HISTORY: FICTION OR SCIENCE? ● BOOK 14

The Issue

with Russian Tartary

Anatoly Fomenko

Gleb Nosovskiy

THE ISSUE WITH RUSSIAN TARTARY

By Anatoly Fomenko and Gleb Nosovskiy

Book 14 of History: Fiction or Science? series.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of the publisher. Critics are welcome, of course, to quote brief passages by way of criticism and review.

Anatoly Fomenko and Gleb Nosovskiy assert the moral right to be identified as the authors of this work.

Translated from Russian by Mikhail Yagupov

Design & layout: Paul Bondarovski

Project management: Franck Tamdhu

On the cover: Portrait of Russian boyar Petr Potemkin by Sir Godfrey Kneller (1646–1723).

Hermitage, St. Petersburg.

Copyright © 2003-2017 Delamere Resources LLC

Published by Delamere Resources LLC

Publisher’s website

2017 print edition

Volume 1:

Dating methods as offered by mathematical statistics, eclipses and zodiacs

Volume 2:

The dynastic parallelism method. Rome. Troy. Greece. The Bible. Chronological shifts

Volume 3:

Astronomical methods as applied to chronology. Ptolemy’s Almagest. Tycho Brahe. Copernicus. The Egyptian zodiacs

Volume 4:

Russia. Britain. Byzantinium. Rome

Video from Wikipedia

Overview of the e-Series

History: Fiction or Science?

by Anatoly Fomenko and Gleb Nosovskiy

Book 1:

The Issue with Chronology

Book 2:

Astronomy vs. History

Book 3:

The Apocalypse Seen by Astronomy

Book 4:

The Issue with Dark Ages

Book 5:

The Issue with Antiquity

Book 6:

The Issue with Troy

Book 7:

The Issue with Russian History

Book 8:

The Horde From Pacific to Atlantic

Book 9:

The Issue with Mongols

Book 10:

The Issue with Ivan the Terrible

Book 11:

The Issue with Tamerlane

Book 12:

USA Has Issues with Maps of 18th Century

Book 13:

The Issue with Czar’s Helmet

Book 14:

The Issue with Russian Tartary

Book 15:

The Issue with British History

Book 16:

Crusades and Exoduses

Book 17:

Maps and Coins vs. History

Book 18:

Swords and Mantles Tell History

Book 19:

The Testament of Peter the Great

Book 20:

The Issue with Baptism of Russia

Book 21:

The Issue with Chinese Astronomy

Book 22:

The Great Wall Of China Hoax

Contents

About the authors

From the publisher

1. More in re the identification of Yaroslavl as the historical Novgorod the Great

1.1. River Volga and River Volkhov

1.2. Excerpts from the history of Yaroslavl

1.3. The possible location of the famous library formerly owned by “Ivan the Terrible”

2. The identity of the Kagans

3. The Horde as the Cossack council (rada)

4. Kiev as the capital of the Goths

5. The destruction of inscriptions on the old Russian relics

5.1. The tomb of Yaroslav the Wise in the Cathedral of St. Sophia in Kiev

5.2. The monasteries of Staro-Simonov and Bogoyavlenskiy in Moscow

5.3. Why would the Romanovs need to chisel off the frescoes and put layers of bricks over the old Czars’ tombs in the cathedrals of the Kremlin?

6. The fake sarcophagi of the pre-Romanovian czarinas made by the Romanovs in the XVII century

7. In the second part of the XVII century the Romanovs removed old headstones from the Russian cemeteries and either destroyed them or used them as construction material. The excavations of 1999-2000 conducted in the Louzhetskiy Monastery of Mozhaysk

8. Geography according to a map of Great Tartary that dates from 1670

9. A. I. Soulakadzev and his famous collection of books and chronicles

10. The name of the victor in the battle of 1241 between the Tartars and the Czechs

11. The location of Mongolia as visited by the famous traveller Plano Carpini

11.1. The “correct” book of Carpini as we have at our disposal today versus the “incorrect” book, which has vanished mysteriously

11.2. The return route of Carpini

11.3. The geography of Mongolia according to Carpini

11.4. In re the name of the Tartars

11.5. Mongolian climate

11.6. The Imperial Mongolian graveyard

11.7. The second graveyard of the Mongols

11.8. Cannons in the army of Presbyter Johannes

11.9. The language of the Mongols

11.10. The real nature of the Mongolian tents, presumed to have made of red and white felt

11.11. The throne of the Mongolian Emperor

11.12. The priests from the entourage of the Mongolian Emperor

11.13. The Mongolian worship of Genghis-Khans effigy

12. Notes of a Mediaeval Turkish Janissary written in the Cyrillic script

13. The crypt of the Godunovs in the Troitse-Sergiev Monastery. The Ipatyevskiy Monastery in Kostroma

14. The modern location of Astrakhan differs from that of the old Tartar Astrakhan, which the Romanovs appear to have razed out of existence

15. The reasons why the Romanovian administration would have to destroy hundreds of maps compiled by the Russian cartographer Ivan Kirillov

16. Braids worn by all inhabitants of Novgorod regardless of sex

What mainstream historians say about the New Chronology?

Overview of the e-Series

Overview of the seven-volume print edition

Also by Anatoly T. Fomenko

Also by Gleb V. Nosovskiy

Bibliography

About the authors

- Fomenko, Anatoly Timofeevich (b. 1945). Full Member (Academician) of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Full Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Full Member of the International Higher Education Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, Professor, Head of the Moscow State University Section of Mathematics of the Department of Mathematics and Mechanics. Solved Plateau’s Problem from the theory of minimal spectral surfaces. Author of the theory of invariants and topological classification of integrable Hamiltonian dynamic systems. Laureate of the 1996 National Premium of the Russian Federation (in Mathematics) for a cycle of works on the Hamiltonian dynamical systems and manifolds’ invariants theory. Author of 200 scientific publications, 28 monographs and textbooks on mathematics, a specialist in geometry and topology, calculus of variations, symplectic topology, Hamiltonian geometry and mechanics, computer geometry. Author of a number of books on the development of new empirico-statistical methods and their application to the analysis of historical chronicles as well as the chronology of antiquity and the Middle Ages.

- Nosovskiy, Gleb Vladimirovich (b. 1958). Candidate of Physics and Mathematics (MSU,Moscow, 1988), specialist in theory of probability, mathematical statistics, theory of probabilistic processes, theory of optimization, stochastic differential equations, computer modelling of stochastic processes, computer simulation.Worked as researcher of computer geometry in Moscow Space Research Institute, in Moscow Machine Tools and Instruments Institute, in Aizu University in Japan. Faculty member of the Department of Mathematics and Mechanics MSU.

From the publisher

Delicate Europe escapes from the Evil Great Tartary

The consensual world history was manufactured in Europe in XVI-XIX centuries with political agenda of powers of that period on the basis of erroneous clerical chronology elaborated by Jesuits Joseph Justus Scaliger and Dionysius Petavius.

“Who controls the past controls the future.
Who controls the present controls the past.”
– George Orwell, 1984.

- By the middle of XVI century the prime political agenda of Europe that reached superiority in Sciences and Technologies, but was still inferior militarily to the Evil Empire of Eurasia, was to free Europe.

- The concerted effort of European aristocracy, black and white Catholic clergy, Protestants, humanists and scientists in XV-XVII centuries in creation and dissemination of fictional Ancient World served this agenda.

- The fictional Ancient World was created by representing events of XI-XVI centuries as ones that happened thousands of years before according to the ancient sources they wrote by authorities they invented.

- The European aristocracy, a considerable part of which were fugitives from Byzantine and/or the inheritors of Eurasian warlords, supported the myth of Ancient World to justify its claims to countries they ruled.

- The black and white Catholic clergy, Protestants developed and supported the myth of Ancient World to justify their claims of being more ancient and to separate themselves from Eurasian orthodoxy in the countries ruled by European aristocracy.

- The scientists supported the myth of Ancient World as safe cover for their heretic research that produced results contrarian to the tenets of Christianity. They justified their discoveries by authorities of ancient scientists they themselves invented and used as pseudonyms.

- The humanists developed and supported the myth of Ancient World as a cozy safe haven for their ideas that conflicted with Christianity and aristocracy. They disguised and justified their ideas on authorities of ancient authors of their own making and wrote under their glorious aliases.

The Great, or Russian, or Evil Tartary was, according to British Encyclopaedia History, edition of 1771, the biggest state in the world. This enormous state has disappeared without a trace from all subsequent editions of Britannica. Clerical mistake? Enigma cloud in mystery?

Solved! Why then the mainstream historians do not shower mathematician Dr. Prof. Fomenko with thanks and laurels?

The Russian historians cannot – because Fomenko asserts that there was no such thing as the Tartar and Mongol invasion followed by three centuries of slavery, providing a formidable body of documented evidence to prove his assertion.

The so-called “Tartars and Mongols” were the actual ancestors of the modern Russians, living in a bilingual state with Arabic spoken as freely as Russian. The ancient Russian state was governed by a double structure of civil and military authorities.

The “horde” in old Russian means an “army”. The “Hordes” were actually professional armies with a tradition of lifelong conscription (the recruitment being the so-called “blood tax”). Their “invasions” were punitive operations against the regions that attempted tax evasion.

Fomenko proves that Russian history as we know it today is a blatant forgery concocted by a host of German scientists brought to Russia by the usurper dynasty of the Romanovs.

English historians rage at the suggestion that the history of ancient England was de facto a Byzantine import transplanted to the English soil by the fugitive Byzantine nobility. To reward the English historians who consider themselves the true scribes of World History, the cover of the book History: Fiction or Science? portrays Tintoretto's Jesus Christ crucified on the Big Ben.

Fomenko wipes out the ancient history of China outright. No such ancient history. Period. The compilation of the so-called ancient Chinese history is reliably datable to the XVII-XVIII century only. It is perfectly recognizable as the ancient European history, reworked and transcribed in hieroglyphs as yet another historical transplantation, this time performed on the Chinese soil by the loving Jesuit hands.

Islam with all its key figures appears as late as XIV-XV century A.D. as a branch of proto-Christianity. This is amply illustrated by imagery of Prophet Mahomet, archangel Gabriel, Heaven and Hell of this period. In today's Islam all imagery of the things living is taboo.

Arabic historians may find consolation in the crucial historical role of the Ottoman Empire in the XVI-XVII century. The trouble is that this empire was initially a proto-Christian state, with Hagia Sophia identifiable as Temple of Solomon. We can only guess if the acquisition of Alexander the Great (a Macedonian and a Christian!) as the founder of the Muslim World Empire will make Fomenko's theories more acceptable to the Arabic mainstream.

Saint Augustine was quite prescient when he said: “Be wary of mathematicians, particularly when they speak the truth.”

Dr. Prof. Anatoly Fomenko is a Full Member (Academician) of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Full Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Full Member of the International Higher Education Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, Professor, Head of the Moscow State University Department of Mathematics and Mechanics. Solved the classical Plateau s Problem from the theory of minimal spectral surfaces. Author of the theory of invariants and topological classification of integrable Hamiltonian dynamic systems. Laureate of the 1996 National Premium in Mathematics of the Russian Federation for a cycle of works on the Hamiltonian dynamic system multitude invariance theory. Author of 180 scientific publications, 26 monographs, and textbooks on mathematics, a specialist in geometry and topology, variational calculus, symplectic topology, Hamiltonian geometry and mechanics, computational geometry. Author of a number of books on the development of new empirical-statistical methods and their application to the analysis of historical chronicles as well as the chronology of antiquity and the Middle Ages.

History is a pack of lies about events that never happened

told by people who weren’t there.

George Santayana,

American philosopher

(1863-1952)

Be wary of mathematiciens, particularly when they speak the truth.

St. Augustine

History repeats itself; that’s one of the things that’s wrong with history.

Clarence Darrow

Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.

George Orwell, 1984

1.

More in re the identification of Yaroslavl as the historical Novgorod the Great

In the previous books we relate our concept of the historical Novgorod the Great as mentioned in the Russian chronicles identifiable as the old Russian city of Yaroslavl and not the modern Novgorod-upon-Volkhov.

1.1. River Volga and River Volkhov

The modern city of Novgorod is situated upon River Volkhov. The name of the river is indeed mentioned in some of the chronicles alongside references to Novgorod the Great. However, one must enquire about whether or not the above can be regarded as proof of the fact that the city of Novgorod the Great from the chronicles really identifies as the modern Novgorod-upon-Volkhov.

The answer turns out to be in the negative. The chronicle references to Volkhov do not contradict the identification of Novgorod the Great as Yaroslavl. The name Volkhov turns out to be another version of the name Volga, which is the river that flows through the city of Yaroslavl to date.

Apparently, the “paper migration” of Yaroslavl (Novgorod) from the banks of the Volga to the West implemented by the politically aware historians resulted in the duplication of Volga’s name, which had transformed into Volkhov. The town of Novgorod on Volkhov became identified as the historical Novgorod the Great in the early XVII century the latest. The implication is that every chronicle that mentions Novgorod the Great, or Yaroslavl, as a city that stands on the banks of River Volkhov, was edited in the XVII century the earliest. This corollary concurs with our general observation that the available editions of the Russian chronicles appear to date from the XVII-XVIII century, and not any earlier, as related above.

A propos, let us pay attention to the simple fact, which is however of great utility to the researcher. The word Volga had once translated as “water” or “watery,” and one can still recognize the respective Russian words (vlaga and vlazhniy). Another related word has always been typical for the Volga dialect and sounds even closer to the actual name of the river – volgliy, which translates as “wet” or “humid.” This word can be found in the dictionaries of Dahl ([223] and Fasmer [866]). In general, we can find its cousins in pretty much every Slavonic language ([866]).

Therefore, one should expect quite a few rivers to be named in a way that resembles the word vlaga, water. Fasmer cites the following examples: River Vlha, a tributary of Laba, Wilga, a tributary of Wisla, the same old Volkhov in the Pskov region, etc. (see [866]).

1.2. Excerpts from the history of Yaroslavl

As early as in the XVII century Yaroslavl had been the second largest city in Russia, only surpassed by Moscow in terms of population ([408], page 7).

By the way, the third largest city in Russia (after Moscow and Yaroslavl) had been Kostroma, which locates right next to Yaroslavl ([438], page 97). Bear in mind that, according to our reconstruction, Kostroma (known as the famous Khoresm in the Arabic sources) had been part of the conglomeration called Lord Novgorod the Great; thus, the two neighbouring cities, Kostroma and Yaroslavl, had been the largest Russian cities of the XVII century, with the exception of the capital.

Yaroslavl’s fortifications had consisted of a mighty citadel, known as the Kremlin, just like its larger namesake in Moscow ([408], page 122). Its disposition had been perfect: “The steep and tall banks of the Volga and Korostlya and a deep crevice in the north naturally transformed this triangle into a fortified island” ([408], pages 2-3; see fig. 14.1). The perimeter defence had been quite formidable, amounting to 20 battle towers.

Fig. 14.1. A XIX century watercolour with a view of the tall hill standing at the junction of the rivers Volga and Kotorosl, which is where the Yaroslavl Citadel had stood (destroyed in the Novgorod pogrom). According to our reconstruction, it can be identified as “Yaroslav’s Court of Novgorod the Great.” In the foreground we can see one of the surviving towers which had once been part of the mighty fortifications of Novgorod the Great, or Yaroslavl. Fragment of the watercolour of G. P. Sabaneyev entitled “A View over Yaroslavl as Seen from Tveritsy.” Reproduced in accordance with [996], pages 186-187.

This is the site of an ancient settlement. The Great Prince Yaroslav the Wise (the same historical personality as Ivan Kalita, or Caliph, according to our reconstruction) had then founded a city here, naming it after himself. Yaroslav himself is quite correctly referred to as the Great Prince of Rostov (and not Kiev) in the chronicles of Yaroslavl ([408]).

One must point our that the entire history of Yaroslavl up until the XVII century is shrouded by an impenetrable veil of darkness in the Romanovian and Millerian version of history. This should come as no surprise to us, since, according to our reconstruction, the entire ancient history of Yaroslavl had been artificially removed from its proper chronological and geographical context and transplanted to the marshy soil of the Pskov region, which is where we find River Volkhov and the town known as Novgorod nowadays.

Yaroslavl rather suddenly emerges from the obscurity of the XVI century as a large fortified city, second only to the capital of the country in size. Its citadel had 24 towers upon a dam. Most of the towers were demolished in the XVIII – early XIX century ([408], page 123). Nevertheless, the few lucky survivors give us some idea of just how powerful the defence line of Yaroslavl had been in that faraway epoch.

Among the latter we find the gate towers named Volzhskaya, Znamenskaya and Ouglichskaya. The Znamenskaya Tower is truly gigantic – its size can compete the very towers of the Kremlin in the capital (see fig. 14.2). The size of the Yaroslavl towers demonstrates the facts that the city had possessed a defence line that could easily place the ancient Yaroslavl in the same category as the most heavily fortified Russian cities – Moscow, Kolomna, Nizhniy Novgorod and Kazan. All of this is to be expected from “Novgorod the Great,” an ancient Russian capital.

Fig. 14.2. The Vlassyevskaya, or Znamenskaya tower that had formerly been part of Yaroslavl’s sturdy fortifications, destroyed in the Novgorod pogrom (according to our reconstruction). A view from the west. Modern photograph. Reproduced in accordance with [996], page 73. In the left corner of the Znamenskaya Tower one can clearly see the remnants of a brick wall, which had once stood adjacent to the tower. The wall was destroyed – there is nothing left but uneven marks.

The famous “Czar’s Site” in the Ouspenskiy Cathedral of the Kremlin in Moscow must be emulating a similar spot in Yaroslavl, which exist until the present day. In fig. 14.3 one sees a photograph of the royal “Patriarch’s Site” in Yaroslavl, and in fig. 14.4 – one of the “Czar’s Site” in the Ouspenskiy Cathedral of the Muscovite Kremlin. The similarity of the two is quite obvious.

Fig. 14.3. The main cathedral of Yaroslavl had special daises for the Czar and the Patriarch, likewise the Ouspenskiy Cathedral in Moscow. Nowadays they are kept in the Church of Ilya the Prophet in Yaroslavl. These daises are shown in the photograph. Reproduced in accordance with [996], pages 140-141.

Fig. 14.4. Czar’s dais of the Ouspenskiy Cathedral in the Muscovite Kremlin. Dated to 1551. Taken from [637], colour insets at the end of the book.

The Romanovian viewpoint should make it rather odd that there should be no surviving military fortifications that would not undergo a complete renovation in the XVII century, despite the fact that many of the old churches and monasteries have remained intact ([408]). What could possibly be the matter here? Could the ancient residents of Yaroslavl have built monastery walls to last much longer than military fortifications?

The above is likely to be explained by our reconstruction, which identifies Yaroslavl as the historical Novgorod the Great. All the fortifications of the latter had been demolished during the very same “Novgorod pogrom” as mentioned above.

If we delve further into the history of the fortifications around Yaroslavl, we shall be confronted by an even greater number of oddities. See for yourselves. We are told that the sturdy fortifications that had protected Yaroslavl up until the XVII century were made of wood, which had led to their presumed incineration in 1658 ([408], page 123). The walls and the towers have allegedly perished in flames.

The blaze is said to have been followed by reconstruction works – the oddest kind imaginable. The three gigantic stone towers of Rubleniy Fort and all of the 16 towers that had constituted the Zemlyanoy Fort were all rebuilt in stone. However, the walls have never been rebuilt! ([408], page 123; see figs. 14.5 and 14.6). It suffices to reflect for a moment in order to understand the futility of such a “reconstruction” – towers without walls can hardly be regarded as a fortification at all, since anyone can make their way past the towers – they need walls to be of any use for defence. Why would one build nineteen enormous towers and then stop and cease the restoration of the fortifications one and for all, which is the version modern historians insist on?

Fig. 14.5. The city of Yaroslavl in the early XVIII century. The painting is kept in the History Museum of Yaroslavl. The city fortifications leave one with an odd impression – we see many large towers of stone (several rows of them), but not a single wall anywhere! We are being told that the inhabitants of Yaroslavl had planted towers everywhere, intending to build walls later but never quite managing to. According to our reconstruction, the powerful military fortifications of Yaroslavl, including the walls, were demolished at the end of the XVI century during the “Novgorod pogrom.” The walls remained intact as potentially useful constructions. Most of them became dilapidated around the XIX century, and were taken down eventually. However, nearly all of them had still been intact in the XVIII century.

Fig. 14.6. Fragment of an ancient painting that depicts Yaroslavl in the early XVIII century. We can see towers, but no walls.

It isn’t hard to guess that the walls of brick fortifications should be built around the same time as the towers, both of them being components of a single fortification line. Towers of brick or stone cannot be erected separately from walls – this would result in the formation of hollow joints. Those would greatly reduce the strength of a military fortification.

Our reconstruction provides a simple explanation to this phenomenon – the “Novgorod pogrom” of the XVI century had pursued the obvious goal of voiding Yaroslavl’s status of a fortified city. This was easily achieved via the demolition of the walls. The towers have been kept as useful constructions that could serve a number of purposes – nothing to do with defence, though. In particular, this implies that the old fortifications of Yaroslavl had been made of stone or brick.

Indeed, let us consider the photograph of the Vlasyevskaya Tower of Yaroslavl, one of the survivors (also known as the Znamenskaya Tower, q.v. in fig. 14.2). In the left corner of the tower we can clearly see the remnants of a brick wall that had once been adjacent to the tower. The wall has been demolished completely, with nothing remaining but the torn trace in the corner of the tower.

Yaroslavl has been an important cultural centre of Russia since the very first days of its existence. Despite the fact that little is known about Yaroslavl before the XVII century, it is reported that in the early XIII century “the first seminary in the North opened here, one that had possessed what was considered a lavish library in that epoch – 1000 books in Greek” ([408], page 5). The famous Slovo o polku Igoreve, which is an account of Prince Igor’s campaign considered one of the primary ancient Russian historical texts, had been kept in Yaroslavl, “where the bibliophile Moussin-Pushkin purchased it from the Archimandrite Ioil Bykovskiy … in 1792” ([408], page 113). Few cities were distinguished by such libraries back in the day. However, the very status of an old capital obliged Yaroslavl, or Novgorod, to own an extensive library.

An attentive study of Nikon’s chronicle as it tells us about the invasion of the Tartars and the Mongols reveals the following curious remark made by the chronicler. The Tartars and the Mongols capture Rostov and Yaroslavl, and then “the entire country, bringing their yoke over many a city” ([408], page 5). Rostov and Yaroslavl are thus pointed out as the cradle of the Great = “Mongolian” expansion, which is in perfect correspondence with our reconstruction.

1.3. The possible location of the famous library formerly owned by “Ivan the Terrible”

It is common knowledge that an enormous royal library had existed in Moscow in the epoch of Ivan the Terrible. It is presumed to have disappeared without a trace after that. Historians and archaeologists are still looking for it. They have looked in Moscow, possibly, in Novgorod (the modern town on River Volkhov, of course), and in Tver. No results so far. What could have become of it? Had it burned completely, down to the very last volume, this would become known – the consumption of a huge library by a fire in the Kremlin could hardly have gone unnoticed.

If it had been destroyed deliberately, individual “harmless” books, which it must have contained at any rate, would have surfaced somewhere by now – old books are usually very expensive. The same applies to the version about the theft of the library – individual books would have appeared on the market at the very least.

The fact that the library had disappeared in its entirety leads one to the thought that it might still be about, concealed somewhere, which is what historians are telling us. They conduct their search most meticulously, and to no avail. We are of the opinion that they are looking in the wrong place. Above we discuss the enthronement of Czar Simeon after the end of the oprichnina epoch in great detail. This monarch had attempted to transfer the capital to Novgorod, and gone so far as to transfer his treasury there. The construction of a powerful imperial citadel was commenced in Novgorod ([776], page 169).

Could Simeon have transferred the royal library to Novgorod as well? This shall explain the fact that it still hasn’t been found. As we already mentioned, the name “Novgorod the Great” had originally belonged to Yaroslavl. When the Romanovs came to power, they deprived Yaroslavl of its old name, which was “transferred” to a small provincial town on River Volkhov. This deed was forgotten, and later Romanovs have already been convinced that Novgorod the Great was located on River Volkhov – they had believed in quite a few stories of dubious veracity told by their royal ancestors in order to justify their enthronement after the palace revolution.

After the end of the confusion epoch in the dynastic history of the Romanovs (roughly the XVIII-XIX century), the Romanovian historians remembered the famous library of Ivan the Terrible and started to search for it – in Novgorod-upon-Volkhov, as one might guess. It is also obvious that no such search has ever been conducted in Yaroslavl. We would recommend the archaeologists to try searching for the famous library of Ivan the Terrible in Yaroslavl, which is where the abovementioned Slovo o polku Igoreve has been found, after all ([408], page 113).

On the other hand, the library of “Ivan the Terrible” may have been located in the town of Alexandrovskaya Sloboda, a former capital of the Horde. The library thus became known as the “Library of Alexandria,” and migrated to faraway Egypt in the official historical paradigm (in Chron6 we demonstrate the Biblical Egypt to be Russia, or the Horde, in the XIV-XVI century). The Egyptian Library of Alexandria is said to have been burned to the ground, which makes it very likely that the library of “Ivan the Terrible,” aka the Library of Alexandria, had indeed been burnt by the first Romanovs, who were incinerating the old history of the Horde with enormous zeal.

2.

The identity of the Kagans

The problem of the Kagans in general, and the famous “Kaganate of the Khazars” in particular, is one of the most intriguing and controversial issues of the old Russian history. Let us remind the reader that the Romanovian history presents the so-called Kaganate of the Khazars as a state hostile to Russia, which had even made the latter pay tribute to the Kagans at some point. The final defeat of the Khazars is said to have taken place in the reign of Svyatoslav and Vladimir; the victory had been a very hard one indeed, and brought about the complete removal of the Khazars from the historical arena.

Let us consider the titles of Vladimir, the Great Prince who is said to have defeated the “hostile Khazar Kaganate”? Is the formula Great Prince actually used in the chronicles, as we believe it to be nowadays? It may be – but hardly in all chronicles. Let us open the famous Word on the Law and Divine Grace ([312]) by Metropolitan Illarion, the first Russian Metropolitan who had lived in the alleged years 1051-1054, according to the Romanovian chronology. How does the Metropolitan refer to the Great Prince, who had almost been a contemporary of his, and a famed hero of the previous generation?

Let us delve into the original in Old Russian, which said “And the word of the Lord was translated into every language, as well as Russian. Blessed be Vladimir, our Kagan, who has baptised us” ([312], page 28). Thus, Great Prince Vladimir was also known as the Kagan, and it isn’t some barely literate scribe calling him that, but rather the head of the Russian Church.

In 1935 B. A. Rybakov copied the following inscription that he found in the Cathedral of St. Sophia in Kiev: “God Save our Kagan S …” ([752], page 49). The phrase was inscribed on one of the pillars in the northern gallery (see fig. 14.7). Academician B. A. Rybakov writes the following: “The Byzantine title [‘Czar’, or ‘Caesar’ – Auth.] came to replace the Eastern title of the Great Princes of Kiev – the Kagan. In the very same temple of St. Sophia there was a pillar decorated by the lettering that said ‘our Kagan S …’ – the capital S might be the initial of either Svyatoslav Yaroslavich or Svyatopolk Izyaslavich, most probably, the former” ([752], page 49). Also: “The Prince of Kiev, whom the Oriental authors … called Kagan” ([752], page 10).

Fig. 14.7. Fragment of B. A. Rybakov’s book with a reproduction of the ancient lettering that he had copied from the column of the Cathedral of St. Sophia in Kiev. Taken from [752], page 49.

The principal part is by no means the attempt to guess a chronicle character by the single surviving initial, but rather the mind-boggling fact that the Orthodox rulers had been known as Kagans. Our reconstruction claims this to be perfectly normal.

According to L. N. Gumilev, “the Khans had ruled over the Avarians, Bulgarians, Hungarians and even Russians; this title was borne by Vladimir the Holy, Yaroslav the Wise, and Oleg Svyatoslavich, a grandson of the latter” ([211], page 435).

We are of the following opinion: Kagan is an Old Russian title equivalent to that of the Czar or the Khan. It is quite obvious that the word Kagan is closely related to the word Khan, and happens to be one of its archaic forms.

We shall also cover the issue of the word Khazars being an old form of the word Cossacks. This isn’t a mere hypothesis of ours, but rather a direct statement made by the Archbishop of Byelorussia in the early XIX century ([423]).

Thus, the “Oriental” title Kagan is most likely to be of a Russian origin. It had once been borne by the Czars, or the Khans of the Russian (“Mongolian”) Empire. This isn’t the only such example. One should also consider the title of Caliph, applied to “rulers who also strived to become heads of religious communities” ([85], Volume 46, page 40). In other words, kings and head priests at the same time. This title had been known rather well in Russia – as Caliph and Kalifa ([786], Issue 6, page 37). We encounter the following passage in a Russian novel of the XVII century: “they revere the Pope like we do the Kalifa” (ibid.).

The readers are entitled to ask us why we believe the word Kalifa to be of a Russian origin. The answer is as follows. In Chron5 we use mediaeval sources to demonstrate the “mysterious” mediaeval king and priest known as Presbyter Johannes to be the very same historical personality as Ivan Kalita, the Russian Czar also known as Batu-Khan. One cannot fail to notice the similarity of the words Kalifa and Kalita; the frequent flexion of the sounds F and T (Thomas/ Foma, Theodor/Fyodor, etc.) makes them as one and the same word de facto.

This brings about the following chain of identifications: Ivan Kalita = Kalifa Ivan = Caliph Ivan, Czar and Head Priest = Presbyter Johannes.

It is little wonder that this title (or alias) of Ivan Kalita, aka Batu-Khan, had survived in many parts of the “Mongolian” = Great Empire as the name of the leader of the state and the Church. Apparently, Batu-Khan, or Ivan Kalita, had been such a leader.

The scholarly concept of the “Mongolian” Khans (whom we now understand to be Russian) as savage nomads is purely fictional, and an invention of the Romanovian historians. We have cited numerous examples of marriages between the “Mongolian” Khans and the Byzantine princesses. Historians are telling us that the refined Byzantine princesses left their luxurious palaces for the yurts of the nomadic savages, herded sheep, cooked pilaf and gathered wild berries. The Golden Horde had presumably left no buildings; hence the implication that its inhabitants had lived in cold tents and chew upon the meat of their sinewy horses.

We also know of many Byzantine emperors married to the daughters of the Khazar Kagans: “Justinian II was married to the daughter of a Kagan, who was baptised Theodora. Tiberius II also married a Kagan’s daughter and returned from Khazaria to Constantinople in 708 with an army of the Khazars [the Cossacks, that is – Auth.]. The wife of Constantine V (741-775) had also been a Kagan’s daughter, baptised Irene as she converted to Christianity … In the IX century the Byzantine emperors formed a Khazar [Cossack – Auth.] court guard. Many of the Khazar warriors became distinguished and got promoted to high ranks in the imperial army and administration” ([823], page 139).

Thus, we are being told that the savage “Mongolian” nomads had been entering dynastic marriages with the royal house of Byzantium for centuries. The former had allegedly been illiterate and lived in the dusty steppe, while the latter wrote poems and historical tractates residing in luxurious palaces.

We believe the picture painted above to be nonsensical. Such a great amount of marriages a priori implies common religions and cultures. Indeed, it is known well that the religion and culture of the mediaeval Byzantium had been very similar to their Russian counterparts. All of the “Khazars” and “Mongols” in the chronicles were Orthodox Russians and neither savage, nor nomadic.

As for Islam – let us point out that the schism between the churches and the segregation of the Islamic tradition, which has led to its transformation into a separate religion, are dating from the epoch of the XV-XVI century, according to our reconstruction. The Orthodox faith and Islam had previously been united into a single religion.

It is common knowledge that Islam had been a Christian sect of the Nestorians initially. The difference between the respective creeds and ritual had been accumulating for a long time before the schism. These two branches of Christianity eventually ceased to resemble each other – however, this happened as late as in the XVII century.

3.

The Horde as the Cossack council (rada)

One cannot fail to point out the obvious similarity between the word Horde (“Orda”) and the word “rada” that means “council” or “row” (“order”) in Russia and Ukrainian. Another related word is “rod”, the Russian for “clan” or “family.” All of these words share a single root and translate as “community.” Other related words are “narod” (“people”) and “rat” (“army”).

The words “rada” and “rod” have been used in Russia for quite a long time. For instance, an elected council known as “Izbrannaya Rada” had been active during one of the periods that later became collated into the reign of “Ivan the Terrible.”

In Ukrainian, the word “rada” means “council” or “gathering of the elders.” It would be natural to assume that the words “orda,” “rada” and “rod” all stem from the same Slavic root that translates as “council” or “government.”

The Latin word ordo might be related as well, likewise the German Ordnung (“order”). Who borrowed from whom depends on the choice of chronology and nothing but.

According to the evidence given by Sigismund Herberstein, an author of the XVI century, “the word Horde … stands for “a gathering” or “a multitude” in their [the Tartar – Auth.] language” ([161], page 167).

Nowadays we are accustomed to using the word “horde” for referring to multitudes of wild nomads. However, as recently as in the XVII century this word had been used in a different meaning – a common synonym of the words “army,” “troops,” etc.

Indeed, let us open the Dictionary of the Russian Language in the XVI-XVII Century:

“Jagan the Third… His Swedish hordes had become accustomed to owning that kingdom as their very own” ([790], Issue 13, page 65).

Another example:

“He was gathering hordes of the Germans under his banners” (ibid.).

Thus, the word “orda,” or “horde,” had been used for referring to German and Swedish troops.

“They know nothing of the ancient customs of their service, neither the civilians, nor the Horde” ([790], issue 13, page 65).

4.

Kiev as the capital of the Goths

“In 1850-1852 the Royal Community of Northern Antiquarians in Copenhagen … published the two volumes of ‘Antquités Russes’… These books contained sagas from Scandinavia and Iceland and passages therefrom, all of which were related to Russian history in one way or another… Among other famous publications found in ‘Antquités Russes’ is the famous ‘Hervarasaga’, which tells us about the son of … King Heidrek of Reidhgotaland whose capital was in Danpstadir (city on the Dnepr)… A. A. Kunik … voices the presumption that ‘the city on the Dnepr had been capital of the Gothic kingdom for a certain period’… The ancient song of Attila … mentions a similar word – Danpar: ‘The famous forest near the Dnepr’… The interpretation of the corrected verse of the ‘Hamdis-mal’ had led to the idea that the capital of the Goths locates somewhere in the Eastern Europe, over ‘Danpar’, which is likely to identify … as the Dnepr…’

As he was trying to locate the place on the coast of Dnepr where the events related in the ‘Hamdis-mal’ took place, Vigfusson had presumed that Danparstadir, the ancient central city on the Dnepr, doubtlessly identified as Kiev … which Vigfusson considers to be the primary centre of the Gothic empire and the capital of Ermanaric” ([364], pages 65-69).

Further also:

“Y. Koulakovskiy also recognized the existence of a Gothic capital on the Dnepr. He believed that Kiev had already been founded in the epoch of Ptolemy, indicated on his map as Metropolis [‘The Mother of Cities’, if we’re to make a word for word translation from the Greek – Auth.]… N. Zakrevskiy (‘Descibing Kiev’, Volume 1, Moscow, 1868, page 6) had believed that the Azagorium of Ptolemy (known as Zagorye among the locals) could be identified as Kiev… F. Braun, V. S. Ikonnikov, A. I. Sobolevskiy, S. Rozhnetskiy, A. Pogodin and I. Stelletskiy had all recognized Kiev as the Gothic capital on the Dnepr. Vigfusson’s theory about Kiev being the capital of the Goths had been in the guidebooks and on the pages of numerous Ukrainian journals” ([364], pages 71-72).

Above we demonstrate the Goths to identify as the Cossacks. Therefore, there’s nothing surprising about the fact that Kiev had been the capital of the Cossacks. This is known well to everyone. Let us pay attention to the fact that Kiev had apparently been indicated on the “ancient” map of Ptolemy. This is also perfectly normal – the reverse would be surprising, since our reconstruction suggests the “ancient” maps to date from the XIII-XVI century A.D.

5.

The destruction of inscriptions on the old Russian relics

5.1. The tomb of Yaroslav the Wise in the Cathedral of St. Sophia in Kiev

According to our hypothesis, Ivan Kalita, aka Yaroslav the Wise, aka Batu-Khan was buried in the famous Egyptian pyramid field, the former central imperial graveyard of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire, q.v. in Chron5.

However, it is common knowledge that the marble sarcophagus traditionally identified as the sarcophagus of Yaroslav the Wise is located in the famous Cathedral of St. Sophia in Kiev. It presumably dates from the XI century A.D., the very epoch of Yaroslav the Wise. Anyone who visits the cathedral can see it (figs. 14.8 and 14.9).

Fig. 14.8. “The Sarcophagus of Yaroslav the Wise” in the Kiev Cathedral of St. Sophia. The photograph was taken in such a way that the side of the sarcophagus with the chiselled-off artwork cannot be seen. Taken from [663]. Photograph of the XX century.

Fig. 14.9. A XIX century photograph of the “Sarcophagus of Yaroslav the Wise” in the Cathedral of St. Sophia in Kiev. This photograph also shows nothing but the undamaged sides of the sarcophagus. Taken from [578], Book 1, page 253.

The nature of the lettering on the sarcophagus is of the utmost interest. It turns out that none such exists. It is very peculiar that every surface of the sarcophagus but one is in a good condition, one can clearly see the lettering, the ornament and the anagram of Christ’s name. However, there is nothing written on any of the surviving surfaces. All the artwork on this part has been destroyed completely – chiselled off by someone, that is. We see vague traces of the ornament and letters or signs of some sort. Neither the guides nor the scientists working in the museum of the cathedral know anything about the vandals who are to be blamed for this.

What could possibly be written here? Who could have been angered by the lettering on the presumed tomb of Yaroslav the Wise to the extent of wanting to erase it forever? It is most likely that the writing had contradicted the Romanovian version of history and therefore been dealt with in the most ruthless manner possible.

A propos, it turns out that this sarcophagus of Yaroslav the Wise was “discovered in the XVII century” ([578], Book 1, page 253). This is perfectly amazing. Yaroslav the Wise is said to have died in 1054. Six hundred years pass since that time. Finally, in the XVII century, six hundred years later, when the Romanovs decided it was time to write a new version of the “ancient” Russian history, their archaeologists and historians were quick enough to find a substantial number of “Russian antiquities,” including the “sarcophagus of Yaroslav the Wise” that bore no lettering of any sort. There is no marking upon it whatsoever to make one assume that this sepulchre had indeed belonged to Yaroslav the Wise, the famous historical character mentioned in the chronicles.

We see historians at their most arbitrary. The Romanovs needed a “body of evidence,” or visual aids to the recently written “new version” of the Old Russian history. For instance, they were in urgent need of finding the grave of “Yaroslav the Wise,” which was promptly “found” (apparently, with the method of taking an old sarcophagus, chiselling off the inscription that contradicted this version, possibly in Arabic, q.v. above, and declaring it to be the one). The photographs of the “relic” have soon found their way into school textbooks. Much later, already in our epoch, M. Gerasimov tried his best to reconstruct the appearance of Yaroslav; the result can be seen in fig. 14.10.

Fig. 14.10. A facial reconstruction of the man whose remains were found in the “Sepulchre of Yaroslav the Wise” in Kiev (made by M. Gerasimov). Taken from [847].

Let us reiterate: Romanovian historians have written a fable about Russian history in the XVII-XVIII century, which we have been mistaking for the truth ever since.

As the museum staff have told us in Kiev, several cartloads of headstones, icons, books and other artefacts were taken away from the cathedral in the 1930’s. Their fate and destination remain a mystery to this day. Thus, we don’t even know about the artefacts that were kept in the cathedral’s museum in the 1920’s. It makes no sense to hope for a detailed catalogue of those items to be in existence and available to researchers.

We must point out that many odd legends are told about the “sarcophagus of Yaroslav the Wise” in Kiev generally. For instance, in 1995 the guides of the cathedral’s museum were telling the visitors that historians had considered the sarcophagus to be of a Byzantine origin and date from the IV century A.D., predating the death of Yaroslav the Wise by 700 years.

This remark of the guides made many of the visitors wonder about whether the Great Prince Yaroslav the Wise, one of Russia’s most famous rulers at the peak of its prosperity, could really be buried in an imported second hand sarcophagus, albeit a good one, which was bought in faraway Byzantium. The remnants of its previous owner were thrown away to make way for the body of the Great Prince of Kiev Russia. However, even in our cynical age such things are regarded as sacrilege.

The sepulchre must have been prepared as a family affair. One can quite blatantly see two crosses and two hearts tied together with a ribbon. Indeed, the museum staff told us in 1995 that the archaeologists discovered the skeletons of a male and a female in the sarcophagus, as well as the skeleton of a child – possibly, a close relation (a son, for instance).

