessionists
Murad Adji recounts the history of Christianity and its main players with inclusion of the Türkic peoples, a factor notoriously absent in the historiography of Christianity. The work covers a period from the 6th c. AD to almost present. One of the seemingly evident, but never mentioned observations is the naming of Arianism, the name given by the Christian clergy to a religion that covered not only most of the Europe north of the Roman Empire, but also a huge part of the population within the Empire. The Arianism, as a splinter of Christianity, originated and was restricted to the the Egypt/Near East/Roman Empire area, and its ideological impact, in those days of the 4th and 5th centuries, with constant wars and insufficient communications of the time, could not conceivably even touch the areas beyond the Roman Empire. But the monotheistic religion of the Germanic and Türkic peoples and their associates in the same Christian historiography is also invariably called Arianism, though these two phenomena are completely unrelated. By projecting the misnomer “Arianism” onto the indigenous religion of the Germanic and Türkic peoples, this historiography implies that somehow their religion is also Christian, but deficient in respect of their misunderstanding that the Christ is a son of God and a component of a tripartite God comprised of a Father, Son and Holy Spirit fused in one Almighty God. This implication is a total misrepresentation, since at the same time the same historiography depicts the same these people as pagans, shamanists, polytheists and the like, and these two depictions by the same historiography are mutually exclusive. Once is appreciated a fact that the indigenous monotheistic religion had no bearing from the Christianity formulated and enforced within the Roman Empire, that it is no “Arianism” , that the indigenous monotheistic religion had no use for a go-between Son under any name, and even less for a go-between religious institution to communicate with this go-between Son, then becomes understandable the force and hatred invested into decimation of the carriers of the indigenous European monotheistic religion, and the 10+ centuries of continuous propaganda and enforcement that was spent to wipe out the indigenous religion. We are familiar with the indigenous European religion from the time it was observed by Herodotus, he gave us the name “Father” in its Grecified near-Scythian form Papaeus, from Papai, in Türkic Babai (Papai in palatalized pronunciation typical for some Türkic tribes). Incidentally, the provenance of the Scythians, from the S.Scandinavia to India, closely matches the provenance of the indigenous European religion, give or take a thousand miles/kilometers drift in a millennia from the Herodotus to the post-Constantine time.
Another aspect of the faulty historiography is demographical. While even imprecise numbers are not documented, the available numbers give an order of magnitude for a fast and clear picture of the demographic impact from the indigenous people upon the Western Europe. To begin with, in the Atilla's time the 50-million Roman Empire mastered at the Catalaun field ca 300,000 troops, many of them Germanic and Gaulic federates, while Attila had between 300,000 and 700,000 troops, again maybe half of them Germanic or other federates. A ratio of 5-6,000 troops per 40,000 horde gives mobilization from equivalent of 50 to 120 hordes, or a population crowd from 2 million to 4.5 million. It is clear that such a mass could not retreat to the banks of the Meotian Sea, most of them stayed and procreated. That was a huge mass, for those days, of people totally uninitiated in Christianity, but deeply ingrained in their traditional Tengrianism. The next pretender for a dominance over the Eastern Roman Empire were Avars, who with their Bulgar and Slavic federates practically captured and resettled most of the the Byzantine. That the Türkic Avars were adherents of the Tengrianism we still may only surmise, but that they were not initiated into Christianity we know quite well. In the end, the Avars, who had enough manpower to subjugate Byzantine, also remained in the Western Europe, fractured politically, but up and running demographically. Let's give them 1/2 to 1 million to start their procreation. Next, we have the brothers Asparukh, Kuber and Emnetzur that brought hordes of Bulgars to Transylvania, Pannonia, and Italy. Maybe they were not that manifold, only dozens of thousands of them were reported slaughtered. Still, they came in addition to the Alans and Kutigurs that remained there from the Atilla's time, and they fought off Byzantine and Avars, so let's give them 1/2 to 1 million to start with. Next, come the Besenyos, estimated by O.Pritsak at 1 million. After controlling the N.Pontic for 150 years, they moved and resettled in the Balkans, including the Bosnia enclave. If we cut off all the Scytho-Sarmatian people that lived in the Central and Eastern Europe, cut off the Akathyrs that entered the Attila's state, cut off the Scythian states in the N.Pontic, i.e. cut off everybody we know about in the pre-Attila's time, and then cut off Kipchaks, Magyars, Oguzes that came after AD 900, we still have remaining a multitude of 4 to 7.5 million of only Türkic people, who do not have a clue about a concept of a God-Son, and even less about a primordial sin, but who follow their parents in revering the immaterial Creator, and have centuries-old tested rituals of worshipping the Almighty. All these people were either Romans, or Byzantians, or their closest neighbors, when the Christianity was composed, formalized, and introduced for global consumption. Murad Adji recounts the stages and events on the road that led to the decimation of the religion derisively named “Arianism” in the Christian press.
Naturally, all or almost all etymologies of the “Vanished Legacy” chapter would appear contrary to conventional beliefs, which derive all Christian lexicon from Hebrew, Latin or Greek sources. The scholarship that came up with the conventional explanations was not too much based on the records and documents, but rather on the usually accepted folk etymology. Most of the examples cited by M. Adji are semantically more suitable then the traditional explanations, and deserve at least a respect of a new scientific hypothesis. The examples were not peer reviewed, and each one needs to be etymologically studied, but the very mass of the examples is a positive indicator, made more weighty by a convergence of other indicators relevant to the initial stage of the Christianity. Most of the terminology, especially connected with the Eastern Orthodox rites, carry names peculiar exclusively to the Eastern Orthodox Christianity. The references for the Vasmer's widely used conventional etymologies are at the Vasmer's querry site, but Vasmer has a pronounced anti-Türkic tint, visible especially clear for the Türkic words shared by all Slavic vernaculars, i.e. the earliest Türkic loans into the Baltic language(s). The English etymologies are at http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?e. M. Adji listing follows the Russian (Greek) alphabet and Russian spelling, so the order is somewhat out of sync with English.
The author's notes are given in normal font, and the Translator's Notes are in (blue italics and parenthesis), or are in blue boxes.
Europe, Türks, the Great Steppe
Volume 1 Part 3 Chapter 3
Schisms and Secessionists
By the end of the first millennium AD the lands of Europe were split into two hostile camps, the Rome and Constantinople came to hate each other. The reasons for their secret and open hostility were ages old.
First, there were economic reasons. Byzantine has been successfully communicating with the Türks for a long time: the famous Silk Route had its final point in Byzantium crossing the Desht-i-Kipchak. The route from the Vikings to the Greeks also led to the Byzantium through the Desht-i-Kipchak. In their confrontation with the Rome, a successful trade with their eastern neighbors was strengthening the position of the Greeks. Thus the Rome was seeking changes advantageous for them.
A second cause for the confrontation between Rome and Constantinople was not any less important: the religious controversies. They formed a basis for the whole political life in Europe: “The faith belongs to whomever holds the power” . These words were a motto of the time. A world domination was in question, the pretensions of the two powers, who were only hiding their ambitions behind theological disputes: not a God but a golden calf inspired the rulers.
After accepting Christianity in the 4th century AD, both Rome and Constantinople changed to masters from the slaves, and after the Attila's death they were ready to do anything to cleanse their slavish past. The Greek emperors were the first ones to understand how to do that, using a religion which both countries accepted through force, and which was a very important tool to bring the world under their control.
Only the religion tied them with the past with unwashable ink.
In the Central and Western Europe prevailed the Romans, who attracted many Kipchaks to their side. The Eastern Europe remained under the control of the Greeks, who were skillfully balancing between the Rome and the steppe inhabitants. And since in Europe the political pressure was exercised through the Church, the rulers of the two hostile countries turned their eyes to the Church, in hope of influencing their enemies and their neighbors, to rise through it, and create with it their future and their past. The Christianity more and more was becoming a political instrument. And only a political instrument.
Before the 9th century the secular power in Rome run the business of the papacy: church innovations, dogmas and rules were determined, as a rule, by the secular politicians, the Church used to be in their service.
And that was understandable. After the Attila's glorious victories, the Western empire could not reassemble itself for a long while, it was attacked by the “barbarians” and the numerous “barbarian kingdoms” which appeared in Europe.
Only in the year 591, reaching an agreement with the Barbarians-Longobards, the Roman authorities managed to gain a break. And the Church, which had its center in the Byzantine in those days, began acting, the Pope was obligated to coordinate his actions with the Ecumenical Patriarchy, but he did not always do it.
In the 7th-8th centuries the Roman Church, with a blessing of the Pope Gregory the Great, started a skillful secret ideological attack in the north, against the Türks, who predominantly practiced Tengirchilik (or “Arianism” in the Christian terminology). In decades, thousands and thousands of people were drawn into the Roman fold. And they did not even ever know about it!
The Pope lead an adept dialogue with the king of Spain, he found common words with a warlike Brunghilda, the queen of Austrasia, he almost became an insider in the southern areas of the British Isles. The whole Western Europe was feeling the peacemaking of Rome, because everybody was tired of the wars.
Skillfully maneuvering his connections, without advertising them, the Pope was amassing his might, turning the Papacy into an active institution of power … The Pope assembled a secret army, court, finances… And most important was the word (ideology), a main weapon.
Pope Gregory the Great aspired to create a state over the states… The Western Church was secretly and vigorously building it for three hundred years. Just when everything was ready, Pope Nicolas I (858 - 867) declared independence of the Roman Church. That was a very heavy blow for the Byzantium prestige. A hard-won independence! It could not be ignored, it had to be respected.
And in the Byzantium, starting with the emperor Constantine, the Church stood behind the emperor's back, relying on his strength and power. It was resting on the laurels. Its dependence showed up everywhere, it avoided any active politics. Its power was quiet.
In the rivalry for the leadership, Rome has chosen a most difficult, but a most productive way: it was totally self-relying. The Rome was gradually increasing its power, its finances, and at the same time was forming its rites, ceremonies and its service, simplifying the Tengrian canon. In other words, it was searching for its face, its identity. That was the only way it could wrestle the church leadership from the Byzantium, and take again the throne of the master of the Europe.
The Western Church was bravely changing the old services, discarding the old rituals and inventing the new ones, which were spiritually closer for the Europeans. And although the image of the Türkic Heavenly God still was present in its pantheon, but… it was not any more in the foreground. It became a backdrop for the Christ, Mary and various saints. The religion was distancing further away from its sacral essence. The external, ceremonial part clearly dominated innovations of the Rome.
Surely, it had to happen that way: otherwise the Papacy would not obtain its face and a right for its own church policy, which had to be adhered to. In the Middle Ages the ceremonial part was given a special attention. Paradoxically, the outward pomposity led the people away from the God. The Rome, obtaining power, was growing spiritually poorer: the wealth and luxury were defeating it, causing dissident in the congregations.
The Constantinople was loosing to Rome one position after another, the Greek policy was not even conservative, but fossilized. The Greek rulers quietly parasitized religion, like a bear in a lair who lives in the winter off the fat accumulated in the summer. However, in history it could not last for long, the ideas also grow old. The life, with all its laziness and conservatism, does not tolerate a stagnation, it turns into a swamp.
The Byzantium was doomed. Sooner or later the country had to fall into that inglorious swamp: its wellbeing was fully dependent on the Desht-i-Kipchak. It could not ignore the Türks. That's why the Greeks bore a little east for the West and a little west for the East.
Of course, there were some innovations in the Greek Church as well, but they were inconsistent, unthoughtful (iconoclasm, for example). The Constantinople had to show restraint, laudable conservatism, which finally brought the Europe to a division of a single Christian Church into the Byzantine and Roman Churches. It happened on July 16th, 1054, when the acts of mutual excommunication were proclaimed.
The East and the West announced to the world that they have different creeds. That dazzling event was a crowning event of the politics which was held by both sides in one or another way from the 5th century, from the time of the settling the Europe by the Türks and from the adoption of Christianity in the Roman Empire colonies and also by the Rome herself.
That was a first major conflict within the Church. Unfortunately for Europe, it was not the only one: the conflicts of the church and political nature have always formed a certain diplomatic background, filled with mutual accusations of heresy. The feeling was that each European Church owned a certain divine truth that guided it to determine what is right and what is wrong. The Pope Gelacius I, for example, on May 13th 495 AD at the Council in Rome solemnly proclaimed himself a “Christ's viceroy on the Earth” . Not less nor more. The churchmen were claiming a right to call anything they would choose a “heresy” . A struggle against heresy was justifying wars, secret murders, public executions… The politics was dirty and far from ecclesiastical! A stench stood over Europe.
What, for example, was the church inquiry called later “inquisition” ?Or, what the Councils and church courts were always calling for?.. Much was written about them, but mostly one-sided. To appease Rome or Byzantium. Nowhere was defined what was actually called heresy.