5.2. The monasteries of Staro-Simonov and Bogoyavlenskiy in Moscow

A propos, there were precedents of the very same thing that had happened in the Cathedral of St. Sophia – in Moscow, as we mention above (bear in mind that the headstones from the Staro-Simonov monastery in Moscow were barbarically destroyed by sledgehammers in the 1960’s.

We mentioned that the Staro-Simonov monastery is likely to be the final resting place of many warriors who fell in the Battle of Kulikovo. Moreover, old descriptions of this monastery ([646] and [844]) report that many Russian Czars and Great Princes were buried here, no less ([936], Volume 2, page 570). Unfortunately, we find only a single name of a Czar that is buried there in either book. It is Simeon Beckboulatovich ([844], page 50), a co-ruler of Ivan the Terrible. According to our reconstruction, he is one of the four Czars that later became collated into a single figure of Ivan the Terrible. Other famous persons buried in the Simonov monastery include Konstantin Dmitrievich, the son of Dmitriy Donskoi, Prince F. M. Mstislavskiy, princes of Cherkasskiy, Golitsyn, Souleshev, Yousoupov, etc., as well as representatives of the following aristocratic clans: Boutourlin, Tatishchev, Rostovskiy, Basmanov, Gryaznev, etc.. Below we shall tell the readers about the sepulchres of the Kremlin’s Arkhangelskiy Cathedral, where almost all of the Russian Czars are said to be buried. In certain cases, the lettering we find on the tombs looks dubious.

The destruction of headstones is by no means an exclusively modern trend. The archaeologist L. A. Belyaev reports the following about the excavations in the Bogoyavlenskiy monastery near the Kremlin: “The surviving sarcophagi are buried under a pile of white stone debris with fragments of covers and headstones. Some of the debris is constituted by pieces of actual sarcophagi, which were brought to a great deal of harm – possibly, in the end of the XVII century or later” ([62], page 181).

5.3. Why would the Romanovs need to chisel off the frescoes and put layers of bricks over the old Czars’ tombs in the cathedrals of the Kremlin?

There are three famous cathedrals at the very centre of the Kremlin in Moscow – the Ouspenskiy, the Arkhangelskiy and the Blagoveshchenskiy.

The first of the three has always been regarded as Russia’s main cathedral: “The Ouspenskiy cathedral occupies a separate place in Russian history … for centuries on end it has been an important temporal and ecclesiastic centre of Russia – this is where the Great Princes were inaugurated, and there vassals swore fealty to them. Czars and later Emperors received their blessings here as they ascended to the Russian throne” ([553], page 5). The first Ouspenskiy cathedral is presumed to have been founded here under Ivan Kalita and stood here until the alleged year 1472 (ibid., page 6). The cathedral we know under this name today was erected under Ivan III in 1472-1479: “Ivan III, the Great Prince and Ruler of All Russia, decided to erect a residence that would correspond to his position. The new Kremlin was to symbolise the greatness and might of the Russian empire … The works began with the construction of the Ouspenskiy Cathedral, whose size and appearance alluded to its majestic XII century namesake in Vladimir” (ibid.).

According to our reconstruction, Moscow only became the capital of the entire Russia in the reign of “Ivan the Terrible” – at the very end of the XVI century (see Chron6 for more details). A chronological shift of 100 years superimposes the epoch of “Ivan the Terrible” over the reign of Ivan III; thus, many of the events that date from the XVI century ended up in the late XV century courtesy of the Scaligerian and Millerian textbook on Russian history – the epoch of Ivan III, in other words. This makes it obvious why the foundation of a capital in Moscow was initiated by Ivan III, who is said to have constructed a new Kremlin and fashioned its main cathedral after the one in Vladimir – not the previously existing cathedral in Moscow that is supposed to have been standing at this site and serving as the main cathedral of Russia for some 250 years already. According to our conception, the capital of Russia had indeed been in Vladimir up until the XVI century, and before that – in Rostov and Kostroma (reflected in the Arabic sources as Khoresm). The transfer of the capital resulted in the “transfer” of the main cathedral – namely, the construction of its double in Moscow.

It would be apropos to cite the following claim made by the archaeologists: “There are no facts to indicate the existence of a royal court in the Kremlin before the construction works of 1460” ([62], page 86). In particular, “the chronicle of the Troitse-Sergiyev Monastery compiled in 1560’s – 1570’s doesn’t mention its previous existence [the court in Kremlin] anywhere at all” ([62], page 86). In other words, the chroniclers of the Troitse-Sergiev Monastery had known nothing about the existence of a Great Prince’s court on the territory of the Kremlin in Moscow before 1460. This is in excellent concurrence with our reconstruction. Moscow was only founded after the Battle of Kulikovo at the end of the XIV century, and the capital of Russia doesn’t migrate here until the second half of the XVI century.

The Ouspenskiy Cathedral is presumed to have served as the main cathedral of the Russian Empire starting with Ivan III. The cathedral has always enjoyed a very special attention: “In 1481, Dionysius, the best artist of the epoch, had painted the three-tier altar piece and several large icons, accompanied by his apprentices … and in 1513-1515 the cathedral was decorated by frescoes” ([553], page 8).

Did anything remain of this artwork? Can we learn anything about the mediaeval Russia, or the Horde, as it had been before the Romanovs, if we visit the cathedral today? Unfortunately not. This is what we are told: “Precious little of the original artwork has remained intact until the present day: the dilapidated icons were replaced by new ones … the old frescoes were chiselled off in the beginning of the XVII century” ([553], page 8).

These frescoes of Dionysius, presumably “ancient,” had thus been some 100 or 150 years of age when they got chiselled off. Not really that great an age for frescoes; the icons are also rather unlikely to have reached a “dilapidated” state over this short a period. It might be that the cathedral was unfortunate enough to leak, which had made the frescoes short-lived and so on. However, why do we learn of the same fate befalling the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral nearby, built in 1505-1508? This is what we’re told: “The decorations on the walls of the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral date from 1652-1666, the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, who had given the following orders: ‘… the Church of Archangel Michael is to be redecorated completely. The old frescoes are to be chiselled off’, since the XVI century murals dating from the reign of Czar Ivan IV had become rather dilapidated by the middle of the XVII century” ([552], page 8).

We must note that the frescoes painted under the Romanovs in the XVII century have never been chiselled off again in the XVIII, the XIX or the XX century. Why would they need to destroy the relatively new frescoes in the XVII century – masterpieces painted by the best XVI century artists?

Let us emphasise that the frescoes were actually chiselled off and not covered by a layer of new artwork. In other words, two largest cathedrals of the Kremlin had simultaneously been subjected to the laborious procedure of chiselling the plaster off the walls, which were then covered by another layer of plaster that was further decorated by new frescoes. A mere redecoration wouldn’t require the destruction of the old artwork. New murals could be painted over the old ones, the way it was usually done (in the nearby Blagoveshchenskiy Cathedral, which is also part of the Kremlin ensemble, for instance). Could the Romanovs have wanted to destroy every trace of what was painted on the walls of the Kremlin cathedrals in the reign of the previous Horde dynasty? If one paints new frescoes over old ones, the old layer can be seen after the removal of the later artwork. This is often done today, when scientists uncover the frescoes of the XVI, XV or even the XIV century. However, the chiselled-off frescoes are beyond recovery or restoration.

We are being assured that before the plaster in the cathedrals had been chiselled off, “a description of the initial compositions was made … which had helped to preserve the ideological conception and the composition scheme of the XVI century artwork” ([552], page 8). This is how the modern researchers admit the loss of the old murals, which had vanished without a trace, leaving nothing but the “composition” intact. The Romanovs may indeed have kept the original composition. It had affected nothing of substance.

A propos, the frescoes of the Blagoveshchenskiy Cathedral had not been chiselled off, but rather painted over with a new layer of artwork in the epoch of the first Romanovs. They were uncovered recently, and this brought about many oddities. For instance, the murals depict the genealogy of Jesus Christ that includes many Russian Great Princes (Dmitriy Donskoi, Vassily Dmitrievich, Ivan III and Vassily III, as well as a number of the “ancient” philosophers and poets – Plato, Plutarch, Aristotle, Virgil, Xeno, Thucydides, etc.. All of them have been relations of Christ, according to the old artwork on the walls of the cathedral. This is in perfect correspondence with our reconstruction; all of these people must indeed have been the offspring of Augustus = Constantine the Great, who had indeed been related to Christ. The inclusion of the “ancient” philosophers and authors into “Christ’s family tree,” the artists who painted the murals in the Blagoveshchenskiy Cathedral had strongly contradicted the Scaligerian chronology. However, according to our conception, they were perfectly right.

Apparently, the old artwork in the Blagoveshchenskiy cathedral had struck the first Romanovs as relatively harmless, and so they decided to cover it by a new layer of murals instead of using the chisel. What could have been painted on the walls and the domes of the Arkhangelskiy and Ouspenskiy cathedrals that should make Czar Alexei Mikhailovich give orders to destroy the frescoes mercilessly? The modern “explanation” about disintegration over the course of a century doesn’t hold water.

Apparently, the altar pieces of the Ouspenskiy and Arkhangelskiy cathedral were replaced by completely new ones in the XVII century ([553], page 34; see also [552], page 33). It would be apropos to recollect the fact that many stone sarcophagi in Moscow had suffered substantial damage in the very same epoch ([62], page 81). Also due to “dilapidation,” perhaps?

Furthermore, let us recollect the fact that the old genealogical records were burnt by the Romanovs around the very same time. Those contained the family trees of every noble family in Russia, q.v. above. The ecclesiastical reform of Patriarch Nikon served as pretext for purging every Russian library from books that failed to conform to the dominant ideology. It turns out that “old books had undergone a correction” ([372], page 147). Nowadays it is assumed that only ecclesiastic books have been affected; is it true, though?

Let us return to the cathedrals of Kremlin. Apparently, the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral could have proved a priceless source of information, seeing as how it is the official resting place of Russian Great Princes and Czars, including the first Romanovs. There are about 50 tombs in the cathedral today. It is presumed that every Muscovite Great Prince was buried here, starting with Ivan Kalita. According to the XVII century lettering on the headstones that dates to the epoch of the first Romanovs, the particular characters we find here are as follows:

1. The Pious Great Prince Ivan Danilovich (Kalita). We must point out that the epitaph on his tomb was seriously damaged, and then crudely re-written, q.v. in fig. 14.11.

Fig. 14.11. The headstone of the Romanovian epoch (XVII century), presumably a replica of an older headstone. It rests against the sepulchre ascribed to Ivan Kalita (Caliph) in the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral of the Muscovite Kremlin. It is perfectly visible that even this Romanovian replica was heavily edited. Part of the lettering was destroyed, and the rest obviously underwent a transformation, and a very rough one at that. Photograph taken in 1997.

2. The Pious Great Prince Simeon the Proud.

3. The Pious Great Prince Ivan Ivanovich.

4. The Pious Prince Dmitriy Donskoi.

5. The Pious Prince Afanasiy Yaroslav Vladimirovich Donskogo (!). The sepulchre is dated to 1426.

6. Pious Prince Vassily Vassilyevich (Tyomniy, or “The Dark”).

7. Great Prince and Lord of All Russia Ivan III.

8. Great Prince and Lord of All Russia Vassily III.

9. A separate crypt that is closed for visitors today contains the tombs of “Ivan the Terrible” and his sons Ivan Ivanovich and Fyodor Ivanovich; it had also once contained the body of Boris Fyodorovich “Godunov.”

10. The sarcophagus of Prince Mikhail Vassilyevich Skopin-Shouyskiy is separated from the rest; we find it in side-chapel of John the Baptist. Access to that area is also denied.

11. The sarcophagus of Prince Vassily Yaroslavich stands separately, on the left of the altar. It is said to date from the XV century (the alleged year 1469).

12. The sarcophagus that stands out very explicitly (it is twice as large as any of the other sarcophagi) is that of Pious Prince Andrei Staritskiy.

13. Prince Dmitriy of Ouglich, the youngest son of “Ivan the Terrible.”

14. Alexander Safay Gireyevich, Czar of Kazan (!). Sarcophagus dates from the XVI century.

15. Prince Pyotr, son of Ibreim, son of Mamatak, Czar of Kazan (!). Sarcophagus dates from the XVI century.

16. The first Romanovs – Mikhail Fyodorovich, Alexei Mikhailovich and Fyodor Alexeyevich.

“There are forty-six sarcophagi in the cathedral altogether” ([552], page 24).

Visits to the Arkhangelskiy cathedral had remained forbidden for the public for a long time. It was opened recently; even a brief acquaintance with its interior demonstrates a great number of remarkable phenomena.

Apparently, the tombs one sees in the cathedral today were made of brick in the XVII century under the first Romanovs ([552], page 24). This is the very time that the old frescoes were chiselled off the cathedral’s domes and walls, with new artwork taking their place. It is presumed that “the dead were buried in sarcophagi of white stone buried in the ground. In the first half of the XVII century, brick sarcophagi with headstones of white stone … with Slavic lettering upon them. In the beginning of the XX century, copper and glass casing for the sarcophagi was installed” ([552], pages 25-26). See fig. 14.12.

Fig. 14.12. “White sarcophagi of the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral. 1636-1637. One side of every sarcophagus contains the name of the deceased, as well as the dates of his demise and burial, whereas the other side is decorated with a floral ornament carved in stone” ([107], page 118).

Thus, the old headstones that should obviously be above the bodies were covered by a layer of bricks. It is said that the inscriptions on the old headstones were accurately reproduced on the new brick headstones made by the Romanovs. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to check it nowadays. The tall and massive Romanovian simulacra made of brick cover the old headstones completely. After learning about the barbaric destructions of the old frescoes by the Romanovs, it would be natural to enquire whether the inscriptions on the old headstones could be chiselled off as well. It would be interesting to check this.

Modern researchers write that the history of the royal necropolis “contains many mysteries. Several old graves were lost – possibly, they had been this way before the construction of the building in the early XVI century. One of the perished graves should date from the second half of the XVI century and belong to Prince Vassily, son of Ivan the Terrible, and Maria Temryukovna. It is very noteworthy that the lost graves are children’s for the most part” ([768], page 88). All of the above vividly demonstrates the graves in the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral to be in utter chaos.

The museum’s scientific staff told us that the basement of the Arkhangelskiy cathedral also housed the stone sarcophagi of the Russian Czarinas that were transferred there from a special Kremlin graveyard, which was destroyed already in the XX century, during the construction of the modern buildings. Unfortunately, access to this basement is extremely limited today. It would be very edifying to study the ancient inscriptions upon these sarcophagi, if any of them survived (see the next section for more details).

Let us return to the issue of how precisely the Romanovs reproduced the old lettering from the headstones covered in bricks. It would be interesting to see how precisely the inscriptions on these brick replicas are reproduced on the copper screens with glass panels, which were introduced by the Romanovian historians in the early XX century. This is easy enough to estimate, since the Slavic lettering of the XVII century can be seen through the glass. One does need a torch, though, since the screens cast a shadow over many of the inscriptions, making the latter all but illegible.

Firstly, let us point out that the brick headstones use different titles for referring to different Russian princes – “Pious,” “Pious Great Prince,” and so on. Only starting with Ivan III the title transformed into “Great Prince and Lord of All Russia.” The difference is hardly of an arbitrary nature, and must reflect certain political realities of the epoch.

However, more recent inscriptions on the copper casing uses the uniform title “Great Princes” in every case, which can be regarded as concealment and slight distortion of information.

Secondly, we see a number of blatant inconsistencies. For instance, the Romanovs wrote the following on the abovementioned largest sarcophagus in the cathedral: “In December 7045, on the 11th day, Pious Prince Andrei Ivanovich Staritskoy died.” The copper casing has an altogether different legend upon it: “The grave of Princes Staritskiy – Vladimir (died in 1569) and Vassily (died in 1574). Thus, not only does the legend on the Romanovian brick differ from what we see upon the even more recent copper casing – the very information about the number of the people buried here is vague. Are there two graves here, or is it a single grave? Which is lying to us – the brick, the copper or both? Let us reiterate that this contradiction concerns secondary inscriptions of the Romanovian epoch, since nowadays we don’t know what was written on the ancient headstone, which is covered by the brick layer completely. A propos, the fresco next to the grave of Andrei Staritskiy depicts Andrew the Apostle, who is said to have baptised Russia.

The commentary of a modern historian is as follows: “Out of the three graves, only that of A. I. Staritskiy had the obligatory ornamental inset in white stone on its Western side, but even in the latter case it was removed in 1780 the latest [why would that be? – Auth.]. The only thing that we know is that this inset was discovered in the course of the floor renovation works in 1835 next to the coffin… It was then made part of the eastern wall of the sepulchre that houses Vladimir and Vassily Staritskiy” ([768], pages 89-90).

Coming back to the frescoes, one has to point out that the ones we find in the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral are dedicated to Russian history to a large extent; they portray the Russian princes, and not just the holy ones. Even the frescoes on Biblical topics have often been considered to represent scenes from the Russian history. There is some commentary that goes alongside the artwork, which can be considered an illustrated version of the Russian dynasty’s history – unfortunately, in the Romanovian interpretation of the XVII century and not the original version.

For instance, “the third layer section of the southern wall depicts the victory of the Israelites led by Gideon over the Madian troops. This Biblical scene was usually associated with the victories of Ivan IV over the kingdoms of Kazan and Astrakhan” ([552], pages 12-13). Could this mean that the Biblical scene was painted by the Romanovs over the place where there used to be a scene depicting the victory of Ivan IV over Kazan and Astrakhan, which they had themselves ordered to chisel off together with the very plaster it was painted on. Since the visitors had already been accustomed to seeing the picture of Ivan’s victory here, the freshly painted Biblical scene naturally became “associated with the victories of Ivan IV.” One should also mark the fact that the name Gideon resembles “GD Ioann,” a form of “Gosudar Ioann,” or Lord Ivan.

Alternatively, the Bible might be referring to the history of Russia, also known as the Horde in that epoch, in the XIV-XVI century. In this case, the authors of the Bible included a description of Dmitriy Donskoi's victory over Mamai-Khan in 1380 into the Bible as the victories of Gideon, King of Israel, over the Median troops. See our book entitled “Regal Rome in Mesopotamia: between the Oka and the Volga.”

The restoration procedures conducted in the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral in 1953-1956 have revealed a single pre-Romanovian that managed to remain intact quite miraculously; it is dated to the XVI century nowadays ([552], pages 22-23). The inscription upon it has not survived. The fresco is located in the burial-vault of Ivan IV “the Terrible”; the vault itself can be seen in fig. 14.13. “The dying prince hugs his elder sun, who stands at the head of his bed. The prince’s spouse is sitting at his feet together with the youngest son… This scene resembles the description of the last hour of Vassily III, the father of Ivan IV” ([552], page 22). Isn’t it odd that the fresco that depicts Vassily III is at a considerable distance from his actual grave, and inside the burial-vault of Ivan IV on top of that?

Fig. 14.13. “The interior of the burial chamber of Ivan the Terrible. The sarcophagi weren’t covered with any later covers – the ones we see are authentic and date from the XVII century” ([107], page 116).

We consider the explanation to be rather simple – the fresco depicts the dying “Ivan the Terrible,” or Simeon, who is handing the state over to his son Fyodor. The young Czarina is holding his grandson Boris on her knees – the future Czar Boris “Godunov.” According to our reconstruction, Simeon had been the founder of a new royal dynasty in Russia; therefore, his grave, as well as the graves of his sons and his grandson Boris were buried in a separate vault of the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral. This must also be the reason why the grave of Mikhail Skopin-Shouyskiy, who had died during the reign of Vassily Shouyskiy, is also placed separately, in the side-chapel of John the Baptist. Apparently, Shouyskiy had been preparing the burial-vault for the new dynasty of his – however, his deposition prevented him from being buried here. His remains were brought over from Poland by the Romanovs much later, and buried in the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral.

Corollary: We are of the opinion that the burials in the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral need to be studied once again with the utmost attention. What is written on the ancient stones covered by layers of bricks? Could the lettering upon them be chiselled off? Also, what could possibly be written on the sarcophagi of the Russian Czarinas?

6.

The fake sarcophagi of the pre-Romanovian czarinas made by the Romanovs in the XVII century

One of the Muscovite newspapers was kind enough to send several rather surprising and rare photographs of the burial-vaults where the Russian Czarinas are buried and the plan of their disposition in the basement of the Muscovite Kremlin. This material has struck us as exceptionally interesting; it serves as the basis for a number of important corollaries. In December 1997 we have visited all the tombs in the basement of the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral for a detailed study of all the sepulchres and their comparison to the photographs that we have at our disposal.

There are about 56 stone sarcophagi in the basement; a plan of their disposition is presented in fig. 14.14. Quite a few have no inscriptions upon them whatsoever (18, to be precise). The rest presumably belong to famous women of the royal lineage that were buried there in the XV-XVII century (in particular, Czarinas, their daughters and other female relations of the Czar). There are several children’s graves, but not many. The sarcophagi are of different types, and we shall relate more details concerning this below. Most of the sarcophagi are anthropomorphic, possess a special head compartment and actually serve in lieu of a coffin – in other words, this type of sarcophagus required no additional wooden coffins. The other type, which is of a more recent origin, is rectangular and contains a wooden coffin. In some cases, the remains of these coffins are still intact.

Fig. 14.14. A scheme that shows the disposition of the sepulchres ascribed to the Russian Czarinas and Great Princesses on the ground floor of the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral of the Muscovite Kremlin. The sepulchres were transferred here from the Voznesenskiy Nunnery in the Kremlin ([803], Volume 1, page 121).

The information about the identity of people buried in one grave or another must have initially come from the inscriptions upon the actual headstones, which were collected in the basement of the Arkhangelskiy monastery after the transfer from the Voznesenskiy monastery of the Kremlin, destroyed by the Soviet authorities in 1929 ([803], Volume 1, pages 121 and 125). Oddly enough, there is nothing written on some of the sarcophagi, and they are referred to as “nameless” in the inventory lists. The identity of their occupants is therefore unknown. Had the data come from other sources apart from the abovementioned inscriptions, such as records kept in the Voznesenskiy monastery, there must be some information about a few of the nameless graves in existence. In fig. 14.15 we reproduce a very rare photograph where we see the sarcophagus of Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina carried out of the Voznesenskiy monastery’s cathedral before the demolition of the latter in 1929.

Fig. 14.15. The sarcophagus of Czarina Natalya Naryshkina taken away from the Voznesenskiy Nunnery in 1929. After the transportation of the female sarcophagi to the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral, the Voznesenskiy Nunnery was demolished. Taken from [107], page 245.

There is a list of the sarcophagi kept in the basement of the Arkhangelskiy cathedral that contains the names of the deceased, some of which ring rather dubious to our ears today. The numbers correspond to those on the plan in fig. 14.14:

1. Nameless sarcophagus.

2. Nameless sarcophagus.

3. Yevdokiya, the widow of Dmitriy Donskoi, 1407.

4. Maria Borisovna, the first wife of Czar Ivan III, 1467, see fig. 14.16.

Fig. 14.16. The sarcophagus ascribed to Maria Borisovna, the first wife of Ivan III.

5. Sofia Vitovtivna, the wife of Czar Vassily II, 1453, see fig. 14.17.

Fig. 14.17. The sarcophagus ascribed to Sofia Vitovtovna, the wife of Vassily II Tyomniy. Presumed to date from the XV century. There is a very roughly carved epitaph on the lid of the sarcophagus that reads as “Sophia the Nun.”

6. Sofia Palaiologos, the second wife of Czar Ivan III, 1503, see fig. 14.18.

Fig. 14.18. The sarcophagus ascribed to “Sofia Palaiologos,” wife of Ivan III. Photograph taken from the head side.

7. Yelena Glinskaya, the second wife of Czar Vassily III, 1538, see fig. 14.19.

Fig. 14.19. The sarcophagus ascribed to Yelena Glinskaya: “… The deceased Great Princes Yelena, wife of Vassily Ivanovich, Great Prince of the entire Russia.”

8. Anastasia Romanovna, the first wife of Czar Ivan IV (“The Terrible”), 1560.

9. Maria Temryukovna, the second wife of Czar Ivan IV (“The Terrible”), also known as Maria Cherkeshenka (“The Cherkassian”), see fig. 14.20.

Fig. 14.20. The sarcophagus ascribed to Maria the Cherkassian, wife of Ivan IV “The Terrible.”

10. Marfa Sobakina, the third wife of Czar Ivan IV (“The Terrible”), 1571, fig. 14.21.

Fig. 14.21. The sarcophagus ascribed to Marfa Sobakina, wife of Ivan IV “The Terrible.”

11. Maria Nagaya, the sixth wife of Czar Ivan IV (“The Terrible”), 1608.

12. Irina Godunova, the wife of Czar Fyodor Ivanovich, 1603.

13. Yekaterina Bouynosova of Rostov, wife of Czar Vassily Shouyskiy, 1626.

14. Maria Vladimirovna Dolgoroukaya, first wife of Czar Mikhail Fyodorovich Romanov, 1625.

15. Yevdokia Loukianovna, the second wife of Czar Mikhail Fyodorovich Romanov, 1645.

16. Elder Iouliania, mother of Anastasia Romanovna, 1579.

17. Paraskyeva, the daughter of Czar Mikhail Fyodorovich, 1620.

18. Pelageya, the daughter of Czar Mikhail Fyodorovich, 1620.

19. Maria, the daughter of Czar Ivan V Alexeyevich, 1692.

20. Fyodor Ivanovich Belskiy, 1568.

21. Anna Ivanovna Belskaya, 1561.

22. Yevdokiya Fyodorovna Mstislavskaya, 1600.

23. Nameless sarcophagus.

24. Feodosiya, daughter of Czar Fyodor Ivanovich and Irina Godunova, 1594.

25. Anastasia, daughter of Vladimir Staritskiy, 1568.

26. Nameless sarcophagus.

27. Nameless sarcophagus.

28. Anna, daughter of Czar Alexei Mikhailovich, 1659.

29. Theodora, daughter of Czar Alexei Mikhailovich, 1678.

30-36. Nameless sarcophagi.

37. Sofia, daughter of Czar Mikhail Fyodorovich, 1636.

38. Marfa, daughter of Czar Mikhail Fyodorovich, 1632.

39. Yevdokiya, daughter of Czar Mikhail Fyodorovich, 1637.

40. Theodosia, daughter of Czar Ivan V Alexeyevich, 1691.

41. Anna, daughter of Czar Vassily Shouyskiy, 1610.

42. Nameless sarcophagus.

43. Yevdokiya, second wife of Vladimir Staritskiy, 1570.

44-48. Nameless sarcophagi.

49. Yevdokiya, daughter of Vladimir Staritskiy, 1570.

50. Yefrosinya, mother of Vladimir Staritskiy, 1569, see fig. 14.22.

Fig. 14.22. The sarcophagus ascribed to Staritskaya. Made of headstone fragments held together by copper brackets.

51. Maria, daughter of Vladimir Staritskiy, 1569.

52. Anna, daughter of Czar Mikhail Fyodorovich, 1692.

53. Tatiana, daughter of Czar Mikhail Fyodorovich, 1706.

54. Natalia Kirillovna Naryshkina, second wife of Czar Alexei Mikhailovich, mother of Peter the Great, 1694.

55. Agafia Semyonovna Groushetskaya, wife of Czar Fyodor Alexeyevich, 1681.

56. Maria Ilyinichna Miloslavskaya, first wife of Czar Alexei Mikhailovich, 1669.

The general disposition of the sarcophagi alongside one of the basement’s walls can be seen in fig. 14.23. This is where we presumably find the graves of the famous Russian Czarinas of the XV-XVI century.

Fig. 14.23. The rows of sarcophagi ascribed to the Russian Czarinas from the ground floor of the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral. In the foreground we see the sarcophagus ascribed to Yelena Glinskaya, with the alleged sarcophagus of Sofia Palaiologos on the right of it. The sarcophagi we see in the photograph are numbered 7-15 in the scheme. In the distance we see the sarcophagi of the Romanovian epoch, which are much larger and apparently authentic. They are numbered 55 and 56 in the scheme.

Nevertheless, the consensual attribution of some of the sarcophagi is very dubious indeed. This concerns the pre-Romanovian graves; the Romanovian sarcophagi are all bona fide.

We notice the following oddities:

1) It is perfectly unclear just why Sarcophagus 6, q.v. on the plan in figs. 14.14 and 14.18 should be attributed to Sofia Palaiologos, wife of Ivan III. This is a partially demolished sarcophagus; its lid is completely intact, albeit shattered. It has no inscriptions upon it, except for the roughly-scratched word sofea (see fig. 14.24). Could this “inscription” have sufficed for attributing the sarcophagus in question to the famous Sofia Palaiologos? The rough and sketchy character of the inscription is also emphasised by its slanted alignment in relation to the sides of the lid; the scratches are shallow, and it takes an effort to make them out upon the surface of the stone. A brief glance leaves us with the impression that the lid is altogether void of lettering, it looks just the same as the lids of the nameless coffin. How could this unseemly, slanted piece of graffiti, scratched with a nail or something similar, have appeared on a royal sarcophagus? Also, the poor quality of this so-called “royal sarcophagus” (as well as of other pre-Romanovian sarcophagi housed in the cathedral’s basement) is confusing at the very least.

Fig. 14.24. The sarcophagus ascribed to “Sophia Palaiologos,” wife of Ivan III. Part of the lid near the head. As we can see, there is a shallow and rough inscription scratched on the stone right next to the edge. It reads as “Sophia the Nun.” There is nothing else written anywhere on the sarcophagus. The letters were scratched so shallow that one can hardly make them out in the photograph. However, we can clearly see that the sarcophagus was neither carved out from a single block of stone, nor assembled of whole slabs of stone. It is made of odd stone fragments held together by copper brackets and then whitewashed over in order to make the surface smooth.

2) The very same question can be asked in reference to Sarcophagus 5, q.v. on the scheme in figs. 14.14, 14.17 and 14.23. This sarcophagus is ascribed to Sofia Vitovtovna, the wife of Vassily II (XV century) nowadays. There are no inscriptions anywhere on the lid apart from another rough, sketchy and slanted inscription that is very shallow and may have been made with a nail: “Sofe[a] inoka”, or “Sofia the Nun,” q.v. in fig. 14.17. In fig. 14.25 one sees a drawn copy of this inscription, which is very hard to make out. We have used a very high-quality photograph for this purpose, where the letters were as distinct as they could get. Could this simple and cheap stone coffin with a piece of graffiti scratched thereupon in an unhandy manner be a sarcophagus of a Czarina as well? Could it be true that the two famous Czarinas, Sofia Palaiologos and Sofia Vitovtovna, did not get so much as an accurately carved lettering on the coffin lid? Are we being told that these famous Russian Czarinas were buried ceremonially, with their relations, the entire court and a great many visitors present, in these primitive and cheap coffins with clumsily-scratched letters on the lid? For some reason, upon the sarcophagi of the Romanovian epoch we find long and detailed epitaphs, carved in stone skilfully and deeply. Other old nameless sarcophagi are also covered in beautiful carved ornaments.

Fig. 14.25. Our drawn copy of the inscription on the lid of the sarcophagus that reads “Sophia the Nun”; nowadays the grave is ascribed to Sophia Vitovtovna, the wife of Vassily II Tyomniy.

3) Moreover, how could the name “Sofia the Nun” have appeared upon the sarcophagus of Sofia Vitovtovna? This is simply an impossibility. If Sofia had indeed taken the vows, she should have received a new name as a nun, one that had to differ from her old name, Sofia. However, the graffiti on the sarcophagus tells us that Sofia had been the monastic name of the deceased, which can only mean that before taking the vows she had been known under a different name than Sofia, whereas Sofia Vitovtovna was definitely called Sofia. This implies that what we see is an outright hoax. This grave can by no means contain the remains of Sofia Vitovtovna, the famous Russian Czarina. We are being lied to.

4) A careful study demonstrates that the overwhelming majority of the sarcophagi attributed to the Russian Czarinas of the XV-XVI century nowadays weren’t made of individual stone slabs, but rather bits and pieces of stone held together by copper rods or brackets. This rather frail construction would then be covered in a layer of plaster, which made it look like a sarcophagus. It is natural that the transportation of these “composite sarcophagi” from the Voznesenskiy monastery to the basement of the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral had not been performed with sufficient care, which has resulted in some of the plaster coming off the sarcophagi, and the subsequent collapse of the latter. However, the Romanovian sarcophagi made of whole stones did not come apart, unlike their “composite” counterparts. Some of the sarcophagi (those belonging to “Sofia Palaiologos” and the relation of Staritskiy, for instance) are in a very poor condition – almost completely in pieces, the lid as well as the actual sarcophagus (see figs. 14.18, 14.23, 14.24 and 14.22). The cracks reveal the brackets, apparently copper ones, seeing as how they’re green and not rusty. These brackets had served for holding various parts of the “composite sarcophagi” together. Some of the brackets have fallen out, and now lie alongside the bones of the deceased, q.v. in fig. 14.18, for instance.

We can clearly see that the coffins had not been made of whole limestone slabs, but rather fragments, or trash, which can only mean that the coffins in question belonged to common folk and not the XVI century members of the royal family. It is obvious enough that stone or concrete sarcophagi must have been expensive, and few could afford them; a “composite sarcophagus” would be much easier to make.

Thus, the Romanovs must have simply used a number of anonymous sarcophagi in the middle of the XVII century, or chiselled the lettering off a few coffins in order to have some body of evidence required for proving the veracity of their fallacious history. The authentic sarcophagi of the Russian Czarinas must have simply been destroyed by the Romanovs, if they had indeed been in Moscow and not the royal cemetery in Egypt, Africa – Giza valley or the famous Luxor. However, the Romanovs needed some artefacts to support the historical credibility of their artificial “Old Russian history.” We see how the Romanovian historians and archaeologists concocted their “successful discoveries” of allegedly authentic ancient sepulchres of Yaroslav the Wise, Vladimir the Holy and so on around the same time as their colleagues in Moscow were diligently stocking up on sarcophagi for the “royal necropolis of the XI-XVI century.”

The “ancient royal coffins” were made in haste; their construction was ordered by the Romanovs. It has to be said that the sarcophagi were constructed rather clumsily – it could be that they simply decided to convert the old graveyard of the monastery into the allegedly ancient “final resting place of the old pre-Romanovian Czarinas.” The names of the nuns were chiselled off the lids, and covered by headstones with “apropos inscriptions.” The old sarcophagi were thus concealed by the headstones, and so the actual perpetrators hadn’t been too careful about the lettering on the sarcophagi, which is understandable, since the latter were to be buried in the ground right away, at any rate. Some of the sarcophagi were left without any inscriptions whatsoever; in two cases, the names of simple nuns, scribbled with a sharp objects, weren’t obliterated in time. This is how unscrupulously the Romanovs had created the false “royal necropolis” of the Muscovite Kremlin. We are beginning to realise that there must have been no royal necropolis in existence before the Romanovs. The Great Czars (Khans) of Russia, or the Horde, as well as their wives, were buried in the imperial royal burial ground – the famous pyramid field or Luxor in Egypt, Africa.

Less distinguished persons would be buried in Russia. However, the Romanovs had been striving to destroy all the really old sarcophagi that could have told us about the true history of the pre-Romanovian Russia, or the Horde, ever since their enthronement in the XVII century. What we are demonstrated nowadays as “authentic ancient artefacts” is nothing but Romanovian simulacra or sarcophagi of the common folk, which the Romanovian historians have declared royal without bothering about such trifles as proof.

Ancient Russian sarcophagi of white stone were used as construction material in the Romanovian epoch, which reflects the attitude of the Romanovs towards the ancient history of Russia. Let us ponder this for a moment. Would any construction workers we know vandalise a nearby cemetery in order to procure stone for building a residential house? Would any of the readers feel like inhabiting a house like that? Such actions have always been considered sacrilege or signs of scorn and hatred directed at the deceased. This is precisely what we see in the behaviour of the Romanovian usurpers. Let us quote a passage from the book written by L. A. Belyaev, a modern archaeologist ([62]). He reports the following as he tells us about the excavations conducted in the cathedral of the Muscovite Bogoyavlenskiy monastery: “The ornamented headstones dating from the early XIV century [?] used as filling material in one of the dining-room’s walls” ([62], page 297). Thus, the old pre-Romanovian headstones were used as construction material for a dining room (see fig. 14.26).

Fig. 14.26. Ancient pre-Romanovian headstones of white stone decorated with carvings and used as construction materials for the dining hall of the Bogoyavlenskiy Monastery in Moscow. Taken from [62], table 30.

We must also pay attention to the fact that the headstones that L. A. Belyaev refers to in [62] look very much like the headstone from the Old Simonov monastery (see fig. 6.28), as well as the old child’s sarcophagus from the basement of the Arkhangelskiy cathedral (see fig. 6.30). They are all made of individual limestone slabs and covered in the same kind of deep ornamental engraving; this must have been the standard appearance of the pre-Romanovian headstones, which had all been destroyed and pointedly used as construction material.

Let us return to the graves from the basement of the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral that presumably belong to the Russian Czarinas. We must remind the reader that all of the sarcophagi, with the exception of the ones installed in the Romanovian epoch, were made of a very cheap material – stone shards held together by copper brackets and plastered over. Our opponents might declare this to be an ancient Russian custom, claiming that before the Romanovs even the Czars were buried in such cheap and unsophisticated coffins, citing Russian poverty, primitive rituals of the Asian nomads and so on.

However, this isn’t true. The numerous remnants of the limestone sarcophagi dating from the pre-Romanovian epoch were all made of individual stone slabs and decorated with deep and accurate carvings. You can still see similar stone slabs or their debris in many of the old monasteries in Russia. No plaster here. Why would Russian Czarinas be buried in cheap sarcophagi made of plastered-over flotsam and jetsam, then? We are of the opinion that there’s just one answer to this – the Romanovs had replaced real sarcophagi by cheap unsophisticated imitations, which were instantly buried and removed from anyone’s sight, and so no special effort was invented into their production. The Romanovian hoaxers did not use any limestone or cover it with carvings, deciding that plaster should do the trick.

5) Let us now turn to the sarcophagi of the Romanovian epoch, starting with the XVII century and on. Those appear to be authentic. Bear in mind that there are two types of these sarcophagi – the anthropomorphic stone coffins with a head compartment, and the rectangular sarcophagi of stone with a wooden coffin inside of them. The sarcophagi in question are numbered 24, 28, 29, 37, 39, 40 and 52-56 in fig. 14.14. All of them date from the Romanovian epoch, except number 24, which must make them authentic.

A more careful study reveals a fascinating detail. It turns out that all of the Romanovian anthropomorphic sarcophagi date from before 1632, which is the dating that we find on the last of them (number 38). All the other Romanovian sarcophagi of this type date from earlier epochs, or the beginning of the XVII century.

On the other hand, all the Romanovian sarcophagi of the second type (rectangular with a coffin inside) date from 1636 and on. This is very interesting indeed – apparently, the Russian burial rituals were reformed between 1632 and 1636 (insofar as royal burials were concerned, at least). We see that before 1632 the first Romanovs had still adhered to the old burial customs of the Horde. However, they have subsequently decided to abandon this practice in a very abrupt way – starting from 1636, they have been doing it differently. This detail might be of great importance; a reform such as this one would naturally have to be a large-scale event, ecclesiastical as well as secular. It must have taken place in the middle of the XVII century, namely, in 1632-1637.

It is all the more amazing that nothing is told about this important event in Russian history nowadays. For instance, A. V. Kartashov’s Essays on the History of the Russian Church ([372], Volume 2, pages 110-112) refers to the period between 1634 and 1640 as to the epoch of Patriarch Ioasaf I, who must have taken part in the preparation and the implementation of the reform. However, A. V. Kartashov, famous scientist and the author of a fundamental work ([372]) does not utter a single word about it. He discusses other reforms of lesser importance credited to the same patriarch in great detail; however, burial rituals, which are much more important, aren’t mentioned anywhere.

Let us turn to another fundamental multi-volume oeuvre of Makariy, Metropolitan of Moscow and Kolomna, entitled History of the Russian Church ([500]). The patriarchy of Ioasaf is discussed on pages 314-325 of Volume 6; however, not a single word is uttered about the burial reform. However, we do find what must be a trace of this reform. Makariy writes the following about the ritual of burying priests as described in the Prayer-Book of Patriarch Filaret: “Ioasaph’s prayer-book of 1639 abolishes this ritual as presumable heritage of ‘Yeremey, the heretic Bulgarian priest’” ([500], Volume 6, page 322).

This discovery of ours – namely, the change of the Russian burial ritual around 1632-1637, instantly allows us to discover the forgery among the sarcophagi kept in the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral of the Muscovite Kremlin. Let us consider Sarcophagus 24. It is ascribed to Theodosia, the daughter of Fyodor Ioannovich and Irina Godunova, q.v. in fig. 6.30 and the list above. The actual sarcophagus is void of lettering; the inscription must have come from some external headstone in the Voznesenskiy monastery that was lifted in order to transfer the sarcophagus to the basement of the Arkhangelskiy cathedral. However, it is obviously a forgery. If it had indeed been a pre-Romanovian sarcophagus, it would belong to the old anthropomorphic type, which is not the case with Sarcophagus 24; it is of the new type, and therefore cannot predate 1632. We catch the falsifiers of the Russian history red-handed once again.

It becomes obvious why the Russian history textbooks of the Romanovian epoch don’t mention the reform of the burial ritual in the 1630s – one of the reasons must be that the historians are very eager to date some of the XVII century sarcophagi (of the new type) to older, pre-Romanovian epochs. This is why they remain taciturn about Ioasaf’s reform (if it isn’t out of ignorance).

7.

In the second part of the XVII century the Romanovs removed old headstones from the Russian cemeteries and either destroyed them or used them as construction material. The excavations of 1999-2000 conducted in the Louzhetskiy Monastery of Mozhaysk

One of the oldest Russian monasteries, the Bogoroditse-Rozhdestvenskiy Louzhetskiy friary, is located in Mozhaysk. The friary is presumed to have been “founded by St. Ferapont in 1408 at the request of Andrei Dmitrievich of Mozhaysk, son of Great Prince Dmitriy Donskoi” ([536], page 100). The monastery exists until this day, although it has been reconstructed (see fig. 14.27).

Fig. 14.27. The Louzhetskiy Monastery of Our Lady’s Nativity in Mozhaysk. View from the north. Photograph taken in 2000.

In 1999-2000, the archaeological and restoration works in Louzhetskiy friary resulted in the removal of two-meter layers of the ground. In fig. 14.28 we cite a photograph of 2000 made in Louzhetskiy monastery after the top layers of the ground were removed. The dark strip at the bottom of the cathedral corresponds to the thickness of the removed layers – it was painted with dark paint after exposure. These excavations in the friary courtyard revealed an amazing picture, which we shall relate in the present section. We are very grateful to Y. P. Streltsov, who had pointed out to us the facts that we shall be referring to herein.

Fig. 14.28. The Louzhetskiy Monastery in Mozhaysk. We see the courtyard. In 1999, some two metres of the turf were removed. The former level of soil can be judged by the dark strip at the bottom of the monastery’s cathedral. One can also see that the windows of the cathedral have been elevated except for one window, which had been at ground level when the excavations were conducted. In the foreground we see a few sarcophagi of the XVII-XIX century, unearthed during excavations and arranged in accurate rows. The level of soil in the courtyard now corresponds to that of the XVII century. Photograph taken in 2000.

It turned out that extensive construction works were conducted in the friary in the second half of the XVII century. The old headstones from the Russian cemeteries were walled up into the fundaments of the XVII century constructions. The amount of headstones used as construction material is so tremendous that one gets the impression local cemeteries were completely stripped of headstones at some point in time. One must note that the old headstones that were hidden from sight as a result of this operation were considerably different from the ones presented as “specimens of the Old Russian style” nowadays. Almost all of the old headstones found in Louzhetskiy monastery during the excavations are covered in the exact same kind of ornamental carving as the ones from the Old Simonov monastery – a forked cross with three points, q.v. in fig. 14.29.

Fig. 14.29. One of the ancient Russian headstones unearthed from the XVII century foundation of the Louzhetskiy Monastery during the excavations of 1999-2000. It was used as construction material during the epoch of the first Romanovs. Photograph taken in 2000.

After the top layer of ground from the site next to the northern wall of the monastery’s main Cathedral of Our Lady’s Nativity had been removed, the foundation of a small church was found. It was built in the XVII century (see fig. 14.30). The time of its construction can even be indicated with more precision as postdating 1669. Apparently, the builders have used the old headstones alongside some of the “fresh” slabs of stone in a number of cases. There aren’t many such slabs in the foundation, but a few are present. In the summer of 2000 we have seen two of those – one dating from 7159, or 1651 A.D. in modern chronology, and the other, from 7177, or 1669 A.D. (see figs. 14.31 and 14.32). Thus, the construction works must have been carried out after 1669, since we find a stone with that dating in the foundation.

Fig. 14.30. Louzhetskiy Monastery in Mozhaysk. The foundation of a destroyed XVII century church with old Russian headstones used as construction material. According to the writings on the headstones, we see the remains of construction works conducted in 1669 or later. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.31. A XVII century headstone immured in the foundation of the demolished church of the Louzhetskiy Monastery, which was uncovered during the excavations of 1999. The epitaph reads: “Our Lord’s servant, Sister Taiseya, formerly Tatiana Danilovna, died on the 5th day of January in the year of 7159.” The year corresponds to 1651 A.D. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.32. A XVII century headstone immured in the foundation of the demolished church of the Louzhetskiy Monastery, which was uncovered during the excavations of 1999. The epitaph reads: “Our Lord’s servant, Brother Savatey Fyodorov, son of Poznyak, died on the 7th day of February in the year of 7177.” The year corresponds to 1669 A.D. Photograph taken in 2000.

The general impression that one gets after familiarizing oneself with the results of the excavations conducted in the Louzhetskiy monastery is as follows. Apparently, in the XVII century the old headstones were removed from cemeteries en masse, and used as construction material (in particular, for the abovementioned foundation of a small church in the XVII century, which contains several dozen old headstones. Many of them became chipped or were broken so as to fit into the construction (see figs. 14.33-14.39). The numerous fragments of the old headstones became unstuck during the excavations. Some of them have been cleaned from the dirt and arranged in a pile in the courtyard of the friary (see fig. 14.40).

Fig. 14.33. Ancient headstone of white stone with a triangular cross engraved upon it, which was used as construction material in the foundation of the XVII century church of the Louzhetskiy Monastery in Mozhaysk. The foundation was unearthed after the excavations of 1999. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.34. Headstones of white stone with engraved triangular crosses. Immured in the foundation of a XVII century church. Louzhetskiy Monastery, Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.35. Headstones of white stone with engraved triangular crosses. Used as construction material in the foundation of a XVII century church. Louzhetskiy Monastery, Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.36. Headstone of white stone with a triangular cross engraved upon it. Immured in the foundation of a XVII century church. Louzhetskiy Monastery, Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.37. Headstone of white stone with a triangular cross engraved upon it. Used as construction material in the foundation of a XVII century church. Louzhetskiy Monastery, Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.38. Headstones of white stone with triangular crosses immured in the foundation of a XVII century church. One of them is marked “7 February 7191.” The dating converts into the modern chronological system as 1683 A. D. Louzhetskiy Monastery, Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.39. Fragment of a headstone with an exceptionally large triangular cross engraved upon it. We see the central part of the cross, which has remained intact. Apart from that, on the side of the headstone we see the remnants of an ornament that one often sees on other old Russian headstones. From the masonry of the XVII century church at the Louzhetskiy Monastery in Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.40. Fragments of the ancient Russian headstones used in the XVII century masonry of the Louzhetskiy Monastery in Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

Most of these old headstones bear the symbol of a three-point forked cross; however, there are several exceptions. For instance, one of the fragments found in the Louzhetskiy monastery is decorated with a four-point cross, but the shape is different from that of the modern crosses – this one resembles the footprint of a bird (see fig. 14.41).

Fig. 14.41. The four-pointed cross on the ancient Russian headstone looks like a bird’s footprint or a triangular forked cross with an extra branch at the top. It differs greatly from the four-pointed crosses commonly found on Christian graves. The Louzhetskiy Monastery, Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

Another rare specimen is a five-point forked cross. A slab with such a cross was discovered by Y. P. Streltsov and G. V. Nosovskiy, one of the authors, in the summer of 2000, in the foundation of the stone staircase that had once led to the gate of Our Lady’s Nativity Cathedral from the west. The staircase is in ruins nowadays, and has been replaced by modern metallic stairs. However, a part of the foundation remained intact. This is where this rare old headstone was discovered (see figs. 14.42 and 14.43).

Fig. 14.42. Ancient Russian headstone with a five-pointed forked cross uncovered from the XVII century masonry of the Louzhetskiy Monastery in Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.43. Headstone of the intermediate variety – with old-fashioned ornamentation, but sans forked crosses. Manufactured during the epoch of the first Romanovs. We see two epitaphs with dates: “On 6 August of the year 7149, the Servant of our Lord, infant Andrei, son of Pavel Fyodorovich Klementyev, rested in peace” on the left and “On 5 February of the year 7149, the Servant of our Lord, infant Pyotr, son of Pavel Fyodorovich Klementyev, rested in peace.” The years convert into the modern chronological system as 1641 and 1643. The lettering was done by a professional carver, likewise the ornamental pattern at the edges of the stone. The epitaphs are authentic. The Louzetskiy Monastery of Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

All the frescoes in the monastery’s Cathedral of Our Lady’s Nativity were chiselled off. We are familiar with such displays of all-out demolition from what we found in the cathedrals of the Muscovite Kremlin, q.v. in Chron4, Chapter 14:5. The pre-Romanovian frescoes there have also been chiselled off, and they were anything but “ancient and dilapidated” when they got destroyed – not even a hundred years old. Something of this sort must have taken place in the Louzhetskiy monastery, Mozhaysk. Many small fragments of chiselled-off plaster covered in dots of bright paint from the old frescoes were piled up right in the yard of the monastery. They were discovered in the course of the excavations in 1999. We have seen them in the summer of 2000 (see fig. 14.44). Apparently, the old frescoes of the Russian cathedrals had failed to correlate with the reality tunnel of the Romanovian historians and contradicted the Romanovian version of the Russian history, and therefore became destroyed – first in the Muscovite Kremlin, and later throughout all of Russia.

Fig. 14.44. This is all that remains of the ancient frescoes from the Cathedral of Our Lady’s Nativity at the Louzhetskiy Monastery. The frescoes were chiselled off together with the plaster in the epoch of the XVIII-XIX century and piled up at the southern wall of the monastery, right next to the gate. Piles of rubble and plaster fragments were discovered here after the excavations of 1999. Photograph taken in 2000.

The destruction of the frescoes on the walls of the ancient Russian churches and cathedral is rather typical. Sometimes historians manage to blame it on the “intervention forces of the Poles and the Lithuanians running rampant in the epoch of the Great Strife,” who appear to have possessed a certain inexplicable penchant for the destruction of monastery libraries, ancient artwork and any artefact that might provide us with information concerning the old Russian history in general. Sometimes we are told that an ancient cathedral “has never been decorated” – presumably, there was enough money for the construction of this cathedral, but the artwork had fallen prey to the lack of funds, so the walls were simply whitewashed. However, occasionally, as is the case with the Louzhetskiy monastery of Mozhaysk, it is admitted that the frescoes were destroyed by the Romanovian authorities. Why was that done? No explanations are ever given by the representatives of historical science; however, our reconstruction explains everything perfectly well.

Let us return to the Russian headstones of the old kind found in the Louzhetskiy monastery. The inscriptions upon them are of the utmost interest – especially the opportunity of finding a pre-Romanovian inscription. Unfortunately, it turns out that there are either no inscriptions on the stones whatsoever (as one sees in fig. 14.29, for instance), or there is some lettering that is presumed to date from the XVI century, but appears to be counterfeit (alternatively, it is genuine and dates from the epoch of the Romanovs). We shall discuss this in more detail below. For the meantime, let us just reiterate that we haven’t managed to find a single authentic inscription dating from the pre-Romanovian epoch on these stones – it appears that all the old headstones with such inscriptions were destroyed, or subjected to the chisel at least. However, even after this procedure the silent stones must have remained a nuisance for the Romanovian historians, and were thus taken away from the cemeteries and buried underground, where no one could see them. After the religious reform (q.v. described in Chapter 6 above) the Russian cemeteries became outfitted with a new kind of headstone, the Romanovian model, quite unlike its predecessor. Later it all became conveniently forgotten.

However, below we shall see that the Romanovs haven’t come up with this radical method at once. They had initially tried to correct the inscriptions on some of the old headstones at least. And so they had launched a campaign for the erasure of inscriptions found upon some of the ancient headstones and the complete destruction of the rest. The old stones or the old texts were replaced by new ones and given fresh pre-Romanovian datings. As we shall see in case of the Louzhetskiy monastery, this replacement was made so carelessly that it is instantly obvious to a modern researcher. Apparently, the XVII century officials who were checking the replacement works in the Russian cemeteries weren’t too pleased with the quality, and decided to have all the headstones removed and replaced by a completely new variety. This may also have pursued the objective of facilitating the location and destruction of the pre-Romanovian headstones with “irregular” symbols and inscriptions upon them.

Let us therefore turn to the epitaphs. All the ones that we have seen upon the old headstones in the Louzhetskiy monastery begin with words “In the year … such-and-such was buried here.” Thus, the date is always indicated in the very beginning of the epitaph. The old stones discovered in the Louzhetskiy monastery appear to be referring to the XVI century, or the pre-Romanovian epoch. However, we have found other stones of the exact same type with XVII datings, already from the Romanovian epoch. There is nothing surprising about this fact; we have already mentioned that the burial customs, including the headstone type, were only reformed in the second half of the XVII century; therefore, the old headstones had still been used in Russia during the first few decades of the Romanovian epoch. The technique and the quality of the artwork (the forked cross and the perimeter strip) are completely the same on both the Romanovian and the pre-Romanovian stones; the carvers of the XVII century were therefore at the same technical level as their XVI century predecessors, and worked in the same manner.

The truly amazing fact is as follows. On the stones with Romanovian datings, all the inscriptions are of the same high quality as the artwork. The lettering and the artwork are carved deep into the stone by a professional craftsman (see figs. 14.43, 14.45, 14.46 and 14.47). The craftsman paid attention to the shading of the letters, tried to use lines of different thickness, which made the lettering look more dynamic. The same technique was used in the artwork of the forked cross and the perimeter ornament. Also, the inscriptions of the Romanovian epoch always fit into the place between the two top lines of the cross and the perimeter artwork. The space of this field would differ from headstone to headstone; this would be achieved via different angles of the cross lines and different locations of its centre. It is perfectly obvious that the craftsmen would always know the size of the space they needed for the epitaph and arrange the artwork accordingly.

Fig. 14.45. Headstone of the old fashion with a forked cross manufactured in the epoch of the first Romanovs. The epitaph is as follows: “On 10 July of 7142, the servant of our Lord, U … avlov … rovich … Kle … rested in peace.” The dots mark obliterated or illegible letters. The year translates into the modern chronological system as 1634. The quality of the lettering is just as high as that of the border ornament. The epitaph is authentic. The Louzhetskiy Monastery of Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.46. Headstone of the old fashion with a forked cross manufactured in the epoch of the Romanovs (1631). Found broken during the excavations of 1999-2000 underneath the belfry of the Louzhetskiy Monastery. Put together from pieces and placed in the newly constructed belfry. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.47. Lettering on a headstone dating from 1631, found underneath the bell-tower of the Louzhetskiy Monastery: “The year of 7139 (1631 A.D.), in the 15th day of June, in memory of St. … Maximovich Vaneyko, known to the monks of as Brother Arkadiy the Hermit.” The lettering is authentic. Louzhetskiy Monastery, Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

However, this is not the case with the pre-Romanovian headstones. The quality of the lettering is considerably lower than that of the ornaments found on the same headstone. At best, the epitaphs are scratched upon the stone with some sharp stylus (see fig. 14.48). Many of such inscriptions have guiding lines (fig. 14.49). Those naturally disfigure the epitaphs and make them look crude and clumsy, while the perimeter artwork is still distinct and professional. Moreover, some of the lettering that is said to date from the XVI century also fails to correspond to the size of the field, proving too short – for instance, in fig. 14.50 the inscription clearly says 7076, or 1568 A.D. See also figs. 14.51 and 14.52. We also discovered an obviously mutilated epitaph, where the artwork on the headstone is perfect, and the epitaph is simply scratched upon the stone with a rough stylus and very clumsily (figs. 14.53 and 14.54). This inscription is obviously false; it contains a dating – “Зпи,” or 7088 since Adam (1580 A.D.). It appears as though the hoaxers put a new inscription with a XVI century dating onto an old headstone.

Fig. 14.48. Lettering on a headstone with a forked cross – apparently, a forgery. The stone itself, as well as the ornamentation and cross, were performed by a professional carver. The lettering was simply scratched on the stone with some sharp object. One doesn’t need to be a carver in order to match in – a simple nail shall suffice. The Louzhetskiy Monastery of Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.49. Explicitly counterfeit lettering on a headstone with a forked cross. In the top right we see a scratched date – presumably, a XVI century one (the letters stand for the 7050’s or the 7080’s; one needs to subtract 5508 to end up with a modern dating falling over the middle or the end of the XVI century. One sees the crude guiding lines – however, they didn’t make the letters any less clumsy. The ornaments look older than the lettering – time has almost obliterated them. Nevertheless, it is obvious that, unlike the lettering, the ornaments were carved by a professional. Photograph of 2000, taken in the Louzhetskiy Monastery of Mozhaysk.

Fig. 14.50. Lettering of the alleged XVI century on an old headstone with a forked cross; obviously done by a lay carver, and obviously fails to correspond to the place reserved for it. The dating reads perfectly unambiguously: “Orina Grigoryeva, died on 1 October 7076.” The lettering is thus dated to 1568 A.D. (7076 – 5508 = 1568). It is most likely to be a forgery. Photograph of 2000, taken in the Louzhetskiy Monastery of Mozhaysk.

Fig. 14.51. Lettering upon an old headstone with a forked cross, presumably dating from the pre-Romanovian epoch. The lettering is extremely crude, unprofessional and does not correspond to the size of the space reserved for it. The dating is all but obliterated; however, we can still read its second half as “16”; it must have stood for either 7016 or 7116, which translates as 1508 or 1608, making the date pre-Romanovian. The entire lettering consists of 4 or 5 words and only occupies a small part of the available space. However, the border ornamentation and the forked cross were carved professionally and accurately. The lettering is most likely a forgery. Photograph of 2000, taken in the Louzhetskiy Monastery of Mozhaysk.

Fig. 14.52. Fragment of the previous photograph with the lettering. Photograph taken in 2000.

Fig. 14.53. Lettering on an old headstone, presumably dating from the XVI century. Photograph of 2000, taken in the Louzhetskiy Monastery of Mozhaysk.

Fig. 14.54. A close-in of the lettering from an old headstone allegedly dating from the XVI century. Right next to the excellent ornamentation we see an uneven lettering that looks as though it were scratched upon the stone by a child: “7088 … month … on the 12th day in memory of … the martyr … Servant of Our Lord.” The date translates as 1580 A.D. It is most likely a typical example of outright negligence typical for the authors of counterfeit epitaphs in the XVI century. The Louzhetskiy Monastery of Mozhaysk. Photograph taken in 2000.

In general, we notice the following strange phenomena:

1. The headstones with dates pertaining to the Romanovian epoch have epitaph lettering of as high a quality as the artwork of the perimeter ornaments and the forked crosses.

2. The headstones with alleged pre-Romanovian datings upon them are covered in high quality artwork for as long as the cross and the ornaments are concerned; however, the epitaphs are all immature and rough. The contrast between the ornaments and the lettering is hard not to notice at once.

The “pre-Romanovian” epitaphs are scribbled in stone rather primitively – they lettering has no rectangular edges from the chisel, and all the lines are of the same width. In other words, no professional carving methods were used when these inscriptions were made, anyone can write a similar epitaph with a simple nail. Some of these inscriptions were unfinished and end abruptly, q.v. in figs. 14.50, 14.51 and 14.52. However, their content does not make them any different from the epitaphs of the Romanovian epoch. The formulae used in the text are the same.

Our opponents might want to suggest that the XVI century craftsmen had still found it hard to carve letters upon stone surfaces with any degree of skill. However, we cannot agree with this version – the elaborate perimeter ornament and the cross are carved immaculately!

The more persistent of our opponents might want to make another suggestion, namely, that a common practice of “recycling the headstones” had existed in the XVI century – that is to say, people would grab old headstones, chisel the epitaphs off them, scribble new ones and put the stones onto fresh graves. This mysterious practise would cease in the XVII century for some reason. Let us ponder the discovery once again. Every single headstone from the Louzhnetskiy monastery that is said to date from the XVI century has a crude epitaph and a very fine ornament, while in case of the XVII century headstones the ornaments and the epitaphs both look perfect. There isn’t a single XVI century headstone with an original epitaph in existence – the only ones that we have at our disposal shall prove to be “recycled” stones in this case. This would be very odd indeed – after all, some of the XVI century headstones should have survived in their original condition, if we are to assume that a part of them was used for the second time. This isn’t the case.

The most probable explanation of the discrepancy between the finesse of the artwork and the sketchy crudeness of the epitaphs in case of the XVI century headstones is altogether different. Every epitaph on every pre-Romanovian headstone was destroyed in the second half of the XVII century. The Romanovs ordered for a number of replicas to be manufactured so as to make the absence of headstones less conspicuous. Some of the old stones were covered in new inscriptions with counterfeit pre-Romanovian dates; the actual formula used in the epitaph had remained identical to the one commonly used in the Romanovian epoch. The objective had been to “prove” that no burial custom reform ever took place, and that the pre-Romanovian epitaphs had generally been just the same as the ones used in the time of the Romanovs. Their content, alphabet, language, etc., had presumably remained the same as they had been before the ascension of the Romanovs.

Counterfeit epitaphs of the alleged XVI century had however proved too crude, which is easy to understand. In case of a real headstone, the relations of the deceased that pay the carver for his work are very meticulous about the quality of the latter, and control the quality of the lettering. But if the authors of the false lettering were following orders from the faraway Moscow or St. Petersburg, they would hardly be bothered about anything else but the “correct” text. No one would require quality artwork from those. The actual headstones had been old and authentic, with ornaments and forked crosses; the perpetrators would hastily scribble epitaphs thereupon. We aren’t talking professional carvers here – it doesn’t seem plausible that the order to write false epitaphs on the headstone had been accompanied by money to hire professional carvers.

The next order had been to remove all the old-fashioned headstones from cemeteries and to make new one to a different standard, pretending it had “always existed.” The old headstones, with both the authentic epitaphs of the Romanovian epoch and the counterfeit ones that had been supposed to play the part of authentic pre-Romanovian headstones inscribed upon them, were utilised as construction stone.

The excavations at the Louzhetskiy Monastery reveal all these numerous distortions of the ancient Russian history.

We are confronted with several issues of the greatest interest. What could have been written on the authentic Russian headstones of the pre-Romanovian epoch? What language were the epitaphs in – Church Slavonic, Arabic, Turkic, or some other language, forgotten nowadays? It would be expedient to remind the reader that inscriptions upon Russian weapons had been in Arabic up to the XVI and even the XVII century, q.v. in Chron4, Chapter 13. Could the same be the case with the Russian epitaphs? It is possible that before the Romanovs the Arabic language had been considered holy in Russia, alongside Church Slavonic and Greek.

All of the above requires a very careful study. Without answering these questions, we cannot really reconstruct the true realities of life in Russia before the Romanovs. Russian archaeologists have a tremendous scope of work here.

In May 2001 we visited Louzhetskiy monastery once again, after the passage of roughly a year since our first visit. What have we seen? It turns out that the excavated foundation of an old church that we mentioned above has changed its appearance. Parts of several ancient headstones of the XVI-XVII century that had formerly protruded from the fundament have been broken off or covered in cement. Some of the surviving fragments containing ancient artwork and lettering have been lost as a result. We are of the opinion that it would be better to preserve the uncovered ruins in their original condition as an important historical artefact and have them visited by tourists and schoolchildren. These authentic historical artefacts that were unearthed quite miraculously are in poor correspondence with the consensual version of history. Some of the individual headstone fragments put up for exhibition at some distance from the foundation remain intact, but not all of them. We didn’t many of the ones that had been here in 2000.

8.

Geography according to a map of Great Tartary that dates from 1670

In fig. 14.55 one sees a map that was manufactured in Paris in 1670 and whose full title runs as follows: “La Grande Tartarie. Par le Sr. Sanson. A Paris. Chez l’Auteur aux Galleries du Louvre Avec Privilege pour Vingt Angs. 1670.”

Fig. 14.55. A map of the Great Tartary made in Paris in the alleged year 1670. La Grande Tartarie. Par le Sr. Sanson. A Paris. Chez l’Auteur aux Galleries du Louvre Avec Privilege pour Vingt Ans. 1670.

The map is very interesting indeed, and corresponds well to our reconstruction. Let us begin with the observation that the map in question is one the Great Tartary, or the Mongol Tartary (bearing in mind that the word “Mongol” translates as “Great”). According to the map, Great Tartary didn’t just include the Russian Empire in the modern sense of the term, but also China and India.

The map rather spectacularly gives us several versions of the same geographical name. For instance, the names Moal, Mongal and Magog are synonyms, according to the map. Then we have Ieka-Moal, Iagog and Gog, which all mean the same things. Actually, the reflections of the Biblical nations of Gog and Magog identified as the Goths and the Mongols, or the Cossacks, have survived in Scaligerian history until the present day, q.v. in Chron5. We see India referred to “Mogol Inde,” or the word “Mongol” with the Old Russian word inde, which translates as “far away.” In other words, the name translates as “the faraway Mongols,” or “the faraway Great Ones.”

In Siberia we see the “Alchai” mountains also known as “Belgian Mountains.” A little further to the west we also find the name Germa, or Germany. What we see here must reflect an interesting historical process. After the fragmentation of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire, which had spanned a large part of Eurasia, Africa and America, many of the old “Mongolian” names began to travel Eastwards from the West. This process was captured by the numerous freshly compiled maps of the Western Europe. The former Great Tartary was thus declared to have spanned the territories that lay to the east of the Volga and nothing else. Therefore, the former geography of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire became compressed in a way; the scribes and cartographers of the Western Europe have been laborious enough to wipe out the Horde terminology from their own territory. As a result, some of the “Mongolian” imperial geographical names travelled to the east, beyond Ural. Indeed, the map of 1670 that we have under study contains the European names Germa(ny) and Belgium. These blunders were naturally corrected later, and nowadays we don’t see any traces of Germany or Belgium in Siberia. All we have are Mongolia and India, greatly reduced in size, since in the XIV-XVI century the names Mongolia and India had been used by the Westerners for referring to the entire Horde, or Russia. See Chron5 for more in re the application of the name India to Russia in the Middle Ages.

Let us return to the map of 1670, q.v. in fig. 14.55. We see the town of Bulgar in Moscovia, right next to Kazan, upon River Volga. The river Don is called Tana. Another city whose name rings very interesting to us is Wasilgorod, which is located on River Volga, between Nizhniy Novgorod and Kazan – the name translates as “City of Vassily” or “Czar Ciry.” There is no such city here nowadays. Could it be the XVII century name of Cheboksary? The root SAR in the name of the city is really one of the numerous versions of the word Czar. The modern River Lena in Siberia is called “Tartar river,” whereas the entire north-eastern Siberia bears the name “Su-Moal ats Tartar.”

We can therefore see that in the XVII century the West Europeans had still used the old Horde names for many geographical locations on the territory of Russia; those were subsequently erased by the Scaligerian and Romanovian historians and cartographers.

9.

A. I. Soulakadzev and his famous collection of books and chronicles

Alexander Ivanovich Soulakadzev had lived in 1771-1832 ([407], pages 155-156). He is a famous collector of old books and chronicles, including those concerned with Russian history. Over the years, he had collected an enormous amount of books and chronicles that amounted to several thousand units. Towards the end of his life, he published a catalogue of books and chronicles that he had collected. There were many heated debates concerning his activities in the XVIII-XIX century. Modern historians believe him to be a malicious and “one of the most notorious Russian falsifiers of historical works, whose activities are reflected in dozens of special works… He had specialised in large-scale counterfeit propagation … It is truly baffling just how boldly he had manufactured and advertised the counterfeits. The amount and “genre scope” of his creations are also quite amazing” ([407], page 155).

The heated interest of the Russian XIX century intelligentsia in the historical materials collected by Soulakadzev was combined with active accusations of Soulakadzev’s alleged proneness for “collecting the ancient chronicles and disfiguring them with his own amendments and subscripts to make them seem more ancient,” according to A. K. Vostokov’s sentiment of 1850 (quotation given according to [407], page 160). P. M. Stroyev wrote the following in 1832: “When he [Soulakadzev – Auth.] … had still been alive, I have studied his treasure vaults of literature, which Count Tolstoy was intending to purchase in those days… The rather crude corrections that nearly every chronicle appeared to have been afflicted by haunt me until this day” (quotation given according to [407], pages 160-161).

Nevertheless, the situation appears to have a lot more facets to it than we can see nowadays. Historians themselves admit the following: “These harsh and sceptically patronising assessments of Soulakadzev’s collection had proved unjust in many cases. Over his life he had indeed managed to collect a large and valuable collection of printed and handwritten materials. The collection had been based … on the library and chronicle collection of his father and grandfather [it is assumed that Soulakadzev had been the descendant of the Georgian prince G. M. Soulakidze – Auth.]. It later became complemented by the items he had bought, received as presents, and possibly also purloined from ecclesiastical and secular collections and libraries… A number of truly unique documents mysteriously ended up as part of his collection, in particular – the lists of chronicles that were sent to the Synod at the end of the XVIII century on the orders of Catherine the Great (they had been kept in the archives of the Synod up until the beginning of the XIX century). Nowadays we know of a chronicle numbered 4967” ([407], page 161).

This number demonstrates that Soulakadzev’s collection had included 4967 books and chronicles at least! “Upon one of the chronicles Soulakadzev has written about his ownership of ‘over 2 thousand chronicles of different kinds, excepting the ones written on parchment.’ It is difficult to check the veracity of this evidence – surviving library catalogues name 62 to 294 Slavic and Western European chronicles… Nowadays we know the locations of more than 100 chronicles that had formerly been owned by Soulakadzev” ([407], page 161).

It was Soulakadzev’s collection that gave us such famous Russian sources as “the History of the Kazan Kingdom in its XVII century copy, the Chronographical Palea of the XVI century, the Chronicle of A. Palitsyn [one of the primary sources on the history of the Great Strife of the early XVII century – Auth.], the Southern edition of the Chronographer, and a fragment of Nicon’s chronicle as a XVII century copy” ([407], page 162). These sources are not considered counterfeit by modern historians – on the contrary, they study them diligently and use them as basis for dissertations and scientific monographs. Thus, the collection of Soulakadzev is divided in two parts: the “correct sources” and the “incorrect sources,” or alleged forgeries. It would be interesting to learn about the basis of these allegations.

Let us state right away that we do not intend to act as judges insofar as the issue of whether or not Soulakadzev had been a hoaxer is concerned. We haven’t had the opportunity to study the history of his collection in detail, and we haven’t held any of the chronicles or the books that he had purchased in our hands. Moreover, most of them are presumed lost or have been destroyed deliberately, as we shall mention below. However, our analysis of the Russian history makes the entire picture of Soulakadzev’s collection serving as the apple of discord and instigating a struggle in the ranks of the historians and the intelligentsia a great deal clearer.

Let us consider the argumentation used by the historians that accuse a large part of Soulakadzev’s collection of being “counterfeit” and “bastardising Russian history.” We learn that “this ‘passion’ of Soulakadzev’s was rooted in the social and scientific atmosphere of the first decades of the XIX century. The century began with many great discoveries made in the field of the Slavic and Russian literature and literacy: in 1800, the first publication of the ‘Slovo o polku Igoreve’ came out … Periodicals published sensational news about the library of Anna Yaroslavna, the runic “Chronicles of the Drevlyane,” a Slavic codex of the VIII century A.D. discovered in Italy and so on” ([407], pages 163-164).

In 1807 Soulakadzev “told Derzhavin about the ‘Novgorod runes’ that he had had at his disposal” ([407], page 164). Shortly after that, Soulakadzev purchased “Boyan’s Song of the Slavs” or the “Hymn to Boyan.” This text is presumed to be one of Soulakadzev’s falsifications nowadays. Historian V. P. Kozlov writes that “the present specimen of a ‘runic’ text obviously demonstrates that this agglomeration of pseudo-anachronisms derived from Slavic roots of words is quite unlikely to have any meaning” (ibid.).

V. Kozlov proceeds to cite what he must consider the “most absurd fragment” of the “Hymn to Boyan,” alongside Soulakadzev’s translation. However, we find nothing manifestly absurd here. A propos, this text appears to resemble the Etruscan texts that we consider in Chron5. Their language, which appears to be of a Slavic origin, has got a number of idiosyncrasies uncharacteristic for the Old Russian language that we’re accustomed to. There are thus authentic ancient texts in existence, whose language resembles that of the “Hymn to Boyan.” This naturally doesn’t imply that the “Hymn” is authentic; however, one would have to prove it a forgery first. We find no such proof anywhere in [407], for instance.

Let us point out a certain peculiarity that concerns the system of accusations against Soulakadzev. For instance, V. P. Kozlov’s book entitled The Mysteries of Falsification. Manual for University Professors and Students ([407]) devotes a whole chapter to Soulakadzev, which begins with the phrase “The Khlestakov of Russian ‘archaeology’ .” Nevertheless, we haven’t found a single straightforward accusation of falsification based on any actual information anywhere on the thirty pages occupied by this chapter. There isn’t a single proven case of forgery – all the accusations are based on vague pontificating about the alleged vices of Soulakadzev. His interest in theatrical art is called “fanatical” by Kozlov ([407], page 156), who also hints that Soulakadzev may have invented his princely Georgian origins, without bothering to give us any proof of the above ([407], page 155). Historians are particularly irate about the unpublished historical play of Soulakadzev entitled “Ioann, the Muscovite Warlord,” whose characters are said to “inhabit … a fantasy world” ([407], page 158). Kozlov cites a whole list of Soulakadzev’s vices – “unsystematic curiosity, romantic propensity for fantasising accompanied by a dilettante’s approach, wishful thinking, and the solution of problems with the aid of self-assured stubbornness and bons mots instead of actual knowledge” ([407], page 155). It goes on like this, without a single sign of evidence or example.

Why would this be? What could explain the vitriol that obviously betrays an innate hatred for Soulakadzev harboured by the author?

It is rather difficult to find a single answer to this question. We believe the reason to be formulated in the following passage. Apparently, Soulakadzev “in his patriotic inspiration … gives a blow-by-blow account of the Slavic history as a chain of victorious campaigns of the Slavs… He had clearly been searching for evidence in favour of the viewpoint that had made the Slavs all but the direct heirs of the Ancient Rome who had also been the most highly-evolved nation in Europe” ([407], page 168). The analysis that we provide in Chron5 makes it obvious that Soulakadzev’s point of view had been correct for the most part – at least, the theory about the Slavic Great = “Mongolian” Empire, or the Horde, being the actual successor of the Byzantine kingdom whose heyday had been in the XI-XIII century. Apart from that, in Chron7 we demonstrate that the Horde Empire of the XIV-XVI century became reflected in the “ancient” history as the “ancient” Roman Empire. The Romanovian historians had already been introducing another chronology of the ancient history, largely imported from the Western Europe, where the Slavs had been considered the most backward nation in existence. The primary documents that had contained the history of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire, had been destroyed during the first two centuries of the Romanovian reign in Russia. The surviving historical evidence had amounted to a collection of assorted odds and ends, indirect references, and individual documents. But even those had been regarded as a menace by the sentinels of the official Romanovian history. Soulakadzev must have gathered a collection of such surviving individual documents. Since he had not been a professional historian, he did not possess the motivation to either confirm or disprove the Romanovian version of history. He appears to have been driven by a sincere desire to understand the ancient history of Russia, which had been his major fault and the reason for all the accusations of insufficient professionalisms coming from the part of the Romanovian (and therefore also modern) historians. From their point of view, a professional is someone who works towards supporting the Scaligerian and Romanovian version of history. Anyone who dares to oppose it must be destroyed. The destruction can manifest as the attachment of labels – one of “malicious hoaxer” in case of Soulakadzev. The name of the heretical collector can then be demonized in any which way – he can be declared a fanatic, an amateur and a myth-monger. The school and university schoolbooks can ruin his reputation post mortem, casually referring to the collector as to a major hoaxer. The students hardly have any other option but believing it.

Let us return to the “Hymn to Boyan” that Soulakadzev is supposed to have written himself. The commentators pour their utmost loathing and scorn upon this “pseudo-literary work”; on the other hand, historians themselves admit that the Hymn had “initially made a very strong impression on Soulakadzev’s contemporaries … this can be clearly seen from Derzhavin’s translation of the Hymn, likewise the fact that … [the ‘Hymn to Boyan’ – Auth.] had been used as a veracious historical source for the biography of Boyan published by the Syn Otechestva (‘Son of the Fatherland’) periodical in 1821” ([407], page 168).

Thus, the XIX century Russian society, likewise the writers, who had been educated people and connoisseurs of the Old Russian literature, did not have any complaints about the “Hymn to Boyan.” However, a short while later the professional historians of the XIX century had “instantly adopted a doubtful and even all-out sceptical stance towards the ‘Hymn to Boyan’” ([407], page 168). The “explanation” offered by the learned historians is as follows: “Some parties … had boasted about … finding what they assume to be the Runic alphabet of the ancient Slavs … which was used for writing the ‘Hymn to Boyan’ … These runes resemble … the letters of the Slavic alphabet to an enormous extent, and therefore conclusions were made about the Slavs’ very own … Runic alphabet that had existed before the Christianity, and that when Cyril and Mefodiy were inventing the modern Russian alphabet, they had taken the existing Slavic runes and added a few Greek and other letters thereto!” ([407], pages 168-169).

Indeed, how could a historian of the Scaligerian and Romanovian school possibly tolerate the heretical theory (which, as we are beginning to realise, might very well be a true one) that the Cyrillic alphabet is but a slight modification of the Slavic runes, with the addition of several symbols from the Western alphabets? After all, this is the very alphabet that we found all across the Western Europe (also under the name of the “Etruscan alphabet”). Since we already understand what the real events behind this smokescreen had really been like (q.v. in Chron5), it becomes obvious why the commentators should be in this great a distress about the whole affair. It is a heavy blow to the entire edifice of the Scaligerian chronology. The Russian society of the XIX century must have still possessed a distant memory of its own history, namely, that of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire. However, the Romanovian historians must have been very well aware of what had been going on, hence the relentlessness of their stance. The reaction of these venerable scholars to all such phenomena had always been very quick and to the point, demonstrating good education and absolute ruthlessness. All the runic texts written by the ancient Slavs have been declared fake; Soulakadzev had gathered the reputation of a malicious hoaxer, with all kinds of vices attached so as to discredit his collection, which must have contained a great number of truly interesting objects, to as great an extent as possible.

We can judge about it by one single catalogue of books and chronicles that were part of this collection made by Soulakadzev himself. The very name of the catalogue is rather conspicuous: “An inventory, or a catalogue of ancient books, handwritten as well as printed, many of which were anathematised by ecclesiastic councils, and others burnt by numbers, even though they would only concern history; many of them were written upon parchment, and others upon leather, beech planks, pieces of birch bark, thick saturated canvas, etc.” (quoting according to [407], page 176). Here are some of the most interesting sections that this inventory had contained: “‘Banned books forbidden for reading and keeping,’ ‘Books called heretical,’ ‘Apostate literature’ ” (ibid.).

Historians admit that “the ‘Inventory’ had contained several real works of Russian and Slavic literary art whose originals had never been seen; scientists were anxious to locate them” ([4-7], pages 176-177). Wherefore the anxiety? Some of the scientists must have wanted to read and study the books in question, whereas the others had been after reading and destroying them. One must admit that, sadly, the latter party appears to have succeeded, since the fate of the enormous, and apparently priceless collection of Soulakadzev had been quite tragic. It had been destroyed de facto, and in a very sly manner.

According to V. P. Kozlov, “Soulakadzev’s collection of books and manuscripts … ceased to exist as a single entity after the death of its collector. A large part of it appears to be altogether lost” ([407], pages 161-162). Historians believe this to be Soulakadzev’s “own fault.” Apparently, he is to be blamed for leaving his wife with the false impression of the collection’s great value. Therefore, the widow who had been “deceived by her husband” did not want to separate the collection into lesser portions or individual books, and had initially wanted to sell it all to a single buyer. It is reported further that “the collectors from Moscow and St. Petersburg, who had initially been very interested in the purchase of Soulakadzev’s collection, soon all but boycotted the widow” ([407], page 162).

“The bibliographer Y. F. Berezin-Shiryaev reports … the sad fate that appears to have befallen … the majority of the manuscripts and the books. In December 1870 he walked into a bookshop at Apraksin Court in St. Petersburg, and saw ‘a multitude of books tied into gigantic bundles and laying around on the floor. Almost all of the books had been in ancient leather bindings, and some of them even in white sheep leather… The next day I found out that the books I saw in Shapkin’s shop had once belonged to the famous bibliophile Soulakadzev, and had been kept for several years tied into bundles up at someone’s attic. Shapkin had purchased them cheaply’” ([407], page 162). Berezin-Shiryaev had bought “all the foreign books that had been at Shapkin’s disposal – over 100 volumes, as well as a number of books in Russian” ([407], page 162). The great value of Soulakadzev’s collection is rather eloquently confirmed by the very fact that among the books strewn all over the floor of Shapkin’s shop there were a few mid-XVI century editions.