The Church ideologists skillfully induced an opinion in the minds of millions of the people that existed an enemy of the Christ, whom the pious Church was struggling against. The enemy, who combated the Church and the “Christ's surrogate on the Earth” , i.e. against a living God… Everything was entangled and called with an unknown (i.e. Türkic!) word “heresy” .
The bonfires of the inquisition clearly were lit not with a brushwood...
It was the Kipchaks, brought up with different spiritual traditions, who were burning in the pyres, sure that Christ was not a god, they were tortured and tormented, they were forced to renounce their belief in the Heavenly God - Tengri, the churchmen were destroying Türkic sacred literature, first translating it into their languages, and again covering with the abstract word “heresy”…Thus for centuries the Türks were weaned from their culture and history. And it seems they had been weaned.
Figuratively speaking, the Rome was preparing the massacre of St. Bartholomew many centuries before the year 1572, killing anyone disagreeing with its spiritual policy. The arms of some Roman and Byzantine whited sepulchres have blood to their elbows.
Only in France over 30 thousand people were killed during that “night” (by the way, it lasted for several days), they were enemies of the Roman Christianity, of course the Calvinists did not realize their Tengrian roots, the time took its toll, but they did not loose their hatred of Rome, passing the hate of the Catholicism along generations. Very unlikely that any European could explain the reasons of their hate of the Catholics, they were always hated by- half of the Europe. Without any explanations.
Repressions, falsifications, blackmail, threats were a policy of the Church. Before the St. Bartholomew massacre, and after it… It was loosing an open dialogue with its opponents, and thus in Christianity appeared an absurd rule: “unthinking faith” . The Christians were proscribed from discussing the faith dogmas.
…The Catholics introduced more than 60 alterations in the Tengrian canon to suit their politics. Sometimes the “novelty” was taken from Mitraism, the religion competing with Christianity, widespread in the Roman Empire for some time.
But certain innovations were not readily accepted by even the Roman Church. For example, the Filioque dogma, i.e. a doctrine about the origin of the Holy Spirit, appeared at the end of the 7th century as an enhancement of those accepted in the 5th century. Initially the Filioque was introduced into theological credo by the Spaniards, and in the 1009 it was also accepted by the Rome.
This and other examples (and there are many of them!) show that all Church doctrines were formulated by ordinary people who were politicians. And they were created to suit the politics. The Godly substance of religion was being washed away for centuries, the spiritual content was leaving the churches as the Rome was sinking in wealth, self-contentedness, and debauchery.
Alas, the history of the Great Steppe was forgotten in Italy, France, Spain, and England, it was etched out by the inquisitors. But it did not die! During all these centuries it has been living with the descendants of Attila, passed from a generation to a generation. It faded but not forgotten.
The split of the Church is the division of the spheres of domination. And nothing more. And this division was completed by the 11th-12th centuries, slowed by the Kipchaks who were not letting it happen: they desperately resisted the Fate, and drew their inevitable end closer, their endless infights had to exhaust the great nation. Kipchaks, like children, always wanted to prove something to somebody. And the generosity in the adult world is disastrous, it exacts an excessive price.
In the 6th century, for example, Kipchaks challenged the rest of the Europe. Then, the religious fanatics of the Rome organized a massacre of Jews, and their exile from the Palestine: the Rome was also consolidating through the cleansing of the Christianity from the Judaism, insisted by the Greeks. And the Rome partially succeeded in that.
The Christianity did not serve the Jewish nation a best service. It rudely intruded into the spiritual life of the Jews, introducing what they did not have, the Christ!.. Reportedly a son of the God.
But Judaism does not have a God-Father. Thus a son could not show up. And that is clear from the text of the original Old Testament. The Jews learnt about that story much later (or more accurately about details of a life of a Jew who was named Jesus Christ in the 2nd century). They could not have learnt before the Ecumenical Council II in the 381 AD, where the Gospels, i.e. a New Testament, were approved. Before that were used more than a hundred of contradictory variations of his life, the so-called Apocryphal Evangelies. Of those were selected four versions.
The story about Christ is a Greek invention. And positively not a Jewish one.
The first Christian communities appeared, as is known, in the territory of the Asia Minor (the Byzantium!) and not in the Palestine. And those communities did not break with Judaism. That is a manifestation of the early Christianity, which was a sect of the Judaism. Is not it indicative, almost all “sacred” texts of the first Christians were written in Greek and with the Greek alphabet?..
The pronouncement of the Christianity a new European religion gave Byzantium rich fruits: the three was growing in the Byzantium garden! But any fruit tree grows wild under a lazy master. That was how it happened, in the 6th century the Rome started a campaign against Palestine, not to run there theological disputes, but to hurt Byzantium by beating the Jews.
In the politics, like in chess, the opponent move is answered with a response. But the Greeks cowardly kept mum, for them replied Kipchaks: to their own detriment, but in opposition to Rome, they gave shelter to the innocent Jewish nation beaten for no sins. The Desht-i-Kipchak extended a hand to the weak, showing that the Türks were following the commandment “Blessed are the merciful” . In the 6th century in the steppe settlements appeared Jewish quarters with synagogues, the Djugut-auls. The Jews as citizens, and not the slaves, were granted rights to participate in the life of the Desht-i-Kipchak, excluding the military service, which they could not physically endure, and besides in the army they could not observe the Moses' laws.
No nation had as much freedom as the Jews. In Khazaria, for example, the Jews were in trade. They stayed in touch with their fellowmen hiding from the Roman legionaries in Spain. In a word, the Türks trusted them fully, and paid for that.
Their protection gave a reason to talk of “Judaisation” of the Khazar Kaganate and, consequently, about isolating the Desht-i-Kipchak as a spreader of the “Jewish” infection. Even though no traces of “Judaisation” were ever found by the archeologists. But the reputation turned out to be persistent.
The records in historical works of that time tell about an interest of the Khazars toward the Jewish faith, but they are only in the context of the Türks sheltering the exiled Jews, isolating one process from the other makes no sense. And besides, it should be remembered that the words “Christian” and “Jews” for the Türks were synonyms (I wish M.Adji stated the words he is referring to - Translator's Note).
The Khazar Kagan become interested in Christianity because of the example of the ruler of the Caucasian Albania, that is quite possible: in the Derbent was a Caucasian Patriarchal seat… Anyway, the chronicles never mention Judaism of the Türks, while they do mention their Christianity.
The tale about election of the faith by the Kagan is another falsification. Not by an accident a legend of the same script, but with a “positive” ending was written by the same hand for the Kyiv Rus.
… Certainly, the proximity of two free nations, the Kipchaks and the Jews, led to a mutual benefit. The Jews demonstrated to be not bad craftsmen and traders. The Kipchaks in response protected their Djugut-auls as their own. It is important to note that Türks lived in peace with their neighbors, and did not aim to suppress their culture or adopt it. But they loved exotic women.
Without exaggeration, only the largess of the Kipchaks saved the Jews from an inevitable demise to which the Europeans doomed them. Unfortunately, that has also been forgotten, although nowadays there are many Jews with Türkic appearance: blue-eyed and wide cheekbones (in Slavic anthropology, the wide cheekbones are diplomatically called “broad-faced” , to distance them from the wide cheekbone “Mongoloids” - Translator's Note). Those are the “traces” of fraternity of the two nations… And even these blue-eyed Jews picture their saviors as scoundrels.
Historians (certainly including Jewish historians) sooner or later would have to extricate the Great steppe country, our common Motherland, from the grappling claws of oblivion, they would have to discern the cobwebs of intrigues and contrivances that steamrolled its history.
The Byzantine, Roman, Russian historiographers have erased Desht-i-Kipchak from the map. Like though there were no Kipchaks who brought to Europe a belief in the Heavenly God.
The Chinese. conquered by the Türks earlier than were the Europeans, also had the same sin. Time has come, and the Chinese rose their heads. They started their politics, using the honesty and credulity of the Türks. Their motto was simple: “Who wants to rule the Middle Kingdom should eradicate punishment (i.e. weapons), and who wants to subdue his enemies by force defers the virtue” .
This Chinese adage is akin to the Christian “love thy neighbor”…With such chaffy words was brought a disarray to the Türkic society, they deprived people of their physical power, irresistible before. The Chinese skillfully brought antagonism between Türkic rulers, they were the first who came up with an idea to fight the enemy with its own hands.
The discord microbe, like a rust, since then penetrated the Türkic society, it was passed on with the mother's milk. To hate so much each other, to envy so much each other nowadays can only the Kipchaks, whose brother is sometimes worse then a worst enemy. And that all happened because they trusted the alien words.
After the death of Atilla, not a few the Desht-i-Kipchak eastern lands became a part of the Chinese Empire without a fight. On those lands lived Türks, those Türks who chose to live under the power of the Chinese emperor… They “loved their neighbor” , and put off their weapons “not to defer the virtues” . And the Chinese border went far north from the Great Wall. The Chinese talked and acted, the Türks sat and listened.
The free people of the Steppe had forgotten that Tengri-Khan made the Türkic nation free, and gave her a face and the vast Steppe… Kipchak lost it all, believing the alien words and an alien God.
The Kagan of the eastern Türks, Kutlug, later retook the lands seized by the Chinese. That was a happy time when the Kutlug warriors were recognized by the other Kagans. For a few years an order reigned in the Desht-i-Kipchak. But after Kutlug, called Elterish (i.e. Kagan - gatherer), died, a fratricide returned to the Steppe… And everything started over again.
No wonder that from the 8th century the Byzantium tried to distance itself from the increasingly crippled ally. But without a Türkic support the Byzantine emperor was not worth much: he was felled as soon as he started acting independently, the provincial nobles deposed him and in the Constantinopol came to power an Isaurian (Syrian, 717-802) dynasty.
The new Byzantine emperors declared iconoclasm (anti-icon-ism), a religious doctrine in the Byzantium in the 7th - 9th centuries, which rejected reverence of the icons based on the Old Testament commandments. During iconoclasm were destroyed thousands of the sacred art monuments, made mostly by the Türkic craftsmen or according to the Tengrian traditions.
This was the methods they were using to reinforce their position, starting changes in the Church and distancing the Türks from it. Announcing expelling of the Türkic icons, the rulers did not want a breakup, but a gradual submission of the Desht-i-Kipchak: in the 9th century for the first time the Greeks dictated the conditions.
And they succeeded in it.
A shadow of Constantinople enveloped Eastern Europe. The presence of the Jews in the Desht-i-Kipchak increased the darkness, contributing to the isolation of the Kipchaks. That was good for the Rome at that time, it again, like a thousand years ago, was coming to the world scene, reviving the former empire: a complete submission of Europe through the Christian Church was a matter of time. The Byzantian churchmen saw their defeat, but could not counteract it.
Meanwhile the Türks, provoked by the Chinese and the Europeans into fratricide feuds, were in desperate situation: they visibly kept growing weaker, nothing was left from their former might. They should have defended from the external enemies, but they saw only the internal ones, and a brother was killing a brother. That is why, at a right moment, the Vikings easily captured the Ukraine Kaganate from the sickly the Desht-i-Kipchak. That is why the inexperienced in the steppe wars “Ruses” attacked the rulers of the depleted Khazaria.
“No bonds are holier than brotherly” . The discord microbe was a God's punishment: the Almighty withdrew the sanity from the steppe nation.
Unfortunately, many pages of the Desht-i-Kipchak history are to remain blank: those events cannot be restored. The documents were destroyed. Only in the archives were remaining some specks, records about Greeks conducting genocide against Kipchaks of the Great Bulgaria Kaganate in the 8th - 9th centuries. They renamed to Greeks the Kipchak in their service, they claimed the border lands of the Bulgarians.
There is archival evidence about the conceited descendants of Homer burning, in addition to the icons, frescos, and statuary, the spiritual literature of Türks. The archives with the “ancient Bulgarian books” . Where are the traces of the rich libraries which Europe was studying?.. Mountains of the books written in the Türkic runes were thrown into the fires! This is the fact not even denied by the “Christianity” encyclopedia, for instance, it reports there that already in the 19th century the Greeks burnt one of the last libraries of the “ancient Bulgarian” books… This is where the Türkic heritage had disappeared to!
The Greeks, in our opinion, during the years of the next Bulgarian genocide, renamed the Kipchak language into the “ancient Bulgarian” and, after including in it a couple of dozens of the Slavic words, proclaimed it a “Church Slavonic” language. The Greeks, like the Romans, were physically destroying the extraneous clergy, which was following the traditions of Tengirchilik… The persecution was violent, it was performed by great experts in black cassocks (ironically, their cassock vestments were called in Türkic - Translator's Note).
Only in the archives accidentally survived some specks of history, the evidence of the past vehemence … This is why the Great Steppe was named a crowd of the “wild nomads” , and the “Pagan Tatars” . Like nothing more survived about it.
The ancient Türks worshipped God solemnly, turning to Him with a pure soul. And with divine singing. That's why the Türkic spiritual fountain became popular at first among the Armenian, Albanian, Iberian bishops and later among the Byzantine, Roman and others: they saw the new, true belief there. And they accepted its holiness.