The following circumstance cannot fail to attract our attention – the first book purchases were made from Soulakadzev’s wife by P. Y. Aktov and A. N. Kasterin, the famed collectors from St. Petersburg. One must think that they had purchased the most valuable items from Soulakadzev’s collection. What do we see? It had been these very books that had for some reason failed to survive ([407], page 162). Kasterin, for instance, was already selling Soulakadzev’s books in 1847. He had destroyed the “banned books,” and was selling all the “extra” ones that he had been forced to buy from the allegedly avaricious widow of Soulakadzev and didn’t really need. It is characteristic that those of Soulakadzev’s books that were bought from Shapkin later by Berezin-Shiryaev and Dourov have remained intact and retained their integrity ([407], page 173). The obvious reason for this would be that both Berezin-Shiryaev and Dourov were buying their books after the collection had been subjected to a “censor’s purge” – all the really dangerous sources must have already been effectively destroyed.

By the way, Soulakadzev himself had been prone of accusing some of the sources favoured by the Romanovian and Scaligerian historians of being counterfeit. For instance, he wrote that he believed “the ancient songs of Kirsha Danilov to have been written recently, in the XVII century. There is nothing ancient about either their style or their story; even the names are partially figmental, and partially thought up in such a manner that they should sound like the old ones” ([407], page 173). Historians cannot refrain from making the irate comment about “the aplomb and the assurance of the author’s [Soulakadzev’s – Auth.] judgements and assessments being truly amazing” ([407], page 173).

Historians are also very irritated by Soulakadzev’s research into the history of the Valaam monastery, the so-called “Opoved” (the name translates as “account” or “introduction”). Soulakadzev gives a synopsis of all the evidence that concerns the voyage of Andrew the Apostle from Jerusalem to Valaam. We see the situation with the “Hymn to Boyan” recur. Initially, the Russian society had treated Soulakadzev’s research as a bona fide historical work. Indeed, “the four first editions of the ‘Description of the Valaam Monastery’ (starting with 1864 and on until 1904) … had used the ‘Opoved’ as a bona fide historical source” ([407], page 175). However, nowadays historians never tire of repeating that Soulakadzev’s sources as used in the “Opoved” were “counterfeits.” V. P. Kozlov is rather self-assured in the following passage, yet he doesn’t cite any actual evidence: “Soulakadzev uses counterfeited sources in order to prove it in his work that Valaam had been inhabited by Slavs since times immemorial, and not the Karelians and the Finns. The Slavs are supposed to have founded a state here, after the Novgorod fashion, which had even maintained a relation with the Roman emperor Caracalla” ([407], page 175). Even this quotation alone proves that Soulakadzev had not used any counterfeited sources. According to Chron5, Valaam had indeed belonged to Novgorod the Great, or Yaroslavl, which had maintained close ties with Czar-Grad, or the New Rome on the Bosporus. The actual Novgorod the Great had been referred to as Rome or New Rome in a number of sources, q.v. in Chron5. Andrew the Apostle must also have visited these parts.

Thus, our reconstruction makes a great many things fall into place, and pours an altogether different light over the activity of Soulakadzev, likewise the parties that have tried, and are still trying to do everything within their power to make the surviving evidence collected by Soulakadzev disappear forever.

10.

The name of the victor in the battle of 1241 between the Tartars and the Czechs

According to the Scaligerian history, in 1241 the “Mongolian” troops (or the troops of the Great Empire) invaded the Western Europe ([770], page 127). However, it is presumed that, after having conquered Hungary and Poland, they could not manage to make it to Germany and were defeated by the army of the Czech king. The entire tableau we are presented with is one of a conflict between the “righteous” West Europeans and the “villainous Mongols,” who had suffered a well-deserved defeat in the Czech kingdom and were forced to turn back Eastwards. Our reconstruction makes the history of this conquest look substantially different – as a series of civil wars that had ended with the propagation of imperial power over the vast territories of Eurasia and Africa – in particular, Germany and the Czech kingdom. The “Tartars and Mongols” did not leave these territories. It would therefore be expedient to learn more about the victorious party, one that had one the battle for the Czech kingdom, which is presumed to mark the end of the Great = “Mongolian” Conquest of the Western Europe. As we already know, the “Mongolian,” or imperial troops were marching west led by the Czar, or Khan, known as Batu-Khan (or Batya), Yaroslav and Ivan Kalita, or Ivan the Caliph, q.v. above.

What do we learn? The old documents have preserved the name of the victor – his name turns out to be Yaroslav ([770], page 127). Scaligerian historians obviously claim that he had not been a “Mongol,” but rather a “Czech warlord.” Nowadays, when we have already become accustomed to the largely distorted consensual version of world history, no one shall ever get the idea that the character in question can be identified as a “Mongol,” the great Batu-Khan, also known as Great Prince Yaroslav. However, this is precisely how it should be according to our reconstruction, since Yaroslav happens to be another name of Czar Batu, or Batu-Khan, also known as Ivan the Caliph. He had been a warlord of the Czechs, among other things, since the Czechs were part of his “Mongolian” imperial army. Modern historians are correct, in a way – Yaroslav had been the ruler of the Czechs, among other things.

This is how these events are described by V. D. Sipovskiy, a XIX century historian: “In the spring of 1241 Batu-Khan crossed the Carpathian mountain ridge and defeated the Hungarian king, then two more Polish princes. The Tartars had then invaded Silesia, where they defeated the troops of the Silesian duke. The way to Germany was open; however, the country was saved by the army of the Czech king. The first defeat of the Tartars took place during the siege of Olmütz; they were defeated by Yaroslav of Sternberg, military leader of the Czechs” ([770], page 127).

Obviously, this passage is all about the XVII-XIX century interpretation of the events, when the true history of the faraway XIII-XIV century had already been forgotten or falsified. However, the victor’s name has fortunately reached our age. It is Yaroslav. We can identify the same character as Batu-Khan = Ivan Kalita, also known as Caliph John and Presbyter Johannes. Could this be the real reason why neither the Czechs or the Germans have any memory of being conquered by the Great “Mongolian” army, namely, that their ancestors had been the actual “Mongols” marching westwards under the banners of the Horde, or Russia?

In Chron5 we cite a number of facts that can be interpreted as clear evidence of the German populace having formerly consisted of ethnic Slavs for the most part. We learn about this from the surviving historical documents as well as evidence provided by contemporaries.

11.

The location of Mongolia as visited by the famous traveller Plano Carpini

11.1. The “correct” book of Carpini as we have at our disposal today versus the “incorrect” book, which has vanished mysteriously

In the present section we shall comment on the famous mediaeval book by Plano Carpini that deals with his voyage to the court of the Great Mongolian Khan ([656]). Carpini went to Mongolia as a Papal envoy; his book is presumed to be one of the primary original sources of information about the Mongolian Empire in the alleged XIII century. In reality, according to the New Chronology, the book in question refers to the epoch of the XIV-XV century.

Let us begin with the final fragment of Carpini’s book, which is very remarkable indeed: “We plead unto the readers to alter nothing in our narration and to add no further facts thereto… However, since the inhabitants of the lands that we visited en route, Poland, Bohemia, Teutonia, Leodia and Campania, had wanted to read this book as soon as they could, they copied it before we had a chance to finish writing and proofreading it in our spare time. Let it therefore come as no surprise to anyone that the present work contains more details and is edited better [sic! – Auth.] than the other one, since we have quite … managed to correct the present book” ([656], page 85).

What does the above tell us? Firstly, the fact that apart from Carpini’s text that we have at our disposal today there were other “unedited” versions of his books, against which Carpini (in reality, an editor from the XVII century or an even later epoch writing on his behalf) forewarns the reader. The “old” texts are therefore presumed “utterly erroneous” and unworthy of the reader’s attention; we should all read the corrected and therefore veracious version.

It would be very interesting to read the old versions of Carpini’s book that had presumably been “erroneous.” Unfortunately, this is unlikely to ever happen – the true text of Carpini’s book must have been destroyed without a trace in the XVII century. Even if it does exist in some archive to this day, the chances of its ever getting published are nil – it shall instantly be labelled “incorrect a priori.” Why would one publish the “incorrect” text if we have the “correct” one at our disposal? After all, didn’t Carpini himself strongly advise against reading the incorrect versions of his book.

We are of the following opinion. What we have at our disposal today is a very late edition of Carpini’s old text, which is likely to have been made in the XVII or even the XVIII century in order to make Carpini’s book correspond to the Scaligerian version of history. Someone must have re-written the initial work of Carpini, wiping out every single trace of the real history of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire, or Russia (The Horde). The European scene of events travelled to the vicinity of the faraway Gobi Desert, which lies to the south of Lake Baikal. The everyday realities of Russian life were transferred to the “distant Mongolian steppes.” It is also possible that the editor, who had lived in a more recent epoch, did not understand many of the references made by old original.

11.2. The return route of Carpini

As we have seen, Carpini had travelled through the following countries as he was returning from “Mongolia”: Poland, Bohemia, Teutonia and Leodia. By the way, could the mediaeval Leodia be identified as the “ancient” Lydia, aka Lithuania or Italy = Latinia? After that, Carpini reaches Campania in Italy.

It is amazing (from the Scaligerian viewpoint) that Carpini doesn’t mention a single country that would lay to the west of Poland as part of his itinerary on the way back from the Great Khan’s capital, or the environs of Caracorum. He appears to have left Caracorum, which modern historians locate somewhere in the Gobi desert, thousands of miles away from the Polish borders, and arrived in Poland immediately. However, Carpini doesn’t utter a word about the numerous lands that he must have travelled through en route from the distant Gobi Desert to Western Europe.

Could he have mentioned these lands in the account of his journey from Europe to Caracorum, and therefore decided to withhold from mentioning them twice? This isn’t the case. Upon reaching Volga from Europe he immediately came to Caracorum. However, where could the true location of the city really be? We are of the opinion that Carpini didn’t go to any distant deserts – he came to Russia, or the Horde, immediately; its central regions began right after Poland. Carpini’s description only allows us to trace his journey to Volga. Then it is said that the party of the travellers had “travelled very fast” and swiftly reached the Great Khan’s capital. We are told that Carpini went East right from Volga – however, there’s nothing to suggest this in his text; we could just as well come to the conclusion that he travelled North, up the Volga, and soon reached Yaroslavl, or Novgorod the Great – Caracorum, that is, or simply “tsarskiye khoromy” – “The Czar’s Abode,” which is the most likely origin of the name. One must remember that nothing remotely resembling an old capital has ever been found anywhere near the stony Gobi Desert ([1078], Volume 1, pages 227-228). Archaeologists cannot find so much as an equivalent of a regular mediaeval town.

11.3. The geography of Mongolia according to Carpini

Our opponents might recollect that Carpini made a geographical description of the Khan’s land. We see the section entitled “On the Geography of the Land” (Mongolia) at the very beginning of Chapter 1. This is what Carpini tells us:

“The land in question lays in the part of the East where, as we presume, the East connects with the North. To the East [of the Mongols’ – Auth.] lays land of China” ([656], page 31). If we are to adopt the Scaligerian viewpoint and presume that Caracorum is located in the Gobi desert or somewhere around that area, China shall lay to the South and not the East; this contradicts the information provided by Carpini. However, if the Czar’s Abode, or Caracorum, can be identified as Yaroslavl, or Novgorod the Great, everything becomes instantly clear – we have Siberia to the East of Yaroslavl, and then Scythia, or China; the modern China lays even further to the East. However, in Chron5 we demonstrate that China, or Scythia, had been the mediaeval name for the Eastern Russia – possibly, the lands beyond Volga and Ural.

Let us proceed. According to Carpini, “the land of the Saracens lays to the South” ([656], page 31). If we are to presume that Caracorum is located in the Gobi Desert, we shall find China to the South, which can by no means be referred to as the “land of the Saracens,” the mediaeval name of the Middle East, Arabia and a part of Africa, but never modern China. Once again, a miss. But if we’re to assume that Caracorum, or the Czar’s Abode, identifies as Yaroslavl, or Novgorod the Great, everything falls into place immediately. To the South of Yaroslavl we have the Black Sea, Arabia, the Middle East and other veritable Saracen regions of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire of the XIV-XVI century.

Further Carpini reports that “the land of the Naimans lays to the west” ([656], page 31). If we are to assume that Caracorum had indeed been located somewhere in the dusty environs of the Gobi Desert, we are forced to make another assumption together with the modern commentators, who identify the Naimans as “one of the largest Mongolian tribes that had led a nomadic existence upon the vast territories … adjacent to the valley of the Black Irtysh” ([656], page 381). However, this large Mongolian tribe mysteriously disappeared – we shall find nothing remotely resembling “the republic of Naimania” anywhere upon this territory nowadays; no such state has left any trace in history.

However, identifying Caracorum, or the Czar’s Abode, as Yaroslavl, or Novgorod the Great, shall instantly make us recognise the Naimans as the famous European Normans. It is presumed that the Normans had been the mediaeval residents of Scandinavia, Germany, France and Southern Italy. One must also recollect Normandy in France. How would a mediaeval traveller describe the comparative location of the Normans and Russia, or the Horde? The former had resided to the West from the latter, which is precisely what we learn from Carpini.

What does Carpini tell us about the northern neighbours of the Mongols? “The land of the Tartars is washed by an ocean from the north” ([656], page 31). Is there any ocean to wash the northern coast of China? The very concept is preposterous. To the north from the modern Mongolia we find the vast Siberian lands – the Arctic Ocean is thousands of miles away. Once again, the attempts of the modern commentators to identify Carpini’s Mongolia as the modern Mongolia are doomed from the very start.

Carpini’s account begins to make sense once we assume Russia, or the Horde, to be the very Mongolia that we described. Indeed, Russia is washed by the Arctic Ocean from the North. The Russian lands had been inhabited all the way up to the Arctic Ocean, and the Horde had always had seaports there (Arkhangelsk, for instance). Therefore, Carpini had every right to say that Russia, or the Horde, which had been known as the “Land of the Tartars” in the West, is washed by an ocean from the North.

11.4. In re the name of the Tartars

Carpini’s book had originally been entitled as follows: “History of the Mongols, that we Know as the Tartars, by Giovanni da Plano Carpini, Archbishop of Antivari” ([656], page 30). The very title suggests that the word Tartars had served as the “external” name of the “Mongols,” or the “Great Ones.” This is how they were known in the Western Europe. Sometimes they would also be referred to as the Turks – the latter is likely to be a derivative of the name Tartars (from the Russian word “torit,” which translates as “to lay a path,” “to move forward,” etc.).

11.5. Mongolian climate

Carpini proceeds to surprise us his description of the Mongolian climate, which leaves one with the impression that its author had never actually left his study. The editor of Carpini’s text had clearly been completely ignorant of the climate in the country that he was supposed to “describe” as an eyewitness.

An excellent example is as follows. Carpini relates the following story, which is most edifying indeed: “Heavy hail often falls there… When we had been visiting the court, there was a hailstorm so fierce that the melted hail made 160 people drown right there, at the court, as we learned from trustworthy sources, and a lot of property and houses perished” ([656], page 32). Has anyone ever seen hailstorms that would bring great floods in their wake, with people drowning in the water from the melted hail, which would also destroy houses and property? This picture becomes quite preposterous if we try to apply the above description to the environs of the stony and dry Desert Gobi.

However, the very same fragment becomes perfectly realistic once we try to cast away the misleading information planted in the text by the editors of the XVII-XVIII century and reconstruct the original, which must have referred to a mere flood brought about by an overflowing river. Indeed, such catastrophes often wipe out entire towns and villages, and lead to many casualties. Everything is clear.

11.6. The Imperial Mongolian graveyard

Next Carpini tells us the following about the Mongols: “Their land has two graveyards. One of them is used by the emperors, the princes and all the nobility; they are carried there from wherever they happen to die … and buried alongside large amounts of gold and silver” ([656], page 39). We would very much like to ask the archaeologists about the location of this famous “Mongolian” graveyard. Could it be in Mongolia, or the Gobi Desert, perhaps? Archaeologists tell us nothing of the kind. There isn’t anything that would remotely resemble an imperial graveyard with heaps of silver and gold anywhere near the gloomy desert Gobi. But our reconstruction allows us to point out this graveyard instantly (see Chron5 for more details). It is quite famous - the Valley of the Dead and Luxor in Egypt. This is where we find gigantic pyramids and hundreds of royal tombs, some of which are indeed filled with gold and other precious metals and gems. Let us recollect the luxurious tomb of Pharaoh Tutankhamen, for instance, and the vast amount of gold used in its construction – not a speck of silver anywhere, just gold and gemstones. According to our reconstruction, this is where the “Mongolian” = Great Empire had buried its kings, some of the top ranking officials, and, possibly, some of their relatives. The corpses would be mummified before their last journey to Egypt.

11.7. The second graveyard of the Mongols

The second Mongolian graveyard is of an equal interest to us. Carpini reports the following: “The second graveyard is the final resting place of the multitudes slain in Hungary” ([656], page 39).

We are therefore supposed to believe that the vast steppes of Mongolia conceal a gigantic graveyards where multitudes of Mongolian warriors were buried after having fallen in Hungary. Let us study the map in order to estimate the distance between Hungary and the modern Mongolia. It’s a long way indeed – over five thousand kilometres as the crow flies, and much more if one is to travel the actual roads. It is therefore assumed that the bodies of many thousands of fallen Mongolian warriors were loaded onto carts and sent to the distant steppes of the modern Mongolia, over rivers, forests and hills. How many months did this voyage take? Why would one have to carry the bodies this far, and what would become of them after such lengthy transportation?

We believe this picture painted by the Scaligerian history to be completely implausible. The bodies of the deceased could only have travelled a short distance, which means that the homeland of the “Mongols,” or the land of the Tartars, had bordered with Hungary, which is completely at odds with the Scaligerian history. However, this corresponds to our reconstruction perfectly well, since the Great = “Mongolian” Empire identifies as Russia, or the Horde, which had indeed bordered with Hungary. It is also true that there are thousands of burial mounds in the Ukraine, for instance, and some three thousand of them in the region of Smolensk ([566], page 151). Those are the so-called “burial mounds of Gnezdovo,” which lay to the south from Smolensk and are concentrated around the village of Gnezdovo ([797], page 314). The burial mounds of Gnezdovo constitute “the largest group of burial mounds in the Slavic lands, which counts up to three thousand mounds nowadays” ([566], page 151). These burial mounds are very likely to be the graves of the “Mongolian” = Great Empire’s warriors who had been killed in Hungary.

11.8. Cannons in the army of Presbyter Johannes

Carpini, or, rather, the editor of the XVII-XVIII century who impersonates him, wants to make us believe the following preposterous picture to be true. In one of the battles, Presbyter Johannes had “made copper effigies of people and mounted them on horses, having lit a fire inside them; behind the copper effigies there were riders carrying bellows … When they army came to the battlefield, these horses were sent forward side by side. As they were approaching the enemy formations, the riders in the back put something in the fire [sic! – Auth.] that was burning inside the abovementioned copper effigies, and then they started to blow the bellows hard. Thus they invoked the Greek Fire, which was incinerating horses and people alike, and the air went black for the smoke” ([656], page 46).

We are of the opinion that the original text contained a description of copper cannons in the “Mongolian” troops, or the army of the Great Empire. As a matter of fact, cannons were often decorated with cast figures of animals and people, q.v. in Chron6, Chapter 4:16. The strange fable-like descriptions like the one quoted above result from the editorial intervention of the XVII-XVIII century, whose objective had been define as complete obliteration of all obvious references to late mediaeval events in Russia, or the Horde.

See Chron5 for more on Presbyter Johannes.

11.9. The language of the Mongols

Carpini reports that when he had brought a papal epistle to the emperor of the “Mongols,” the document needed to be translated. What language was it translated into? According to Caprino, “We have brought the epistle to the Czar and asked for people who could translate it… Together with them, we have made a word-for-word translation into the Russian, Saracen and Tartar languages; this translation was then presented to Batu, who read it very attentively, taking notes” ([656], page 73).

On another occasion, already at the court of the Mongolian emperor, Carpini and his companions were asked the following question: “Does His Holiness the Pope have any translators who understand the written language of the Russians, the Saracens or the Tartars?” ([656], page 80). Carpini replied in the negative, and so the reply of the Mongols had to be translated into a language that the Pope would understand. It turns out that the initial Mongolian missive to the Pope had been written in “the language of the Russians, the Saracens and the Tartars.” Could this imply that the three were really a single language? Let us recollect Carpini’s statement about Tartars being the Western European name of the “Mongols,” or “The Great Ones.” This appears to be why he specifically refers to the Tartar language here. We must emphasise that Carpini does not utter a single word about the “Mongolian” language; all the Mongolian khans turn out to be literate and capable of reading Russian; moreover, they know nothing about any “Mongolian” language of any sort – at least, Carpini doesn’t mention it once in the account of his voyage to “Mongolia.”

11.10. The real nature of the Mongolian tents, presumed to have made of red and white felt

According to Carpini, the Mongolians live in tents. This appears obvious to everyone today – after all, the Mongols are said to have been poorly-educated savages who never mastered the fine art of architecture, and whose way of living had been utterly primitive. However, it turns out that the “Mongolian” tents had been of the most peculiar kind. For instance, one of these tents was “made of white felt,” and could house “over two thousand people,” no less ([656], 76). A strange tent, isn’t it then? The size is closer towards that of a stadium.

The inauguration ceremonies of the Mongolian emperors were also held in tents – the only residential constructions known to Mongolians. Carpini was present at one such ceremony. This is what he tells us: “Another tent, which they called the Golden Horde, was prepared for him in a beautiful valley among the hills, next to some river. This is where Kouiouk was supposed to become enthroned on the day of Our Lady’s Assumption… This tent stood on poles covered with thin sheets of gold, which were nailed to the trees with golden nails” ([656], pages 77-78).

However, not all of the Mongolian “tents” were made of white felt; some were also red. This is what Carpini reports: “We have arrived to another place, where there stood a magnificent tent of fiery red felt” ([656], page 79). Also: “The three tents that we were referring to above had been enormous; other tents of white felt, which were quite large and also beautiful, had belonged to his wife” ([656], page 79).

What did the original text say before having been edited tendentiously in the XVII-XVIII century.

As for the inauguration in a tent of white tent on gilded poles of wood, and on the day of the Assumption at that, the situation is perfectly clear. A comparison with the consensual version of the Russian history reveals that the inauguration ceremony as mentioned above was held in the Ouspenskiy Cathedral of white stone; its name translates as “Cathedral of the Assumption,” which is where the Russian Czars got inaugurated. The dome of the building was indeed covered with sheets of gold. Carpini didn’t quite understand the principle of their construction; no nails could be seen anywhere, hence his assumption that the nails were made of gold as well. His mistake is perfectly understandable – he had been from a country where there were no gilded domes, which is why he didn’t know the construction principle of the golden domes, and was surprised at having noticed no nails.

Let us also make the following remark about the Russian word for “tent” – “shatyor.” The French word for “castle” is “chateau,” for instance; it is read as shato, which sounds very similar to the word “shatyor”; also cf. the Turkish word “chadyr”, which translates similarly ([955], Volume 2, page 405). Therefore, whenever we see Carpini refer to a “tent,” the last thing we should think of is a frail construction of rods covered with cloth, or even leather or felt. We believe that the author was really referring to a castle, or palace, of the Russian Czars, or the Khans of the Horde, made of white stone. They were reverently titled emperors by the West Europeans, who had ruled over the entire Great = “Mongolian” Empire, and not just its individual provinces, such as France, Germany or England. Local rulers bore more modest titles of kings, dukes and so on; however, there had just been one Empire and one Emperor, an autocrat.

Let us return to the description of the Mongolian tents and enquire about the references to felt in Carpini’s text, where the author should really be describing stone buildings. There can be several reasons for it. A possible explanation is that the editor of the XVII-XVIII century had tried to emphasise the primitive nature of the savages from the Far East. Another possibility is the transformation of the Russian word for “felt” (“voylok”), which rings very similar to the word “block,” which may have been used by Carpini to refer to either red bricks or blocks of white stone. This is how the editors of the XVII-XVIII century transformed palaces of white stone and castles of red brick into eerie tents of white and red felt, fluttering in the wind yet capable of housing two thousand people ([656], page 76). One must also recollect the words “palatka” and “palata” – “tent” and “chamber,” respectively, and the words “palace,” “palacio,” “palazzo” and “palais” that still exist in English, Spanish, Italian and French and all mean the same thing. The word in question is likely to be a derivative of “palata”, which is how the chambers of the Russian Czars were called.

Real history of the XIV-XVI century became obliterated from human memory in the XVII-XVIII century. As a result, the gigantic “Mongolian” cathedrals and palaces with gilded domes in Moscow and elsewhere had been artificially transferred to the Far East in the documents, having turned into primitive and dusty felt tents of the Khans, open to every wind. For instance, there is a fantasy engraving that presumably depicts the tent of a Mongolian Khan – on wheels, drawn by a herd of bulls (see fig. 14.56). Such unbelievable luxury and comfort!

Fig. 14.56. Engraving depicting the yurt, or tent, belonging to the Great Khan of “Mongolia.” Such absurdities have been drawn ever since the XVII-XVIII century, which is when the true history of the XIV-XVI century became forgotten – for instance, the fact that the Great = “Mongolian” Czar, or Khan, had lived in a palace of white stone and prayed in huge churches with gilded domes. Neither the palaces, nor the cathedrals had any wheels. Taken from [1264], Volume 1, cover illustration.

11.11. The throne of the Mongolian Emperor

Carpini reports the construction of a “tall dais made of wood [presumably, imported wood, since it would have to come a long way to the rocky Gobi desert – Auth.], upon which there had stood the Emperor’s throne. It was made of ivory, beautifully carved and adorned with gold, gemstones, and pearls, if our memory errs us not” ([656], page 79).

It is most curious indeed that the “Mongolian” throne, likewise the seal of the “Mongolian” Emperor, were forged by Kozma, a Russian craftsman. Carpini describes “a Russian named Kozma, the Emperor’s very own and favourite goldsmith… Kozma has shown us another throne, which he had made for the Emperor before his inauguration, as well as the imperial seal, also of his own making, and translated to us the text of the inscription on the seal” ([656], page 80).

We know nothing of whether this luxurious throne made by a Russian craftsman has been found by anyone in the environs of the Gobi Desert. The answer is certain to be in the negative, given reasons being wars, sandstorms, the passage of many centuries and so on. No throne in Gobi, that is.

However, the throne of Ivan IV “The Terrible” exists until this day, and is in a perfect condition. It is kept in the Muscovite Armoury – the royal chambers (“tsarskiye khoromy”), or Caracorum. It is indeed completely covered in ivory carvings, q.v. in fig. 14.57. The throne leaves one with the impression of being made of ivory entirely. We are by no means suggesting it to be the very same throne of the “Mongols,” or the Great Ones, that Carpini describes. He may have been referring to a similar throne; however, he gives us evidence of the custom that had existed in Russia, or the Horde, namely, the use of ivory for decorating thrones. At least one such throne has reached our day and age.

Fig. 14.57. Throne ascribed to Ivan IV “The Terrible.” Kept in the Armoury of the Muscovite Kremlin. A propos, this throne “used to be ascribed to Ivan III” ([96], page 56, ill. 35). Everything is perfectly clear – according to our reconstruction, Ivan III is largely a phantom reflection of Ivan IV, which is why historians regularly confuse the identities of “the two Ivans.” Taken from [187], page 365.

The counter-argumentation of learned historians is known to us perfectly well. It runs along the lines of the Russian Czars importing their customs from the distant land of Mongolia in the Far East, the Muscovites tending to slavishly emulate the customs of their former conquerors, the savage and cruel “Mongolian” Khans, even after the stifling “Mongolian” yoke had been lifted, and so forth. However, the question remains very poignant – why is it that there are no traces of anything described by Carpini anywhere in the vicinity of Gobi Desert, the presumed centre of the “Mongolian” Empire, and plenty of such traces and relics in Russia?

11.12. The priests from the entourage of the Mongolian Emperor

Carpini uses the word “clerics” several times in his narration. It is odd that in almost every case they are mentioned as “Russian clerics” or “Christian clerics” ([656], page 81).

We can thus see that the “Mongolian” = Great Emperor had been surrounded by Christian clerics. This is in total contradiction with the Scaligerian history, and perfectly normal within the framework of our reconstruction. The Great, or “Mongolian,” Czar (also known as Khan) of Russia (or the Horde) had naturally been surrounded by Orthodox Russian priests.

When Carpini and his companions were leaving the Mongolian court, the emperor’s mother gave each of them a coat of fox fur as a present. Carpini makes the satisfied remark that the fur was “facing outwards” ([656], page 82).

Once again, it is easy enough to recognise the customs of the Russian court. Even in the XVI century, the foreign envoys had been very proud of fur coats and other ceremonial attire that they would receive as presents from the Czar. Such presents were considered special tokens of royal sympathy. For instance, the Austrian ambassador, Baron Sigismund Herberstein, included a portrait of himself dressed in the Russian clothes that he had received from the Czar ([161], page 283). He had certainly considered himself honoured (see fig. 14.58). In fig. 14.59 we reproduce another portrait of Herberstein, where he is drawn wearing the clothes that he had received as a present from the “Turkish Sultan” ([90], page 48).

Fig. 14.58. “The imperial envoy S. Herberstein wearing the luxurious Russian attire received from Vassily III as a present. Engraving of the XVI century” ([550], page 82).

Fig. 14.59. “Sigismund Herberstein wearing the clothing given to him as a present by the Turkish sultan. 1559. Xylograph from the book entitled ‘A Biography of Baron Herberstein for his Grateful Descendants.’ Vienna, 1560” ([90], page 48).

11.13. The Mongolian worship of Genghis-Khans effigy

Carpini reports that the “Mongolians” had worshipped an effigy of Genghis-Khan ([656], page 36). This is in perfect correspondence with our reconstruction, which suggests that Genghis-Khan had also been known as St. George. Russians are indeed known to worship the famous icon of St. George (known as “The Victorious” in Russia). There are many versions of this icon in existence. As for the icon, or the effigy of Genghis-Khan, it hasn’t left a single trace in the consensual history of the land known as Mongolia nowadays – likewise luxurious ivory thrones, felt tents on gilded poles, etc. We are of the opinion that most of them exist until the present day – it is just that the location of the “Mongolian” imperial capital is indicated incorrectly. It had stood on River Volga, which is a far cry from the Gobi desert, and been known as Yaroslavl, or Novgorod the Great, and was subsequently moved to Moscow.

12.

Notes of a Mediaeval Turkish Janissary written in the Cyrillic script

The book that we have under study is extremely interesting. It is entitled Notes of a Janissary. Written by Konstantin Mikhailovich from Ostrovitsa ([424]). Let us consider the end of the book first. It is concluded by the following phrase: “This chronicle was initially set in Russian letters in the year 1400 A.D.” ([424], page 116). The Polish copy puts it as follows: “Tha Kroynika pyszana naprzod litera Ryska latha Narodzenia Bozego 1400” ([424], page 29).

This phrase obviously irritates the modern commentators to a great extent, since nowadays it is “common knowledge” that no Russian letters could be used outside Russia by default – everyone is supposed to have used the Romanic alphabet. A. I. Rogov comments thusly: “The very phrase contains a large number of errata insofar as the correct XVI century orthography of the Polish language is concerned. The nature of these ‘Russian letters’ remains quite mysterious. It is possible that the author implies the use of the Cyrillic alphabet – Serbian, perhaps” ([424], page 29). Amazing, isn’t it? A modern commentator who writes in Russian finds the nature of Russian letters mysterious.

The language of the original is presumed unknown ([424], page 9). However, since contemporary commentators still cannot completely ignore the reference to “Russian letters,” they cautiously voice hypotheses about whether or not Constantine could have written “in Old Serbian or Church Slavonic – after all, the numerous Orthodox Christians that had resided in the Great Principality of Lithuania had used a similar language as an acrolect, and must have been capable of understanding the language of the ‘Notes’… One must be equally cautious about the evidence given by M. Malinovsky, who reports the existence of a Cyrillic copy of the ‘Notes’ in the Derechin library or Sapeg, referring to the words of Jan Zakrevski, a gymnasium teacher from Vilna. One must remember that alphabets and languages had been used very eclectically in the Great Principality of Lithuania, to the extent of using the Arabic alphabet in Byelorussian books [sic! – Auth.]” ([424], page 31).

The fact that certain Byelorussian books were set in the Arabic script is most remarkable, and our reconstruction explains it very well indeed.

The Notes of a Janissary were translated into Czech under the following title, which is also of interest to our research: “These deeds and chronicles were described and compiled by a Serb, or a Raz, from the former Raz Kingdom, also known as the Serbian Kingdom, named Konstantin, son of Mikhail Konstantinovich from Ostrovitsa, who was taken to the court to Mehmed, the Turkish Sultan, by the Turks and the Janissaries. He had been known as the Ketaya of Zvechay in Turkish, and at the court of the French King they knew him as Charles” ([424], page 30).

It is thus obvious that Raz, the old name of the Serbs, all but coincides with that of Russians (Russ). The old name of the Serbian Kingdom gives the latter away as the Russian Kingdom. This makes the author of the “Notes” Russian, or a Serbian. Also, the Turks had called him a “Ketaya” – Chinese, or Scythian (Kitian), as we already know. Konstantin had therefore been a Russian, or a Serbian Scythian. He had therefore obviously written in the Russian language and used the Cyrillic alphabet. Everything falls into place yet again.

Modern commentators tell us further that the dating of “1400” is incorrect and must be replaced by 1500 ([424], page 29). The 100-year error is well familiar to us as yet another manifestation of the centenarian chronological shift, which had very visibly affected the history of Russia and Western Europe.

Historians are confused by many of the facts described in the “Notes.” They believe the text to contain a great number of contradiction. On the one hand, Konstantin hates the Turks; on the other, he often portrays them favourably. Also, he appears to be a Christian (see [424], page 14). “The book [Notes of a Janissary – Auth.] does not utter a word about the conversion of the author to Islam. On the contrary – Konstantin emphasises the strength of his Christian faith. This is obvious the most in the introduction and the fourth chapter of the ‘Notes’” ([424], page 15).

And yet Konstantin is familiar with Islam perfectly well – from firsthand experience and not by proxy. The modern commentator makes the following confused remark: “Could he have visited the mosques this freely without being a Muslim himself? Moreover, Konstantin reports having much lot more firsthand knowledge of the Muslim rites – such as the dances of the dervishes, for example, who would normally forbid entrance not just to the representatives of other creeds, but even to those of the Muslims who hadn’t been initiated into the dervish cult. Even the ‘born-again’ dervishes were forbidden from attendance. Finally, it is perfectly impossible to imagine that the Sultan could have put a Christian in charge of the garrison quartered in one of the important fortresses – Zvechay in Bosnia, making him the commander of fifty janissaries and thirty more regular Turkish soldiers” ([424], page 15).

That which seems strange from the viewpoint of Scaligerian history becomes natural and even inevitable within the framework of our reconstruction. The discrepancies between Christianity and Islam had not been as gigantic in the epoch described by the author as it is normally presumed – the schism became more profound later.

The Notes of a Janissary contradict the consensual Scaligerian history quite often. Modern commentators are forced to point out these contradictions, and they naturally don’t interpret them in Konstantin’s favour. He is accused of making mistakes, being confused and “ignorant of the true history.” Several such passages are quoted below.

“The author collates several historical characters into one, Murad II (who is also falsely named Murad III), such as Sultan Suleiman, Musa and Mehmet I (see Chapter XIX, example 1). This explains the numerous errors in the biographies of the Turkish Sultans, as well as the despots and rulers of Serbia and Bosnia, such as confusing of Sultan Murad for Orkhan (Chapter XIII), naming Urosh I the first King of the Serbs instead of Stefan the First-Crowned (Chapter XV)… This is the very same reason why the author can confuse the date of a city’s foundation for the date of fortification construction (Chapter XVII, remark 7). There is also a number of scandalous geographical blunders whose nature is just the same, for instance, the claim that River Euphrates flows into the Black Sea (Chapter XXXII)” ([424], page 26).

By the way, we see Constantine report the first Serbian, or Russian, king, to have been Urosh – that is, “a Rosh,” or “a Russian.” This is once again perfectly natural from the viewpoint of our reconstruction.

As for the “scandalous” flowing of the Euphrates into the Black Sea, it suffices to say that it is only scandalous in Scaligerian history. There is no scandal in our reconstruction – one might recollect that the name Euphrates may be the old version of Prut, a tributary of the Danube, which does flow into the Black Sea. The sounds F and P were often subject to flexion, and so Prut and Euphrates can be two different versions of the same name.

13.

The crypt of the Godunovs in the Troitse-Sergiev Monastery. The Ipatyevskiy Monastery in Kostroma

The crypt of the Godunovs is located in the town of Sergiev Posad. It is comprised of four graves (see fig. 14.60); the crypt is rather modest. It is presumed that Boris Godunov himself is buried here. A guide told us in 1997 that the sarcophagi had initially been covered by gravestones that lay on the ground, remaining underground themselves. In the early XVIII century this burial site was afflicted by the same disaster as the graves of all the other Russian Czars in the Arkhangelskiy Cathedral of the Kremlin in Moscow – namely, the burial site had been hidden from sight by a massive parallelepiped of brick. The four old gravestones are presumed to have been removed prior to that and made part of the newer construction’s rear wall mounted vertically. Nowadays one can indeed see the top parts of four very small tombstones; the bottom part of a few is beneath the ground, rendering the respective epitaphs illegible (see figs. 14.61, 14.62 and 14.63). By the way, the epitaphs are ostensibly damaged; also, the tombstones are truly minute, nothing remotely resembling massive sarcophagus lids. What was written on the authentic large sarcophagus lids that are presumably buried under the Romanovian construction? Are they still intact?

Fig. 14.60. Sepulchre declared to be the last resting place of the Godunov family. The Troitse-Sergiyev Monastery, town of Sergiyev Posad. Taken from [304], Volume 3, p. 248.

Fig. 14.61. The first two headstones from the alleged sepulchre of the Godunovs. Photograph taken in 1997.

Figs. 14.62 and 14.63. The third and fourth headstones from the alleged sepulchre of the Godunovs. Photographs taken in 1997.

This burial ground is rather bizarre in a number of ways. Today the “Crypt of the Godunovs” is located outside the Ouspenskiy Cathedral, at a considerable distance from the cathedral’s walls. The guide explained to us that the crypt had formerly been part of the cathedral’s ground floor, and then “mysteriously ended up” far away from it after the alleged reconstruction of the Ouspenskiy Cathedral. Our opponents might try to accuse the guide of being mistaken – this is possible, but not very likely, since guides in places like the Troitse-Sergiyev monastery are qualified specialists as a rule. We have unfortunately had no opportunity of verifying this information with any written source.

The above implies that the cathedral has somehow “shrunk” or “relocated.” Also, the ground floor of the Ouspenskiy cathedral is located notably higher than the “Godunovian crypt.” In order to enter the Ouspenskiy cathedral nowadays, one must ascend a rather long staircase. How can it be that the “Crypt of the Godunovs,” which had allegedly been situated on the first floor of the cathedral, could have sunk a few metres and still remained above the ground?

We are of the opinion that all these fantasy explanations date from the XVIII century, when the Romanovs were removing the traces of some shady activity around the crypt of the Godunovs. Our hypothesis is simple – the cathedral certainly didn’t shrink or move; it remains in its initial condition, apart from several minor changes. As for the real crypt that had once been inside the cathedral and belonged to the Godunovs or someone else, it appears to have been destroyed by the Romanovs, or walled over so as to hide it from sight. Then a simulacrum “Crypt of the Godunovs” was built on a plot of land nearby, which isn’t quite as elevated as the basement of the cathedral due to certain idiosyncrasies of the local terrain. Someone may even be buried underneath to make the crypt look real; should any researchers ever want to conduct excavations here, they’ll find “authentic bones of the Godunovs.”

In August 2001 A. T. Fomenko and T. N. Fomenko visited the Ipatyevskiy monastery of Kostroma. According to the official version as carried across by the guide, the monastery had belonged to the Godunovs initially, and the Romanovs only got hold of it after the Great Strife, when their usurpation attempts had finally succeeded, making it their very own dynastic holy place. It is also for this very reason that the construction of the memorial complex designed to commemorate the 300th anniversary of the Romanovian dynasty, complete with 18 bronze figures of the Czars that had actually comprised the dynasty. This memorial has never been erected, although a large number of test castings in bronze have been made. Many representatives of the Godunovs were buried in the Ipatyevskiy monastery – sixty males; furthermore, there have also been females buried here. However, modern guides tell us that in the XVII century the main cathedral of the Ipatyevskiy Monastery “suddenly exploded” – it is presumed that gunpowder had been stored in its basements for a long time, and that the gigantic cathedral blew up as a result of somebody’s criminal negligence. The Romanovs have then erected a new cathedral upon that site as a token of deference. This is the official version that the guides tell to the visitors, also trying to convey implicitly that the Godunovs themselves may be to blame for leaving the gunpowder in the basement. The explosion that destroyed the cathedral many decades later, under the Romanovs, must have been purely accidental. In general, the visitors are advised against putting too much effort into the attempts to find out the truth – they are presumably bound to be futile from the very start due to the passage of too many centuries.