Europeans heard the prayers in the name of heavenly God in the Great Steppe. They took the worshipping ceremonies from the Great Steppe… So many things have been forgotten!
As a matter of fact, the Türkic culture was going into oblivion in different ways in different places - but everywhere is was meanly and doubly. Pope Gregory the Great (590 - 604 years of papacy) was the first who became accustomed to cutting its roots in the Western Europe. A personification of duplicity.
Gregory was from a noble senatorial family, he had a good legal education and brilliant administrative skills. After the death of his father he inherited a great wealth, which he fully used for the upgrade of the monasteries, which were then languishing in poverty. He provisioned the Benedict Monks, and they became his secret and reliable support in the state, his eyes and ears. Gregory did not spare any funds for reinforcing his power, the economic and political matters interested the Pope not less than theological matters.
In the 592, after concluding a peace with the Kipchaks living in the north of the Apennine Peninsula (with the Longobards, the ancestors of the modern Milanians) he proclaimed the Papacy to be a center of the Türkic spiritual culture in Europe. The Pope started a slyest game of “learned ignorance” : the Rome became a humble child who proclaimed his desire to perceive the mysteries of the divine truth.
A legion of the Papal agents, mostly of the Benedict Monks, set out to the Türks. They went into the Türkic temples, to the most sacred !, without any problems, because Pope Gregory since 591 AD was calling himself “a bishop not of the Romans, but of the Longobards” . Does it means of the Türks?! He also called himself “a servant of the God's servants”…How could it impress a haughty Kipchak? He, a “God's servant” , was getting the Roman Pope as his servant. But even that was not all.
Gregory the Great, when he came to the Türks, bowed deeply, and humbly laced a capa over his Pope's clothes, a capa was a Türkic name for a coat worn by the kuls (slaves). “Here I am, a servant of the God's servants!...” he introduced himself. The Kipchaks fell in for that sly fox.
Not by an accident were the Benedict Monks sent to the Türks. Apparently, they were the Türks who switched to the side of the Rome, they very well knew the language and customs of the Great Steppe, and did not suspect a vile role cast for them by the Pope.
And the role was simple: to become usual, to take root, to win a sympathy. In other words, to become their own people. But at the same time they had to secretly spread unrest, to condemn the old order, to suggest new rules, and play on the national piety… In a word, they had to stir things up.
Pope Gregory contrived correctly: talking about the God's son, the Monks gently “sneaked in” his cult. Sooner or later, the Pope thought, the Kipchaks would get accustomed to the Christ, and consequently also to the Rome… Because the Rome and Kipchaks were friends and brothers.
The trust in the relations was reinforced by the Romans' willing adoptions. For example, at that time Christianity adopted a tradition of the church hymns, which the Tengrians had from the old times. Moreover, the Christians began performing their religious services according to the Tengrian “Apostolic Cannons” written for them by the Türk Dionysus the Minor… Everything in the Christian Church mirrored the Tengrian Church, except for the name of the Christ.
A smile of submission was not washing off the Pope's face. The Roman agents were not destroying the temples, but they settled their corners like a mould.
In his secret letter Pope Gregory instructed his legates: “The nation which only lately learned Christianity, but accustomed to its own temples (highlight is mine - M.A.), will begin coming to them, following their custom, in order to worship a true God” , i.e. the Christ. The Papal troops were fiddling near the Türkic altars without any buzz or blood. This order lasted for two centuries, until the Pope Nicolas the Great.
From those days in the everyday life of the Catholic Church appeared a capa, the same old slave's cloth “capa” continues to be called capa, but nowadays it is ornamented with precious stones and golden embroidery… That was a cloth that opened an entry for the Romans into the Türkic souls.
The Pope Gregory was running a real ideological aggression. It was an invasion totally overlooked by the simpleton Türks, they still did not get it. In the embraces of a friendship they were choked. A nation was falling without seeing the enemy's face. In diplomacy, in the intrigues, the Türks were ignoramuses, only in an open fight they could wage a war, with arms. And on a horse. So that the wind would whistles in their ears. The traditions of the Great Steppe are to be blamed, they did not foresee the duplicity normal for the relations between native Europeans. The Rome had a richest experience of the backstage fighting, in its traditions was a skill of adding poison to the wine goblets of even the dearest friends.
In the 3rd c. AD Felix Minucius wrote about this Roman art as follows: “They build altars even to the unknown unheard-of deities. By the way of clinching the sanctities of all the nations, they came to possess their kingdoms” .
As we see, the history was repeated with the Türks. Pope Gregory the Great did not invent anything new, he trod an old reliable pattern that many times had already helped the Romans.
Even the order of the Gregory the Great (later the Roman Church started awarding it to its most prominent heroes) in its form mirrored the Türkic orders known before the Attila time. They were sweeping everything they could.
The obliteration of the Türkic culture in Europe went by old tracks: it was not officially prohibited, they just stopped noting it, and it was gradually forgotten.
By the 8th century the policy of enforcing Christianity, started by the Pope Gregory the Great, yielded the first fruits, many Türks were on the side of the Papacy, they became its main weapon and instrument in a struggle against Tengri and the whole Türkic spiritual culture. Compatriots were crushing their compatriots.
Truthful books certainly will be written about the epoch of the Great Steppe destruction. So far that epoch is known only from the Christian historians. That victory of the Catholics is called a victory over Arians, deliberately ignoring the fact that the Egyptian bishop Arius had nothing to do with the Northern Europe, and that the Türkic monotheism existed eight centuries before Arius was born!
Many facts are on hand about how the Catholics were reinforcing their positions in the Northern Italy, in the continent, in the Southern England. The scheme was always the same: lie, secret intrigues, falsification... The development was not peaceful and easy in everything and everywhere, existed communities that uncovered and resisted the duplicity of the Rome. The most prominent of them were the Türkic Hudayars (aka Slavic “Bogomils” , a translation of the Türkic Hudayar, from huday - “god” and yar - “adore” , i.e “Bogomil (Lat. Bogomilae)” in Slavic, from bog - “god” and mil - “adore” - Translator's Note), whose movement was formed by the 10th century in the territory of the Central Europe, and later the Türkic Cathars and the Türkic Albigenses, who continued the struggle for the purity of the Heavenly God's faith. Cathars, for instance, embraced Tengrianism, due to which they (i.e. the inhabitants of modern France, Italy, Spain, and Germany) were called Khazars or Bulgarians. But the forces were unequal.
Look at what seems to be an “inessential” historical detail, repeatedly mentioned even in the historical novels. In the medieval Europe for noble families existed a ritual: an obligatory ritual combat with a dragon. Without defeating a dragon, a young man could not be called a knight or aristocrat, the doors of the neighboring castles were closed for him… But what a dragon he had to defeat? What or who that mythical image stood for?
Certainly, the Türks. Europe did not have any living dragons. The image of a dragon or of a serpent, as we know, was a symbol of the Türkic culture. A young man had to publicly disown his ancestors, to kill his own memory. The ritual killing of the dragon symbolized a killing of his own ancestors!.. The people gathered in the Vatican were not among the dumbest.
Or another example. The Türks, taught to fight only openly, considered a great shame to do a thrusting stroke with a saber or a dagger, it was looked at as a treacherous strike. The Great Steppe recognized only an open slashing stroke. Even in a most hopeless situation the Türks had to slash and not to thrust: according to the rules of the battle the enemy had to see the strike.
That peculiarity of the Türkic psychology was also noted by the Romans. They started to use in the medieval towns swords, stilettos and daggers against the Türks. The thrusting weapons. In the in the narrow streets they had a superior advantage over a saber. In the traditions of the Steppe, it also was rude to be on a horse in front of a house, a man had to dismount and lead the horse by the reigns. Inside, the Türks were forbidden to bare their arms.
Europe could not be distracted with a fair combat… A saber lost to a sword. The victory of their arms the Europeans were explaining by the observation that a sword shape mirrored the Latin cross. That was symbolizing the victory of the Christ.
In the history of Europe were crusades which actually were different from the “Roman” version (that is a subject for a new book about the modern history)… Only by the 15th century the Catholics won a full victory over the Tengrianism, its last cinders were suppressed and extinguished with the blood of the parishioners.
The word “Tengri” disappeared from the church lexicon as a heretical word. (And this is the name of God-Father!) But the Türkic obstinacy stood. In the 16th century another spiritual movement, Protestantism, formed in the Central Europe… Its originators were consistently expressing their position, rejecting everything connected with Rome. And already without reference to the forgotten Tengrianism.
The Christian Church by that time did not have a single holiday dedicated to the God-Father! The Europe defaced the Heavenly God, and called its victory a Renaissance… Certainly, another book needs to be written about it.
After the Rus was converted to Christianity, it was ingesting the prayers in the very same Church Slavonic language which substratum was the Türkic language. It was assimilating them with its face toward the East, in the Tengrian tradition. And it was writing prayers in Türkic! The old church books attest to it.
Is not it indicative that even the late Russian editions of Afanasiy Nikitin, a Tver merchant who traveled in the 1466 - 1472 across three seas, have the text of a prayer in the Türkic language:
A Rus er Tangryd saklasyn,
And here is the translation:
And the Rus land - God save it.
Like should any Tengrian prayer, the prayer ends with the word “God” : Alla(h), Khoday, Bog, Tengri... The clergy in the Rus was Türkic.
In the Desht-i-Kipchak, seems, was not known about the tragedy of the European Türks: the Rome and Constantinople did not advertise their victories. A barrier between East and West was practically impenetrable. Especially from the eastern side: it was not customary to visit Europe, it was uncomely to talk about Europe, since it abandoned God.
Only when everything settled down and the Greeks in the 15th century signed the Florentine Unia (from Council of Florence, aka Council of Basel, Council of Ferrara, and Council of Siena), the Pope turned eyes far to the East, to the rising sun. Maybe he recalled that “the light begins in the East” . The Papacy conceived a new ideological intervention, called “The Third Rome” .
The conception of the “third Rome” is very simple: to create an affiliate of the Roman Empire in the Eastern Europe. In the Florentine Union, the Byzantine recognized to be a subordinate of the Pope, becoming “a second Rome” for the Central Europe. A third center was needed to control the lands down to the Urals, and further on to the east. And the main important goal was to destroy the mortal enemy of the Pope, the Desht-i-Kipchak, with its hated Tengrianism.
The Papal analysts were looking at Poland, Lithuania and Russia. Who should be the first? Those countries, from their point of view, were fully suitable for the devised role.
In Russia the idea of the “third Rome” was for the first time declared by a Pskov monk Filofei in the beginning of the 16th century. And it became a political doctrine of the Muscovite Russia. The doctrine rested on a conviction that the Rus was a most blameless and pious kingdom in the world…
The Greeks, who undertook a role of producers for the upcoming tragedy, protected the “third Rome “as much as they could, they felt that Moscow was eager to get at any cost a new role. But first, according to the scenario, it had to “surpass everyone in piety” . At that time started a drift of the Türkic history pages into the Muscovite Rus history.
The falsification, an open deceit, can be the best read in the history of the church schism in the 1666 AD. That is a crown jewel of all lies so skillfully ignored by the Russian historians.
At that time, in the end of the 1666, the ring of the bells in Moscow suddenly changed. “They ring for the church service as if it is a fire or a surprise attack” , people were saying. Why a new ringing?
On the 1st of December gathered a Church Council, and approved two important events: first, a split of the former eparchy, and second, a formation of a Christian Church, of the Russian Orthodox Church named at that time Greek-Russian Church. Those were absolutely outstanding events!
But about those events in the Russian historiography not much was written, as if the split is a trivial matter. None of known works tells what was “split” and why. The authors reduce the matter to the church reform of the Nikon patriarch, to the rites, omitting the most important, the change of the Church ideology and the division of the society by the faith criteria.
And that already is not a church schism, it is a stage in the Roman politics aimed for reinforcement of its domination in the east of Europe… That was the Renaissance epoch, after all!
Formerly, the Roman Pope was conquering the nations and countries with the help of the Türkic monks and Türkic knights, first uniting them in the 6th century into religious-knightly Orders.
But in the east of Europe he did it with Greeks and Russians. There his politics was different, but the enemy stayed the same: the spiritual culture of the Great Steppe, its last fleeting hearth.
Seemingly, about the schism in the Russian literature nothing extraordinary was written: OK, that was an ordinary reform, they corrected some mistakes in the texts, and began to form fingers together differently for crossing. What else is there to discuss?.. But was it really the main change, how many fingers, two or three, should the Christians use for crossing? Certainly not.
So, what had “split” after all? The word “split” implies a presence of a whole, which was divided into parts for some reasons. Where is that “whole” ?