Nowadays there are less than a dozen graves left in the Ipatyevskiy monastery that date from the Godunovian epoch. Some of them aren’t attributed to anyone in particular, since the epitaphs on the cracked tombstones are damaged beyond legibility in most cases (see figs. 14.63a, 14.63b and 14.63c. It is interesting that one of the stone sarcophagi is anthropomorphic, or has the shape of a human body (see fig. 14.63d) – the same shape as used in Egypt. However, we see no inscriptions on the sarcophagus; the lid is also missing.

Fig. 14.63a. Lettering on a headstone of the Godunovian epoch; its condition is very poor indeed. The Troitskiy Cathedral of the Ipatyevskiy Monastery in Kostroma. Photograph taken by T. N. Fomenko in August 2001.

Fig. 14.63b. Semi-obliterated lettering on a headstone of the Godunovian epoch. The Troitskiy Cathedral of the Ipatyevskiy Monastery in Kostroma. Photograph taken by T. N. Fomenko in August 2001.

Fig. 14.63c. Headstone of the Godunovian epoch. Sans artwork; no lettering has survived, either. The Troitskiy Cathedral of the Ipatyevskiy Monastery in Kostroma. Photograph taken by the authors in August 2001.

Fig. 14.63d. Anthropomorphic stone sarcophagus of the Godunovian epoch. The Troitskiy Cathedral of the Ipatyevskiy Monastery in Kostroma. These sarcophagi greatly resemble the ones discovered in Egypt. Photograph taken by the authors in August 2001.

This fact fits perfectly well into the series of other “oddities” that accompany the entire history of the Romanovian “restoration” and “renovation works” wreaked upon the ancient Russian cathedrals in the XVII century. Above, in Chapter 5, we mentioned the Muscovite churches that were completely gutted at the order of the Romanovs – this devastation didn’t spare the cathedrals of the Muscovite Kremlin, either. As we can see, a similar process had taken place in other Russian towns and cities. Some of the “Mongolian” cathedrals dating back from the epoch of the Horde were blown up – presumably accidentally. New cathedrals were then built on the old sites; those were said to emulate their predecessors. The realisation that the Romanovs had really accomplished a large-scale destruction and falsification campaign, replacing the true history of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire with the fictitious version of Miller and Scaliger, is only dawning upon us today. Apparently, the making of “correct history” had necessitated gunpowder kegs as a primary ingredient. A similar disaster befell the remaining authentic artefacts from the epoch of the Horde in the 1930’s (this time learned historians used dynamite).

A propos, it is most spectacular how the explosion of the cathedral under the Romanovs was referred to in the official museum guidebook of the “Crypt of the Boyars Godunov in the Ipatyevskiy Monastery of Kostroma” that was hanging on a wall of the crypt in August 2001. The guidebook said the following: “In 1650-1652 the Troitskiy Cathedral was reconstructed and made much larger.” Destruction via explosion most aptly transforms into a “reconstruction.”

We can once again sense the very same temporal boundary as we have already encountered – the epoch of the XVII century that separates Romanovian history from the ancient “Mongolian” history of Russia as the Horde. It is exceptionally difficult to penetrate the barrier of the XVII century, since very few true archaeological artefacts that would date from the XVI century and earlier have survived until our day and age. Old imperial cathedrals and buildings have been destroyed in most of the Empire’s former Western colonies as well. However, the reformers that came to power in the Western Europe around the XVII-XVIII century decided to keep the old architectural style of the “Mongolian” temples, merely proclaiming it to be mind-bogglingly old and theirs originally, q.v. in Chapter 6. Nowadays the visitors from abroad compassionately remark about how few truly old historical artefacts survived in Russia – there must never have been anything truly monumental over here, unlike the enlightened and ancient Western Europe.

14.

The modern location of Astrakhan differs from that of the old Tartar Astrakhan, which the Romanovs appear to have razed out of existence

Let us consider the City-Building in the Muscovite State of the XVI-XVII Century ([190]). In particular, this book relates the history of Astrakhan. We learn of an amazing fact that isn’t really known to the general public. The old city of Astrakhan (formerly known as the Tartar Tsitrakhan) had been a famous city of traders on the right bank of the Volga ([190], page 87). “In the XV century the location of the city at the crossroads of nautical trading routes and roads favoured by the caravan made Astrakhan grow into a trade centre of great prominence” ([190], page 87). The modern city of Astrakhan, or the alleged heir of the Tartar Astrakhan, is usually presumed to stand on the same site as its historical predecessor. However, this is wrong – modern Astrakhan lies nine verst further down the Volga; moreover, it is on the left bank and not the right. Why would this be? When did the Tartar city of Astrakhan relocate to a new site on the opposite coast of the Volga, transforming into the Russian Astrakhan, and how did it happen? The history of this transfer is perfectly amazing, and reveals a few interesting historical facts.

It is presumed that in 1556 the Russian troops took the Tartar city of Astrakhan by storm. The Romanovian version of the Russian history suggests that Astrakhan was joined to the Kingdom of Moscow as a result. Presumably, the military leader I. S. Cheremisinov “was finding it hard to be in control of a city that stands in the middle of an open steppe” ([190], page 87). One wonders about the Tartars, who had presumably retained the city in their hands for centuries before that. Cheremisinov made arrangements with the Muscovite authorities for a transfer of the city to its current location on the other bank of the Volga, nine verst downstream, no less. In 1558 a citadel was erected here, and a new city was built around it in a relatively short time, also called Astrakhan. It is further reported that after Cheremisinov had settled on the new site, “he gave orders for the entire Tartar Tsitrakhan to be demolished” ([190], page 87).

And so, the old Tartar city of Astrakhan simply became demolished. The name has been used for referring to a new city built in a different location ever since. One might wonder whether these events could indeed have taken place in the XVI century and not the XVII, when the Romanovs were busy re-writing history and crushing all those who identified themselves with the Horde in one way or another. The Astrakhan episode reveals the scale of their activities – as we see it isn’t just artwork in the old cathedrals of the Kremlin that became destroyed; the Romanovs would wipe out whole cities, stopping at nothing.

In fig. 14.64 one sees the drawing of the Citadel and the White Castle of Astrakhan made in the XVII century by A. Olearius.

Fig. 14.64. A view of the Astrakhan citadel and the Byeliy Gorod on an old engraving of the XVII century from the book of A. Olearius. Taken from [190], page 91; see also [615].

15.

The reasons why the Romanovian administration would have to destroy hundreds of maps compiled by the Russian cartographer Ivan Kirillov

One wonders whether the name of Ivan Kirillov, the Russian cartographer of the XVIII century, is known to many people nowadays. This is highly unlikely. However, it would be very apropos to mention him now, as well as certain rather unexpected facts that concern him and Russian history. The fate of the maps compiled by Ivan Kirillov is most illustrative indeed, and we’re only beginning to understand its real meaning nowadays. We shall use the reference to Ivan Kirillov contained in the fundamental work ([1459]).

This book describes 282 mediaeval maps from the exposition of 1952 (Baltimore Museum of Art, USA), many of which have also been photographed.

Among others, there was a Russian map of Ivan Kirillov up for exhibition: “Imperii Russici tabula generalis quo ad fieri potuit accuratissime descripta opera e studio Inoannis Kyrillow. Supremi Senatus Imperii Russici Primi Secretarii Petropoli. Anno MDCCXXXIV. St. Petersburg, 1734.”

One must note that the map in question wasn’t reproduced anywhere in [1459]. This fact alone wouldn’t be worthy of mentioning it explicitly, since the book ([1459]) does by no means reproduce all the maps that it describes – only 59 of 282 come with photographs. Yet the history of this map is so odd that its absence from [1459] becomes conspicuous; such a map would definitely be worthy of reproducing it. We shall explain why.

The American authors and organisers of the exhibition report the following amazing facts about the map in question:

“This is the first general map of Russia that had been engraved and printed, but apparently banned. Ivan Kirillov … made a career in the State Chancellery, where he had occupied the position of an ‘expert in [topographical] terrain reconnaissance.’ When Peter the Great decided to compile an exhaustive map of his domain, he put Kirillov in charge of the project. The latter had soon made the discovery that the people around them were recruited from abroad (France and Germany) for their knowledge of astronomy and ability to apply it to geodesic descriptions. Due to the governmental resistance that his plans invariably met and the fact that the authorities had clearly favoured the foreigners, Kirillov had to be particularly insistent about the compilation and publication of a detailed series of maps. The entire work contained three volumes of 120 pages each and included the abovementioned general map of the empire. The Imperial Academy banned Kirillov’s atlas, mysteriously managed to get rid of the printing plates and published an atlas of its own in 1745… Only two copies of Kirillov’s atlas are known, one of them with defects. All prints made from the original plates are extremely rare” ([1459], page 174).

In the next section the authors of [1459] describe the atlas published by the Imperial Academy, making the following satisfied remark: “Although this atlas had not been the first Russian atlas in existence, it was much more exhaustive and scientifically accurate than the atlas of Ivan Kirillov” ([1459], page 175). This official “Romanovian atlas” was published in 1745, eleven years later than the atlas of Kirillov – more than a decade of hard work.

We haven’t seen all of the surviving maps of Ivan Kirillov, and therefore cannot judge their quality or the “scientific inaccuracies” that they presumably contained. The sly word “inaccuracies” is most likely to indicate that Kirillov’s atlas had retained some geographical traces of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire, which had precluded the Romanovian historians from erecting their edifice of “authorised history.” This strange destruction leads us to some thoughts. At any rate, it is obvious that the 360 maps made by Ivan Kirillov must have really irritated the foreign and imperial cartographers of the Romanovs, because the entire volume of work was wiped out of existence. Were they destroying the last traces of Russia as the Horde?

The reasons are perfectly clear – the maps must have explicitly depicted Muscovite Tartary with a capital in Tobolsk, and the Romanovs must have wanted to eliminate every chance of their publication by anyone. According to our reconstruction, the gigantic Muscovite Tartary had remained an independent Russian state that had remained the heir of the Horde up until the defeat of “Pougachev,” and a hostile one at that.

One must point out that Ivan Kirillov had by no means been an obscure cartographer. He had occupied the position of the Senate’s Ober-Secretary ([90], page 172), or one of the highest government offices in the Romanovian administration.

Historians report that in 1727 “I. K. Kirillov became the Ober-Secretary of the Senate and the Secretary of the Commerce Commission, having thus become one of the leading government officials in Russia … He had possessed extensive knowledge of geography, mathematics, physics, history and astronomy” ([90], page 202). One must think that the decision to destroy the work of his lifetime, a collection of 360 maps, had required a direct order of the Imperial court. This is by no means a case of “negligence” – the Romanovs must have really been unsettled with something, if they even destroyed the printing plates.

The modern author of [90] makes a passing reference to the 360 maps of Kirillov and his Atlas as he tells us about Russian works on geography; however, for some reason he totally fails to mention that these maps have been destroyed by the Romanovs, several hundred of them altogether, and only makes the cautious observation that “Kirillov managed to publish, or at least prepare for publication, 37 maps or more, 28 of which have reached our day” ([90], page 202). He is either unaware of the destruction, reluctant to mention it or trying to imply that Kirillov had “really strived” to compile his main maps, but didn’t live long enough.

Only several printed copies of maps from Kirillov’s Atlas survived, quite by chance; however, it becomes perfectly unclear nowadays whether these maps are in fact authentic.

The only map that we can see nowadays bears the proud name of the “General Map of the Russian Empire” and is presumed to be the original of 1734 ([1160], page 217); see fig. 14.65). Let us doubt its authenticity for the simple reason that all the names in the map are in Latin, q.v. in fig. 14.66 (apart from the explanations in the top left and the bottom left corner, which are both in Russian).

Fig. 14.65. Map ascribed to the Russian cartographer Ivan Kirillov entitled “The General Map of the Russian Empire.” It is presented as a 1734 original to us today. Taken from [1160], page 217.

Fig. 14.66. Fragment of the “General Map of the Russian Empire” (ascribed to Ivan Kirillov), a close-in. However, all the names on the map are in Latin and not in Russian. Taken from [1160], page 217.

Our opponents might suggest that the Russians had always possessed a slavish mentality, hence the custom to use Latin for the maps of the Russian Empire drawn for the Russian Emperors, who are said to have been in utter awe of the enlightened Europe, despising their own language. Indeed, after the usurpation of the Russian throne by the pro-Western Romanovian dynasty in XVII, Russia fell under a great foreign influence (see more details in Chron7). On the other hand, the world map compiled by the Russian cartographer Vassily Kiprianov had been made for Peter the Great as well, and all the names upon it are in Russian ([90], pages 206-207). It is therefore highly unlikely that Kirillov’s General Map of the Russian Empire had been in Latin – the cartographer must have used the Russian language; however, the hoaxers of a later epoch who had destroyed the authentic Russian maps of Kirillov to hide all traces of their criminal activity simply took some Western map of Russia in Latin and proclaimed it to have been compiled by Kirillov.

One must note that the state of Muscovite Tartary is altogether missing from the General Map of the Russian Empire with Latin names, allegedly compiled by Ivan Kirillov in 1734 – there is no such name anywhere on the map (see fig. 14.65). Nevertheless, the world map compiled by the cartographers of the Encyclopaedia Britannica in 1771, 37 years later than “Kirillov’s map,” doesn’t simply contain a map of the Muscovite Tartary with a capital in Tobolsk, but also claims it to be the largest state in the world ([1118], Volume 2, page 683).

16.

Braids worn by all inhabitants of Novgorod regardless of sex

The famous icon entitled “The Praying People of Novgorod” dating from the XV century depicts a large number of Novgorod’s populace, male and female, dressed in traditional Russian clothing. It is quite spectacular that all of them wear their hair in braids (see fig. 14.67 and 14.68). Men are depicted with beards and braided hair; we also see the names of the people.

Fig. 14.67. Fragment of an old Russian icon portraying the people of Novgorod. They all wear their hair in braids. Taken from [636], flyleaf.

Fig. 14.68. Fragment of the icon; a close-in. Ioakov and Stefan of Novgorod, with braided hair. Their names are written on the icon. Taken from [636], flyleaf.

This icon tells us unequivocally that all the Russians had once customarily worn braids, women as well as men.

What mainstream historians say about the New Chronology?

The New Chronology is a fringe theory regarded by the academic community as pseudohistory, which argues that the conventional chronology of Middle Eastern and European history is fundamentally flawed, and that events attributed to the civilizations of the Roman Empire, Ancient Greece and Ancient Egypt actually occurred during the Middle Ages, more than a thousand years later. The central concepts of the New Chronology are derived from the ideas of Russian scholar Nikolai Morozov (1854-1946), although work by French scholar Jean Hardouin (1646-1729) can be viewed as an earlier predecessor. However, the New Chronology is most commonly associated with Russian mathematician Anatoly Fomenko (b. 1945), although published works on the subject are actually a collaboration between Fomenko and several other mathematicians. The concept is most fully explained in History: Fiction or Science? book series, originally published in Russian.

The New Chronology also contains a reconstruction, an alternative chronology, radically shorter than the standard historical timeline, because all ancient history is “folded” onto the Middle Ages. According to Fomenko’s claims, the written history of humankind goes only as far back as AD 800, there is almost no information about events between AD 800–1000, and most known historical events took place in AD 1000–1500.

The New Chronology is rejected by mainstream historians and is inconsistent with absolute and relative dating techniques used in the wider scholarly community. The majority of scientific commentators consider the New Chronology to be pseudoscientific.

History of New Chronology

The idea of chronologies that differ from the conventional chronology can be traced back to at least the early XVII century. Jean Hardouinthen suggested that many ancient historical documents were much younger than commonly believed to be. In 1685 he published a version of Pliny the Elder’s Natural History in which he claimed that most Greek and Roman texts had been forged by Benedictine monks. When later questioned on these results, Hardouin stated that he would reveal the monks’ reasons in a letter to be revealed only after his death. The executors of his estate were unable to find such a document among his posthumous papers. In the XVII century, Sir Isaac Newton, examining the current chronology of Ancient Greece, Ancient Egypt and the Ancient Near East, expressed discontent with prevailing theories and proposed one of his own, which, basing its study on Apollonius of Rhodes’s Argonautica, changed the traditional dating of the Argonautic Expedition, the Trojan War, and the Founding of Rome.

In 1887, Edwin Johnson expressed the opinion that early Christian history was largely invented or corrupted in the II and III centuries.

In 1909, Otto Rank made note of duplications in literary history of a variety of cultures:

“… almost all important civilized peoples have early woven myths around and glorified in poetry their heroes, mythical kings and princes, founders of religions, of dynasties, empires and cities—in short, their national heroes. Especially the history of their birth and of their early years is furnished with phantastic [sic] traits; the amazing similarity, nay literal identity, of those tales, even if they refer to different, completely independent peoples, sometimes geographically far removed from one another, is well known and has struck many an investigator.” (Rank, Otto. Der Mythos von der Geburt des Helden.)

Fomenko became interested in Morozov’s theories in 1973. In 1980, together with a few colleagues from the mathematics department of Moscow State University, he published several articles on “new mathematical methods in history” in peer-reviewed journals. The articles stirred a lot of controversy, but ultimately Fomenko failed to win any respected historians to his side. By the early 1990s, Fomenko shifted his focus from trying to convince the scientific community via peer-reviewed publications to publishing books. Beam writes that Fomenko and his colleagues were discovered by the Soviet scientific press in the early 1980s, leading to “a brief period of renown”; a contemporary review from the journal Questions of History complained, “Their constructions have nothing in common with Marxist historical science.” (Alex Beam. “A shorter history of civilization.” Boston Globe, 16 September 1991.)

By 1996, his theory had grown to cover Russia, Turkey, China, Europe, and Egypt [Emp:1].

Fomenko’s claims

According to New Chronology, the traditional chronology consists of four overlapping copies of the “true” chronology shifted back in time by significant intervals with some further revisions. Fomenko claims all events and characters conventionally dated earlier than XI century are fictional, and represent “phantom reflections” of actual Middle Ages events and characters, brought about by intentional or accidental misdatings of historical documents. Before the invention of printing, accounts of the same events by different eyewitnesses were sometimes retold several times before being written down, then often went through multiple rounds of translating and copyediting. Names were translated, mispronounced and misspelled to the point where they bore little resemblance to originals.

According to Fomenko, this led early chronologists to believe or choose to believe that those accounts described different events and even different countries and time periods. Fomenko justifies this approach by the fact that, in many cases, the original documents are simply not available. Fomenko claims that all the history of the ancient world is known to us from manuscripts that date from the XV century to the XVIII century, but describe events that allegedly happened thousands of years before, the originals regrettably and conveniently lost.

For example, the oldest extant manuscripts of monumental treatises on Ancient Roman and Greek history, such as Annals and Histories, are conventionally dated c. AD 1100, more than a full millennium after the events they describe, and they did not come to scholars’ attention until the XV century. According to Fomenko, the XV century is probably when these documents were first written.

Central to Fomenko’s New Chronology is his claim of the existence of a vast Slav-Turk empire, which he called the “Russian Horde”, which he says played the dominant role in Eurasian history before the XVII century. The various peoples identified in ancient and medieval history, from the Scythians, Huns, Goths and Bulgars, through the Polyane, Duleby, Drevliane, Pechenegs, to in more recent times, the Cossacks, Ukrainians, and Belarusians, are nothing but elements of the single Russian Horde. For the New Chronologists, peoples such as the Ukrainians, Belarusians, Mongols, and others who assert their national independence from Russia, are suffering from a historical delusion.

Fomenko claims that the most probable prototype of the historical Jesus was Andronikos I Komnenos (allegedly AD 1152 to 1185), the emperor of Byzantium, known for his failed reforms; his traits and deeds reflected in ‘biographies’ of many real and imaginary persons (A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. Czar of the Slavs (in Russian). St. Petersburg: Neva, 2004.). The historical Jesus is a composite figure and reflection of the Old Testament prophet Elisha (850-800 BC?), Pope Gregory VII (1020?-1085), Saint Basil of Caesarea (330-379), and even Li Yuanhao (also known as Emperor Jingzong, or “Son of Heaven”, emperor of Western Xia, who reigned in 1032-1048), Euclides, Bacchus and Dionysius. Fomenko explains the seemingly vast differences in the biographies of these figures as resulting from difference in languages, points of view and time frame of the authors of said accounts and biographies.

Fomenko also merges the cities and histories of Jerusalem, Rome and Troy into “New Rome” = Gospel Jerusalem (in the XII and XIII centuries) = Troy = Yoros Castle (A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. Forgotten Jerusalem: Istanbul in the light of New Chronology (in Russian). Мoscow: Astrel, AST, 2007). To the south of Yoros Castle is Joshua’s Hill which Fomenko alleges is the hill Calvary depicted in the Bible.

Fomenko claims the Hagia Sophia is actually the biblical Temple of Solomon. He identifies Solomon as sultan Suleiman the Magnificent (1494–1566). He claims that historical Jesus may have been born in 1152 and was crucified around AD 1185 on the hill overlooking the Bosphorus.

On the other hand, according to Fomenko the word “Rome” is a placeholder and can signify any one of several different cities and kingdoms. He claims the “First Rome”, or “Ancient Rome”, or “Mizraim”, is an ancient Egyptian kingdom in the delta of the Nile with its capital in Alexandria. The second and most famous “New Rome” is Constantinople. The third “Rome” is constituted by three different cities: Constantinople (again), Rome in Italy, and Moscow. According to his claims, Rome in Italy was founded around AD 1380 by Aeneas, and Moscow as the third Rome was the capital of the great “Russian Horde.” Similarly, the word “Jerusalem” is actually a placeholder rather than a physical location and can refer to different cities at different times and the word “Israel” did not define a state, even not a territory, but people fighting for God, for example, French St. Louis and English Elizabeth called themselves the King/Queen of Israel.

He claims that parallelism between John the Baptist, Jesus, and Old Testament prophets implies that the New Testament was written before the Old Testament. Fomenko claims that the Bible was being written until the Council of Trent (1545–1563), when the list of canonical books was established, and all apocryphal books were ordered to be destroyed. Fomenko also claims that Plato, Plotinus and Gemistus Pletho are one and the same person; according to him, some texts by or about Pletho were misdated and today believed to be texts by or about Plotinus or Plato. He claims similar duplicates Dionysius the Areopagite, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, and Dionysius Petavius. He claims Florence and the House of Medici bankrolled and played an important role in creation of the magnificent ‘Roman’ and ‘Greek’ past.

Specific claims

In volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4 of History: Fiction or Science?, Fomenko and his colleagues make numerous claims:

- Historians and translators often “assign” different dates and locations to different accounts of the same historical events, creating multiple “phantom copies” of these events. These “phantom copies” are often misdated by centuries or even millennia and end up incorporated into conventional chronology.

- This chronology was largely manufactured by Joseph Justus Scaliger in Opus Novum de emendatione temporum (1583) and Thesaurum temporum (1606), and represents a vast array of dates produced without any justification whatsoever, containing the repeating sequences of dates with shifts equal to multiples of the major cabbalistic numbers 333 and 360. The Jesuit Dionysius Petavius completed this chronology in De Doctrina Temporum, 1627 (v.1) and 1632 (v.2).

- Archaeological dating, dendrochronological dating, paleographical dating, numismatic dating, carbon dating, and other methods of dating of ancient sources and artifacts known today are erroneous, non-exact or dependent on traditional chronology.

- No single document in existence can be reliably dated earlier than the XI century. Most “ancient” artifacts may find other than consensual explanation.

- Histories of Ancient Rome, Greece and Egypt were crafted during the Renaissance by humanists and clergy - mostly on the basis of documents of their own making.

- The Old Testament represents a rendition of events of the XIV to XVI centuries AD in Europe and Byzantium, containing “prophecies” about “future” events related in the New Testament, a rendition of events of AD 1152 to 1185.

- The history of religions runs as follows: the pre-Christian period (before the XI century and the birth of Jesus), Bacchic Christianity (XI and XII centuries, before and after the life of Jesus), Christianity (XII to XVI centuries) and its subsequent mutations into Orthodox Christianity, Catholicism, Judaism, and Islam.

- The Almagest of Claudius Ptolemy, traditionally dated to around AD 150 and considered the cornerstone of classical history, was compiled in XVI and XVII centuries from astronomical data of the IX to XVI centuries.

- 37 complete Egyptian horoscopes found in Denderah, Esna, and other temples have unique valid astronomical solutions with dates ranging from AD 1000 and up to as late as AD 1700.

- The Book of Revelation, as we know it, contains a horoscope, dated to 25 September - 10 October 1486, compiled by cabbalistJohannes Reuchlin.

- The horoscopes found in Sumerian/Babylonian tablets do not contain sufficient astronomical data; consequently, they have solutions every 30–50 years on the time axis and are therefore useless for purposes of dating.

- The Chinese tables of eclipses are useless for dating, as they contain too many eclipses that did not take place astronomically. Chinese tables of comets, even if true, cannot be used for dating.

- All major inventions like powder and guns, paper and print occurred in Europe in the period between the X and the XVI centuries.

- Ancient Roman and Greek statues, showing perfect command of the human anatomy, are fakes crafted in the Renaissance, when artists attained such command for the first time.

- There was no such thing as the Tartar and Mongol invasion followed by over two centuries of yoke and slavery, because the so-called “Tartars and Mongols” were the actual ancestors of the modern Russians, living in a bilingual state with Turkic spoken as freely as Russian. So, Russia and Turkey once formed parts of the same empire. This ancient Russian state was governed by a double structure of civil and military authorities and the hordes were actually professional armies with a tradition of lifelong conscription (the recruitment being the so-called “blood tax”). The Mongol “invasions” were punitive operations against the regions of the empire that attempted tax evasion. Tamerlane was probably a Russian warlord.

- Official Russian history is a blatant forgery concocted by a host of German scholars brought to Russia to legitimize the usurpingRomanov dynasty (1613-1917).

- Moscow was founded as late as the mid-XIV century. The battle of Kulikovo took place in Moscow.

- The tsar Ivan the Terrible represents a collation of no fewer than four rulers, representing two rival dynasties: the legitimate Godunov rulers and the ambitious Romanov upstarts.

- English history of AD 640–1040 and Byzantine history of AD 378–830 are reflections of the same late-medieval original.

Fomenko’s methods

Statistical correlation of texts

One of Fomenko’s simplest methods is statistical correlation of texts. His basic assumption is that a text which describes a sequence of events will devote more space to more important events (for example, a period of war or an unrest will have much more space devoted to than a period of peaceful, non-eventful years), and that this irregularity will remain visible in other descriptions of the period. For each analysed text, a function is devised which maps each year mentioned in the text with the number of pages (lines, letters) devoted in the text to its description (which could be zero). The function of the two texts are then compared. (Chron1, pp. 187–194.)

For example, Fomenko compares the contemporary history of Rome written by Titus Livius with a modern history of Rome written by Russian historian V. S. Sergeev, calculating that the two have high correlation, and thus that they describe the same period of history, which is undisputed. (Chron1, pp. 194–196.) He also compares modern texts, which describe different periods, and calculates low correlation, as expected. (Chron1, pp. 194–196.) However, when he compares, for example, the ancient history of Rome and the medieval history of Rome, he calculates a high correlation, and concludes that ancient history of Rome is a copy of medieval history of Rome, thus clashing with mainstream accounts.

Statistical correlation of dynasties

In a somewhat similar manner, Fomenko compares two dynasties of rulers using statistical methods. First, he creates a database of rulers, containing relevant information on each of them. Then, he creates “survey codes” for each pair of the rulers, which contain a number which describes degree of the match of each considered property of two rulers. For example, one of the properties is the way of death: if two rulers were both poisoned, they get value of +1 in their property of the way of death; if one ruler was poisoned and another killed in combat, they get -1; and if one was poisoned, and another died of illness, they get 0 (Fomenko claims there is possibility that chroniclers were not impartial and that different descriptions nonetheless describe the same person). An important property is the length of the rule. (Chron1, pp. 215–223.)

Sample Fomenko parallelism.

Fomenko lists a number of pairs of unrelated dynasties – for example, dynasties of kings of Israeland emperors of late Western Roman Empire (AD 300-476) – and claims that this method demonstrates correlations between their reigns. (Graphs which show just the length of the rule in the two dynasties are the most widely known; however, Fomenko’s conclusions are also based on other parameters, as described above.) He also claims that the regnal history from the XVII to XX centuries never shows correlation of “dynastic flows” with each other, therefore Fomenko insists history was multiplied and outstretched into imaginary antiquity to justify this or other “royal” pretensions.

Fomenko uses for the demonstration of correlation between the reigns exclusively the data from the Chronological Tables of J. Blair (Moscow, 1808-1809). Fomenko says that Blair’s tables are all the more valuable to us since they were compiled in an epoch adjacent to the time of Scaligerian chronology. According to Fomenko these tables contain clearer signs of “Scaligerite activity” which were subsequently buried under layers of paint and plaster by historians of the XIX and XX centuries.

Astronomical evidence

Fomenko examines astronomical events described in ancient texts and claims that the chronology is actually medieval. For example:

- He says the mysterious drop in the value of the lunar acceleration parameter D” (“a linear combination of the [angular] accelerations of the Earth and Moon”) between the years AD 700–1300, which the American astronomer Robert Newton had explained in terms of “non-gravitational” (i.e., tidal) forces. By eliminating those anomalous early eclipses the New Chronology produces a constant value of D” beginning around AD 1000. (Chron1, pp. pp.93-94, 105-6.)

- He associates initially the Star of Bethlehem with the AD 1140 (±20) supernova (now Crab Nebula) and the Crucifixion Eclipse with the total solar eclipse of AD 1170 (±20). He also believes that Crab Nebula supernova could not have exploded in AD 1054, but probably in AD 1153. He connects it with total eclipse of AD 1186. Moreover he holds in strong doubt the veracity of ancient Chinese astronomical data.

- He argues that the star catalog in the Almagest, ascribed to the Hellenistic astronomer Claudius Ptolemy, was compiled in the XV to XVI centuries AD. With this objective in sight he develops new methods of dating old stellar catalogues and claims that the Almagest is based on data collected between AD 600 and 1300, whereby the telluric obliquity is well taken into account.

- He refines and completes Morozov’s analysis of some ancient horoscopes, most notably, the so-called Dendera Zodiacs—two horoscopes drawn on the ceiling of the temple of Hathor—and comes to the conclusion that they correspond to either the XI or the XIII century AD. Moreover, in his History: Fiction or Science? series finale, he makes computer-aided dating of all 37 Egyptian horoscopes that contain sufficient astronomical data, and claims they all fit into XI to XIX century timeframe. Traditional history usually either interprets these horoscopes as belonging to the I century BC or suggests that they weren’t meant to match any date at all.

- In his final analysis of an eclipse triad described by the ancient Greek Thucydides in History of the Peloponnesian War, Fomenko dates the eclipses to AD 1039, 1046 and 1057. Because of the layered structure of the manuscript, he claims that Thucydides actually lived in medieval times and in describing the Peloponnesian War between the Spartans and Athenians he was actually describing the conflict between the medieval Navarrans and Catalans in Spain from AD 1374 to 1387.

- Fomenko claims that the abundance of dated astronomical records in cuneiform texts from Mesopotamia is of little use for dating of events, as the astronomical phenomena they describe recur cyclically every 30–40 years.

Rejection of common dating methods

On archaeological dating methods, Fomenko claims:

“Archaeological, dendrochronological, paleographical and carbon methods of dating of ancient sources and artifacts are both non-exact and contradictory, therefore there is not a single piece of firm written evidence or artifact that could be reliably and independently dated earlier than the XI century.” (Chron1.)

Dendrochronology is rejected with a claim that, for dating of objects much older than the oldest still living trees, it isn’t an absolute, but arelative dating method, and thus dependent on traditional chronology. Fomenko specifically points to a break of dendrochronological scales around AD 1000.

Fomenko also cites a number of cases where carbon dating of a series of objects of known age gave significantly different dates. He also alleges undue cooperation between physicists and archaeologists in obtaining the dates, since most radiocarbon dating labs only accept samples with an age estimate suggested by historians or archaeologists. Fomenko also claims that carbon dating over the range of AD 1 to 2000 is inaccurate because it has too many sources of error that are either guessed at or completely ignored, and that calibration is done with a statistically meaningless number of samples. Consequently, Fomenko concludes that carbon dating is not accurate enough to be used on historical scale.

Fomenko rejects numismatic dating as circular, being based on the traditional chronology, and points to cases of similar coins being minted in distant periods, unexplained long periods with no coins minted and cases of mismatch of numismatic dating with historical accounts. (Chron1, pp. 90-92.)

He fully agrees with absolute dating methods for clay tablets or coins like thermoluminescence dating, optically stimulated luminescence dating, archaeomagnetic, metallographic dating, but claims that their precision does not allow for comprehensive pinpointing on the time axis either.

Fomenko also condemns the common archaeological practice of submitting samples for dating accompanied with an estimate of the expected age. He claims that convergence of uncertainty in archaeological dating methods proves strictly nothing per se. Even if the sum S of probabilities of the veracity of event produced by N dating methods exceeds 1.00 it does not mean that the event has taken place with 100% probability.

Reception

Fomenko’s historical ideas have been universally rejected by mainstream scholars, who brand them as pseudoscience, but were popularized by former world chess champion Garry Kasparov. Billington writes that the theory “might have quietly blown away in the wind tunnels of academia” if not for Kasparov’s writing in support of it in the magazine Ogoniok. Kasparov met Fomenko during the 1990s, and found that Fomenko’s conclusions concerning certain subjects were identical to his own regarding the popular view (which is not the view of academics) that art and culture died during the Dark Ages and were not revived until the Renaissance. Kasparov also felt it illogical that the Romans and the Greeks living under the banner of Byzantium could fail to use the mounds of scientific knowledge left them by Ancient Greece and Rome, especially when it was of urgent military use. However, Kasparov does not support the reconstruction part of the New Chronology. Russian critics tended to see Fomenko’s New Chronology as “an embarrassment and a potent symbol of the depths to which the Russian academy and society have generally sunk … since the fall of Communism.” Western critics see his views as part of a renewed Russian imperial ideology, “keeping alive an imperial consciousness and secular messianism in Russia.”

In 2004 Anatoly Fomenko with his coauthor Gleb Nosovsky were awarded for their books on “New Chronology” the anti-prize of the Moscow International Book Fair called “Abzatz” (literally ‘paragraph’, a euphemism for a vulgar Russian word meaning disaster or fiasco) in the category “Esteemed nonsense” (“Pochotnaya bezgramota”) awarded for the worst book published in Russia.

Critics have accused Fomenko of altering the data to improve the fit with his ideas and have noted that he violates a key rule of statistics by selecting matches from the historical record which support his chronology, while ignoring those which do not, creating artificial, better-than-chance correlations, and that these practices undermine Fomenko’s statistical arguments. The new chronology was given a comprehensive critical analysis in a round table on “The ‘Myths’ of New Chronology” chaired by the dean of the department of history of Moscow State University in December 1999. One of the participants in that round table, the distinguished Russian archaeologist, Valentin Yanin, compared Fomenko’s work to “the sleight of hand trickery of a David Copperfield.” Linguist Andrey Zaliznyak argued that by using the Fomenko’s approaches one can “prove” any historical correspondence, for example, between Ancient Egyptian pharaohs and French kings.

James Billington, formerly professor of Russian history at Harvard and Princeton and currently the Librarian of Congress placed Fomenko’s work within the context of the political movement of Eurasianism, which sought to tie Russian history closely to that of its Asian neighbors. Billington describes Fomenko as ascribing the belief in past hostility between Russia and the Mongols to the influence of Western historians. Thus, by Fomenko’s chronology, “Russia and Turkey are parts of a previously single empire.” A French reviewer of Billington’s book noted approvingly his concern with the phantasmagorical conceptions of Fomenko about the global “new chronology.”

H.G. van Bueren, professor emeritus of astronomy at the University of Utrecht, concluded his scathing review of Fomenko’s work on the application of mathematics and astronomy to historical data as follows:

“It is surprising, to say the least, that a well-known (Dutch) publisher could produce an expensive book of such doubtful intellectual value, of which the only good word that can be said is that it contains an enormous amount of factual historical material, untidily ordered, true; badly written, yes; mixed-up with conjectural nonsense, sure; but still, much useful stuff. For the rest of the book is absolutely worthless. It reminds one of the early Soviet attempts to produce tendentious science (Lysenko!), of polywater, of cold fusion, and of modern creationism. In brief: a useless and misleading book.” (H. G. van Bueren, Mathematics and Logic.)

Convergence of methods in archaeological dating

While Fomenko rejects commonly accepted dating methods, archaeologists, conservators and other scientists make extensive use of such techniques which have been rigorously examined and refined during decades of use.

In the specific case of dendrochronology, Fomenko claims that this fails as an absolute dating method because of gaps in the record. However, independent dendrochronological sequences beginning with living trees from various parts of North America and Europe extend back 12,400 years into the past. Furthermore, the mutual consistency of these independent dendrochronological sequences has been confirmed by comparing their radiocarbon and dendrochronological ages. These and other data have provided a calibration curve for radiocarbon dating whose internal error does not exceed ±163 years over the entire 26,000 years of the curve.

In fact, archaeologists have developed a fully anchored dendrochronology series going back past 10,000 BCE. “The absolutely dated tree-ring chronology now extends back to 12,410 cal BP (10,461 BC).”

Misuse of historical sources and forced pattern matching

Critics of Fomenko’s theory claim that his use of historical sources is highly selective and ignores the basic principles of sound historical scholarship.

“Fomenko … provides no fair-minded review of the historical literature about a topic with which he deals, quotes only those sources that serve his purposes, uses evidence in ways that seem strange to professionally-trained historians and asserts the wildest speculation as if it has the same status as the information common to the conventional historical literature.”

They also note that his method of statistically correlating of texts is very rough, because it does not take into account the many possible sources of variation in length outside of “importance.” They maintain that differences in language, style, and scope, as well as the frequently differing views and focuses of historians, which are manifested in a different notion of “important events”, make quantifying historical writings a dubious proposition at best. What’s more, Fomenko’s critics allege that the parallelisms he reports are often derived by alleged forcing by Fomenko of the data – rearranging, merging, and removing monarchs as needed to fit the pattern.

For example, on the one hand Fomenko asserts that the vast majority of ancient sources are either irreparably distorted duplicate accounts of the same events or later forgeries. In his identification of Jesus with Pope Gregory VII (Chron2, p. 51) he ignores the otherwise vast dissimilarities between their reported lives and focuses on the similarity of their appointment to religious office by baptism. (The evangelical Jesus is traditionally believed to have lived for 33 years, and he was an adult at the time of his encounter with John the Baptist. In contrast, according to the available primary sources, Pope Gregory VII lived for at least 60 years and was born 8 years after the death of Fomenko’s John-the-Baptist equivalent John Crescentius.)

Critics allege that many of the supposed correlations of regnal durations are the product of the selective parsing and blending of the dates, events, and individuals mentioned in the original text. Another point raised by critics is that Fomenko does not explain his altering the data (changing the order of rulers, dropping rulers, combining rulers, treating interregna as rulers, switching between theologians and emperors, etc.) preventing a duplication of the effort and effectively making this whole theory an ad hoc hypothesis.

Selectivity in reference to astronomical phenomena

Critics point out that Fomenko’s discussion of astronomical phenomena tends to be selective, choosing isolated examples that support the New Chronology and ignoring the large bodies of data that provide statistically supported evidence for the conventional dating. For his dating of the Almagest star catalog, Fomenko arbitrarily selected eight stars from the more than 1000 stars in the catalog, one of which (Arcturus) has a large systematic error. This star has a dominant effect on Fomenko’s dating. Statistical analysis using the same method for all “fast” stars points to the antiquity of the Almagest star catalog. Rawlins points out further that Fomenko’s statistical analysis got the wrong date for the Almagest because he took as constant Earth’s obliquity when it is a variable that changes at a very slow, but known, rate.

Fomenko’s studies ignore the abundance of dated astronomical records in cuneiform texts from Mesopotamia. Among these texts is a series of Babylonian astronomical diaries, which records precise astronomical observations of the Moon and planets, often dated in terms of the reigns of known historical figures extending back to the VI century BCE. Astronomical retrocalculations for all these moving objects allow us to date these observations, and consequently the rulers’ reigns, to within a single day. The observations are sufficiently redundant that only a small portion of them are sufficient to date a text to a unique year in the period 750 BCE to 100 CE. The dates obtained agree with the accepted chronology. In addition, F. R. Stephenson has demonstrated through a systematic study of a large number of Babylonian, Ancient and Medieval European, and Chinese records of eclipse observations that they can be dated consistently with conventional chronology at least as far back as 600 BCE. In contrast to Fomenko’s missing centuries, Stephenson’s studies of eclipse observations find an accumulated uncertainty in the timing of the rotation of the earth of 420 seconds at 400 BCE, and only 80 seconds at 1000 CE.