Tengrianism taught humility in front the fate, and a silent passion aimed for perceiving a divine truth… This side of the religious medal in Russia was accentuated with special attention. The Viking rulers pointedly emphasized it because it called the people to humility and submission. Adopting in the end of the 10th century the Türkic faith, the Vikings made a peace with the Türks. And in that, no doubt, was displayed their political wisdom. Like the Greeks, they were not interested in a divine truth. Not accidentally the first sainted in Russia were Boris and Gleb, their whole holiness was that they let themselves to be killed without a fight. The humility, a most important postulate of the Tengrianism, was immediately carried in the Rus to absurdity.
However, there the most pious thoughts were always complemented with materialistic behavior. In the 11th-12th centuries in the temples of the Kyiv Rus started sounding the political melodies, for the first time they happened there … Thanks to the Ruses, in the depths of the Tengrianism was arising a discord.
Remaining a western country in its roots, the Viking Rus adopted an alien eastern spiritual culture, which is impossible. Even theoretically the Rus could not have adopted it, it required a different genetical code. In the “steppe” church, called “Scythian” at the Ephesus Council II (449 AD) were brought together East and West. They could not find a compromise, their split was a matter of time.
The most eastern, in both geographical and spiritual sense, the Scythian eparchy even then was already isolated. It was not forgotten that it sheltered the Jews. The past magnificence of Attila was well remembered. The Romans and Greeks could not forget a many things… Only the Caucasian Churches, which together with Kipchaks remained faithful to the God, keept in touch with the Türks. Basically, that was what in the former times was called the Eastern Church.
The Caucasus, though, was under a Roman pressure, they tried to bend its pastors to a belief in the Christ only. In the Armenia that effort was somewhat successful, in the 1198 there appeared a community of the Christian Catholics, later it fled and in the 1717 it resettled in Venice… But in a big Russia a “schism” could not happen. The scale was different, the Europeans had to prepare the split carefully and unhurriedly.
And it was prepared without omitting evem small details…
Tengrians were notable for their freedom - they did not have an hierarchy like the papacy. The most important questions were settled according to the eastern tradition, they held Councils convened on as needed basis. Türks did not rule their spiritual life, they had a different custom. And that became their minus, relying on the God they fell in trouble. The Türkic clergy seemed had forgotten that the Europe was alien for them, with its own rules! Because of their conservatism and exceeding stubbornness, the Türks were being taken.
Another weakness of Tengrianism was that in contrast with the western Church, where the service was performed in Latin, it used the local languages. A desire to make the service accessible turned out to be a disaster, it brought about dissention which led to division, it was separating the flock into national regions and states. In other words, the spiritual institution of the Great Steppe was falling apart, it was never united and monolithic… And that was also in the Vatican designs. The Papal intelligence was excellent.
Bumping into the European culture, the Tengrianism suffered losses, first of all, because of the lack of organization. The Europe had its rules and laws. That made the Tengrianism volnurable.
The West did not adopt the spiritual freedom of the Great Steppe, it could not stand it in its clergy. Their views upon the culture and values it displayed first at the Nicene Council (aka Nicaea) of the 325 AD, and than at the Chalcedon Council of the 451 AD. There, the incipient Church was formalized first of all as an organization!
The Greeks figured out that the Türks would not take a role of the head of the Christian Church, the Byzantine emperor Constantine headed the Church. And not the Türk, to whom Constantine was paying a tribute! In Rome until the 9th century the Christian Church also was headed by the emperor. And in the Desht-i-Kipchak that never happened! The Türkic Khans did not even think about a power over the Church, which would be understood as power over the God. The Khans simply were not allowed to participate in the discussions of the church affairs. The secular and spiritual were leading separate lives in the Great Steppe.
Initially that was the same in Rus. The first who felt taut under the Church roof was the Prince Andrey Bogolyubskiy (1111 - 1174), in the whole “steppe” eparchy he was the only one saw not the force of the religious spirit, but the force of its power. (Here they are, the Vikings! Here it is, the West!) From that moment a desire to subdue the Church or at least a part of it did not leave the Rus Prince, as it once did not leave the Greek emperor Constantine. And then the Pope Gregory the Great also.
But neither by building an opulent temple in Vladimir, nor even by commandeering a precious Kyiv relic, the icon of the Blessed virgin, the Prince achieved anything… He clearly lacked the Roman patience and the Greek duplicity. He was too straightforward (because of Kipchak blood of his mother).
And although the prince ordered to depict him with a nimbus over his head, he did not become any sainter. He could not meddle with the church affairs. The conflict between the Church and the secular power in the Rus, buried at the center, had ripened by the 12th century. It was inevitable: two psychologies, two world systems, the Eastern and the Western, clashed with each other… Without getting into details, let us only mention that Prince Andrey paid for his impudence, God punished him, “he wanted to be an autocrat” said his contemporaries who violently murdered him at night of June 30th, 1174.
God also saved the Tengrian faith during the Mongol rule in the Desht-i-Kipchak, already called a Golden Horde. The Mongols did not care to control anything, the Tengrianism was close for them. Batu Khan, ascending to the throne, built a temple, wished to be baptized, and his son Sartakh was a Christian clergyman, he rose to the rank of a deacon. The Mongols were liberal in everything, they freed the Russian clergy from taxation, and guarded the churches and monasteries against the Rus princes, who used to stick their hands in the church's pockets like their own.
The Golden Age of Orthodox Christianity in the Rus coincided with the Mongolian dominion. The Mongolian Yassa of Chingizkhan gave Moscow protection and freed it from taxes in exchange for a promise to pray for the khan and his family… From the Mongolian mercifulness. the monasteries gained the most.
In the 14th century the Ruses built as many monasteries as were built during the previous four centuries after they parted with paganism. By the 1550 AD in the Rus were more than two hundred monasteries. Unfortunately, the Russian historiography does appreciate this fact, insisting on dwelling about the sufferings of the Russian Orthodox Church under the Mongols. At the same time they smartly forget to add that at that time the Russian Church did not exist yet, it was formed only in the 1589, more than a hundred years after the so-called Mongol-Tatar yoke.
Byzantium was skillfully provoking Moscow for a breakup with the Steppe. After signing the Florentine Union in the 1439, the Greeks totally turned away from the Heavenly God, and turned into a secret weapon of the Rome.
It were precisely the Greek rulers who began to “correct” the Rus spiritual life, and then also the politics. They implanted an opinion as though Russia has accepted a cross not from the Steppe, but from the Byzantine. They were not hindered by the fact that in the history of the Greek Church, the baptism of the Rus was not recorded! It was important for the Greeks to tie the young and inexperienced state by the church bonds, to bond it with ideology. And, unfortunately, they succeeded in that.
The (Rus) Graecophilism started in the 1393, when the Greek patriarch wrote a letter to the Prince Vasily of Moscow, where he said “by the rumors” in the Rus is a Church, but without a Tsar: “It is impossible for the Christians to have a Church and not to have a Tsar. The Tsardom and Church have a close unity and ties with each other, and it is impossible to separate one from another” .
The West began playing up to the Moscow rulers, flattering them, wanting to see in them an ally against the Türks. From that letter started a big political game, the Moscow was being assured of its magnificence and a special role.
… The European Christians recognized spiritual institution of the Great Steppe as far back as from the 5th century (Ephesus Council II, 449), later it had several centers (Astrakhan, Bryansk, Kazan, Kyiv, Vladimir-Suzdal, Ryazan-Murom, Eletsk, Saray, Tambov and others), the residence of the patriarch was in the Great Steppe. Existed the independent Albanian (purely Christian) Church in the Caucasus, it was established in the 304 and existed until 1836.
The Rus did not have its own Church, the Greeks were deceitful there. Hence their “there are rumors” , that there is a Church, although they perfectly knew that there was none. Only in the 1448 the Moscow received a right for its metropolis.
Its first bishop (Metropolitan in the Greek Orthodox lingo) became Ionah, the Rus autocephaly (church independence) started with him. But it was under a supervision of the Türkic clergy.
In Moscow and in Rus the prayers were read in Türkic. All the religious services were performed in the Türkic language. Only having its own metropolis allowed the Moscow to chose the language of the religious service. That was a tradition of the Steppe (Ancient Orthodox) Church.
In the 16th century, with their good knowledge of the Great Steppe culture, the Greeks coach the Russian princes on the ways to capture the Great Steppe through the Church. With its help and with help of a Tsar's scepter can be dained a great power, they were assuring. And they were absolutely right… But how to capture the religious power?
It envolved starting a war against Kazan and Astrakhan khanates and, by the weakening the eparchy, to transfer the patriarchy to the Moscow. Then the Moscow prince would become a ruler of the Desht-i-Kipchak and the Tsar of the whole Russia…
When the military matters were “settled down” , Kazan and Astrakhan fell. And in the 1589 (already during the prince Fyodor, aka Theodore II, 1584-1598) an eparchy was established in Moscow. Thus, the Moscow was becoming a capital of the kingdom and a spiritual center of the Türkic lands!.. The Tsar's powers were inspiring, they were prompting, and it was important to stabilize the success. Then was started what was called by the historians the “trouble times” . Its troubles were made by the Russians themselves, who started grandiose political changes and regrouping of powers in the society. Those were very troubled times.
Boris Godunov (1598-1605), a native of the Steppe, who excellently knew the Türkic traditions, got rid of Fyodor, and proclaimed himself a “Russian Tsar” , showing qualities of an energetic politician. He turned to the Greek pastors and entrusted them for the “generous alms” (as recorded in the document) to execute a not quite legal transaction. Four Greek patriarchies, without even reading the papers (no time to translate them) signed the Russian original. They recognized a fifth person, he Muscovite Patriarch, to be equal with them. And that was it! Nothing else was needed. The Russian Church happened, it entered the international scene and formally obtained the same rights as the Türkic Church.
Addressing the Russian Tsar in that memorable year 1589, the Constantinople Patriarch Jeremiah uttered the words which fell deeply into the Tsar's soul. V.O. Klyuchevskiy reproduced them as follows: “The Ancient Rome has fallen due to heresy, the second Rome, the Constantinople, is in the possession of the Hagarian (Arab) grandsons, the Türks, and your great Russian kingdom - the third Rome - in piety surpassed everyone” .
These were calculating words: these words become imbedded in the politics of the “third Rome” .
After these sacramental words of the Greek patriarchy become clear certain facts of the further Russian history, the Greek had determined the course of unrelated events. For example, who would provoke the armies in the Russian - Türkish wars. Why the Russian cannon-fodder would go so cheaply in the European war markets… Many events in the history of the 16th - 18th and the following centuries (period of the Romanov's rule) come in different shades then is rendered by the Eurocentric literature: it becomes evident that the Russian Tsars lived with the Greek standards!
The Rus believed in its role of a successor of the Byzantium and the Primate of the Orthodox world.
Though, it was marked by similar ambitions earlier, when the Greeks entered the Kremlin, through the marriage of Zoe Sophia Paleologus in 1472 (a niece of the last emperor) with the Moscow Prince Ivan III, and settled there, proclaiming the Rus as a Byzantium's successor, and beginning to stir the Russians up against the Türks, against the Kazan and Astrakhan khanates.
The open despotism quickly grew into a policy of Moscow. Which, of course, caused a protest of the local clergy, which manifested in the confrontation of the Metropolitan Filip with Ivan the Terrible. The Metropolitan could not see the meaningless annihilation of the people. And he demanded “that the Great Prince stop oprichnina” (oprichnina is a Russian word expressing a systematic pogrom for the native “aliens” ). For under the cover of oprichnina was led a predatory policy, and the ethnic cleansing, and increase in the power of Ivan the Terrible! Everything was up in a political cottonball, skillfully enmeshed by the Greeks.
Earlier, before the Greek meddling, the subject of ethnic unity in the Rus even did not exist. There were no ethnic problems. It is enough to turn to the family trees of the Russian nobility, in Saltykov-Schedrin joke “Urus-Kugush-Kildy Baevs” to see that over half of the nobles were the natives of the Steppe. and not Slavs or Ruses. Ivan the Terrible wanted to level the country with the oprichnina. But the oprichnina was only exhausting Rus, but not curing it.
However, the Tsar ignored the metropolitan's demand to stop the oprichnina. And Malyuta Skuratov put an end to the demand, he strangled Metropolitan Filip.
Thus the Muscovite Prince subdued the Church by force, and annointed himself with the title “Tsar” !His success was partial: he was afraid of, but not listen to.
Naming himself a Tsar, Ivan IV immersed into illusion of a spiritual freedom. He generously awarded the priests and monasteries that supported him in his struggle against the strangled Metropolitan. But the impostor had forgotten that he also was a mortal, and that God would make him answer for the innocent blood. And it happened that very soon the Rürik Viking dynasty in Moscow came to an end (1598)… “You can not deceive God” , used to say common people, and had crossed themselves with relief.
Tengrianism survived again, it was gaining strength, as from forging blows, still remaining common for the Slavic Rus and the Türkic Steppe.
The physical strength in the spiritual disputes in the Rus is not much of a help, the Greeks understood that quickly. They became alarmed because in Moscow Ioann Neronov began gathering adherents of a peaceful gain of the Russian Church independence. But the unity of the Russian clergy did not suit the Greeks' plans, they were betting on a different scenario.
Only the “quietest” Muscovite Tsar Alexey Mikhaylovich knew about the plans of his ushers. To execute everything without any blood and strangulations.
As soon as he become a Russian Tsar, Alexey Mikhailovich (1645-1676) declared himself an admirer of Ivan the Terrible, but however he was not going to repeat his mistakes. At the grave of the killed Metropolitan Filip he asked God to forgive the abuses of the monarchy. And having had prayed for the forgiveness of the sins, he started acting.
He turned Moscow into a center of “Muscoviteness” , establishing bureaucracy everywhere. What kind of “departments” did not appear in those days. Dozens of them. Only one was missing, the Church Department… And the Tsar decided to create a Christian Church, to rule over it, following the example of the Byzantine emperors.
The opponents of the Heavenly God faith from a distance were domesticizing Moscow to the Christianity. They installed as a the tutor of the Prince Alexey a boyar Morozov, a man who hated Rus and the Steppe, and respected only the West. How did they manage to do it?! It was not an accident.
In a word, the pupil surpassed his tutor, until his death the Tsar consulted only with him … So let us think: was the Time of Troubles really troubled? Was it an accident that after a series of failures with False-Dmitriys (foreign tsars) in the 1613 the Russian throne took Mikhail Romanov? Who installed him? How did he do that? Why the initial last name of that family until the middle of the 14th century was Türkic: at first Kobyl (dandy, gallant), then Koshkins (i.e. Cat's) and by the close of the 16th century Zakharyin-Üriyevs, Zakharyin-Koshkins? And from where came the name Romanov?
It is known that the father of the first Russian Tsar of the Romanov dynasty, the Patriarch Filaret (secular name Fedor Zakharyiev-Üriyev) was close to the Greek Patriarch… And that clarifies something. In particular, why the “Romanovs” . In Latin that word means “Roman” , considering the earlier events the change of the name “Koshkin” (i.e. Cat's) into “Romanov (i.e. Roman's) takes evidently political connotation, which could not be missed in the Rome.
At the time of the Romanovs, the Europeans became regular visitors in Moscow, they used to come there like to their home. Alexey Mikhailovich himself, especially after his visit to Poland, was almost regarded as a Catholic. He even changed his clothes for the western style, and demanded other boyars to do the same.
The spirit of Europe was unstoppably penetrating the pores of the Kremlin! It went into every crevice. The doors and windows now were wide open. The Greeks behaved as masters: they were teaching, and giving advises not whispering, but at the top of their voices… The Papal legates, like inspectors, were visiting there.
Of course, nobody would ever determine in detail the flow of events. But the fact remains that Rus was turning away from the past, in other words, it was turning away from itself, adopting a new way of life, expedient for the West (In our opinion, that was the reason for the schism). But to achieve the desired, they needed a Church Council, where the Church could officially distance itself from the Tengrianism, and become a Christian country following the example of the western countries.
That Council took place in the 1654, that was the start of the the schism. And in the 1666 was approved what had already happened, drawing a closure line for the decisions of the Council of the 1654.
To preside over the new Council, were invited Greek Patriarchs, Paisius Alexandrian and Makarius Antiochian. They were invited with a full knowledge that both of them were dismissed because of their sympathy to the Rome. But they were invited nevertheless. And they came. Two secret Jesuits, two patented swindlers, with a silent blessing of the Kremlin decided the fate of the Tengrianism. By the will of the Council, and with the Council hands they split the Rus and the Steppe, the last foothold of the Heavenly God faith, this is what was split at that time!.. Ii seems that the star above Rome was in truth shining brighter in those days.
Tsar Alexey replaced a free Church with a Church Department, and his son Peter I even removed the word “church” from its name, replacing it with a title “Orthodox Confession Department” . Tsar Alexey regarded Nikon as a commander for his Church Department, Nikon was a Muscovite Patriarch since 1652, and showed himself as a self-willed person inspiring for power.
For the ignorant Nikon, spiritual ideals were alien and incomprehensible . He cared only for power and nothing else. Barely installed at a Patriarch pulpit, he started changing everything to the Greek mode, destroying everything Türkic. In the Russian Church was introduced Greek clothing. In the Patriarchal kitchen was introduced Greek food … Everything was copied from the aliens.
And the Greeks, with a glance at Rome, also led their own calculated politics: after the loss of the Byzantine in the 1453 they regarded Rus as an ally against the Türks. Operating in a long haul mode, they did everything to win over the inexperienced Russians. Their diligence can be envied. In the 1650, for example, in the Afon monastery (which one?) they burnt publicly the ancient church books written in the Türkic language. They burnt an entire library! This was their way to wish new books for the Rus.
A little bit earlier the Greeks invented another “news” for the Russian history. It turned out that the famous Monomach's hat, the symbol of the Rus monarchy, was made… in the Byzantium. That was ostensibly a gift of the emperor Constantine to the Kyiv prince Vladimir. The unscrupulous lie, it also became a page in the Russian history, proving a traditional character of the relationship between the Rus and Byzantium.
The Greeks disgracefully faked small and large, rationalizing the political theory of the “third Rome” .
The schism was carefully prepared with a proper diligence, neither the Russian Tsar nor Nikon knew all its secret springs. And they even did not guess about it. The Patriarch was ordered to correct the church books, to introduce new ranks and rites. In other words, to create a new Church. A Christian Church! And Nikon was giving orders because he was sure that he was reforming the old Tengrian Church!
One would think that the free Rus run a free politics… But no, as a matter of fact there precisely was no freedom, they executed instructions prepared by the Rome. One of them said as follows:
“… d) the Tsar should talk about a Unia infrequently and carefully, so that the matter would not start form him, but the Russians themselves would first suggest several insignificant subjects of the faith requiring some changes, and thus establish a path to the Unia,
e) publish a law that in the Russian Church everything must be consistent with the rules of the Councils of the Greek Fathers, and entrust the execution of the laws to the people reliable, adherents of the Unia: will arise disputes, the Tsar will learn of them, he will convene a Council, and there may approach the Unia,
f) give a hint to the black clergy about privileges, give a hint to the white clergy about rewards, give a hint to the people about freedom, and give a hint to everybody about the enslaved Greeks” .
To the adoption of the union itself, i.e. the official recognition of the Roman power over the Rus the events did not develop, the circumstances prevented it. However, the ceremony of its adoption would have been a superficial farce. In reality, Moscow accepted the Unia: the Papal instruction relating to the reform of the Russian Church were completely executed! The Rus became a Christian country. And at that time nothing else was required. The country fell in a complete ideological dependence.
The conflict between the Eastern and the Western ideologies did not arise by accident. The Tengrianism was upbringing a person primed for heroism, for action, in other words a person disposed for development. Its philosophy of reincarnation of the soul, accepted by Buddhists, never deprived a man of a hope. Even after death, purified in hell or in heaven before the judgement of the Almighty, a man is born again. A man is given a chance to rectify his former sins, and in that lies the wisdom of the Tengri's teaching about the eternity of the soul.
The Great Tengri teaches that each man creates heaven or hell for himself with his own hands. Everything depends only upon him and his behavior… That's why the Türks valued in a man first of all the actions and the deeds.
And the Christianity, by simplifying the Tengrian canon, calls a man to save his soul, i.e. it calls for inactivity. The less you do the less you sin. A future is defined as an eternal heaven or eternal hell. And that's all! To pray, to wait, to fear, to love thy neighbor, to save yourself, to be humble, to not grumble, to turn another cheek, to suffer, to see pleasure in poverty and pains… and so on and so forth… These all ostensibly follow the Christ's commandments. Just to make people peacefully wait for the end of their days… and to love absolutely everyone. Even the scoundrels in the Greek sandals and Roman togas sunk in luxury and lechery.
What would best this invention for conquering the nations?!
Is there a better ideology to install in the empty head of a slave?.. The Greeks and the Romans gained a full revenge for Attila, for their former disgrace, converting great riders into a pitiful tribe of slaves, who do not raise their eyes to the Eternal Blue Sky.
At the Moscow Council of 1666 the Greeks forced a change in the Rus divine pantheon. A main figure in the new Church was not the God, but the Christ. The West insisted on his supremacy.
The inexperienced Rus that major ideological doctrine understood naively, but violently: everything was reduced to an argument about how to write “Isus” or “Iisus” . The Ruses did not see a difference between God and not a God, they did not feet it, because they were bi-theists: they believed in the Heavenly God, but remained adherents of the ancient Slavonic beliefs - “faith of the fathers” . It has not been forgotten until now. The Russian Orthodox Church still widely recognizes some pagan cults (Maslenitsa, or Shrovetide and others).
And that at the Council of 1666 behind the “Iisus” stood another ideology nobody did not even understand.
The Rome proved that its arguments were weightier. Now Moscow accepted them too! It did not name the Pope a Lord of the World, as etiquette requires… However, seems that trifle was forgiven.
The main achievement was the Theological Board instead of the free theological system… Here they are, these “a few unimportant subjects of the faith” , as was written in the Papal instruction. The Patriarch Nikon noticed them, but, again according to the instruction, not the Tsar!.. The secrets were revealing even in the details. The Papal instructions performed perfectly.
Into the former Rus law were written six major innovations. Of course six are not sixty, as for the Catholics. But in the spiritual life one word is enough to destroy everything.
Six innovations! And what kind of innovations… Crossing with two fingers was replaced with crossing with three fingers. Why? Two fingers is a Tengrian sign.
It was also prohibited to write “Isus” , it was ordered to write and pronounce “Iisus” , in the European manner. With no explanations!
The old books defined: during baptizing, wedding and consecration of a temple the procession circles by the sun (i.e. clockwise). Nikon ordered procession to go against the sun… Is this a trifle? Certainly not. In the 1479 during consecration of the Assumption Cathedral the Greek Metropolitan Herontious began walking not in a Tengrian manner, clockwise, but in the opposite direction, when the Great Prince Ivan III stopped him, saying that that would cause the God's retribution. However, in the 1666 the Moscow, forgetting about the inevitable God's retribution, led the Russian Church against the God's will.
With these trifles was changing the ideology of the faith in the Rus, it was becoming pro-Tsarist and Westernized! The Moscow, which was dreaming about the laurels of the Orthodox world leader, obtained the freedom of action.
Not accidentally still in the 1656 Nikon founded the New Jerusalem Monastery and the city New Jerusalem! In his opinion it was the future capital of the Christian world… Thus in the Rus began a new history, it was connected, according to Klüchevskiy, with the “colonization of other lands and nations” .
Nobody was embarrassed by the fact that the new “Muscovite” Church as a bearer of the society morals was of no use, since it is said: “Without the pastor's freedom the flock is not free” . And the pastor was a first in line without freedom. The Muscovite “clergy” , as any commander, was appointed and dismissed by a Tsar's whim.
And what's more, the Russian clergymen reported to the authorities the secrets of the confessions. For non-reporting they were stripped of their status, they were simply kicked out.
Of course, the pious Russian nation, brought up with the Kipchak traditions, would have never accepted the western innovations proclaimed by the Patriarch Nikon, if the “reformer” did not have the Tsar's stick in his hands… The force overcame the Rus.
The Theological Board in Moscow was acting: the secular officials of Patriarch and Diocese Departments (those bureaus were created!) were rewriting and correcting ancient divine books, and introducing new rites into the liturgy. “Correction of the liturgy books in itself could not defile those books,” wrote a famous theologian, professor N.D. Uspenskiy, “if the printed editions were suitable… but the high quality was absent in the aforementioned western editions” . And precisely all the changes were taken from the Greek books printed in the Latin printing houses in Venice!
Supervision over the correction of the books was done by a Greek Arsenius, who was changing Orthodoxy to Catholicism and vice verse, and who was sentenced for swindling. That “Solovki convict” , the “sly Greek” (as he was described in literature) by Tsar Alexey's order established a school, where he taught Greek and Latin languages, and the rules of life to the youth.
In old times, the Türks used to rewrite religious books by hand. But how? By the monks' labor. Their mastery was considered sacred. Any error in a book was almost regarded as a sin. According to the experts, the ancient books contain less errors than the modern prints. What corrections were the problem discussed at the Moscow Councils of the 1654 and then at the 1666?
Securing access to the monastery's library, the historian and theologian B. Kutuzov compared the old and new texts. The results were surprising: the “old” ones were more accurate and deeper. And they have fewer mistakes. It is impossible to object to astonishing results of B. Kutuzov, they are too specific. It is is very a well researched work. Apart form his works, are also known the works by other theologians, for example, by the professor N.D. Uspenskiy.