Magnitude and consistency of conspiracy theory

Fomenko claims that world history prior to 1600 was deliberately falsified for political reasons. The consequences of this conspiracy theory are twofold. Documents that conflict with New Chronology are said to have been edited or fabricated by conspirators (mostly Western European historians and humanists of late XVI to XVII centuries). The lack of documents directly supporting New Chronology and conflicting traditional history is said to be thanks to the majority of such documents being destroyed by the same conspirators.

Consequently, there are many thousands of documents that are considered authentic in traditional history, but not in New Chronology. Fomenko often uses “falsified” documents, which he dismisses in other contexts, to prove a point. For example, he analyzes the Tartar Relation and arrives at the conclusion that Mongolian capital of Karakorum was located in Central Russia (equated with present-day Yaroslavl). However, the Tartar Relation makes several statements that are at odds with New Chronology (such as that Batu Khan and Russian duke Yaroslav are two distinct people). Those are said by Fomenko to have been introduced into the original text by later editors.

Many of the rulers that Fomenko claims are medieval doppelgangers moved in the imaginary past have left behind vast numbers of coins. Numismatists have made innumerable identifications of coins to rulers known from ancient sources. For instance, several Roman emperors issued coinage featuring at least three of their names, consistent with those found in written sources, and there are frequent examples of joint coinage between known royal family members, as well as overstrikes by kings who were known enemies.

Ancient coins in Greek and Latin are unearthed to this day in vast quantities from Britain to India. For Fomenko’s theories to be correct, this could only be explained by counterfeit on a very grand and consistent scale, as well as a complete dismissal of all numismatic analyses of hoard findings, coin styles etc.

Popularity in forums and amongst Russian imperialists

Despite criticism, Fomenko has published and sold over one million copies of his books in his native Russia. Many internet forums have appeared which aim to supplement his work with additional amateur research. His critics have suggested that Fomenko’s version of history appealed to the Russian reading public by keeping alive an imperial consciousness to replace their disillusionment with the failures of Communism and post-Communist corporate oligarchies.

Alexander Zinoviev called the New Chronology “one of the major scientific breakthroughs of the XX century.”

(Wikipedia text retrieved on 2nd August, 2015)

Afterword from the publisher

Dr. Fomenko et al as scientists are ready to recognize their mistakes, to repent and to retract on the condition that:

- radiocarbon dating methods pass the black box tests, or

- astronomy refutes their results on ancient eclipses, or

- US astrophysicist Robert Newton was proved wrong to accuse Ptolemy of his crime.

At present, historians do not, can not, and will not comply. The radiocarbon dating labs run their very costly tests only if the sample to be dated is accompanied with an idea of age pronounced by historians on basis of … subjective … mmm … gutfeeling … and the history books they have been writing for the last 400 years. Radiocarbon labs politely bill for their fiddling and finetuning to get the dates “to order” of historians. Circulus vitiosus is perfect.

Overview of the seven-volume edition

History: Fiction or Science?

Chronology 1

A. T. Fomenko

Introducing the problem.

A criticism of the Scaligerian chronology.

Dating methods as offered by mathematical statistics.

Eclipses and zodiacs.

Chronology 2

A. T. Fomenko

The dynastic parallelism method.

Rome. Troy. Greece. The Bible.

Chronological shifts.

Chronology 3

A. T. Fomenko, T. N. Fomenko, V. V. Kalashnikov, G. V. Nosovskiy

Astronomical methods as applied to chronology.

Ptolemy’s Almagest. Tycho Brahe. Copernicus.

The Egyptian zodiacs.

Chronology 4

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy

Russia. Britain. Byzantium. Rome.

Chronology 5

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy

Russia = Horde. Ottomans = Atamans.

Europe. China. Japan.

The Etruscans. Egypt. Scandinavia.

Chronology 6

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy

The Horde-Ataman Empire.

The Bible. The Reformation.

America. Passover and the calendar.

Chronology 7

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy

A reconstruction of global history.

The Khans of Novgorod = The Habsburgs.

Miscellaneous information.

The legacy of the Great Empire in the history and culture of Eurasia and America.

This seven-volume edition is based on a number of our books that came out over the last couple of years and were concerned with the subject in question. All this gigantic body of material was revised and categorized; finally, its current form does not contain any of the repetitions that are inevitable in the publication of separate books. All of this resulted in the inclusion of a great number of additional material in the current edition – including previously unpublished data. The reader shall find a systematic rendition of detailed criticisms of the consensual (Scaligerian) chronology, the descriptions of the methods offered by mathematical statistics and natural sciences that the authors have discovered and researched, as well as the new hypothetical reconstruction of global history up until the XVIII century. Our previous books on the subject of chronology were created in the period of naissance and rather turbulent infancy of the new paradigm, full of complications and involved issues, which often resulted in the formulation of multi-optional hypotheses. The present edition pioneers in formulating a consecutive unified concept of the reconstruction of ancient history – one that apparently is supported by a truly immense body of evidence. Nevertheless, it is understandable that its elements may occasionally be in need of revision or elaboration.

A. T. Fomenko

Also by Anatoly T. Fomenko

(List non-exhaustive)

A. T. Fomenko. Differential Geometry and Topology. Plenum Publishing Corp., 1987. New York and London: Consultants Bureau.

A. T. Fomenko. Variational Principles of Topology. Multidimensional Minimal Surface Theory. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1990.

A. T. Fomenko. Topological variational problems. Gordon and Breach, 1991.

A. T. Fomenko. Integrability and Nonintegrability in Geometry and Mechanics. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1988.

A. T. Fomenko. The Plateau Problem. Vols. 1, 2. Gordon and Breach, 1990. (Studies in the Development of Modern Mathematics.)

A. T. Fomenko. Symplectic Geometry. Methods and Applications. Gordon and Breach, 1988. Second edition 1995.

A. T. Fomenko, Dao Chong Thi. Minimal Surfaces and Plateau Problem. American Mathematical Society, 1991.

A. T. Fomenko, V. V. Trofimov. Integrable Systems on Lie Algebras and Symmetric Spaces. Gordon and Breach, 1987.

A. T. Fomenko, A. A. Tuzhilin. Geometry of Minimal Surfaces in Three-Dimensional Space. (In: Translation of Mathematical Monographs, vol. 93. American Mathematical Society, 1991.

A. T. Fomenko. Topological Classification of Integrable Systems. Advances in Soviet Mathematics, vol. 6. American Mathematical Society, 1991.

A. T. Fomenko. Tensor and Vector Analysis: Geometry, Mechanics and Physics. Taylor and Francis, 1988.

A. T. Fomenko, S. V. Matveev. Algorithmic and Computer Methods for Three-Manifolds. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1997.

A. T. Fomenko, T. L. Kunii. Topological Modeling for Visualization. Springer-Verlag, 1997.

A. T. Fomenko, B. A. Dubrovin, S. P. Novikov. Modern Geometry. Methods and Applications. Springer-Verlag, GTM 93, Part 1, 1984; GTM 104, Part 2, 1985, GTM 124, Part 3, 1990.

A. T. Fomenko, S. P. Novikov. The basic elements of differential geometry and topology. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1990.

A. T. Fomenko, A. V. Bolsinov. Integrable Hamiltonian Systems: Geometry, Topology, Classification. Taylor and Francis, 2003.

A. T. Fomenko. Empirico-Statistical Analysis of Narrative Material and Its Applications to Historical Dating. (Vol. 1: The Development of the Statistical Tools. Vol. 2: The Analysis of Ancient and Medieval Records.) The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994.

A. T. Fomenko, V. V Kalashnikov, G. V. Nosovsky.Geometrical and Statistical Methods of Analysis of Star Configurations. Dating Ptolemy’s Almagest. USA: CRC Press, 1993.

A. T. Fomenko. New Methods of Statistical Analysis of Historical Texts. Applications to Chronology. Antiquity in the Middle Ages. Greek and Bible History. Vols. 1, 2, 3. USA, Lewiston, Queenston, Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1999.

A. T. Fomenko. Mathematical Impressions. American Mathematical Society, 1990.

Also by Gleb V. Nosovskiy

(List non-exhaustive)

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. On Calculating the Parent Structures in Shuffled Sequences. Vector and Tensor Analysis Seminar Works, Issue 22. Moscow: Moscow State University Publications, 1985.

G. V. Nosovskiy. Controlling the Diffusion Processes on an Edgeless Manifold. Science Candidate of Physics and Mathematics Dissertation. Moscow: Moscow University, 1988.

A. T. Fomenko, V. V. Kalashnikov, G. V. Nosovskiy. Geometrical and Statistical Methods of Analysis of Star Configurations. Dating Ptolemy’s Almagest. CRC Press, 1993. 300 pages.

G. V. Nosovskiy. Nonlinear Potentials Construction for Degenerate Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman Equations in Rd. In: Almanac Statistics and Control of Random Processes, Volume 5. Moscow: TVP, 1994.

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. The New Chronology and Conception of the Ancient History of Russia, Britain and Rome. Facts. Statistics. Hypotheses. Volumes 1 and 2. Moscow: Moscow State University Didactic and Scientific Centre of Pre-University Education, 1995.

A. T. Fomenko, V. V. Kalashnikov, G. V. Nosovskiy. Dating the Almagest Star Catalogue. Moscow: Faktorial, 1995.

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. The Empire. A New Mathematical Chronology of the Antiquity. Faktorial, Moscow, 1996.

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. Mathematico-Statistical Models of Information Distribution in Historical Chronicles. In: Mathematical Issues of Cybernetics, issue 6. Moscow: Nauka, Fizmatlit, 1996.

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. Mathematical Chronology of Biblical Events. Moscow: Nauka, 1997. 408 pages.

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. Biblical Russia. Russian Empire, or the Horde, and the Bible. A New Mathematical Chronology of the Antiquity. Volumes 1 and 2. Moscow: Faktorial, 1998.

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. An Introduction to the New Chronology. Moscow: Kraft, 1999.

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. A Reconstruction of Global History. New Chronology. Moscow: Delovoi Express, 1999.

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. A Reconstruction of Global History. The research of 1999-2000. Moscow: Delovoi Express, 2000.

A. T. Fomenko, V. V. Kalashnikov, G. V. Nosovskiy. Astronomical Analysis of Chronology. Moscow: Delovoi Express, 2000.

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. A New Chronology of Egypt. Astronomical Dating of Egyptian Zodiacs. Moscow: Veche, 2002 and 2003.

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. King of the Slavs. St. Petersburg: Neva, 2004.

A. T. Fomenko, G. V. Nosovskiy. A New Chronology of Russia: Russia, Britain, Byzantium and Rome. Moscow: RIMIS, 2004.

A. T. Fomenko, A. A. Golovanov, D. P. Ilyutko, G. V. Nosovskiy. Computer Geometry: A Textbook for University Students. Moscow: Akademiya Publishing Centre, 2006.

Bibliography

Separate books on the New Chronology

Prior to the publication of the seven-volume Chronology, we published a number of books on the same topic. If we are to disregard the paperbacks and the concise versions, as well as new re-editions, there are seven such books. Shortened versions of their names appear below:

1. Introduction.

2. Methods 1-2.

3. Methods 3.

4. The New Chronology of Russia, Britain and Rome.

5. The Empire.

6. The Biblical Russia.

7. Reconstruction.

• Book one. Introduction.

[Intro]:1. Fomenko, A. T. New Experimental Statistical Methods of Dating Ancient Events and their Application to the Global Classical and Mediaeval Chronology. Pre-print. Moscow, The State Television and Radio Broadcast Committee, 1981. Order #3672. Lit. 9/XI-81. No. BO7201, 100 p.

[Intro]:2. Fomenko, A. T. Some New Empirico-Statistical Methods of Dating and the Analysis of Present Global Chronology. London, The British Library, Department of Printed Books, 1981. Cup. 918/87. 100 p.

[Intro]3. Fomenko, A. T. A Criticism of the Traditional Chronology of the Classical Age and the Middle Ages (What Century Is It Now?). Essay. Moscow, Publishing House of the Moscow State University Department of Mechanical Mathematics, 1993. 204 p.

[Intro]:4. 2nd edition, revised and expanded. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. A Criticism of the Traditional Chronology of the Classical Age and the Middle Ages (What Century Is It Now?). Moscow, Kraft-Lean, 1999. 757 p. Kraft Publications released a concise version of this book in 2001. 487 p.

[Intro]:5. Another revision. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. What Century Is It Now? Moscow, AIF-Print Publications, 2002. 511 p.

• Book two, part one: Methods-1.

[Meth1]:1. Fomenko, A. T. The Methods of Statistical Analysis of Narrative Texts and their Chronological Applications. (The identification and dating of dependent texts, statistical chronology of the antiquity, as well as the statistics of ancient astronomical accounts.) Moscow, The MSU Publishing House, 1990. 439 p.

[Meth1]:2. 2nd revised edition came out in 1996 as The Methods Of Mathematical Analysis of Historical Texts. Chronological applications. Moscow, Nauka Publications, 1996. 475 p.

[Meth1]:3. Several chapters of the book came out in 1996, revised and extended, as a separate book: Fomenko, A. T. The New Chronology of Greece. Antiquity in the Middle Ages, Vols. 1 and 2. Moscow, MSU Centre of Research and Pre-University Education, 1996. 914 p.

[Meth1]:4. The English translation of the book, extended and revised to a large extent, was released under the following title: Fomenko, A. T. Empirico-Statistical Analysis of Narrative Material and its Applications to Historical Dating. Vol. 1, The Development of the Statistical Tools. Vol. 2, The Analysis of Ancient and Mediaeval Records. The Netherlands, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994. Vol. 1: 211 p. Vol. 2: 462 p.

[Meth1]:5. A Serbian translation titled Фоменко А. Т. Статистичка хронологиjа. Математички поглед на историjу. У ком смо веку? was published in 1997. Belgrade, Margo-Art, 1997. 450 p.

[Meth1]:6. The book was published in a revised and substantially extended version in 1999 as Volume 1 in a series of two: Fomenko, A. T. The Methods of Statistical Analysis of Historical Texts. Chronological Applications. Vol. 1. Moscow, Kraft and Lean, 1999. 801 p.

[Meth1]:7. A revised version of the book was published as two volumes (the first two in a series of three) in 1999 in the USA (in Russian) by the Edwin Mellen Press. Fomenko, A. T. New Methods of Statistical Analysis of Historical Texts. Applications to Chronology, Vols. 1 and 2. The publication is part of the series titled Scholarly Monographs in the Russian Language, Vols. 6-7. Lewiston, Queenston, Lampeter, The Edwin Mellen Press, 1999. Vol. 1: 588 p. Vol. 2: 564 p.

• Book two, part two: Methods-2.

[Meth2]:1. Fomenko, A. T. Global Chronology. (A Research of the Classical and Mediaeval History. Mathematical Methods of Source Analysis. Global Chronology.) Moscow, MSU Publications, 1993. 408 p.

[Meth2]:2. A revised and substantially extended version of the book as the second volume in a series of two: Fomenko, A. T. The Methods of Statistical Analysis of Historical Texts. Chronological Applications, Vol. 2. Moscow, Kraft and Lean, 1999. 907 p.

[Meth2]:3. A revised version of the book was published as the last volume in a series of three in the USA (in Russian) under the title: Fomenko A. T. Antiquity in the Middle Ages (Greek and Bible History), the trilogy bearing the general name: Fomenko A. T. New Methods of the Statistical Analysis of Historical Texts and their Chronological Application. The publication is part of the series titled Scholarly Monographs in the Russian Language. Lewiston, Queenston, Lampeter, The Edwin Mellen Press, 1999. 578 p.

• Book three: Methods-3.

[Meth3]:1. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G. V. Nosovskiy. Geometrical and Statistical Methods of Analysis of Star Configurations. Dating Ptolemy’s Almagest. USA: CRC Press, 1993. 300 p.

[Meth3]:2. The Russian version of the book was published in 1995 in Moscow by the Faktorial Publications under the title: Kalashnikov V. V., Nosovskiy G. V., Fomenko A. T. The Dating of the Almagest Star Catalogue. Statistical and Geometrical Analysis. 286 p.

[Meth3]:3. A substantially extended and revised version of the book: Kalashnikov, V. V., G. V. Nosovskiy, and A. T. Fomenko. The Astronomical Analysis of Chronology. The Almagest. Zodiacs. Moscow, The Delovoi Express Financial Publications, 2000. 895 p.

[Meth3]:4. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The New Chronology of Egypt. The Astronomical Dating of Ancient Egyptian Monuments. Research of 2000-2002. Moscow, Veche Press, 2002. 463 p.

• Book four: Russia, Britain and Rome.

[RBR]:1. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The New Chronology and Conception of the Ancient History of Russia, Britain, and Rome. Facts, Statistics, Hypotheses. Vol. 1, Russia. Vol. 2, Britain and Rome. Moscow, MSU Centre of Research and Pre-University Education. Two editions, 1995 and 1996. 672 p.

[RBR]:2. A somewhat adapted and revised version of the book came out in 1997: Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. Russia and Rome. How correct is our understanding of Eurasian history? Vols. 1 and 2. Moscow, Olymp Publications, 1997. 2nd edition 1999. The next three volumes from this series of five were published in 2001. Vol. 1: 606 p. Vol. 2: 621 p. Vol. 3: 540 p. Vol. 4: 490 p. Vol. 5: 394 p.

[RBR]:3. A revised version of the first volume was published in 1997 as a separate book: Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The New Chronology of Russia. Moscow, Faktorial Publications, 1997. Re-editions 1998 and 1999. 255 p.

[RBR]:4. A new, substantially extended and revised version of the first two-volume edition as a single volume: Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The New Chronology of Russia, Britain and Rome. Moscow, Anvik, 1999. 540 p.

[RBR]:5. A new revised version of this book came out as a single volume: Fomenko A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. Moscow, The Delovoi Express Financial Publications, 2001. 1015 p.

• Book five: The Empire.

[Emp]:1. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Empire (Russia, Turkey, China, Europe, Egypt. The New Mathematical Chronology of Antiquity). Moscow, Faktorial, 1996. Re-editions 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001 and 2002. 752 p.

• Book six: The Biblical Russia.

[BR]:1. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Mathematical Chronology of the Biblical Events. Moscow, Nauka Publications, 1997. 407 p.

[BR]:2. A substantially revised and extended version: Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Biblical Russia. The Empire of Horde-Russia and the Bible. The New Mathematical Chronology of Antiquity. Vols. 1 and 2. Moscow, Faktorial, 1998. Vol. 1: 687 p. Vol. 2: 582 p.

[BR]:3. A somewhat condensed version, which nevertheless contained some important new material: Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. Horde-Russia on the Pages of the Biblical Books. Moscow, Anvik Publications, 1998. 430 p.

[BR]:4. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Biblical Russia. Selected Chapters I (The Empire of Horde-Russia and the Bible. The New Mathematical Chronology of Antiquity. History of the Manuscripts and Editions of the Bible. The Events of the XI-XII Century A.D. in the New Testament. The Pentateuch.). Moscow, Faktorial, 1999. 173 p.

[BR]:5. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Biblical Russia. Selected Chapters II (The Empire of Horde-Russia and the Bible. The New Mathematical Chronology of Antiquity. History of the XIV-XVI Century in the Last Books of the Kings. The History of the XV-XVI Century in the Last Chapters of the Books of the Kings. History of the XV-XVI Century in the Books of Esther and Judith. The Reformation Epoch of the XVI-XVII Century). Moscow, Faktorial Press, 2000. 223 p.

• Book seven: Reconstruction.

[Rec]:1. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. A Reconstruction of Global History (The New Chronology). Book 1. Moscow, The Delovoi Express Financial Publishers, 1999. 735 p.

[Rec]:2. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. A Reconstruction of Global History. The Research of 1999-2000 (The New Chronology). Moscow, The Delovoi Express Financial Publishers, 1999. 615 p.

[Rec]:3. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. A Reconstruction of Global History. Joan of Arc, Samson, and the History of Russia. Moscow, The Delovoi Express Financial Publishers, 2002.

We have to point out that the publication of our books on the New Chronology has influenced a number of authors and their works where the new chronological concepts are discussed or developed. Some of these are: L. I. Bocharov, N. N. Yefimov, I. M. Chachukh, and I. Y. Chernyshov ([93]), Jordan Tabov ([827], [828]), A. Goutz ([220]), M. M. Postnikov ([680]), V. A. Nikerov ([579:1]), Heribert Illig ([1208]), Christian Blöss and Hans-Ulrich Niemitz ([1038], [1039]), Gunnar Heinsohn ([1185]), Gunnar Heinsohn and Heribert Illig ([1186]), Uwe Topper ([1462], [1463]).

Our research attracted sufficient attention to chronological issues for the Muscovite publishing house Kraft to print a new edition of the fundamental work of N. A. Morozov titled Christ, first published in 1924-1932.

Sources in Russian

[1]. Abalakin, V. K. The Essential Ephemeris Astronomy. Moscow, 1979.

[2]. Abbas, Shalabi. The Entire Egypt, from Cairo to Abu-Simbel and Sinai. 2nd extended Russian edition. Florence, Bonechi, 1996.

[2:1]. Avadyaeva, E., and L. Zdanovich. The Hundred Great Afflictions. Moscow, Veche, 1999.

[3]. Agathius. The Reign of Justinian. Moscow-Leningrad, USSR Academy of Sciences Publications, 1953. See also Agathius, Scholasticus. Agathiae Myrinaei Historiarum libri quinque. Berolini, 1967.

[4]. Mez, Adam. The Muslim Renaissance. Moscow, Nauka, 1966. German edition: Mez, A. Die Renaissance des Islams. Heidelberg, 1922.

[5]. Azarevich, D. I. The History of the Byzantine Law. Yaroslavl, 1876-1877.

[6]. Aydarova-Volkova, G. The Priceless Experience. A Cultural Dialogue. Looking Across the Centuries. The Kazan magazine, Issue 9-10 (1999): 13-21.

[7]. Acropolite, George. The Chronicle of the Great Logothete George Acropolite. St. Petersburg, 1863.

[8]. The Historical Acts Compiled and Published by the Archaeographical Commission. St. Petersburg, The State Document Preparation Expedition Typography. Vols. 1 and 2. 1841.

[9]. Nazarov, V. D., ed. The Acts of the State of Russia. Archives of the Muscovite Monasteries and Cathedrals. The XV – early XVII century. Moscow, The Ladomir Research and Publication Centre, 1998.

[10]. Alexandria. A Novel about Alexander the Great Based on a Russian Chronicle of the XV century. Moscow-Leningrad, Nauka, 1966.

[11]. Petrukhno, A. S., N. I. Shirinya, S. A. Gleybman, and O. V. Zavgorodniaya. Alexander’s Village (Alexandrovskaya Sloboda, or, literally, “The Freemen’s Village of Alexander”). An Album. The Russian Federation Ministry of Culture. City of Alexandrov. The State Museum of Art, History, and Architecture of Alexander’s Village. The City Council of the City of Alexandrov. 1996.

[12]. Alexander’s Village (Alexandrovskaya Sloboda). The materials of a scientific and practical conference. Vladimir, Golden Gate Publications, 1995.

[13]. Alexandrovsky, M. I. A Historical Reference Book for the Churches of Moscow. Moscow, The State Museum of History, Department of Visual Arts, the Architectural Graphics Fund, 1917 (with an additional written before 1942).

[14]. Alexeyev, M. P. On the Anglo-Russian Relations in the Time of Yaroslav the Wise. The Scientific Bulletin of the Leningrad State University (4, 1945): 31.

[15]. Alexeyev, Y. My Monarch Sent Me to the Sultan. The Rodina magazine, No. 2 (1997): 31-36.

[16]. Alessandro, Angelini. Piero della Francesca. The Great Italian Masters series. Moscow, Slovo, 1997. The Italian edition: Italy, Scala, Instituto Fotografico Editoriale, 1995.

[16:1]. [Altarpieces] Caterina Limentani Virdis and Mari Pietrogiovanna. Altarpieces. The Art of the Early Renaissance. Translated from Italian. Byely Gorod, 2002. Arsenale editrice, Italy, 2001.

[17]. The Alphabetic Syntagm of Matthew Vlastar. Translated from Greek by Rev. Nikolai Ilyinsky, a teacher from the Seminary School of Tauris. Simpheropol, 1892. A new edition: Moscow, Galaxy Publications, 1996.

[18]. Alberti, L. Leon Battista Alberti. A collection of essays. Moscow, the USSR Academy of Sciences, Nauka, 1977. Complete ed. Oxford, Phaidon, 1977.

[19]. Amalrik, A. S., and A. L. Mongayt. The Essential Archaeology. Moscow, Prosveshchenie, 1963.

[19:0]. [Amartoles, George]. Matveyenko, V., and L. Shchegoleva. The Chronicle of George the Monk. Russian text, comments, indications. Moscow, Bogorodskiy Pechatnik, 2000.

[19:1]. The catalogue of the exhibition 500 Years Since the Discovery of America. The Hermitage. Russian National Library. St. Petersburg, Slavia-Interbook, Inc., 1993.

[20]. Amousin, I. D. The Dead Sea Scrolls. Moscow, Nauka, 1960.

[21]. Amphitheatrov, A. Collected Works in 8 Volumes. Vol. 4. St. Petersburg, Prosveshchenie, 1911.

[22]. Anastasov, L. A New Direction in Science? Be careful! The Science and Technology magazine (Moscow), No. 8 (1983): 28-30.

[23]. Müller, V. K., comp. The English-Russian Dictionary. 70,000 words. Moscow, The State National and Foreign Dictionary Publishing House, 1961.

[24]. Andreyeva, V., V. Kuklev, and A. Rovner. An Encyclopedia of Symbols, Signs, and Emblems. Moscow, Lokid/Myth/Ad Marginem, 1999.

[25]. Anninskiy, S. A. The News of the Tartars in Europe Brought by the Hungarian Missionaries. Included in The Historical Archive, 71-112. Moscow-Leningrad, The RAS Institute of History, RAS Publications, 1940.

[26]. Antwerp and its Sights. Antwerp, Editions THILL S.A. Brussels, 1999. In Russian.

[27]. Antonov, A. V. Genealogical Murals of Late XVII Century. The Archaeographical Centre. The Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts. The Russian Historical Research, No. 6. Moscow, the Archaeographical Centre Publications.

[28]. Antonova, V. I., and N. E. Mneva. The Catalogue of Ancient Russian Art from the Tretyakov Gallery. Moscow, 1963. Vol. 1: p. 256; Vol 2: pp. 413 and 421.

[29]. The Apocryphal Jesus, Holy Family, and Christ Witness Legendry. Sventsitskaya, I. S., and A. P. Skogorev, comp. Moscow, Kogelet, 1999.

[30]. Apollodorus. The Mythological Library. Leningrad, Nauka, 1972. English edition: Apollodorus. The Library. London-New York: Loeb Classical Library, 1921.

[30:1]. Arago, F. The Biographies of the Famous Astronomers, Physicists, and Geometricians. Books 1 and 2 (Vols. 1-3). Translated by D. Perevoshchikov. Moscow-Izhevsk, The Scientific Research Centre for Regular and Chaotic Dynamics, 2000.

[31]. Arenkova, Y. I., and G. I. Mekhova. The Don Monastery. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1970.

[32]. Aristaenetus. The Love Epistles. Eustathius, Macrembolites. The Story of Ismene and Istmenias. Moscow-Leningrad, Nauka, 1965. Also see Aristaenetus. The Love Epistles. In W. Kelley. Erotica. London, Bohn’s Classical Library, G. Bell & Sons, 1848. Eustathius, Macrembolites. Ismene and Istmenias. London, 1788.

[33]. Zdanovich, G. B., ed. Arkaim. Research. Prospects. Findings. A collection of essays. From the series titled The Historical Pages of Southern Ural. The Arkaim Reserve works, State University of Chelyabinsk, the Specialized Arkaim Nature and Landscape Centre of History and Archaeology. The State Reserve of Ilmen. Chelyabinsk, the Kamenny Poyas Creative Group, 1995.

[34]. Arnold, Y. El Señor Kon-Tiki. Moscow, Mysl, 1970.

[35]. Aronov, V. The Elseviers (A History of Literary Art). Moscow, Kniga, 1975.

[36]. The Chronicler of Archangelsk. A complete collection of Russian chronicles, Vol. 37. Leningrad, Nauka, 1982.

[37]. Archangelskiy, Leonid. The Samurai Steel. An article for the magazine called Magnum. The New Magazine on Arms (November-December 1998): 18-21.

[38]. Avdousina, T. D., and T. D. Panov. Archaeological Antiquities: The Muscovite Kremlin. The Moscow Kremlin State Museum and Reserve for History and Culture. Moscow, 1996.

[39]. Serge, Archbishop. The Complete Oriental Menology. Vols. 1-3. Vladimir, Typography & Lithography of V. A. Parkov in Vladimir, 1901. Reprinted Moscow, Orthodox Encyclopaedia Centre of Ecclesiastic Research, Palomnik Publications, 1997.

[40]. Archimedes. The Works. Moscow, Fizmatgiz, 1962. English edition: Archimedes, The Works of Archimedes. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1912.

[40:0]. Asov, A. I. The Book of Veles. Moscow, Menedzher, 1995, 2nd edition.

[40:00]. Asov, A. I., Konovalov, M. Y. The Ancient Aryans. The Slavs. Russia. Moscow, Veche, 2002.

[40:1]. Gentili, Augusto, William Barcham, and Linda Whiteley. The National Gallery of London. From the The Great Museums of the World series. Moscow, Slovo, 2001. A translation of the Italian edition Udine: Magnus Edizioni, 2000.

[41]. Nikitin, Afanasiy. Voyage over the Three Sees. Published in the Literary Monuments of Old Russia. 2nd Half of the XV Century. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1982.

[42]. Nikitin, Afanasiy. Afanasiy Nikitin’s Voyage over the Three Sees. 1466-1472. Foreword, translation, text preparation and commentary by N. I. Prokofiev. Moscow, Sovietskaya Rossiya, 1980.

[43]. Akhmanova, O. S., and others. Precise Methods of Language Study. Moscow, 1961.

[44]. Bayev, K. L. Copernicus. From the Celebrity Biographies series, Issue 7 (55). Moscow, The Magazine and Newspaper Consociation, 1935.

[45]. Beyer, Rolf. The Queen of Sheba. From the Mark In History series. Rostov-on-Don, Fenix Publications, 1998. A translation from the German original by Beyer, Rolf. Die Königin von Saba. The Question Mark series, Gustav Lübbe Verlag GmbH, Bergisch Gladbach. 1987.

[46]. Balandin, R. K. A Miracle or a Scientific Enigma? Science and Religion Discussing the Shroud of Turin. Moscow, Znaniye, 1989. The Question Mark series, Issue 1, 1989.

[47]. Balandin, R., and L. Bondarev. Nature and Civilization. Moscow, Mysl, 1988.

[48]. Baldin, V. I., and T. P. Manushkina. The Laura of Serge and The Trinity. The Architectural Set and the Collections of Ancient Russian Art of the XIV-XVII Century. Moscow, Nauka, 1996.

[49]. Baranov, V. Logic Isn’t Facts. The Science & Technology magazine (Moscow), No. 4 (1983): 24-28.

[50]. Baronius, C. The Ecclesial and Secular Annals from the Birth of Christ and until the Year 1198. Typography of P. P. Ryabushinsky, from Baronius, Annales ecclesiastici a Christo nato ad annum 1198. Moscow, 1913.

[51]. Bartenev, S. The Moscow Kremlin in the Antiquity and Nowadays. Moscow, Synodal Typography, 1912.

[52]. de las Casas, Bartólome. History of the Indias. Leningrad, Nauka, 1968.

[53]. Baskakov, N. A. Russian Names of Turkic Origin. Moscow, Nauka, The Main Oriental Literature Editing Board, 1979.

[54]. Magarichev, Y. M., ed. and comp. The Cultural and Historical Reserve of Bakhchisaray. Simferopol, Tavria, 1995.

[55]. Bakhshi, Iman. Jagfar Tarikhy. A Collection of Bulgarian Manuscripts from 1680. Russian translation of the Bulgarian text by I. M. K. Nigmatoullin. Orenburg, The Orenburg Press Contact, KOPF, editorial board of the Bulgaria Courier, 1993.

[56]. Bashmakova, I. G., and G. S. Smirnova. The Naissance and the Development of Algebra. Published in the Aperçus on the History of Mathematics edited by B. V. Gnedenko. Moscow, MSU Publications, 1997.

[57]. Belenkiy, M. S. Judaism. Moscow, Gospolitizdat, 1966.

[58]. Bellosi, Luciano. Giotto. Moscow, Slovo Press, 1996. Translated from the 1995 Italian edition by Scala, Istituto Fotografico Editoriale.

[59]. Belova, A. G. The Historical Morphology of the Arabic Language. Moscow, 1994.

[59:0]. Belova G. A, Sherkova T. A. Russians in the Land of Pyramids. Travellers, Scientists, Collectioners. Moscow, Aleteya, 2003.

[59:1]. Belyavsky, V. A. Legendary and Historical Babylon. Moscow, Mysl, 1971.

[60]. Belyavsky, M. T. M. V. Lomonosov and the Foundation of the Moscow University (1755-1955). Edited by M. N. Tikhomirov. Moscow, MSU Publications, 1955.

[61]. Belyaev, D. V. Byzantine. Essays, Materials and Notes concerning Byzantine Antiquity. Book III. St. Petersburg, 1891-1906.

[62]. Belyaev, L. A. The Ancient Monasteries of Moscow According to Archaeological Data. Moscow, The Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Archaeology. Research and materials concerning the archaeology of Moscow. Vol. 6. 1995.

[63]. Belyaev, Y. 100 Monsters of Antiquity. An illustrated encyclopaedia of mythology. Moscow, Raritet, 1997.

[64]. Bémont, C., and G. Monod. The Mediaeval History of Europe. Petrograd, 1915. French edition: Bémont, C., and G. Monod. Histoire de l’Europe au Moyen Âge. Paris, 1921.

[64:1]. Berg, L. S. The Discovery of Kamchatka and Bering’s Expedition. Moscow-Leningrad, The USSR Academy of Sciences Press, 1946.

[64:2]. Berg, L. S. Essays on the History of Russian Geographical Discoveries. Moscow-Leningrad, The USSR Academy of Sciences Press, 1946.

[65]. Berry, A. Concise History of Astronomy. Translated by S. Zaimovskiy. Moscow-Leningrad, GITTL, 1946.

[66]. Archimandrite Nicephor. The Biblical Encyclopedia (The Full Illustrated Biblical Encyclopedia). Moscow, The A. I. Snegiryova Typography, 1891. A modern reprint was published by the Laura of St. Serge and the Holy Trinity in 1990.

[67]. The Bible. 10th edition. St. Petersburg, 1912.

[68]. The Bible. Books from the Old and the New Covenant in Russian Translation with Anagoges and Appendices. Moscow, Moscow Patriarchy Press, 1968. There are numerous re-editions in existence, for instance, the one published by the Russian Biblical Society in Moscow, 1995.

[69]. The Bible. Books of the Holy Writ from the Old and the New Covenant. Russian translation with appendices. 4th edition. Brussels, Life with God Press, 1989.

[70]. The Bible, or the Books of the Holy Writ from the Old and the New Covenant with Anagoges. 2nd edition. St. Petersburg, Synodal Typography, 1900. Reprinted by the Russian Biblical Society in Moscow, 1993. (This version of the Bible dates to the 1st half of the XVIII century and is therefore occasionally called Elizabethan.)

[71]. Scorina’s Bible. A facsimile edition of the Bible published by Francisco Scorina in 1517-1519. Volumes 1-3. Minsk, The Petrus Brovka Byelorussian Sovetskaya Encyclopaedia Press, 1990.

[72]. Bickerman, E. Chronology of the Ancient World. Moscow, Nauka, 1975. Translated from the English edition published in London by Thames & Hudson, 1968-1969.

[73]. Biroulia, Y. N. Russian Naval Charts of 1701-1750. Copies from originals (Atlas). St. Petersburg, The Military Navy Publications, 1993.

[74]. The Book of Good Tidings. Interpretations of the Holy Gospel by St. Theophilactus, the Archbishop of Bulgaria. The Gospel According to Mark Interpreted. St. Petersburg, P. P. Soykin’s Publications. Reprinted St. Petersburg, Satis Press, 1993.

[75]. Blazhko, S. N. A Course of Practical Astronomy. Moscow, Nauka, 1979.

[76]. Blair, G. Chronological Tables Spanning the Entire Global History, Containing Every Year since the Genesis and until the XIX Century, Published in English by G. Blair, a Member of the Royal Society, London. Vols. 1 and 2. Moscow University Press, 1808-1809. The English edition: Blair’s Chronological and Historical Tables, from the Creation to the Present Time, etc. London, G. Bell & Sons, 1882.

[77]. Bobrovnitskaya, T. A. The Royal Regalia of the Russian Rulers. The Kremlin in Moscow. Published to Commemorate the 500th Anniversary of the State Coat of Arms and the 450th Anniversary of the Inauguration of the First Russian Czar Ivan the Terrible. Moscow, The Moscow Kremlin State Museum and Reserve for History and Culture, 1997.

[78]. Bobrovnitsky. The Origins and the Process of the Roman Catholic Liturgy. Kiev, 1873.

[79]. Bogdanov, Ivan. Name Lists of the Bulgarian Khans. Sofia, Otechestvenia Front Press, 1981.

[80]. Gousseva, E., A. Lukashov, and others. Our Lady of Vladimir. A collection of materials. Exhibition catalogue. The State Tretyakovskaya Gallery, The Moscow Kremlin State Museum and Reserve for History and Culture. Moscow, Avangard Press, 1995.

[80:1]. Boguslavskiy, V. V. The Slavic Encyclopaedia. Vols. 1 and 2. Moscow, OLMA-Press, 2001.

[81]. Bozhilov, Ivan. The Asen Dynasty (1186-1460). Genealogy and Prosopography. Sofia, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences Press, 1994.

[82]. Bolingbroke. Epistles on Historical Studies and their Utility. Moscow, Nauka, 1978.

[83]. Bolotov, V. V. Lectures on Ancient Ecclesial History. Vols. 1-4. Published posthumously under the editorship of Prof. A. Brilliantov. St. Petersburg, 1907. Reprinted Moscow, Spaso-Preobrazhensky Monastery of Valaam, 1994.

[84]. Bolkhovitinov, E. A. (Metropolitan Eugene). The Concise Chronicle of Pskov. Pskov, Otchina Press, 1993.

[85]. The Great Soviet Encyclopaedia. Vols. 1-51. 2nd edition. Moscow, The Soviet Encyclopaedia Press, 1949-1957.

[85:1]. The Great Soviet Encyclopaedia. Vols. 1-30. 3rd edition. Moscow, 1969-1978. (Electronic version on 5 CD-ROMs.)

[86]. The Great Catechism. Moscow, 7135 (1627 ad). Reprinted by the Royal Grodno typography in 7291 (1683 AD).

[87]. The Great German-Russian Dictionary. 2nd edition, Stereotyped. Moscow, Russkiy Yazyk, 1980.

[87:1]. The Great Turkish-Russian Dictionary. 20,000 words and word groups. The RAS Institute for Oriental Studies. 2nd edition. Moscow, Russkiy Yazyk, 1998.

[88]. The Great Encyclopaedic Dictionary. Moscow, The Great Russian Encyclopaedia Press, 1998.

[89]. Borisov, N. S. Ivan Kalita. The Celebrity Biographies series. Moscow, Molodaya Gvardia, 1995.

[90]. Borisovskaya, N. Engraved Ancient Maps and Plans of the XV-XVIII century. Cosmography, Maps, Star Charts, City and Battle Plans. From the Pushkin State Museum of Art Collection. Moscow, Galaktika Press, 1995.

[91]. Bosch, Hieronymus. Self-titled album of reproductions. Moscow, Uniserv, 1995.

[91:1]. Botticelli. An album from the Masters of Art series. Text by Elena Carpetti. 1997, Giunti Gruppo Editoriale, Florence, 2002. Russian edition by Byely Gorod, Moscow, 2001.

[92]. Beaufort, Louis de. Dissertation sur l’incertitude des cinq premiers siècles de l’histoire Romaine. Utrecht, 1738. Republished Paris, Blot, 1886.

[93]. Bocharov, L. I., N. N. Yefimov, I. M. Chachoukh, and I. Y. Chernyshev. The Conspiracy Against Russian History. (Facts, Mysteries, Versions). Moscow, Anvik, 1998.

[93:1]. Brant, Sebastian. Ship of Fools. Part of the The World Literature Bibliothèque series (Series 1, Vol. 33). Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1971.

[94]. Brownley, C. A. Statistical Theory and Methodology in Science and Technology. Moscow, Nauka, 1977.

[95]. Brashinskiy, I. B. Looking for the Scythian Treasures. Leningrad, The USSR Academy of Sciences, Nauka, 1979.

[96]. Brodsky, B. Kremlin – The Heart of the Fatherland. Moscow, Izobrazitelnoye Iskusstvo, 1996.

[97]. Bronstein, I. N., and K. A. Semendyaev. A Reference Book on Mathematics. Moscow, Nauka, 1986.

[98]. Bronsten, V. A. Claudius Ptolemy. Moscow, Nauka, 1988.

[99]. Brugsch, Heinrich. History of the Pharaohs. Translated by G. K. Vlastov. Published in the series titled The Chronicles and the Monuments of the Ancient Egypt. St. Petersburg, I. I. Glazounov’s Typography, 1880. English edition: Egypt under the Pharaohs. A History Derived Entirely from the Monuments. London, J. Murray, 1891.

[99:1]. Bruges: its Sights and Delights. City Plan. (Russian version). E.E.C., Editions Thill S. A., Brussels, 1997.

[100]. Bryusova, V. G. Andrei Rublev. Moscow, Izobrazitelnoye Iskusstvo, 1995.

[101]. Bouganov, V. I. Razin and his Followers. Documents, Accounts of the Contemporaries. Moscow, Nauka, 1995.

[102]. Bouganov, S. I. Native Historiography of Russian Chronicles. Moscow, Nauka, 1975.

[103]. Bouzeskoul, V. P. An Introduction into Greek History. Lectures. Vol. 1. Petrograd, 1915.

[104]. Boukreyeva, T. N. The Basel Museum of Arts. Moscow, Izobrazitelnoye Iskusstvo, 1987.

[105]. Boulatov, A. M. The Historical Plans of Moscow. Release III. Moscow, Zhiraf, 2000.

[106]. Burian, Y., and B. Moukhova. The Enigmatic Etruscans. Moscow, Nauka, 1970.

[107]. Bouseva-Davydova, I. L. The Temples of the Muscovite Kremlin: Holy Relics and other Antiquities. Moscow, The Nauka Int’l Academic Publishing Co., 1997.

[108]. Boutkevich, T. I. An Overview of Russian Sects. Kharkov, 1910.

[109]. Boutkov, P. Defending the Russian Chronicle of Nestor from the Vituperation of the Sceptics. St. Petersburg, 1840.

[110]. Boutomo, S. I. Radionuclear Datings and the Construction of an Absolute Chronological Scale of Archaeological Monuments. In Archaeology and Natural Sciences. Moscow, Nauka, 1965. 35-45.

[111]. Boutromeyev, V. Global History in Individual Personalities. Late Middle Ages. Moscow, Olma, 1999.

[112]. Kalougin, V. I., comp. Folk Tales and Legends. Moscow, Sovremennik, 1991.

[113]. Bychkov, A. A., A. Y. Nizovsky, and P. Y. Chernosvitov. The Conundrums of Ancient Russia. Moscow, Veche, 2000.

[114]. Bychkov, V. V. The Mediaeval Aesthetics of Russia. XI-XVII century. Moscow, Mysl, 1992.

[114:1]. Bauval, Robert, and Adrian Gilbert. The Orion Mystery. Unlocking the Secrets of the Pyramids. Russian translation. Moscow, Veche, 1996.

[115]. Bulgaria. A Traveller’s Map. Scale: 1:530000. Sofia, Datamap Revue, 1997.

[116]. Wagner, G. K. Soviet Union and its Famous Works of Art. Old Cities of Russia. A traveller’s guide. Moscow, Iskusstvo, Edizion Leipzig, 1980.

[116:1]. Weinstein S., and M.Kryukov. The Saddle and the Stirrup. The Znaniye-Sila (Knowledge is Power) magazine (Moscow), August 1985, 24-26.

[117]. Valishevsky, K. Ivan the Terrible. Moscow, IKPA-press, 1989. Reprinted from Moscow, Obshchestvennaya Polza Typography, 1912.

[118]. Valishevsky, K. Ivan the Terrible. Moscow, Svarog, 1993.

[119]. Valishevsky, K. The First Romanovs. Moscow, Kvadrat, 1993.

[120]. Vasiliev, A. A. The History of Byzantium. The Fall of Byzantium. The Palaeiologi Epoch (1261-1453). Leningrad, Academia, 1925.

[121]. An Introduction into Special Historical Disciplines. Moscow, MSU Publications, 1990.

[122]. Weber, George. Universal History. Moscow, 1892. English edition: Weber, G. Outline of Universal History from the Creation of the World to the Present Time. London, 1851.

[122:1]. Hungarian-Russian Dictionary. 40,000 words. Moscow-Budapest, Russkiy Yazyk, The Hungarian Academy of Sciences Publishing House, 1974.

[123]. Weisman, A. D. Greek-Russian Dictionary. 5th edition. St. Petersburg, published by the author, 1899. Reprinted Moscow, Graeco-Latin Department of Y. A. Shichalin, 1991.

[124]. Weisman, A. D. Latin-Russian Dictionary. St. Petersburg: published by the author, 1899. Reprinted Moscow, Graeco-Latin Department of Y. A. Shichalin, 1991.

[125]. Venelin, Y. News of the Varangians as Related by Arab Scribes; their Alleged Crimes as Seen by the Latter. The Imperial Moscow University Society for History and Russian Antiquities Readings, Book IV, Section V: 1-18. 1870.

[125:1]. Vereshchagin V. V. Vereschagin, the Artist. Napoleon I in Russia, 1812. Tver, the Sozvezdie Agency of Tver, 1993.

[125:2]. Vermoush, G. Diamonds in World History and Stories about Diamonds. Moscow, Mezhdunarodnye Otnosheniya, 1988.

[126]. Veselovsky, A. N. Russians and Veltins in the Saga of Tidrec of Berne (Verona). St. Petersburg, Typography of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, 1906. A separate engraving from the Russian Language and Belles Lettres Department Courier, Vol. XI (1906), Book 3: 1-190.

[127]. Veselovsky, I. N. Aristarchus of Samos – The Copernicus of the Antiquity. Historical and astronomical research. Issue 7: 44. Moscow, Nauka, 1961.

[128]. Veselovsky, S. B. A Research into the History of Oprichnina. Moscow, 1963.

[129]. The Russia Academy of Sciences Courier, Vol. 68, No. 10 (October 1998). Moscow, Nauka.

[129:1]. Palaudirias, S. A., Editorial Escudo de Oro. The Entire Antwerp. In The Entire Europe Collection. Antwerp, published in Russian. Barcelona, 1998.

[129:2]. Bersnev, P. V., comp. The Old Testament Apocrypha. The Book of the Jubilees. Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. Translated by A. V. Smirnov. Published in the Alexandrian Library series. St. Petersburg, Amphora, 2000.

[129:3]. Vzdornov, G. I. Book Art in Old Russia. Handwritten Books in the North-Eastern Russia in the XII – Early XV century. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1980.

[130]. Widukind of Corvea. The Deeds of the Saxons. Moscow, Nauka, 1975. See also Widukind. Sächsische Geschichten. Translated by R. Schottin, foreword by W. Wattenbach. GV. Leipzig, 1882. Also see: Widukind. Sächsische Geschichten. New revision by Paul Hirsch. GV, Bd. 33, Leipzig, 1931.

[131]. The Byzantine Book of the Eparch. Moscow, Oriental Literature Publications, 1962. Also see The Book of the Eparch. Le livre du préfet, with an introduction by Prof. Ivan Dulcev. “Reprint of … the publication (by Jules Nicole) of the Book of the Eparch, to which is added … a facsimile of the complete manuscript and Freshfield’s English translation.” 1970.

[132]. Byzantine Historians. Dexippos, Eunapius, Olympiodorus, Malchus, Peter the Patrician, Menander, Candides, Nonnos, Theophanes the Byzantine. St. Petersburg, 1858.

[133]. Byzantine Legends. Leningrad, Nauka, 1972.

[134]. Vilinbakhov, G. V. The State Coat of Arms of Russia. 500 Years. St. Petersburg, Slavia. The State Hermitage. The Presidential State Heraldry Commission. The Moscow Kremlin State Museum and Reserve for History and Culture, 1997.

[135]. Vilinbakhov, G., and T. Vilinbakhova. St. George and his Image as Used in Russia. St. Petersburg, Iskusstvo, 1995.

[136]. de Villehardouin, Geoffroy. The Conquest of Constantinople. Moscow, Nauka, 1993.

[137]. Vinogradov, V. K. Theodosia. A Historical Aperçu. Yekaterinodar, Kilius & Co Typography, 1902. (A reprint of the first part of the book is given in the historical and literary almanac titled Okoyem [Horizon], No. 2 for 1992, Theodosia.)

[138]. Vittorio, Serra. The Entire Rome. (Flowers. Churches. Museums. Monuments. Fountains. The Vatican. The Sistine Chapel. Tivoli. Ostia Antica). Bonechi Edizioni “Il Turismo.” Florence, 1994.

[139]. Vladimirov, L. I. The Omnified Literary History. Moscow, Kniga, 1988.

[140]. Vlasov, Sergei. The Deeds of Constantine the Great. First Experimental Typography of the State Committee of Russian Federation, Eleemosynary Institution “The Order of Constantine the Great”, 1999.

[141]. Vnouchkov, B. C. The Prisoner of Schliesselburg. Yaroslavl, the Upper Volga Publications, 1988.

[142]. Voyekova, I. N., and V. P. Mitrofanov. Yaroslavl. From the series titled Museum Cities. Leningrad, Avrora, 1973.

[143]. The Military Topographic Map of Moscow and its Environs (1860). The map was published in the Rarities of Russian Cartography series. Moscow, Kartair, the scientific and editorial publishing house of I. R. Anokhin, 1998.

[144]. Around the Coliseum. The Izvestiya newspaper, 18 May 1977.

[145]. The Vologda Chronicle. The Anthology of Ancient Russian Literature, Vol. 37. Leningrad, Nauka, 1982.

[145:1]. The Land of Volokolamsk. Dedicated to 400 Years of Glorifying the Most Reverend Joseph of Volotsk. Under the general editorship of Pitirim, the Metropolitan of Volokolamsk and Yurievsk. Moscow, Prosvetitel, 1994.

[146]. Volfkovich, S. I. Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov as a Chemist (1854-1946). The Journal of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Department of Chemistry, No. 5 (1947).

[147]. Volfkovich, S. I. Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov. His Life and Works on Chemistry. The Priroda (Nature) magazine, No. 11 (1947).

[148]. Voronikhina, L. N. Edinburgh. The Cities and Museums of the World series. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1974.

[149]. Vostokov, A. A Description of the Russian and the Slovenian Manuscripts of the Rumyantsev Museum as Compiled by Alexander Vostokov. St. Petersburg, Typography of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, 1842.

[150]. The Chronicle of Ivan Timofeyev. Prepared for printing, translated and commented by O. A. Derzhavina. Moscow-Leningrad, 1951.

[151]. Global History. 10 volumes. Moscow, USSR Academy of Sciences, The Socio-Economic Literature Department Publications, 1958.

[152]. The Unified Library of Russia, or the Book Catalogue for an Exhaustive and Detailed Description of our Fatherland. 2nd extended edition. Moscow, 1845.

[153]. Maggi, G. and Valdes, G. The Entire Turkey. Florence, Casa Editrice Bonechi, 1995.

[154]. Wooley, L. Ur of the Chaldees. Moscow, Oriental Literary, 1961 (1972). English edition: Wooley, L. Ur of the Chaldees. London, Benn, 1950. See also: Wooley, L. Excavations at Ur. A Record of Twelve Years. London, Benn, 1955.

[155]. Galfridus Monmutensis. History of the Brits. The Life of Merlin. Moscow, Nauka, 1984. English edition: Histories of the Kings of Britain by Geoffrey of Monmouth. Translated by L. A. Paton. London-New York, 1912. See also: Giles, J. A., ed. Six Old English Chronicles. London, 1848.

[156]. Garkavi, A. Y. The Accounts of the Slavs and the Russians as Given by Muslim Authors (from mid-VII century until the End of the X century AD). St. Petersburg, 1870 (1872).

[157]. Genova, E., and L. Vlakhova. 24 Church Plates from the Rila Monastery. Sofia, Bulgarsky Khudozhnik, 1988.

[158]. GEO. A monthly magazine. No. 1 (January, 2000). Moscow, Gruner and Yar Ltd.

[159]. Geographical Atlas. Moscow, The General Council of Ministers, Department of Geodetics and Cartography. 1968.

[160]. Herberstein. Baron Sigismund Herberstein. Notes on the Affairs of the Muscovires. St. Petersburg, A. S. Souvorin’s Press, 1908. Rerum moscoviticarum commentarii. Wien, S. l. et d., 1549. Rerum moscoviticarum commentarii. Basiliae, 1551. Rerum moscoviticarum commentarii. Basiliae, 1556. Moscovia, der Hauptstat in Reissen. Wien, 1557. Major, R. H., ed. Notes upon Russia. 2nd edition. New York, London Hakluite Society, 1963. Vol. 10: 1-116; Vol. 12: 3-174.

[161]. Herberstein, Sigismund. Notes on Moscovia. Moscow, MSU Publications, 1988.

[161:1]. Herberstein. Ziga Herberstein. Sigismund Herberstein – the Warrior, Statesman, Diplomat and Peacemaker. An edition of the Dr. F. Preshern Society for Contact Development between Slovenia and Russia.Moscow Byelye Alvy Press, Bilio, Humar Press, 2000.

[162]. von Winkler, P. P., comp. Coats of Arms of Cities, Provinces, Regions and Towns of the Russian Empire Included into the Complete Collection of Laws and Regulations between 1649 and 1900. St. Petersburg: published by the book salesman Iv. Iv. Ivanov, 1899. New edition: Moscow, Planeta, 1990.

[163]. Herodotus. History. Leningrad, Nauka, 1972. English edition: The History of Herodotus. From the series Great Books of the Western World. Vol. 5. Chicago, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., The University of Chicago, 1952 (2nd edition 1990). See also: Herodotus. The Histories of Herodotus, etc. London and New York, Everyman’s Library, 1964.

[164]. Herzen, A. G., and Y. M. Mogarichev. The Fortress of Gems. Kyrk-Or, Chufut-Kale. Published as part of the series The Archaeological Monuments of the Crimea. Simferopol, Tavria, 1993.

[165]. Herzen, A. G., and Y. M. Mogarichev. Salachik. The Ouspensky Monastery. Bakhchisaray. The State Museum and Reserve for History and Culture of Bakhchisaray. 1991.

[165:1]. Hertzman, Yevgeni. The Lost Centuries of Byzantine Music. The XX International Congress of Byzantine Scholars. St. Petersburg, The Humanitarian Academy Publishing Centre, 2001.

[166]. Gerchouk, Y. Y. History of Drawing and Book Art. Moscow, Aspect, 2000.

[167]. Gililov, I. A Passion Play of William Shakespeare, or the Mystery of the Great Phoenix. Moscow, “Artist. Rezhissyor. Teatr” Publications, 1997.

[168]. Glazounov, I. Russia Crucified. The Our Contemporary magazine, Issues 1-5, 7-9, 11 (1996). This material was subsequently published as a book.

[169]. Gnedenko, A. M., and V. M. Gnedenko. For One’s Comrades, or Everything about the Cossacks. Moscow, The Int’l Fund of Slavic Writing and Culture. ARP Int. Co., 1993.

[170]. The A. V. Shchusev Museum of Architecture, archive 1246/1-13.

[171]. Golenishchev-Kutuzov, I. N. The Mediaeval Latin Literature of Italy. Moscow, Nauka, 1972.

[172]. Golitsyn, N. S. The Great Warlords of History. Vol. 1. St. Petersburg, 1878.

[173]. Golovanov, Y. Etudes on Scientists. Moscow, Molodaya Gvardiya, 1976.

[174]. Golovin, B. N. Language and Statistics. Moscow, 1971.

[175]. Goloubovsky, P. V. The Pechenegs, the Torks, and the Polovtsy before the Tartar Invasion. Kiev, 1884.

[176]. Goloubtsov, A. P. Selected Readings on Ecclesial Archaeology and Liturgy. St. Petersburg, Statis, 1995.

[177]. Goloubtsova, E. S., and V. M. Smirin. “On the Attempts of Using the ‘New Methods’ of Statistical Analysis to Ancient Historical Material.” The Courier of Ancient History, 1982, No. 1: 171-195.

[178]. Goloubtsova, E. S., and G. A. Koshelenko. Ancient History and the “New Methods.” Historical Issues, No. 8 (1982).

[179]. Goloubtsova, E. S., and Y. A. Zavenyagin. Another Account of the New Methods and the Chronology of Antiquity. Historical Issues, No. 12 (1983): 68-83.

[180]. Homer. Iliad. Translated by N. I. Gnedich. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1969. See also: Homer, The Iliad of Homer. Chicago University Press, London, 1962.

[180:1]. Homer. The Odyssey of Homer. New York, Harper & Row, 1967.

[181]. Goneim, M. The Lost Pyramid. Moscow, Geographiz, 1959. English edition: Goneim, M. The Lost Pyramid. New York, Rinehart, 1956.

[182]. Gorbachevsky, B. Crosses, Fires, and Books. Moscow, Sovetskaya Rossiya, 1965.

[183]. Gordeyev, A. A. History of the Cossacks. Vol. 1-4. Moscow, Strastnoi Boulevard, 1992.

[184]. Gordeyev, N. V. The Czar Cannon. Moscow, Moskovskiy Rabochiy, 1969.

[185]. The Towns and Cities of Russia. An Encyclopaedia. Moscow, The Great Russian Encyclopaedia Publications, 1994.

[186]. Gorsey, Gerome. Notes on Russia. XVI – Early XVII century. Moscow, MSU Press, 1990.

[187]. The State Armoury. Album. Moscow, Sovetskiy Khudozhnik, 1988. A new edition by Galart Press, Moscow, 1990.

[188]. The A. S. Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts. Catalogue of paintings. Moscow, 1995, Mazzotta. Printed in Italy.

[189]. The Ruler is a Friend of his Subjects, or Political Court Hortatives and Moralistic Speculations of Kan-Shi, Khan of Manchuria and China. Collected by his son, Khan Yun-Jin. St. Petersburg, 1795.

[190]. Goulianitsky, N. F., ed. The Urbanism of the Muscovite State of the XVI-XVII centuries. Moscow, The Russian Academy of Architecture. Stroyizdat, 1994.

[191]. The Faceted Chamber in the Moscow Kremlin. Leningrad, Aurora, 1982.

[192]. Granovsky, T. N. Lectures on Mediaeval History. Moscow, Nauka, 1986.

[193]. Grebelsky, Peter K., and Alexander B. Mirvis. The House of the Romanovs. Biographical Information about the Members of the Reigning House, their Predecessors and Relations. St. Petersburg, LIO Redaktor, 1992.

[194]. Mina, Gregory. Uffizi and Pitti. The Art of the Florentine Galleries. Album. From the Great Museums of the World series. Moscow, Slovo, 1999. A translation of the Italian edition by Magnus Edizioni, Udine, Italy, 1994, 1996.

[195]. Gregorovius, F. Mediaeval History of Athens. St. Petersburg, 1900. German edition: Gregorovius, F. Geschichte der Stadt Athen im Mittelalter. Stuttgart, 1889.

[196]. Gregorovius, F. Mediaeval History of Rome. The V-XVI century. Vols. 1-5. St. Petersburg, 1902-1912. English edition: Gregorovius, F. History of the City of Rome in the Middle Ages. London, G. Bell & Sons, 1900-1909.

[197]. Grekov, B. D., and A. Y. Yakubovsky. The Golden Horde and its Decline. Moscow-Leningrad, USSR Academy of Sciences, 1950.

[198]. Greece: Temples, Sepulchres and Treasures. The Lost Civilizations Encyclopaedia. Translated from English by N. Belov. Moscow, Terra Publishing Centre, 1997. Original edition, Time-Life Books BV, 1994.

[199]. Gribanov, E. D., and D. A. Balalykin. Medicine of Moscow on the Medals of Imperial Russia. Moscow, Triada-X, 1999.

[200]. Nicephor, Gregoras. Roman History, beginning from the Conquest of Constantinople by the Latins. St. Petersburg, 1862.

[201]. Grigorovich, V. An Account of Travelling through European Russia. Moscow, 1877.

[202]. Grigoriev, V. V. Saray: The Capital of the Golden Horde, and the Issue of its Location. St. Petersburg, 1845.

[203]. Grigoriev, G. L. Who was Ivan the Terrible Really Afraid of? On the Origins of the Oprichnina. Moscow, Intergraph Service, 1998.

[204]. Grigoulevich, I. R. The History of the Inquisition. Moscow, Nauka, 1970.

[205]. Grigoulevich, I. R. The Inquisition. Moscow, Politizdat, 1985.

[206]. Grishin, Yakov. The Tartars of Poland and Lithuania (the Heirs of the Golden Horde). Kazan, The Tartar Publishing House, 1995.

[207]. Groslie, B. Borobudur. The Greatest Collection of Buddhist Sculpture in the World is being Destroyed by Erosion. The UNESCO Courier, No. 6 (1968): 23-27.

[208]. Gudzy, N. K. History of Early Russian Literature. Moscow, Uchpedgiz, 1938. English edition: New York, Macmillan & Co, 1949.

[209]. Gouliaev, V. I. Pre-Columbian Voyages to America. Myths and Reality. Moscow, Mezhdunarodnye Otnoshenia, 1991.

[210]. Gouliaev, V. I. America and the Old World in the Pre-Columbian Epoch. Moscow, Nauka, 1968.

[210:1]. Gouliaev, V. I. Following the Conquistadors. Moscow, The USSR Academy of Sciences, Nauka, 1976.

[211]. Gumilev, L. N. Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe. Moscow, Mysl, 1992.

[212]. Gumilev, L. N. In Search of the Figmental Kingdom (the Legend of the Kingdom of Presbyter Johannes. Moscow, Tanais, 1994.

[213]. Gumilev, L. N. Hunnu. St. Petersburg: Time-Out-Compass, 1993.

[214]. Gumilev, L. N. The Black Legend. Moscow, Ekopros, 1994.

[215]. Gumilev L. N. The Huns in China. Moscow, Nauka, 1974.

[216]. Gumilev, L. N. From Rus’ to Russia. Moscow, Ekopros, 1992.

[217]. Gourevich, A. Y. The Mediaeval Cultural Categories. Moscow, Kultura, 1972.

[218]. Gourevich, V. B. An Introduction into Spherical Astronomy. Moscow, Nauka, 1978.

[219]. Gouter, R. S., and Y. L. Polounov. Girolamo Cardano. From the Founding Fathers of Science and Technology series. Moscow, Znaniye, 1980.

[220]. Goutz, Alexander K. The True History of Russia. Omsk, Omsk State University Press, 1999.

[221]. D. The Stirrup of Quiet Don: the Enigmas of the Novel. Paris, YMCA Press, 1974.

[222]. Davidenko, I. V. The Word Was, The Word Is, The Word Shall Always Be… A Philological Fantasy. Moscow, Russkiy Dvor Press, 1999.

[223]. Dal, V. An Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Russian Language. St. Petersburg-Moscow, The M. O. Wolf Society Press, 1912.

[224]. Dal, V. An Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Russian Language. St. Petersburg-Moscow, The M. O. Wolf Society Press, 1914. Reprinted Moscow, Citadel, 1998.

[225]. Dal, Vladimir. An Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Russian Language. Moscow, State National and Foreign Dictionary Publishing House, 1956.

[226]. Damascene, John. Dialectic. Moscow, 1862. See also: John of Damascus. Dialectica. New York, St. Bonaventure Franciscan Institute, 1953.

[227]. Damascene, John. Three Apologies against the Detractors of the Holy Icons or Effigies. St. Petersburg, 1893. English edition: Baker, T. John Damascene on Holy Images Followed by Three Sermons of the Assumption. London, 1898.

[228]. Dantas, G. Parthenon in Peril. The UNESCO Courier, No. 6 (1968): 16-18, 34.

[229]. Dante, Alighieri. Minor Œuvres. Moscow, Nauka, 1968. Also see: Dante, Alighieri. Opere Minori. Florence, 1856.

[230]. Dante, Alighieri. The Divine Comedy. Translated from the Italian by A. A. Ilushin. Moscow, Philological Department of the M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, 1995.

[231]. Darethes of Phrygia. The History of the Destruction of Troy. St. Petersburg, Aleteya, 1997.

[232]. Darkevich, V. P. The Secular Art of Byzantium. Works of Byzantine Art in the Eastern Europe of the X-XIII century. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1975.

[233]. Darkevich, V. P. The Argonauts of the Middle Ages. Moscow, Nauka, 1976.

[233:1]. The Gifts of the Magi – a Source of Bliss until Our Day. Translated from modern Greek by M. Klimenko. The Holy Mount Athon, the Monastery of St. Paul the Apostle. Information about this book was obtained from the Holy Lamp newspaper published by the Preobrazhensky Temple in the Bolshie Vyazyomy village, No. 1 (1996).

[234]. The Gifts Made by the Imperial House of Russia to the Museum of History. Catalogue of an exhibition. Moscow, The State Museum of History, Publishing Department. 1993.

[235]. Dowley, Tim. The Biblical Atlas. Three’s Company & Angus Hudson Ltd., 1989. Russian translation: Moscow, The Russian Biblical Society, 1994.

[236]. Cameniata, Johannes. Two Byzantine Chronicles of the X century. The Psamathian Chronicle; The Conquest of Thessalonica. Moscow, Oriental Literature Publications, 1962. Also see: Cameniata, Joannes. De Exicidio Thessalonicae. In: Clugnet, L. Bibliothèque hagiographique orientale. Paris, 1901-1905.

[237]. Dvoretsky, I. K. Latin-Russian Dictionary. 50,000 words. Moscow, Russkiy Yazyk, 1976.

[237:1]. Deveuze, Lily. Carcassonne. The Golden Book series (in Russian). Florence, Bonechi, Central Typography, 2000.

[238]. Dementyeva, V. V. “The Roman History of Charles Rollen” as Read by a Russian Nobleman. The Ancient History Courier, No. 4 (1991): 117-122.

[239]. Denisov, L. I. The Orthodox Monasteries of the Russian Empire. Moscow, 1908. 389-393.

[240]. Jalal, Assad. Constantinople. From Byzantium to Istanbul. Moscow, M. & S. Sabashnikov, 1919. French edition: Jalâl, A. Constantinople de Byzance à Stamboul. Paris, 1909.

[241]. Jivelegov, A. K. Dante Alighieri. From the Celebrity Biographies series. Moscow, OGIZ, The Magazine and Newspaper Trust, 1933.

[242]. Jivelegov, A. K. Leonardo da Vinci. From the Celebrity Biographies series. Moscow, OGIZ, The Magazine and Newspaper Trust, 1935.

[243]. Giovanni, Villani. The New Chronicle, or the History of Florence. Moscow, Nauka, 1997. Italian edition: Cronica di Giovanni Villani a miglior lezione redotta coll’aiuto detesti a penna. Florence, Magheri, 1823; Rome, Multigrafica, 1980. Vols. 1-8.

[244]. Giovanni, Novelli. The Shroud of Turin: The Issue Remains Open. Translated from Italian. Moscow, Franciscan Press, 1998.

[245]. Giua, Michele. The History of Chemistry. Moscow, Mir, 1975. Italian original: Giua, Michele. Storia della chimica, dell’alchimia alle dottrine moderne. Chiantore, Turin, 1946; Union Tipografiko-Editrice Torinese, 1962.

[246]. Digests of Justinian. Selected fragments translated by I. S. Peretersky. Moscow, Nauka, 1984.

[247]. Diehl, Ch. History of the Byzantine Empire. Moscow, IL, 1948. English edition: Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1925.

[248]. Diehl, Ch. Chief Problems of the Byzantine History. Moscow, 1947. French edition: Diehl, Ch. Les Grands Problèmes de l’Histoire Byzantine. Paris, Armand Diehl Library, A. Colin, 1947.

[249]. Diels, H. Ancient Technology. Moscow-Leningrad, ONTI-GTTI, 1934.

[250]. Diophantes. Arithmetics. Moscow, Nauka, 1974. See also: Diophantus, Alexandrinus. Diophanti Alexandrini Opera Omnia, cum graecis commentaries. Lipsiae: in aedibus B. G. Teubner, 1893-1895.

[251]. Diringer, D. The Alphabet. Moscow, IL, 1963. English edition: London, Hutchinson & Co., 1968.

[252]. Dietmar, A. B. Ancient Geography. Moscow, Nauka, 1980.

[253]. Yankov, V. P., comp. Following the Roads of the Millennia. A collection of historical articles and essays. Book four. Moscow, Molodaya Gvardia, 1991.

[254]. Drboglav, D. A. Mysteries of Ancient Latin Hallmarks of IX-XIV century Swords. Moscow, MSU Press, 1984.

[255]. Ancient Russian Icon Art. Moscow, Kedr, 1993. From the collection of the Tretyakovskaya Gallery.

[256]. Ancient Russian Literature. Depictions of Society. Moscow, Nauka, 1991.

[257]. Bonhard-Levin, G. M., ed. Ancient Civilizations. A collection of essays. Moscow, Mysl, 1989.

[258]. Struve, V. V., and D. P. Kallistov., eds. Ancient Greece. Moscow, USSR Academy of Sciences, 1956.

[259]. Drews, Arthur. The Christ Myth. Vol. 2. Moscow, Krasnaya Nov’, 1924. English edition by T. Fisher Unwin. London and Leipzig, 1910.

[260]. Drews, Arthur. Did St. Peter the Apostle Really Exist? Moscow, Atheist, 1924. See also: A. Drews. Die Petrus-le-gende. Jena, E. Diederichs, 1924.

[261]. Drümel, Johann Heinrich. An Attempt of Proving the Ararat Origins of the Russians Historically as those of the First Nation after the Deluge. St. Petersburg, 1785. A Russian translation of a German book published in Nuremberg in 1744.

[262]. Douboshin, G. N. A Reference Book for Celestial Mechanics and Astrodynamics. Moscow, Nauka, 1976.

[263]. Doubrovsky, A. S., N. N. Nepeyvoda, and Y. A. Chikanov. On the Chronology of Ptolemy’s Almagest. A Secondary Mathematical and Methodological Analysis. The Samoobrazovanie (Self-Education) magazine (Moscow), No. 1 1999.

[263:1]. Duby, Georges. The Middle Ages (987-1460). From Hugo Capet to Joan of Arc. Moscow, Mezhdunarodnye Otnosheniya, 2000. French original: Duby, Georges. Le Moyen Âge. De Hugues Capet à Jeanne d’Arc (987-1460). Collection Pluriel. Hachette, 1987.

[264]. Dupuy, R. Ernest, and Trevor N. Dupuy. The Harper Encyclopaedia of Military History. From 3500 BC to the Present. Commentary by the Polygon Press. Vol. 1: 3500 bc-1400 ad. Vol. 2: 1400–1800. St. Petersburg-Moscow, Polygon-AST, 1997. English original published by Harper Collins.

[265]. Dürer, Albrecht. Tractates. Diaries. Letters. St. Petersburg, Azbuka, 2000.

[265:1]. [Dürer] Albrecht Dürer. Engravings. Moscow, Magma Ltd., 2001. First published in 1980 by Hubschmidt et Bouret.

[265:2]. The Jewish Encyclopaedia. Vols. 1-16. A reprint of the Brockhaus-Efron edition for the Society for Scientific Judaic Publications, St. Petersburg. Moscow, Terra-Terra, 1991.

[266]. The Hebraic Text of the Old Testament (The Tanach). London, the British and Foreign Bible Society, 1977.

[267]. Eusebius Pamphilus. Ecclesial History. St. Petersburg, 1848. English edition: Eusebius Pamphilus. History of the Church. London, 1890.

[268]. Eusebius Pamphilus. Eusebius Pamphilus, Bischop of the Palestinian Caesarea, on the Toponymy of the Holy Writ. St. Jerome of Strydon on the Hebraic Locations and Names. Translated by I. Pomyalovsky. St. Petersburg, 1894. Latin edition: Eusebius Pamphilus. Eusebii Pamphili Episcopi Caesariensis Onomasticon Urbium et Locorum Sacrae Scripturae. Berolini, 1862.

[269]. Eutropius. A Concise History Starting with the City’s Creation. From the Roman Historians of the IV century series. Moscow, Russian Political Encyclopaedia, 1997.

[270]. Yegorov, D. N. An Introduction into the Mediaeval Studies. The Historiography and the Source Studies. Vols. 1-2. Moscow, High Courses of Female Education, Department of History and Philosophy, Publishing Society.

[271]. Yermolayev, G. Mystery of the “Quiet flows the Don.” Slavic and European Journal, 18, 3 (1974).

[272]. Yermolayev, G. The True Authorship of the “Quiet flows the Don.” Slavic and European Journal, 20, 3 (1976).

[273]. Yefremov, Y. N., and E. D. Pavlovskaya. Dating the “Almagest” by the Actual Stellar Movements. The USSR Academy of Sciences Archive, Vol. 294, No. 2: 310-313.

[274]. Yefremov, Y. N., and E. D. Pavlovskaya. Determining the Epoch of the Almagest Star Catalogue’s Creation by the Analysis of the Actual Stellar Movements. (On the Problem of Ptolemy’s Star Catalogue Authorship). The Historical and Astronomical Research. Moscow, Nauka, 1989. 175-192.

[275]. Jambus, M. The Hierarchical Cluster Analysis and Related Correspondences. Moscow, Finances and Statistics, 1988. Also see: Kendall, M., and A. Stewart. The Advanced Theory of Statistics (4th edition). London, C. Griffin, 1977.

[275:1]. Living History of the Orient. Collected works. Moscow, Znanie, 1998.

[276]. Zivkovic, Branislav. Les monuments de la Peinture Serbe Médiévale. Zivkovic, Branislav. Zica. Les dessins des fresques. Belgrade, Institut pour la protection des monuments historiques de la Republique de Serbie, 1985.

[277]. The Art of Ancient Russia. XI – early XIII century. Inlays, Frescoes, Icons. Leningrad, Khudozhnik RSFSR, 1982.

[278]. Cellini, Benvenuto. The Life of Benvenuto Cellini, the Son of Maestro Giovanni Cellini, a Florentine, Written in Florence by Himself. Moscow, 1958. The English edition was published by Edito-Service in Geneva, 1968.

[278:1]. The Hagiography of Reverend Sergiy (The Life and the Great Deeds of the Most Reverend and Blessed Father Sergiy the Thaumaturge, the Hegumen of Radonezh and the Entire Russia). Compiled by Hieromonk Nikon (subsequently an Archimandrite). 5th edition. The Laura of Serge and The Holy Trinity. Own typography. 1904.

[279]. The Life of Savva Storozhevsky. Reprinted after an old XVII century edition. Published in the Zvenigorod Region History Materials, Issue 3. Moscow, The Archaeographical Centre, 1994.

[280]. Zhitomirsky, S. V. The Astronomical Works of Archimedes. Historical and Astronomical Research, Issue 13. Moscow, Nauka, 1977.

[281]. Zholkovsky, A. V. Pasternak’s Book of Books. The Zvezda (Star) magazine, No. 12 (1997).

[282]. Zabelin, I. E. Quotidian Life of Russian Czarinas in the XVI and XVII centuries. Novosibirsk, Nauka, 1992.

[283]. Zabelin, I. E. The History of Moscow. Moscow, Svarog, 1996.

[284]. Zabelin, I. E. The History of Moscow. Moscow, Stolitsa, 1990.

[285]. Zabelin, I. E. The Historical Description of the Stauropigial Monastery of Moscow. 2nd edition. Moscow, 1893.

[286]. Zaborov, M. A. History of the Crusades in Documents and Materials. Moscow, Vyshchaya Shkola, 1977.

[287]. Zaborov, M. A. Crusaders in the East. Moscow, Nauka, Chief Editing Board of Oriental Literature, 1980.

[288]. Zavelskiy, F. S. Time and its Keeping. Moscow, Nauka, 1987.

[289]. Porfiriev, G., ed. The Mysteries and Conundrums of the “Quiet flows the Don.” Collected works. Samara, P.S., 1996.

[290]. The Gospel Teachings. Jordanville, the Rev. Job. Pogayevsky Typography, 1987.

[290:1]. Zaliznyak, A. A., and V. L. Yanin. The XI century Psalm Book of Novgorod as the Oldest Book in Russia. The RAS Courier, Vol. 71, No. 3 (2001): 202-209.

[291]. Zamarovsky, V. Mysteries of the Hittites. Moscow, Nauka, 1968. Also see: Zamarovsky, V. Za tajemstvism rise Chetitu. Prague, 1964.

[291:1]. Zamkova, M. V. Louvre. (The Masterpieces of World Art in your Home). Album. Moscow, Olma-Obrazovanie, 2002.

[292]. Notes of the Russian and Slavic Archaeology Department of the Russian Archaeological Society. Vol. XII. Petrograd, Typography of Y. Bashmakov & Co, 1918.

[293]. Star Charts of the Norhern and the Southern Hemisphere. Edition: Maru severni a jizni hvezdne oblohy. Czechoslovakia, Kartografie Praha, 1971.

[294]. Kondrashina, V. A., and L. A. Timoshina, eds. Zvenigorod Over Six Centuries. A collection of articles. To the 600th anniversary of the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery. The Moscow Oblast Administration Culture Committee. The Zvenigorod Museum of History, Arts, and Architecture. The Federal Archive Service of Russia. Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts. Moscow, URSS Press, 1998.

[294:1]. Zgura, V. V. Kolomenskoye. An Aperçu of its Cultural History and Monuments. Moscow, O.I.R.U., 1928.

[295]. Zelinskiy, A. N. Constructive Principles of the Ancient Russian Calendar. The Context 1978 collection. Moscow, Nauka, 1978.

[296]. Zelinskiy, F. Selected Biographies of Ideas. Vols. I-IV. St. Petersburg, 1905-1922.

[297]. Zenin, D. The Ancient Artillery: Truth and Fiction. The Science and Technology magazine, No. 5 (1982): 25-29.

[298]. Zenkovsky, S. A. Old Ritualists of Russia. The XVII century Religious Movements. Moscow, Tserkov, 1995.

[299]. Zima, D., and N. Zima. Nostradamus Deciphered. Moscow, Ripol Klassik, 1998.

[299:1]. The Banner of Reverend Serge (Sergiy) of Radonezh. Psaltyr, 1934. Reprinted by RIO Dennitsa, Moscow, 1991.

[300]. Zoubov, V. P. Aristotle. Moscow, The USSR Academy of Sciences Press, 1963.

[301]. Ivan IV The Terrible. Essays. St. Petersburg, Azbuka, 2000.

[301:1]. Ivanov, O. The Zamoskvorechye: Chronicle Pages. Moscow, V. Shevchouk Publications, Inc., 2000.

[302]. Idelson, N. History of the Calendar. Leningrad, Scientific Publications, 1925.

[303]. Idries, Shah. Sufism. Moscow, 1993.

[304]. Ieger, Oscar. Global History. Vols. 1-4. St. Petersburg, A. F. Marx, 1894-1904.

[304:1]. Ieger, Oscar. Global History. Vols. 1-4. St. Petersburg, A. F. Marx, 1904. Amended and expanded. Faximile reprint: Moscow, AST, 2000.

[304:2]. Ieger, Oscar. Global History. Vols. 1-4. St. Petersburg, A. F. Marx, 1904. 3rd ed., amended and expanded. Faximile reprint: Moscow, AST, 2001; St Petersburg, Polygon, 2001.

[305]. Jerusalem in Russian Culture. Collected essays. Moscow, Nauka, 1994.

[306]. Selected Letters of A. N. Roudnev to V. N. Leonova. Frankfurt-am-Main, Nadezhda, 1981.

[306:1]. A Representation of the Terrestrial Globe. Russian map from the Rarities of Russian Cartography series. (There is no compilation date anywhere on the map. The publishers date it to mid-XVIII century, q.v. in the annotation). Moscow, the Kartair Cartographical Association, 1996.

[307]. Derevenskiy, B. G., comp. Jesus Christ in Historical Documents. From the Ancient Christianity series, Sources section. St. Petersburg, Aleteya, 1998.

[308]. Ouspensky, L. A. Icon Art of Ancient Russia. Album. Foreword by S. S. Averintsev, compiled by N. I. Bednik. St. Petersburg, Khudozhnik Rossii, 1993.

[309]. Ilyin, A. A. The Classification of Russian Provincial Coins. Issue 1. Leningrad, The State Hermitage, 1940.

[310]. Ilyin, M., and T. Moiseyeva. Moscow and its Environs. Moscow, 1979.

[311]. Ilyin, M. The Ways and the Quests of an Arts Historian. Moscow, Iskusstvo Publications, 1970.

[312]. Illarion. On the Law and the Bliss. Moscow, Stolitsa and Skriptoriy, 1994.

[312:1]. The Names of Moscow Streets (multiple authors). Under the general editorship of A. M. Pegov. Moscow, Moskovskiy Rabochiy, 1972.

[313]. de la Vega, Inca Garcilazo. History of the State of the Incas. Leningrad, Nauka, 1974.

[314]. Foreigners on Ancient Moscow. Moscow of the XV-XVII centuries. Collected texts. Moscow, Stolitsa, 1991.

[315]. of Hildesheim, Johann. A Legend of the Three Holy Kings. Translated from German. Moscow, Enigma-Aleteya, 1998. German edition: von Hildesheim, Johan. Die Legende von den Heiligen Drei Königen. Berlin, 1925.