The “new” books seemed were designed to work for a schism. That is evidenced by numerous examples. For example, it was written in the old text: “We pray to You, Oh Lord, and make the evil spirit leave the one crossing himself” , and in the new one: “… make it leave the crossing one, we pray to you, the evil spirit” . Having read that, the people were terrified: “We do not want to pray to the evil spirit” .
What was it, a mistake, a provocation? Or an open scorn of the Russians? No, the events had another explanation, the “reformers” did not know the language in which they were correcting the texts! They came from abroad and did not understand the Russian texts in which the Türkic words and phrases were intermixed with the Slavic. That was the specific character of the Church Slavonic language!
From the unfamiliarity with the Russian culture, and neglect of its Türkic roots, comes this everlasting mess in the spiritual life in Russia.
The first martyrs for the true faith in the Rus were the proto-priests Ioan Neronov, Loggin, Daniil, Avvakum and the bishop Paul Kolomenskiy, who threw during a conversation with the almighty Nikon: “We will not accept a new faith” . Nikon's reply was beating of the old man. Then was exile and tortures followed and, receiving the last “no” , in the 1682 the latter-day Moscow Christians burnt the great martyrs on a bonfire.
By that time the Russian Church was totally under control of the Greeks. Later the power went to the brothers I. and S. Likhud, the pupils of the Venice and Padua Jesuit colleges. They were implementing the “Nikon's” reform in the Rus… In other words, they finally established the Greek-Russian Church! This was initially called the organization now known as the Russian Orthodox Church.
In 1687 one of the brothers headed a Theological Hellene-Greek Academy, a training center for the staff for the state and Church needs (today it is a Moscow Theological Academy in Trinity-Sergiev Laura). The Likhud brothers also created a network of Hellene-Greek schools, starting with Epiphany Monastery and Monastery of the Savior… The western education was even implemented at secular schools.
God-loving Russia was unstoppably changing, turning into a Christian Russia.
In order to force the pious Russian nation into accepting the new faith and the new books, to place the power in the hands of the Christian rulers, the Council of the 1666 decided: “To subject the dissidents of the Church decisions to severe punishment: imprison them, exile, beat them with beef sinews, cut off their noses and ears, cut out their tongues, and sever their hands” .
The self-proclaimed sages were acting insanely.
“The third Rome” , “pious Christian kingdom” was preparing a platzdarm base. Even before the schism Council, in the 1664, the Tsar switched to cruel methods. The military expeditions of the prince Ivan Prozorovskiy and colonel Alexander Lopukhin showed their valor in full. They annihilated chapels, temples, monasteries, together with their inhabitants.
But the stubborn nation was not accepting the new “Jesuit” faith, it resisted to the last. Then commenced a total annihilation of the old clergy. The enforcers were killing for just putting two fingers together. Or for looking to the Heaven during a prayer! Or for mentioning the Heavenly God… The Rus was insane to please the Europe.
The changes touched on everything: the Türkic liturgical music, which emphasized the grandeur of the liturgy, was re-written. On the Italian manner, of course. But even distorted, it makes a deepest impression, especially at Easter, it is showing the heavenly magnificence which it had and from which it was deprived of.
They also repainted the Türkic icons. They rejected the old elegant school of icon-painting, which followed Andrey Rublev, for a new “Moscow” school, with puffed up Greek faces.
Even into the canon of the Greek-Russian Christian Church they (the Greeks) smuggled formulations against which objected all Russian clergymen. Just one this fact tells a lot about the events happening in the Rus.
The theory of the “third Rome” crushed as a card house, bloodily creating a Christian Church, the Greeks made out of Rus not a keeper of the traditions, but theit destroyer: “The herald of the further reign of the Holy Spirit on the Earth simply transformed into one of the monarchies, a simple state, but with new imperial ambitions” .
So write historians about those events.
The Tsar Alexey was laboriously and adamantly “cracking a window to Europe” . _Precisely in those years among the Russian Türks became especially popular Islam. Subjugated but not crushed, they did not wish to betray Tengri-Khan. They did not want to recognize the Christ, who was advancing with bared Russian arms.
Knowing that both Allah and Tengri were the names of the Heavenly God, more and more Kipchaks in the 17th century (in counteraction to the “Greek” Moscow) started learning other ceremonies of revering the Heavenly God. And today only the Moslem Kipchaks address Allah with the names Tengri or Khoday. This is absolutely right. This was the way the ancestors used to pray before our era, when no Christianity or Islam existed, but in the sky was only the invincible Alla, the Almighty Tengri-Khan.
So they turned to Him.
In ancient times the meaning of the Türkic word “Alla” was “giving and taking away” . Therefore the people were turning their palms to the Heaven, saying: “Alla” . In this form Chuvashes, Buryats and Khakases (non-Muslims) retained this expression: it comes from “al” (hand). And does the famous Arab “Bismi-l-lyahi-r-rahmana-r-rahim (In the name of Allah, kind and merciful)” come from there?
These are clearly the words of a Tengrian! In the Arab translation they repeated the famous ancient Türkic phrase “Alla(h) - giving and taking away” . Its latest and final form. Why not?
“Compassioned” means “Displaying Favor” , or “Giving” in other words. “Merciful” means “Ready to Help” , i.e. “Removing Worries and Troubles” . This meaning is contained in the short Türkic phrase “Alla” , first heard in the Altai mountains two and a half thousand years ago.
From that also comes another known expression “God's hand” .
The Kipchaks of the Russian Empire, who accepted Islam, survived as people of the Desht-i-Kipchak. And those who fell to the “Greek” cross “disappeared” , they were Rusified. In the 18th-19th centuries, they were baptized by force, were given Russian names, and registered as Russians. There are millions of them.
Nowadays they are not the steppe people, but the Slavs. The Great Steppe has been forgotten, its traditions unknown. The Ryazan, Penza, Simbirsk, Saratov, Samara, Don, Tula, Kursk, Belgorod, Tambov, Caucasus, Siberian and other yesterday's Kipchaks nowadays live with a different history. Without roots, without ancestors.
The memory about the “Greek” terror against Desht-i-Kipchak preserved the temples, converted by the Türks into mosques. There On the ancient walls are Tengrian adji signs, and was added a six-pointed star, a sign symbolizing a transformation of the faith.
To suit the Greeks, Russia even changed the form of the necklaces crosses. Earlier, they were equilateral … What does that mean? An unexpected conclusion: it turns out not all Russian Old Believers are the “keepers of the true faith” , as they call themselves. The Russian Old Believers have a Greek cross! They accepted it, and survived the Tsar's persecutions. An eight-pointed cross… And that says everything.
Formerly, neither the Russians nor the Türks called themselves Christians, it was stated in other way: “Do you believe in God?” If you say “Yes” , you are with us. Thus there was no national strife in Russia. With “God help us!” the ancestors were doing to a battle. They lived “for God's sake”…They were God-believers, crossians (Slav. “Krestians” ), i.e. “people reverent of equilateral cross” .
After the Council of 1666 the Russia was mutilating its spiritual culture for almost 250 years, searing it out from the nation. But even violently wounded, the faith in God did not die: people practiced religion secretly, they fled to the forests, moors and Siberia, they suffered cold and hunger, but were passing the vision of the Heavenly God to their children… Although much has been forgotten in three and a half centuries.
Peter I was especially violent, he started his reign with a campaign against Cossacks, in the Great Steppe, where the holy belief in God lived in force and purity in those days. The idea of the Azov campaigns was nurtured by the Greeks and Romans for a long time, that was both the colonization of the Steppe, and a final strike on the belief in God.
It was under the Peter that the Cossacks-Kipchaks, these bearers of the pure faith, were depicted as drunken bands, as runaway criminals, the Russian scum. Since that time started that the Cossacks are fugitive slaves. Peter even chose a mocking seal for the Cossack army, a naked Cossack sitting on an empty wine barrel, out of a last penny.
And in the good old days a deer, and not a drunkard was a symbol of Don, a heavenly deer which Kipchaks brought from the Altai. I its honor were erected “olen” (deer) stelae and stones, of which the modern Cossacks, it seems, have never heard. “Elen” (deer) is the most ancient symbol of faith in the Great Steppe.
To suppress the Don liberty, Peter sent Prince Dolgoruky. The famous Russian historian S.M. Solovyev wrote about those terrible events: “On the 4th of November Dolgoruky arrived there, the thieves came out to battle, but they could not resist the Tsar's army and turned back to their settlement, on their heels the winners also broke into the settlement, knocked the Cossacks from the settlement, and pursued them to the Don, slashing them with no mercy, 3,000 corpses fell dead, many drowned, some were shot swimming, and those who managed to swim across froze (early November river water temperature must be around 10°C/50°F, river around 200 m wide - Translator's Note)… The settlement Reshetov was set on fire, but that was a last fire. The Don was pacified” .
A good lesson received the “thieves” , as in Moscow started to call the Tengrian mutineers. And were given other similar lessons, but they taught the Kipchaks nothing.
Still the historian Jordan relayed, how the Romans have taught Kipchaks a good lesson. Once in their villages was a poor harvest, and the Romans were selling them, starving, the stale products for gold. When they run out of gold, they traded the dog meat for the children of the Kipchaks. And the parents were giving their kids, seeing a salvation in it... Then these grown up children became the enemies of their parents. It is bad, when the people do not know their past.
And another stroke, one more event that also gives a good idea. In the 1918 the Red Guards captured Ufa. The Kommissars ordered to arrest the Ufa Metropolitan Andrey (Prince Ukhtomsky) and to plunder the churches... But the order was not executed. The Russian flock fled, and to protect the Metropolitan and the churches came the Moslem Türks, who declared that they would not turn over “this great mufti” to the God's enemies, and would not allow to violate the “Orthodox Mosques” ... That's them, the Kipchaks, irrepressible and unpredictable people...
Unfortunately, neither the state authorities, nor the state Russian Church acknowledged a guilt for their deeds. Only the holy fathers of the “Coaching Council” of the real Orthodox Church proclaimed in the 1928: “The unjust damnations and curses of the ancient Orthodox rites and piety are invalid and detestable, the Great Moscow Council of the 1666 - 1667 is not a “Great” but a Russian, bandit council. For those maligning the ancient ceremonies and piety: Anathema” .
Much has been forgotten, indeed. But not everything.
Europe, Türks, the Great Steppe
Volume 1 Part 3 Chapter 2
The known Türkic spiritual heritage is really small, next to nothing. And that is strange. Where did everything evaporated to? It existed and vanished… It is not in the books, not in the displays of the museums. But still it exists! At least it did.
Rediscovering a past is a task of the History, the History may be viewed from two angles: as the list of dates and events, descriptions of battles and dynastic changes, which is certainly important, or as an evolution of ideas, nations' feelings, their moods in this or that epoch. That is the only way to visualize the ancestor's real, living history, and not a fantasy.
The details, the minutiae is what makes a picture whole. An absence of a single stroke, of a single color on the canvas indicates a phony. You ca not strike out the words from a song, as a saying goes. A living life is a perfection in itself.
The forensics manage to uncover most difficult crimes from barely perceptible traces. Can the forensic methods be applied to history? Maybe its time has came?..
It could start with a search for the “vanished” Türkic cultural inheritance. The heritage could not disappear without a trace. Even pronunciation of some words may bear fruits. Here are the examples.
Abbot (Gk. Abbas, Slav. Abbat) - this word is being derived from Aramaic word “abo” or “avva” , supposedly an appellation for a teacher in a synagogue. The superiors of the monasteries (of the Benedictine or Clunian or Cistercian orders) were called this since the 5th century.
The word “abbot” entered the church lexicon at Attila's times. In the language of the ancient Türks the word “abata” (abata < aba + affix -ta ) meant “next to father” . The expression “abata” reflected the idea of abbey: the followers of Benedict of Nursia settled near the “saintly father” . There existed a whole ritual.
The European abbeys duplicated the rules of the ancient Türkic and Lamaist monasteries which followed the traditions of Tengirchilik (Eng. Tengrianism, if you want to “Sumerize” it, you can pronounce it “Dingirchilik” ). Ordinances divided monasteries into two types: for study of philosophy and for instruction of believers.
In Kazakhstan, for example, survived sacred places containing the word “abat” . And in the Aktübinsk region, in Abat-Baytak, are ancient temples and remains of the monastic cells, still goes on a pilgrimage to these sites.
Acathistus - church hymns. The most ancient in Christianity is considered the acathistus written in the 7th century after delivery by the Blessed Virgin of Constantinople from the barbarian invasion.
According to the official version the word originates from the Greek “akathistos” and means “not sitting” because, it is explained, the acathistus is performed while standing. This is a dubious explanation, because the Greeks called reading and singing of hymns while standing “stadeis” (standing).
A different explanation is true. The word “acathistus” is an adaptation of the ancient Türkic expression aq apizik, consisting of aq (blessed, favorable) and apizik (abisik) (dedication, hymn). Aq apizik expresses the essence of the acathistus!
Iin the expression aq apizik is worthy of notice the second word, apizik. During royal coronation or clerical ordination the Tengrians were performing an initiation ceremony called “apizik” (apizik, abisik), the Türks even had an expression: “...el orniliv abisikig teg” (“… as throne inauguration” ). First it was recorded in the Brahmi script (attested from the 6th century BC), which points to the antiquity of this Türkic expression and ritual.
The unbecoming for a prayer word “not sitting” is an attempt to explain an unknown Türkic expression customary in the Tengirchilik (Tengrianism) (aq apizik ~ akapizik ~ akapis ~ akaphis ~ acathis ~ akathistos).
That hymn praising the Heavenly God in the 7th century was adopted by the Church form the Türks, according to its own documents, on an initiative of Pope Gregory the Great.
Altar - a place for sacrifices. Account goes that this word is Latin altaria, altarium: from altus (tall) and ara (elevation), i.e. “elevated place” . In the Christian synagogues the role of altar played a table where “the love-feast” (Gr. “agape” ) was taking place.
Starting in the 4th century, i.e. from the time Christians organized their first temples, the name “altar” was given to the part of the church facing the east and separated by icons. The most ancient altar temples are known in the Caucasus, the Caucasus Albania and Iberia.
The new Christian altars were made following the Türkic examples and by the Türkic masters. Not accidentally the Council of Laodicea in the year 363 resolved: “In the God's places or in churches is not appropriate to install the so-called “agapes” .
The word “altar” is an adaptation of an ancient Türkic expression ala tor, which consist of the words ala (“Taker” , one of the forms for addressing the Heavenly God) and tor (place of honor, place opposite an entrance). I.e. the “honor place of the Taker” (ala tor ~ alator ~ alatar ~ altar ~ altaria).
This interpretation expresses the function of the altar and corresponds with the religious customs of Tengrians. The early Christians adopted the object and its name.
Amen - “let it be right” , the final word of a prayer. It is ostensibly from the Old Testament. But theologians themselves state that in the New Testament “amen” frequently sounds differently from the Jewish books.
That contradiction is alleviated easily: The Christians adopted not only the prayer ceremony from the Tengirchilik, but also accompanying it many terms.
In Türkic amin means “I am safe” , “I am guarded” .
The tradition to say amin at the end of the prayer was noted for the Türks still in great antiquity. Its origins are in the cult formed long before our era: the souls of the ancestors (amin) were asked for help and protection (this phenomenon is not particular to the Türks only, beliefs in intercession by the diseased relatives or heroes (saints) were widely spread in Judaism and Christianity with some minor adaptations to the cannons governing at the time).
The Chuvashes, for example, have a prayer formula: “Amin, Tura, zyrlah!” , i.e. “Amin, Tura, save us!” (“Tura” is Chuvash appelation for Tengri). Thus, closing the prayer with the word “amen” finds its natural explanation.
Artos (Gr., Slavic) - leavened bread consecrated on Easter, another name is prosphora. Reportedly it originated from the Greek word “artos” - “bread” .
But let us analyze a very important detail: for that sacrament the Eastern Church uses only a leavened bread, while the Western Church uses only unleavened bread. Why?
Such a fundamental difference in one of the most important Christian sacraments has to be explained, but no explanation was ever given…. Where does this tradition originate? It also comes from the Tengirchilik.
The leavened bread the Tengrians used to bring to the churches as a gift to Tengri on spring holidays, that was an ancient Türkic religious ceremony known long before our era. This ritual become obligatory for the Easter celebration in the Eastern Church, and hence comes the Easter cake, kulich (Fr. Gr. kollikion - round bread).
With this totally unknown before ritual came into the Church language the unfamiliar ancient Türkic word artut (offering, gift), and it became “artos- bread” understood by the Greeks (artut ~ artus ~ artos). The Türks still bake only leavened bread, otherwise they ca not bake.
God (Slav. Bog) - high essence with ultimate intelligence, absolute perfection, omnipotence, who created the world and is ruling ruling it.
The word Bog (God) is usually connected with the Mongolian “Burkhan” . But the word “Bog “, as we know, was in the Slavic language long before the arrival of the Mongols.
Sometimes the name of the Almighty is taken from Sanskrit: in the Vedic mythology “Bhaga” is a deity whose name is translated as “share” , “happiness” , “property” . But this version does not have valid arguments, they are only soundalikes. And that's all.
It is more convincing to search for the word “Bog” in the ancient Türkic bodi, which is also confirmed by an ancient Buddhist tradition. It is known that in the 1st century after the Buddhist 4th Council accepted the Tengrian (Tengirchilik) ceremonies for the sacred service, “Mahayana” (wide chariot), a new teaching, became widespread in opposition to the ancient “Khinayana” (narrow chariot) teaching. It appeared during King Kinishka, this was the way the name of Erke Khan sounded in India, he was a ruler of the Kushan Empire.
“Bodhi” (Illumination, Awakening) became a most important term in Buddhism, meaning a highest consciousness, spiritual cleansing, achievement of wisdom. It the Türkic that word was pronounced “bodi” . In the Sutra “Golden Glitter” is said: “Bodi tegma tujunmaqi? jana sozlagali boltuqmaz” (“The vision called bodhi cannot be expressed by words” ).
In Asia the word “bodi” with centuries transformed into “Bogdokhan” (achieved Enlightment Khan, Enlighted Khan), “bogdo-gegen” (the August Light ), and in the Europe unfamiliar with the Estern culture it meant not the “Heavenly Light” but only the name of the Almighty - God.
The appelation “Bog” , “Bokh” , “Bozhe” , “Boje” are found only between the nations whose history is connected with the Türkic history. Noteworthy that the Türkic word boq (bo) meant “to attain peace, calm” .
It may also be that the expression “deseast in Boze” , now understood as “to die with God” , is a paraphrase of the Türkic expression bodi bosa-. It consist of two words: bodi (Enlightment) and bosa- (to depart), or together “to depart Enlighted” (the suggested etymology is interesting, though Slavic languages have a very substantial Indian substrate, of which the generic “Bog”/God is only one example, and there is a huge distance between Slavic Antes' chieftain and Asian Buddhism. See the “The word "God" in different languages” ).
Bursa - residence for poor students, usually at a seminary. This word is deduced from the Latin word bursa - “bag” , “purse” , with explanation that in the Middle Ages that was the name of a moneybag in an association. That is a doubtful explanation. The idea of this type of institutions, and their name, was borrowed from the Türks in the 5th century and it has a chain of evidence.
Translated from the ancient Türkic, the word bursan (bursan ~ bursa) means a “monks' community” , which exactly meets the correct meaning of the word “bursa” .
Lord (Slavic “Gospodi” ) - one of the Slavic appellations to the God. For some reasons it is deduced from Slavic ho (ancient nominative case). But alternate explanation is more convincing.
The Eastern philosophy postulates that on the way to perfection a man passes through five stages of knowlege. Like he lives five lives in one. In each stage he has a different understanding of the Truth endowed by the Eternal Blue Sky. Fron that come the five visions and five forms of addressing the Almighty: Tengri, Alla, God, Khodai, Lord (See “The word "God" in different languages” ).
The Slavic “Gospodi” is an expression koz bodi (~ gazbodi ~gosbodi ~ gospodi) from two ancient Türkic words - koz (eye) and bodi (Vision).
A believer asks for “Enlightment” to be given by the Almighty. Tengirchilik and Buddhism ask for it, in the Enlightment they saw the development of the soul and the man hinself. The Christians have an absolutely different objective of religion, they are looking for a salvation from a humility.
Spirit (Slavic “dukh” ) - in the Slavic languages it is understood as an “internal moral strength” . Here is an obvious borrowing of the ancient Türkic word tu - “flag” .
A flag had an aura of holiness for between Asian nations. A guarding spirit lives in a flag, it endows people with military success and with their very existence. A flag was a sacred talisman for the Türks.
In the Europe the flag in its modern form appeared only after the arrival of the Türks.
The Slavic phonetics transformed the word tu turned into “duh” (pronounced as “dukh” in Russian) (tu ~ tug ~ dug ~ dukh) but it retained the sense that the Türks had.
It was a bad omen to drop or damage a flag. Hence come the idioms “to raise fighting spirit” , “fighting spirit declined” , “soul-broken” . All of them are a word-for-word copies of the Türkic expressions.
Heresy - in Christianity is a variance with the official church doctrine, or figuratively a blunder.
The origin of this word is drawn from the Greek word hairesis - “elected manner of thought” , “different theology” . However here is also an obvious adaptation of an ancient Türkic expression jer-esiz. It consists of two words: jer- (to reject) and esiz (evil).
After minor phonetical adaptation, an unfamiliar Türkic expression turned into familiar for the Greeks words “choice” , “contrasting theology” (jer- esiz ~ eresiz ~ hairesis).
Another Türkic etymology for this word is also possible, it is - jer-asi. The combination jer- + affix -asi (< -a + si) literary means “something that should be rejected” (jer-asi ~ eraesi ~ hairesis).
Icon - it comes from the Greek word “image” , the image of Jesus Christ, the Virgin and all the Saints (Gk. eikon “likeness, image, portrait,” related to eikenai “be like, look like at http://www.etymonline.com - Translator's Note).
But the iconography could not begin from the times of the Christ at least because the Christianity was a branch of Judaism which disallow icons and divine images.
The first icons appeared in the Byzantium only in the 6th century . In the end of the 8th century (2nd Nicene Council, 783 - 787) the icons became mandatory attributes of the Christian cult in Europe. One of the advocates for iconography was the Saint John of Damask, seems that he was a Türk by birth. He lived in the 8th century and his name was Mansur. In 787 the Oecumenical Council proclaimed him a “herald of the truth” .
The first Christian icons are noted in the 5th century in the Armenian, the Caucasian Albanian and Iberian churches.
The icons are mandatory in the northern branch of Buddhism, based on the Tengirchilik traditions. The Buddha is depicted with his hand risen in a gesture of pacification: the thumb and the third finger are touching.
In Tengirchilik this gesture is called “bi-fingering” . It was transferred exactly and retained by the Armenian Church and the other Churches which were the first ones to adopt the spiritual traditions of the Türks.
For the Türks, the cult of sacred images is ascends to the petroglyphy. In the remaining beliefs they helped men into the spirit to communicate with God, to reach the Enlightment.
The ancient “petroglyph” tradition of uniting prayer and image was expressed by a compound of two ancient Türkic words: ay- (speak) and koni (truly). The word koni was frequently used in religious terminology of the ancient Türks: for example, koni kertu nom (true teaching).
Borrowing from the Tengrians the iconoclastic rites, the Christians adopted only the external side, seen from their explanation (!), they did not understand the deep kernel of the icons (causing iconoclastic fights!). As a result the Türkic commandment “talk truthfully” or “open your soul” turned into a pathetic Greek “image” .
Almost in all European languages the word “aycon” sounds the same (ay- koni ~ aiconi ~ aicon ~ eikon ~ icon).
Heirmos - in Christianity it is a liturgical chant of the morning canon, serving as a link between the Holy Scripture chants and the troparions (i.e.chants of the current day). Consequently was the name: from the Greek word heirmos - “wattle” . Here, like with icon, is an example of external adoption.
In the Byzantine hymnody the Heirmons appeared not earlier than the 7th century. The word “heirmos” has a Türkic root yir (song) + affix -maz, literally it means “our songs” (yiyrmaz).
Evidently as a result of phonetic adaptation the Türkic “yiyrmaz” turned into a Greek “heirmos” (yir-maz ~ irmaz ~ hirmoz ~ heirmos).
As is known, the singing is a required element of the Türkic spiritual culture, the idiosyncrasy of the Tengrian tradition. It was noted by the Pope Gregory the Great, who has took up that liturgy from the Tengrian Türks: from that came the Gregorian chant of the Catholic Church.
The origin of the word “heirmos” from the Türkic “song” is also confirmed by the fact that the liturgical book “Heirmology” contains only prayers intended for singing. One of the first authors of the heirmoses was St John of Damask (his lay name was Mansur).
Censer (Slavic “kadilo” ) - a swinging container for burning incense used in Christian service. In antiquity it was a cup on the end of a wooden handle, and was called katsia (approximaed Greek spelling). The Russian “Old Believers” still are using this type of incensory. Nowadays a censer is suspended with a chain, it is filled with burning coal and incense is poured on top of it. According to the ancient Eastern beliefs the incense respells evil spirits away.
Both words, “kadilo” and “katsia” are undoubtedly of the Türkic origin. In the ancient Türkic qadit means “repel” , hence the “kadilo” with which the Tengrians respelled evil spirits (qadit- ~ kadyt ~ kadit -> “kadilo” ).
The name “catsia” ascends to the complex word qa cayti (qa cayti ~ kachaiti ~ catsaiti ~ katsaiti ~ catsia), which consists of two ancient Türkic words qa (vessel) and cayti (sacral).
The translation of this word, “vessel with sacred” , reflects not only the purpose of the catsia, but also a reverend attitude to the incense in it.
Kamelaukion - Christianity bonnetlike headdress of the clergy. In the 9th century the emperors' crowns and the Papal tiara were called kamelaukion. The clergy wear kamelaukion since the 15th century.
The origin of the word is drawn from the Greek word kamelos (camel). The name supposedly ascends to the name of the hat made from camel-hair (kamelos). This is an unconvincing version. How is camel connected with the emperor's crown and Papal tiara?
Here is evident another borrowing from Tengirchilik. The name of the headdress originates with qam yelvi, which consist of two ancient Türkic words: qam (clergyman) and yelvi (sacred ritual).
The scenes of the sacred rites survived in the Altai petroglyphs. It is known that a Türkic clergyman would always wear that kind headdress during religious service. The Christians did not have such a headdress.
After its introduction in their ritual, the Christians started searching for an explanation for the unfamiliar term. Nothing was suggested beyond the awkward Greek “camel” .
Klobuk - headdress of the monks consisting of a kamelaukion and a hanging crepe. Modern form iwas copied by the Russian Church from the Greeks in the 17th century. Earlier, the cover was made not of light, but of thick material. The monks of the Pachomius time, 4th century, copied bashlyk (Türkic bonnetlike headdress with foldable ears, literally “header” ).
“Klobuk” has unquestionably Türkic origin. The Christians derive it from the Türkic word “kolpak” - a hood type hat. However, that is not right. The origin of that term is the expression qul ba, which consist of two ancient Türkic words: qul (“slave” ) and ba (“coverlet” ). In other words, “cover for God's slave” .
The name relates the form of the klobuk, and expresses its symbolic content.
Bell - Christians connect its appearance with the name of the bishop Paulinius (353 - 431), they say the form of the wildflowers suggested the idea to him. But that is more than naive. The Latin word for the bell (campana) is explained by the name of the province where they were first made.
The documents testify to absolutely different story. In Italy the bells appeared at the time of Pope Sabinian, ca. the year 604, and in France in the year 550. The Greeks did not know bells until the 9th century. The parishioners were called there by knocking on a beater (wooden board) or an iron blade.
The motherland of the bells is Tibet, they were invented by Abloma, a son of Aboteni and his fourth wife Djamir Gimbare. That is stated in the Eastern legends created before our era.
From the Türks the first to borrow the tradition of the bells were Armenian, to gather parishioners. In the Echmiadzin, a spiritual center of the Armenian Apostolic Church, is an ancient bell from Tibet, apparently presented by the Türks.
Not accidentally the Russian “kolokol” , the German “Glock” and French “cloche” have the same root. But the explanation that they come from the Latin “clocca” is not credible. Here is seen a Latin adaptation of a foreign word, a word which replaced the former campana.
The term is taken from the word qalik qol-, which consists of two ancient Türkic words: qalik (sky, heavens) and qol- (pray, beg). The semantics of the “beg the heavens” directly points to the use of the bell (qalik qol ~ kalykkol ~ kalykol ~ colocolGlock/cloche).
These are the true words, indeed: “A bell is mysteriously connected with sacred forces and human souls, it awakens earth and sky” .
However, another Türkic interpretation of this word is also possible: qol (hand) and oqi- (to call), i.e. “to call with a hand” .
The history of the Italian word “campana” also is different, it has no relation with the Italian province. The name consist of two ancient Türkic words: cam (clergyman) and pan (board), which means “clergyman's board” . This precisely conducts the use of the beater (cam pan ~ campan ~ campana ~ campana).
Furthermore, it explains why the word clocca replaced the word campana when appeared real bells.
And this is not the end of the story. In the Church cannon, in addition to the term “campana” is used a word with a meaning “heavy” (peso?), it is considered to be a translation of the Greek “baraya” (“heavy” ). It is believed that this were called big bells, for their powerful sound.
Here is an obvious combination of two ancient Türkic words: bar- (disappear) and aya (sin) (bar- aja ~ barayag ~ baraya). The translation “sin, disappear” expresses the symbolic essence of the reverberance when the bells ring on the church holydays. For example, on Easter.
The northern branch of Buddhism has a special ceremony for redeeming sins. That ceremony is performed at the entrance of the monastery.
By the way, a small bell is an attribute of the Buddhist altar, it symbolizes the highest wisdom.
Kondak - a genre of the Byzantine church poetry. The word is thought to derive from the Greek word kontakion “brief” .
A creator of the kondaks in the Christian Church is thought to be Roman Sweet-Singer, from Syria, he lived in the 5th-6th centuries. However, the earliest examples are attributed to Methodius, a bishop from Lykia, who died in the 311.
The kondak as a genre of church art in the Western world rose due to the Türks. It is evidenced by Syrian sources of the 6th century. This allows to suggest that the term “kondak” , like the term “heirmos” , is of a Türkic origin. It comes from the ancient Türkic word kondgar (to show the true way) kondgar- + affix -k, literally is “guidance to a true path” . That's why the kondaks relay the subject of a holiday or a life of a saint!
Such interpretation is way more appropriate then the Greek “brief” (kondgar ~ kondgark ~ kondark ~ kondak ~ kontakion).
In the Rus the hymn manuscripts of the 11th-14th centuries included a collection of kondaks and were called “kondakar” . That phonetic adaptation is even closer to the Türkic origin than the Greek (kondgark ~ kondgark ~ kondagark ~ kondakar).
The kondakar script, unfortunately, has not been deciphered. And the reason of the failures lies in ignoring the Türkic traditions. The Europe was not willing to recognize that the kondakar script has Türkic roots.
Koukul - headdress of monks dedicates exclusively to prayer. Unlike klobuk, it drops from the head and falls on both shoulders, breast and back, and on all sides is covered with holy equilateral crosses. A koukul is a sign of benignity, reminding the monk of benignancy and infantile simplicity.
The koukul, like klobuk doubtlessly is of a Türkic origin, the term consists of two words: ku (to guard) and qul (“slave” ). The translation “guard the God's slave” describes the direct purpose of a koukul, and expresses its symbolical meaning.
Labarum - the name of a flag with a cross that was endorsed by the emperor Constantine. The origin of the word “labarum” is reported to be unknown.
The cult of the cross came to the Europe together with the Türkic Kipchaks. The equilateral cross is a symbol of Tengri.
The Byzantium, which was borrowing the worshipping rites of the Heavenly God, and adopting Christianity to them, also adopted the cult of the cross. That's why in the 4th century the equilateral cross appeared on the Constantine's flags.
“Labarum” is a clear adaptation of the Türkic expression ala barim (ala barim ~ alabarym ~ alabarum ~ labarum). It consists from the word ala (meaning “evil contrivance” , “intrigues” ) and barim (disappear, die), formed by the conjugating the verb bar- (to disappear, to die) + affix -im.
The translation of that expression, “fall for bad devisals” , reflects well the situation after which Constantine, a little-known Greek, became the Great Emperor. With a backing of Türkic army, it was not too difficult.
Monastery - community of monks or nuns.
First western monasteries appeared one thousand years after the Buddhist ones, in the 3rd-4th centuries. Those were hermit settlements in Egypt, they were fortress-like. But only in the middle of the 5th century, following the rules of the 4th Oecumenical Council (451) monks were recognized as the Christians and subordinated to the eparchial bishops.
This fact already shows that the idea of monastery could not originate in the Christian fold.
But the official version derives the word “monastery” from the Greek word “monos” (one), hence the monasterion (hermit's cell). But that version completely contradicts the history of the monasteries.
Another unsuccessful Greek “adaptation” is evident! The ancient Türks had a prayer manastar irz-a (“forgive my sins” ). That formula came from Sanskrit. The first word manastar deserves a special attention. It consists of two words: manasa (soul) and tar (to save), translated as “save the soul” .
Apparently, the Türks used to say this short prayer at the entrances of the monasteries or near sacred places. It exactly expresses the feelings of those who sought in the monasteries salvation from the worldly corruption.
Nimbus - shining image around a head (a symbol of sainthood). Its origin has not been determined.
In Europe the word “nimbus” is usually derived from the Latin word nimbus (cloud). In the meantime a nimbus is one of the most ancient symbols of the Eastern culture meaning the outflow of vital energy, wisdom, shining of sanctity. Nimbuses were of different shapes and color.
The term is an evident adaptation of the ancient Türkic expression ja im ba (ja im ba ~ janimba ~ nimba ~ nimbus) consisting of three words: ja (shine), im (sign) and ba (to bind).
The translation is clear: “surround with sign of light” , “illuminate” . It is an instruction for the icon-painters.
Orarion - long ribbon worn by Christian clergymen on the shoulders.
The Church historians have not determined when the orarion became a vestment of clergy. The views also conflict about the origin of the word “orarion” .
By the unhealthy tradition the word “orarion” is thought to be Greek. Some insist on the Greek word “to see, observe” . Others derive it form the word “custody, care” , with a view that the people with orarion attend to the souls of the believers. There is also a Latin version: orarium from orare (to pray).
Such discrepancies are comprehensible. That is a Türkic word, in its base is or- ari- consisting of or- (to weave) and ari (cleanse) (or- ari- ~ orary ~ orari ~ orar~ orarion).
In the expression or- ari- a focus is on ari-. In the ancient Türkic religious texts the word ari- means “to cleanse of the sins” . Here is a citation: “jazuqun aria mujan bula sen” (“your sins will be cleansed and you will obtain justice” ).
Thus the translation of “orarion” from the ancient Türkic, “tie it on and be cleansed” expresses precisely the symbolic essence of the vestment.
Putting an orarion on, a cleric drops its ends down, and after a prayer he ties the orarion's ends, thus showing his spiritual purity. That is a Tengrian tradition.
Pagan (Slavic “Yazychnik” ) - polytheist, idolater.
The word “yazychnik” has a clear ancient Türkic stem jaz- (to sin). The combination jaz- + affix igci is “sinner” (jaz- + igci ~ yazygchi ~ yazychig ~ yazychnik).
Another etymology of that word is also possible: the Türkic stem jazinc (sin) + the Russian suffix nik (jazinc + -nik ~ yazynchnik ~ yazychnik). But this is less likely.
Thus, it can be posited that the Russian word “yazychnik” is a borrowing of the Türkic word “sinner” .
As we can see, criminalists have good prospective in the historical studies. Their methods are handy for it. And we touched on one only area of the “vices” , the religious side… So where have the Türkic cultural wealth disappeared to? This question does not seem as strange as it did in the beginning.
Bur the religious history was not over with the “lost” words, it had a continuation.
Akataev S.N. World Outlook Syncretism of the Kazakhs. Issues I-II. Alma-Ata.,
Banzarov D. The Black Belief or Shamanism with the Mongols… SPb., 1891.
Bedwell G. Church History. M., 1996.
Belikov D.N. Origin of Christianity with the Goths and Bishop Ulfila actions. Kazan., 1887.
[Buzand] History of Armenia by Favtos Buzand. Yerevan., 1953.
Velihanov C.C. Collected Works in 5 Volumes. Volume 1. Alma-Ata., 1961.
Karamzin N.M. History of Russian State. Vol. I-V. M., 1989 - 1996.
Carger M.I. Ancient Kyiv. Vol.1-2. M., L., 1958, 1961.
[Constantine Porfirorodniy] Proceedings of Byzantium Writers about Northern Black Sea Coast (first issue) // Proceedings of National Academy of Material Culture History. Issue 91. M., L., 1934.
Pipes R. Russia under the Old Regime. M., 1993.
Pletneva S.A. The Polovtsians (Kipchaks). M., 1990.
Radzivillovskaya Chronicle, Photomechanical Reproduction of Radzivillovskaya (Konigsberg) Chronicle. SPb., 1902.
Russia between East and West: Culture and Society X - 17th centuries // For XVII International Congress of Byzantium Explorers (Moscow, August 8-15th, 1991). Part I - III, M., 1991.
Rybakov B.A. Kyiv Rus and Russian Principalities of the 12th - XIII centuries, M., 1982.
Rybakov B.A. Handicraft of Ancient Russia. M., 1948.
Rybakov B.A. Russian Chronicles and the author of “The Lay of Igor's Warfare” . M., 1972.
Rybakov B.A. Paganism of Ancient Russia. M., 1987.
Samashev Z.S. Rock Paintings of Upper Irtysh Banks. Alma-Ata, 1992.
[Simokkata] Theophilakt Simokkata. History. M., 1957.
Tacitus Collected Works in Two Volumes. SPb., 1993.
Chichurov I.S. Byzantine Historical Works. M., 1980.
Shakhmatov A.A. Ancient Fates of Russian Nation. Pg., 1919.
Shakhmatov A.A. Essay of Modern Russian Literary Language. L., 1925.
Tengri, Khuday, Deos and God
Crescent and Star in Islam and Türkic world