[316]. The Art of the Countries and the Peoples of the World. A Brief Scientific Encyclopaedia. Vol. 1. Moscow, Soviet Encyclopaedia Publications, 1962.

[317]. Islam: an Encyclopaedic Dictionary. Moscow, Nauka, General Editing Board for Oriental Literature, 1991.

[318]. Martzyshevskaya, K. A., B. J. Sordo-Peña, and S. Mariñero. Spanish-Russian and Russian-Spanish Dictionary. Moscow, Russkiy Yazyk, 1990.

[319]. Historical and Astronomical Research. Moscow, Fizmatgiz, 1955.

[320]. Historical and Astronomical Research. Issue 8. Moscow, Fizmatgiz, 1962.

[321]. Historical and Astronomical Research. Issue 1. Moscow-Leningrad, 1948.

[322]. Historical Notes of Nicephorus Vriennius. St. Petersburg, 1858.

[323]. History of Byzantium. Vol. 1. Moscow, Nauka, 1967.

[324]. History of Byzantium. Vols. 2-3. Moscow, Nauka, 1967.

[325]. History of the Orient. Vol. 2. Mediaeval Orient. Russian Academy of Sciences, the Department of Oriental Sciences. Moscow, Vostochnaya Literatura, RAS, 1995.

[326]. Kouzishchin, V. I., ed. History of the Ancient Orient. Moscow, 1979.

[327]. Kouzishchin, V. I., and A. G. Bokshchanin., eds. History of the Ancient Rome. Moscow, 1971.

[328]. History of Europe. Published in Europe as an initiative of Frederic Delouche. A Collective of 12 European Historians. Minsk, Vysheyshaya Shkola; Moscow, Prosveshchenie, 1996. Translated from Histoire de l’Europe. Hachette, 1992.

[328:1]. History of Europe. The Renaissance. Moscow, Minsk, Harvest, AST, Inc., 2000.

[329]. Melnik, A. G., ed. History and Culture of the Land of Rostov. 1998. Collected essays. Rostov, The Rostov Kremlin State Museum and Reserve, 1999.

[330]. History of the Inquisition in Three Volumes. Vols. 1 and 2: Lee, Henry Charles. History of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages. A reprint of the F. A. Efron, I. A. Brockhaus edition. 1911-1912. Vol. 3: Lozinsky, S. G. History of the Spanish Inquisition. A reprint of the F. A. Efron, I. A. Brockhaus edition. 1914. Moscow, The Ladomir Scientific and Publishing Centre, 1994.

[330:1]. History of Moscow in the Documents of the XII-XVIII century from the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts. The Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts, Moscow Municipal Archive Association. Moscow, Mosgorarkhiv, 1997.

[331]. Sakharov, A. N., ed. History of Moscow. From the Earliest Days until Our Time. Three volumes. Moscow, the RAS Institute of Russian History, the Moscow Municipal Association, Mosgorarkhiv Press. Vol. 1: XII-XVII century. Vol. 2: XIX century. 1997.

[332]. Russian History. From the Ancient Slavs to Peter the Great. Encyclopaedia for Children. Vol. 5. Moscow, Avanta, 1995.

[333]. Udaltsov, A. D., E. A. Kosminsky, O. L. Weinstein, eds. Mediaeval History. Moscow, OGIZ, 1941.

[334]. Skazkin, S. D., ed. Mediaeval History. Volumes 1-2. Moscow, 1977.

[335]. History of French Literature. Collected essays. St. Petersburg, 1887. English edition: Demogeot, J., History of French Literature. London, Rivingstons, 1884 (1883).

[336]. Helmolt, H., ed. The History of Humanity. Global History. Vols. 1-9. Translated from German. St. Petersburg: Prosveshchenie, 1896.

[337]. Istrin, V. M. I-IV Editions of the Explanatory Paleya. St. Petersburg, The Imperial Academic Typography, 1907.

[338]. Istrin, V. M. The Chronicle of John Malalas in Slavic Translation. A reprint of V. M. Istrin’s materials. Moscow, John Wiley & Sons, 1994.

[339]. Pouchkov, P. I., ed. Extinct Nations. Collected essays. Moscow, Nauka, 1988.

[340]. Itogi (The Resume). Weekly magazine. No. 37 (223) (12 September 2000). Moscow, Sem Dney Press.

[341]. Duchich, Jovan. Duke Sava Vladislavich. The First Serbian Diplomat at the court of Peter the Great and Catherine I. Belgrade, Dereta, 1999.

[342]. Kazhdan, A. P. The Origins and the Purport of Christianity. Moscow, 1962.

[343]. Kazhdan, A. P. The Social Compound of the Byzantine Ruling Class of the XI-XII century. Moscow, Nauka, 1974.

[344]. Kazakova, N. A. Western Europe in Russian Written Sources of the XV-XVI century. Leningrad, Nauka, 1980.

[345]. Kazamanova, A. N. An Introduction to Ancient Numismatics. Moscow, Moscow University Press, 1969.

[346]. The Cossack Circle. Quiet flows the Don. Special edition 1. Moscow, Russkoye Slovo, 1991.

[347]. Skrylov, A. I., and G. V. Gubarev. The Cossack Dictionary and Handbook. Cleveland, 1966. Reprinted Moscow, Sozidanie Ltd., 1992.

[348]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Geometry of Mobile Star Configurations and the Dating of the Almagest. Problems of stochastic model stability. Seminar works. The National System Research Institute, 1988. 59-78.

[349]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Statistical Analysis and Dating of the Observations that the Almagest Star Catalogue is Based upon. Report theses of the 5th Int’l Probability Theory Conference in Vilnius, the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences Institute of Mathematics and Cybernetics, Vol. 3 (1989): 271-272.

[350]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G. V. Nosovskiy. Dating the Almagest by Variable Star Configurations. The USSR AS Reports, Vol. 307, No. 4 (1989): 829-832. English translation published in Soviet Phys. Dokl., Vol. 34, No. 8 (1989): 666-668.

[351]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G. V. Nosovskiy. A Retrospective Analysis of the Almagest Star Catalogue and the Problem of its Dating. Preprint. Moscow, National System Research Institute, 1990. 60 p.

[352]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G. V. Nosovskiy. A Quantitative Analysis of the Almagest Star Catalogue. Pre-print. Moscow, National System Research Institute, 1990. 62 p.

[353]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G. V. Nosovskiy. Dating the Almagest Star Catalogue. Preprint. Moscow, National System Research Institute, 1990. 58 p.

[354]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G. V. Nosovskiy. Ptolemy’s Star Catalogue Dated by Mathematicians. Hypotheses, Predictions, and the Future of Science. The Int’l Annual Journal. No. 23 (1990): 78-92. Moscow, Znaniye.

[355]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G. V. Nosovskiy. A Statistical Analysis of the Almagest Star Catalogue. The USSR AS Reports. Vol. 313, No. 6 (1990): 1315-1320.

[356]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G. V. Nosovskiy. Dating the Almagest Star Catalogue. A Statistical and Geometric Analysis. Moscow, Faktorial, 1995.

[356:1]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G. V. Nosovskiy. An Astronomical Analysis of Chronology. The Almagest. Zodiacs. Moscow, The Delovoi Express Financial, 2000.

[357]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and S. T. Rachev. New Methods of Comparing Volume Functions of Historical Texts. Seminar works. Moscow, National System Research Institute, 1986. 33-45.

[358]. Kaleda, G. The Shroud of Our Lord Jesus Christ. To the Centenary of the Manifestation of the Holiest of Relics, 1898-1998. 4th edition. Moscow, Zakatyevsky Monastery Press, 1998.

[358:1]. Russia and the World on Russian Maps. Moscow, published by Vneshtorgbank and the State Museum of History in 2001. Compiled by B. Sergeyev and A. Zaitsev. Maps from the collection of the State Museum of History, 16, Kuznetskiy Most, 103301, Moscow.

[359]. The Stonework Chronicle of the old Moscow. Moscow, Sovremennnik, 1985.

[360]. Kamensky, A. B. The Life and the Fate of the Empress Catherine the Great. Moscow, Znanie, 1997.

[361]. Kaneva, Katerina, Alessandro Cechi, and Antonio Natali. Uffizi. A Guide and a Catalogue of the Art Gallery. Scala/ Becocci, 1997. Moscow, Izobrazitelnoye Iskusstvo, 1997.

[362]. Karamzin, N. M. History of the State of Russia. St. Petersburg, 1842. A reprint of the fifth edition that came out as 3 books with P. M. Stroyev’s Key attached. Books I, II, III, IV. Moscow, Kniga, 1988, 1989.

[363]. Karamzin, N. M. History of the State of Russia (Academic edition). Moscow, Nauka. Vol. 1: 1989. Vols. 2-3: 1991. Vol. 4: 1992. Vol. 5: 1993.

[364]. Karger, M. K. Ancient Kiev. Essays on the History of the Material Culture of this Ancient Russian City. Vol. 1. Moscow-Leningrad, The USSR AS Press, 1958.

[365]. Karger, M. Novgorod the Great. Moscow, The USSR Academy of Architecture. The Architectural History and Theory Institute. 1946.

[366]. Karelin Andrei Osipovich. Legacy of an Artist. Nizhni Novgorod, Arnika, 1994.

[367]. Karnovich, E. P. Patrimonial Names and Titles in Russia. St. Petersburg, 1886. Reprinted in Moscow, Bimpa Press, 1991.

[368]. Valcanover, Francesco. Carpaccio. Album. Moscow, Slovo, 1996. The Italian edition was published in the Great Masters of Italian Art series. Florence, Scala, Istituto Fotografico Editoriale, Antella, 1989.

[369]. Karpenko. V. V. The Names on the Sky at Night. Moscow, Nauka, 1981.

[370]. Carpiceci, Alberto Carlo. The Art and History of Egypt. 5000 Years of Civilization. Russian edition. Florence, Casa Editrice Bonechi, 1997.

[371]. Carpiceci, Alberto Carlo. The Art and History of Egypt. 5000 Years of Civilization. Florence, Bonechi, 1999.

[372]. Kartashev, A. V. Essays on the History of Russian Church. Vols. 1, 2. Moscow, Nauka, 1991.

[373]. Kartashev, A. V. Essays on the History of Russian Church. Moscow, Terra, 1992.

[374]. Carter, H. The Tomb of Tutankhamen. Moscow, Oriental Literature, 1959.

[375]. Quintus Curtius Rufus. The Story of Alexander the Great. Moscow, MSU Press, 1993.

[376]. Denisenko, D. V., and N. S. Kellin. When Were the Famous Dendera Zodiacs Really Created? An appendix to Fomenko, A. T. Criticism of Traditional Chronology of Antiquity and the Middle Ages (What Century is it Now?). Moscow, MSU Publications, the MSU Department of Mechanical Mathematics, 1993. 156-166.

[377]. Fomenko, A. T., N. S. Kellin, and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Issue of the Veracity of the “Ancient” History of Russia by M. V. Lomonosov. Lomonosov or Miller? The Moscow University Courier, Series 9: Philology, No. 1 (1991): 116-125.

[378]. Kenderova, Stoyanka, and Beshevliev, Boyan. The Balkan Peninsula on AlIdrisi’s Map. Palaeographic, Historical and Geographical Research. Part 1. Sofia, 1990.

[379]. Ceram, C. Gods, Graves and Scholars. Moscow, Inostrannaya Literatura, 1960. English original: London, Victor Gollancz in association with Sidgwick & Jackson, 1971.

[380]. Ceram, C. Gods, Graves and Scholars. St. Petersburg, Nizhegorodskaya Yarmarka, KEM, 1994.

[381]. Kibalova, L., O. Gerbenova, and M. Lamarova. An Illustrated Encyclopaedia of Fashion. Prague, Artia, 1966.

[382]. Kinnam, Johann. A Brief Review of the Reigns of John and Manuel Comneni. St. Petersburg, 1859.

[383]. Kinzhalov, R. V. The Ancient Mayan Culture. Leningrad, Nauka, 1971.

[384]. Kiriaku, Georgios P. Cyprus in Colours. Limassol, Cyprus, K. P. Kiriaku (Books & Office Requisites) Ltd., 1987.

[385]. Kirpichnikov, A. N. The Pages of the “Iron Book.” Nauka I Zhizn (Science and Life) magazine, No. 6 (1966): 49-55.

[385:1]. Kiselyova L. I. What do the Mediaeval Chronicles Tell Us? Leningrad, Nauka, 1978.

[386]. Kyetsaa, H. The Battle for the “Quiet flows the Don.” Seanado-Statica, 22, 1976.

[387]. Kyetsaa, H. The Battle for the “Quiet flows the Don.” USA, Pergamon Press, 1977.

[388]. Klassen, E. I. New Materials for the Studies of the Historical Dawn of Slavs in General, and pre-Ryurik Russo-Slavs in Particular, with an Aperçu of the BC History of Russia. Issues 1-3. With the Descriptions of the Monuments Explaining the History of the Slavs and the Russians Compiled by Fadey Volansky and Translated by E. Klassen. Moscow University Press, 1854. Reprinted by Andreyev i Soglasie, St. Petersburg, 1995.

[389]. Klassovsky, V. A Systematic Description of Pompeii and the Artefacts Discovered There. St. Petersburg, 1848.

[390]. Klein, L. S. Archaeology Controverts Physics. The Priroda (Nature) magazine, No. 2 (1966): 51-62.

[391]. Klein, L. S. Archaeology Controverts Physics (continued). The Priroda (Nature) magazine, No. 3 (1966): 94-107.

[391:1]. Klengel-Brandt, E. A Journey into the Old Babylon. Moscow, Nauka, General Editing Board for Oriental Literature, the USSR AS, Institute of Oriental Studies, 1979. Translated from German: Klengel-Brandt, E. Reise in das alte Babylon. Leipzig, 1971.

[392]. Kligene N., and L. Telxnis. Methods of Determining Change Points in Random Processes. Avtomatika i Telemekhanika (Automatics and Telemechanics), No. 10 (1983): 5-56.

[393]. Klimishin, I. A. Chronology and the Calendar. Moscow, Nauka, 2nd edition, 1985.

[394]. Klimishin, I. A. Chronology and the Calendar. Moscow, Nauka, 3rd edition, 1990.

[395]. Klimishin, I. A. The Discovery of the Universe. Moscow, Nauka, 1987.

[396]. Klyuchevsky, V. O. Unreleased Works. Moscow, Nauka, 1983.

[397]. The Book of the Mormon. Another Testament of Jesus Christ. Translated by Joseph Smith, Jun. Salt Lake City, The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints, 1991. (Quoting the Russian translation of 1988).

[398]. The Book of Cosmas Indicopleustes. Published by V. S. Golyshenko and V. F. Doubrovina. RAS, the V. V. Vinogradov Institute of the Russian Language. Moscow, Indrik, 1997.

[399]. Loparev, H. M., ed. The Book of the Pilgrim. Holy Places in Czar-Grad Described by Anthony, the Archbishop of Novgorod in 1200. “The Orthodox Palestinian Collection,” Vol. 17, 3rd edition. St. Petersburg, 1899.

[400]. Literary Centres of the Ancient Russia in the XI-XVI century. St. Petersburg, Nauka, 1991.

[401]. Knorina, L. V. Linguistic Aspects of the Hebraic Commentary Tradition. Voprosy Yazykoznania (Linguistic Issues), No. 1 (1997): 97-108.

[402]. Kowalski, Jan Wierusz. Papacy and the Popes. Moscow, Political Literature Publications, 1991. A translation of the Polish book Poczet Papiezy. Warsaw, 1985.

[403]. Kovalchenko, I. D. The Use of Quantitative Methods and Computers in Historical Research. The Voprosy Istorii (Historical Issues) journal, No. 9 (1984): 61-73.

[404]. Kogan, V. M. The History of the House of Ryurikovichi. St. Petersburg, Belvedere, 1993.

[405]. Kozlov, V. A Case of Church Robbery. The Moskovskiy Zhurnal (Moscow Magazine), No. 7 (1991).

[406]. Kozlov, V. Under the Flag of Nihilism. The Moskovskiy Zhurnal (Moscow Magazine), No. 6 (1991).

[407]. Kozlov, V. P. Falsification Mysteries. An Analysis of Historical Source Forgeries of the XVIII-XIX centuries. Moscow, Aspekt, 1996.

[407:1]. Kozlov, V. T. The 30-Year War. European Splendour. The Renaissance. Humanism. The Enlightenment. Moscow, The V. T. Kozlov Regional Public Fund for the Support and Development of Arts and Culture, 2001. 44.

[408]. Kozlov, P. Yaroslavl. Yaroslavl, The Upper Volga Publishing House, 1972.

[409]. Kozlov, P. I., and V. F. Marov. Yaroslavl. A Guide and a Reference Book. Yaroslavl, The Upper Volga, 1988.

[410]. Kokkinoftas, Kostis and Theocharidis, Ioannis. “Enkolpion.” A Brief Description of St. Kykkos Monastery. Nicosia, The St. Kykkos Monastery Research Centre, 1995.

[411]. Kolodny, L. “Turbulence over the ‘Quiet flows the Don.’ Fragments of the Past: the Sources used for a Certain XX century Animad version. Moskovskaya Pravda (5 and 7 March, 1989).

[412]. Rauschenbach, B .V., ed. Bells. History and Contemporaneity. Compiled by Y. V. Pukhnachev. The Scientific Counsel for World Culture History, the USSR AS. Moscow, Nauka, 1985.

[413]. Kolosov, Vassily. Perambulations in the Environs of the Simonov Monastery. Moscow, 1806.

[414]. Kolchin, B. A., and Y. A. Sher. Absolute Archaeological Datings and their Problems. Moscow, Nauka, 1972.

[415]. Kohlrausch, F. History of Germany. Vols. I, II. Moscow, 1860. English edition: Kohlrausch, F. A History of Germany, from the Earliest Period to the Present Time. New York, D. Appelton & Co, 1896.

[415:1]. Kolyazin, V. F. From The Passion Play Mystery to the Carnival. The Histrionics of the German Religious and Popular Stage of the Early and the Late Middle Ages. Moscow, Nauka, 2002.

[416]. Archimandrite Palladius Kafarov Commentary on Marco Polo’s Voyage through Northern China. St. Petersburg, 1902.

[417]. Comnena, Anna. The Alexiad. Moscow, Nauka, 1965. English edition: Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1969.

[418]. Comnena, Anna. The Alexiad. St. Petersburg. Aleteya, 1996.

[419]. Comnena, Anna. A Brief Account of the Deeds of King Alexis Comnenus. St. Petersburg, 1859.

[420]. Kondakov, N. P. The Iconography of Our Lady. 3 volumes. Moscow, Palomnik. Vols. 1 and 2, 1998. Vol. 3, 1999.

[420:1]. Kondratov, Alexander. The Mysteries of the Three Oceans. Leningrad, Gidrometeoizdat, 1971.

[421]. Kondratyev, I. K. The Ancient Moscow. A Historical Review and a Full List of the City’s Monuments. Moscow, Voyenizdat, 1996.

[422]. Kondrashina, V. A. The Savvino-Storozhevsky Monastery. 600 Years since the Foundation of the Coenoby of Rev. Savva. An album of photographs. Moscow, Leto, 1998.

[423]. Koniskiy, G. (The Archbishop of Byelorussia). The History of Russians, or the Lesser Russia. The Moscow University Typography, 1846.

[424]. Konstantin Mikhailovich from Ostrovitsa. The Notes of a Janissary. Introduction, translation, and commentary by A. I. Rogov. Published in the Monuments of Mediaeval History of the Nations of Central and Eastern Europe series. The USSR AS, Institute of Slavic and Balkan Studies. Moscow, Nauka, 1978.

[425]. Konstantinov, N. The Secret Alphabet of Stolnik Baryatinsky. The Nauka i Zhizn (Science and Life) magazine, No. 10 (1972): 118-119.

[426]. Context 1978. Collected works. Moscow, Nauka, 1978.

[427]. The Koran. Moscow, Oriental Literature, 1963.

[428]. The Koran. Translated by I. Y. Krachkovsky. Moscow, Raritet, 1990.

[429]. Al Rosha, Dr. Mohammed Said., ed. The Koran. 2nd edition, revised and enlarged by Valeria Prokhorova. Damascus-Moscow, The Al-Furkan Centre and Mikhar Corp., 2553, 10.2.95, 1996.

[430]. The Ecclesial Law Book (Kormchaya) of 1620. 256/238, The Manuscript Fund of the Russian National Library (Moscow).

[430:1]. Kornilov N. I., Solodova Y. P. Jewels and gems. Moscow, Nedra, 1983.

[431]. Korkh, A. S. Mikhail Illarionovich Koutouzov. The Moscow State Museum of History. n.d.

[432]. Korsh, M. A Brief Dictionary of Mythology and Antiquities. St. Petersburg, A. S. Souvorin, 1894. Reprinted: Kaluga, Amata, Golden Alley, 1993.

[433]. Kosambi, D. The Culture and Civilization of Ancient India. Moscow, Progress, 1968. English edition: Kosambi D. The Culture and Civilization of Ancient India in Historical Outline. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1965.

[434]. Kosidowski, Z. When the Sun was God. Moscow, Nauka, 1968. Polish edition: Kosidowsky Z. Gdy Slonce Bylo Bogiem. Warsaw, 1962.

[435]. Kostomarov, N. I. The Reign of the House of St. Vladimir. Moscow, Voyenizdat, 1993.

[436]. Kostomarov, N. I. The Age of Turmoil in Early XVII century Moscovia (1604-1613). Moscow, Charli, 1994.

[437]. Kostomarov, N. I. Bogdan Khmelnitsky. Moscow, Charlie, 1994.

[437:1]. Kochergina, V. A. Sanskrit-Russian Dictionary. About 30.000 words. Moscow, Filologia, 1996.

[438]. Golubev, A. A., comp. The Kostroma Region. Moscow, Planeta, 1988.

[439]. Cramer, C. Mathematical Methods of Statistics. Moscow, Mir, 1975. English original: Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1958.

[440]. The Concise Geographical Encyclopaedia. Vol. 1, Moscow, State Academic Soviet Encyclopaedia Publications, 1960.

[440:1]. Krekshin, P. N. A Criticism of the Freshly-Printed Book of 1761 about the Origins of Rome and the Actions of its People and Monarchs. The reverse of the last sheet says: “Criticism by the Nobleman of the Great New Town Peter of Nicephor, son of Kreksha, in 1762, on the 30th day of September, St. Petersburg.” The manuscript is kept in the State Archive of the Yaroslavl Oblast as Manuscript #43 (431).

[441]. The Peasant War in Russia Led by Stepan Razin. Collected documents. Vols. 1-4. Moscow, Academy of Sciences, 1954-1970.

[442]. Luchinat, Christina Acidini. Benozzo Gozzoli. Published in the Great Masters of Italian Art series. Moscow, Slovo, 1996. Italian edition: Scala, Istituto Fotografico Editoriale, 1995.

[443]. Kriesh, Elli G. The Treasure of Troy and its History. Moscow, Raduga, 1996. German original: Kriesh, Elli G. Der Schatz von Troja und seine Geschichte. Carlsen, 1994.

[444]. Kryvelev, I. A. The Excavations in the “Biblical” Countries. Moscow, Sovietskaya Rossia, 1965.

[445]. Kryvelev, I. A. A Book about the Bible. Moscow, Sotsekgiz, 1958.

[446]. Krylov, A. N. Newton and his Role in Global Science. 1643-1943. The USSR Academy of Sciences. Moscow-Leningrad, USSR AS Publications, 1943.

[447]. Xenophon. History of the Hellenes. Leningrad, Ogiz, 1935. English edition: Xenophon. Hellenica. In: W. Briggs, Tutorial Series, Books III, IV. London, 1894.

[448]. Koublanov, M. M. The New Testament. Research and Discoveries. Moscow, Nauka, 1968.

[449]. Koudriavtsev, M. P. Moscow the Third Rome. A Historical and Urbanistic Research. Moscow, Sol System, 1994.

[450]. Koudriavtsev, O. F., comp. Russia in the First Half of the XVI century. A European View. The Russian AS, Global History Institute. Moscow, Russkiy Mir, 1997.

[451]. Kouznetsov, V. G. Newton. Moscow, Mysl, 1982.

[452]. Koulakovsky, Y. A. Byzantine History. Vols. 1, 2. St. Petersburg, Aleteya, 1996.

[453]. Koulikovsky, P. G. Stellar Astronomy. Moscow, Nauka, 1978.

[454]. Koun, N. A. The Predecessors of Christianity. Moscow, 1922.

[455]. Kourbatov, L. G. Byzantine History. Moscow, Vyshaya Shkola, 1984.

[456]. The UNESCO Courier magazine, No. 12 (1968).

[457]. Koutouzov, B. The Church Reform of the XVII century. The Tserkov (Church) magazine (Moscow), Issue 1 (1992).

[457:1]. Koutsenko, G., and Y. Novikov. Make Yourself A Present of Health. Moscow, Moskovskiy Rabochiy, 1988.

[458]. Cimpan, F. The History of the Pi Number. Moscow, Nauka, 1971 (1984). Romanian original: Cipman, F. Istoria Numarului pi. Bucharest, Tineret Press, 1965.

[458:1]. Cumont, Franz. The Mysteries of Mithras. Magicum. St. Petersburg, Eurasia, 2000. Original edition: Franz Cumont. Les Mystères de Mithra. Magicum. Brussels, H. Lamertin, 1913.

[459]. Lavisse, E., and A. Rambaud. History of the Crusades. Vols. I and II. Moscow, 1914. French original: Histoire générale du IVe siècle à nos jours. L’Europe féodale, les croisades, 1095-1270. Paris, A. Colin & Cie, 1893-1901.

[460]. The Lavrenty Chronicle. (A complete compilation of Russian chronicles). V. 1. Moscow, Yazyki Russkoi Kulturi, 1997.

[461]. Lavrov, N. F. A Guide to the Churches of Uglich. Uglich, the Municipal Museum of Arts and History, 1994. A re-print from an 1869 original, Yaroslavl, the Province Typography.

[462]. Lazarev, V. N. The Icon Art of Novgorod. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1969.

[462:1]. Lombroso. C. Genius and Madness. Moscow, Respublika, 1995.

[463]. Lann, E. A Literary Mystification. Moscow, 1930.

[464]. Lauer, Jean-Philippe. The Mystery of the Egyptian Pyramids. Moscow, Nauka, 1966. French edition: Le Mystère des Pyramides. Paris, Presses de la Cité, 1974.

[465]. Deacon, Leon. History. Moscow, Nauka, 1988. See also: Leonis Diaconi Caloensis Historiae libri decem. E recensione C. B. Hasii. Bonnae, 1828.

[466]. Levandovsky, A. P. Charlemagne. From the Empire towards Europe. Moscow, Soratnik, 1995.

[467]. Levitan, E., and N. Mamouna. The Star of Bethlehem. The Nauka i Zhizn (Science and Life) magazine, No. 11 (1989).

[468]. Levchenko, M. V. Byzantine History. Moscow-Leningrad, Ogiz, Sotsekgiz, 1940.

[469]. The Legend of Dr. Faustus. Moscow, Nauka, 1978. Also see: The History of the Damnable Life and Deserved Death of Doctor John Faustus. London, G. Routledge; New York, E. P. Duttom, 1925.

[470]. Lehmann. An Illustrated History of Superstition and Sorcery from the Antiquity to Our Days. Moscow, Knizhnoe Delo, 1900. Also see: Lehmann, A. Overto og trolddom fra de aeldste til vore dage. Copenhagen, J. Frimodt, 1893-1896.

[471]. Lentsman, Y. A. The Origins of Christianity. Moscow, USSR AS Press, 1958.

[471:1]. The Life and Art of Leonardo. Moscow, Byely Gorod, 2001. Giunti Gruppo Editoriale, Florence, 2000.

[472]. Leonid. A Systematic Description of A. S. Ouvarov’s Russo-Slavic Manuscripts. Moscow, 1894.

[473]. Leontyeva, G. A., Shorin, P. A. and Kobrin, V. B. The Keys to the Mysteries of Clio. Palaeography, Metrology, Chronology, Heraldic Studies, Numismatics, Onomatology and Genealogy. Moscow, Prosveshchenie, 1994.

[473:1]. Leskov, A. M. Burial Mounds: Findings and Problems. Leningrad, Nauka, 1981.

[474]. Lesna, Ivan. On the Ails of the Great. Prague, Grafit, 1990.

[475]. Lesnoy, Sergei. History of the Slavs Revised. Melbourne, 1956.

[476]. Lesnoy, Sergei. A Non-Distorted History of the Russians. Vols. 1-10. Paris, 1957.

[477]. Lesnoy, Sergei. Russia, where are you from? Winnipeg, 1964.

[477:0]. Lesnoy, Sergei. The Book of Veles. Moscow, Zakharov, 2002.

[477:1]. A Chronicler of Hellas and Rome. Vol. 1. The RAS Institute of Russian Literature (The House of Pushkin). St. Petersburg, Dmitry Boulanin, 1999.

[478]. Libby, W. F. Carbon-14: a Nuclear Chronometer of Archaeology. The UNESCO Courier, No. 7 (No. 139)(1968).

[479]. Libby, W. F. The Radiocarbon Dating Method. The International Peaceful Nuclear Energy Conference materials (Geneva), Vol. 16 (1987): 41-64.

[480]. Libby, W. F. Radiocarbon: an Atomic Clock. The annual Nauka i Chelovechestvo (Science and Humanity) journal (1962): 190-200. Moscow, Znaniye.

[481]. Libman, M., and G. Ostrovskiy. Counterfeit Masterpieces. Moscow, Sovetskiy Khudozhnik, 1966.

[482]. Livy, Titus. Roman History since the Foundation of the City. 6 volumes. Translation and general editorship by P. Adrianov. Moscow, E. Herbeck Typography, 1897-1899.

[483]. Livy, Titus. Roman History since the Foundation of the City. Vols. 1, 2 and 3. Moscow, Nauka, Vol. 1 (1989), Vol. 2 (1991), Vol. 3 (1993). English edition: Livy, Titus. Works. Cambridge, Mass; London, Heinemann, 1914.

[484]. Livraga, Jorge A. Thebe. Moscow, New Acropolis, 1995.

[485]. Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary. Moscow, Soviet Encyclopedia Publications, 1990.

[486]. Lipinskaya, Y., and M. Martsinyak. Ancient Egyptian Mythology. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1983.

[487]. Lituanus, Michalonis. On the Customs of the Tartars, the Lithuanians and the Muscovites. Moscow, MSU Publications, 1994. See also: Michalonis Lituani. De moribus tartarorum, lituanorum et moschorum fragmina X, multiplici historia referta et Johannis Lascii poloni De diis samagitarum, caeterorumque sarmatarum et falsorum christianorum. Item de religione armeniorum et de initio regiminus Stephani Batori. Nunc primum per J. Jac. Grasserum, C. P. ex manuscriptio authentico edita. Basileae, apud Conradum Waldkirchium, MDCXV, 1-41.

[488]. Literary legacy. V. I. Lenin and A. V. Lunacharsky. Correspondence, Reports, Documents. Moscow, Nauka, 1971.

[489]. Lifshitz, G. M. Essays on Early Christianity and Biblical Historiography. Minsk: Vysheyshaya Shkola, 1970.

[490]. Likhachev, N. P. The Artistic Manner of Andrei Rublev. St. Petersburg, 1907.

[490:1]. Likhacheva, E. A. The Seven Hills of Moscow. Moscow, Nauka, 1990.

[491]. Lozinsky, S. G. History of the Spanish Inquisition. St. Petersburg, Brockhaus and Efron, 1914.

[492]. Lozinsky, S. G. History of the Papacy. Vols. I and II. Moscow, The Central TsS SWB Publications of USSR, 1934.

[493]. Lomonosov, M. V. Selected Works. Vol. 2. History, philology, poetry. Moscow, Nauka, 1986.

[493:1]. Gowing, Sir Lawrence. Paintings in the Louvre. Introduction by Michel Laclotte. Russian Translation by MK-Import, Ltd., Moscow, Mezhdunarodnaya Kniga, 1987. English edition: Stewart, Tabori & Chang, Inc., 1987.

[493:2]. Loades, D. Henry VIII and his Queens. The Mark in History series. Moscow, Feniks.

[494]. Pardi, J., comp. The Pilot Chart of the Gibraltar and the Mediterranean. Translated by I. Shestakov. Moscow, 1846.

[495]. Lourie, F. M. Russian and Global History in Tables. Synchrony tables (XXX century BC – XIX Century). World Governors. Genealogical Tables. Glossary. St. Petersburg, Karavella, 1995.

[496]. Louchin, A. A. The Slavs and History. An appendix to the Molodaya Gvardia (Young Guard) magazine, No. 9 (1997): 260-351.

[497]. Lyzlov, Andrei. History of the Scythians. Moscow, Nauka, 1990.

[497:1]. Liozzi, Mario. History of Physics. Moscow, Mir, 1970.

[498]. Lewis, G. C. A Research of Ancient Roman History and its Veracity. Hannover, 1852. German edition: Untersuchungen über die Glaubwürdigkeit der altrömischen Geschichte, Hannover, 1858.

[499]. Magi, Giovanna. Luxor. The Valleys of the Kings, Queens, Noblemen and Craftsmen. Memnon’s colossi. Deir-el-Bakhari – Medinet-Abu – Ramesseum. Florence, Casa Editrice Bonechi via Cairoli, 1999.

[500]. Makariy (Boulgakov), the Metropolitan of Moscow and Kolomna. History of the Russian Church. Books 1-7. Moscow, The Spaso-Preobrazhensky Monastery of Valaam Publications, 1994-1996.

[500:1]. Makariy, Archimandrite. Ancient Ecclesial Monuments. History of the Hierarchy of Nizhniy Novgorod. The True Tales of Nizhniy Novgorod series. Nizhniy Novgorod, Nizhegorodskaya Yarmarka, 1999.

[501]. Makarov, A. G., and S. E. Makarova. The Scotch Thistle Blossom. Towards the Sources of the “Quiet flows the Don.” Moscow, Photocopied by the General Research Institute of Gas Industry, 1991.

[502]. Makarov, A. G., and S. E. Makarova. Around the ”Quiet flows the Don.” From Myth Creation to a Search for Truth. Moscow, Probel, 2000.

[502:1]. Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. Ruminations in re the First Decade of Titus Livy. – St. Petersburg, Azbuka, 2002.

[502:2]. Machiavelli, Niccolo. The History of Florence. – Leningrad, Nauka, 1973.

[503]. Malalas, John. The Chronicle. Published by O. V. Tvorogov according to The Chronographer of Sofia in the Works of the Ancient Russian Literature Department, Vol. 37, pp. 192-221. Moscow, Nauka. English edition: The Chronicle of John Malalas. Chicago, Chicago University Press, 1940.

[504]. Kantor, A. M., ed. A Concise History of Fine Arts. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1981; Dresden, VEB Verlag der Kunst, 1981.

[504:1]. The Compact Soviet Encyclopaedia. Vols. 1-10. Moscow, Sovetskaya Encyclopaedia, Inc., 1928.

[505]. Malinovskaya, L. N. The Graveyard of the Khans (Mezarlyk). Bakhchisaray, the State Historical and Cultural Reserve, 1991.

[506]. Malinovskiy, A. F. A Review of Moscow. Moscow, Moskovskiy Rabochiy, 1992.

[507]. A Concise Atlas of the World. Moscow, General Department of Geodetics and Cartography of the USSR Council of Ministers. 1979.

[508]. Malver, A. Science and Religion. Russian translation by L. and E. Kroukovsky. N.p., 1925.

[509]. Marijnissen, R. H., and P. Ruyffelaere. Hieronymus Bosch. Commentated album. Antwerp, Mercatorfonds, 1987, 1995. Russian translation by Mezhdunarodnaya Kniga. Moscow, 1998.

[510]. Marco Polo. A Book on the Diversity of the World. The Personal Library of Borges. St. Petersburg, Amphora, 1999.

[511]. Markov, A. A. One of the Uses of the Statistical Method. The Academy of Sciences News, Series 6, Vol. X, Issue 4 (1916).

[512]. Martynov, G. On the Origins of Roman Chronicles. Moscow University Press, 1903.

[513]. Massa, Isaac. A Brief Report of the Beginning and the Origins of Modern Muscovite Wars and Unrest that Occurred Before 1610 in the Brief Time when Several Rulers Reigned. Moscow, The Sergei Doubnov Fund, Rita-Print, 1997.

[514]. Massa, Isaac. A Brief Report on Moscovia. Moscow, 1937.

[514:1]. Matveyenko, V. A., and L. I. Shchegoleva. The Chronicle of George the Coenobite. Russian text, comments, indications. Moscow, Bogorodskiy Pechatnik, 2000.

[515]. Matvievskaya, G. P. Albrecht Dürer the Scientist. 1471-1528. A series of scientist biographies. Moscow, The USSR AS, Nauka, 1987.

[516]. Matvievskaya, G. P. As-Sufi. In Historical and Astronomical Research (Moscow, Nauka), Issue 16 (1983): 93-138.

[517]. Matuzova, V. I. Mediaeval English Sources. Moscow, Nauka, 1979.

[518]. Vlastar, Matthew. Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers. Balakhna, P. A. Ovchinnikov, The F. P. Volkov typography, 1908.

[519]. Smirnov B. L., editor and translator. The Mahabharata. Vols. 1-8. Tashkent, the Turkmenian SSR Academy of Sciences, 1955-1972. Vol. 1: two poems from the III book – Nala and Savitri (The Greatness of Marital Virtue) (2nd edition 1959); Vol. 2 – The Bhagavad Gita (1956); Vol. 3: The Highlander (1957); Vol. 4: The Conversation of Markandhea (1958); Vol. 5: Mokshadharma (1961); Vol. 6: A Journey Through the Treasuries (1962); Vol. 7: The Book of Bheeshma and the Book of the Battle of Maces (1963); Vol. 8: Attacking the Sleeping Ones (1972). English edition: Chicago-London, Chicago University Press, 1973. Also see the edition by the Jaico Publishing House, Bombay, 1976.

[519:1]. The Mahabharata. Narayana. Issue V, book 2. 2nd edition. Translated and edited by Academician B. L. Smirnov of the Turkmenian SSR Academy of Sciences. The TSSR AS, Ashkhabad, Ylym, 1984.

[519:2]. The Mahabharata. The Four Tales. Translated from Sanskrit by S. Lipkin. Interlineary by O. Volkova. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1969.

[520]. The Mahabharata. The Ramayana. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1974. Also see: The Ramayana. Madras, Periyar Self-Respect Propaganda Institution, 1972.

[520:1]. The Mahabharata. Book 2. Sabhaparva, or the Book of the Congregation. Translated from Sanskrit by V. I. Kalyanov. The Literary Monuments series. Moscow-Leningrad, Nauka, 1962.

[520:2]. The Mahabharata. Book 4. Virataparva, or the Book of Virata. Translated from Sanskrit by V. I. Kalyanov. The Literary Monuments series. Leningrad, Nauka, 1967.

[520:3]. The Mahabharata. Book 5. Udhiyogaparva, or the Book of Diligence. Translated from Sanskrit by V. I. Kalyanov. The Literary Monuments series. Leningrad, Nauka, 1976.

[520:4]. The Bhagavad Gita as it is. Complete edition with authentic Sanskrit texts, Russian transliteration, word-for-word and literary translation, and extensive commentaries. The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. Moscow-Leningrad-Calcutta-Bombay-New Delhi, 1984. The first English edition of the Bhagavad Gita: Wilkins. The Bhagavad Gita, or dialogs of Kreeshna and Arjoon. London, 1785. See also: Etgerton, F. Bhagavad Gita, Vols. 1-2. Harvard University Press, 1946 (with transcr. of the text).

[520:5]. The Mahabharata. Book 7. Dronaparva, or the Book of Drona. Translated from Sanskrit by V. I. Kalyanov. The Literary Monuments series. St. Petersburg, Nauka, 1993.

[520:6]. The Mahabharata. Book 3. The Book of the Woods (Aryanyakaparva). Translated from Sanskrit by A. V. Vasilkov and S. L. Neveleva. The Monuments of Oriental Literature series. LXXX, 1987.

[520:7]. The Burning of the Snakes. A Tale from the Indian Epic, the Mahabharata. Translated by V. I. Kalyanov. Moscow, Goslitizdat, 1958.

[521]. Mezentsev, M. T. The Fate of Novels (Concerning the Discussion on the “Quiet flows the Don” Authorship Problem). Samara, P. S. Press, 1994.

[522]. Medvedev, R. Who Wrote the “Quiet flows the Don”? Paris, Christian Bourg, 1975.

[522:1]. Meyer, M. S., A. F. Deribas, and N. B. Shuvalova. Turkey. The Book of Wanderings. A historical guidebook. Project author S. M. Bourygin. Moscow, Veche, Khartia, 2000.

[523]. Melnikova, E. A. Ancient Scandinavian Geographical Works. Moscow, Nauka, 1986.

[524]. Memoirs of Margaret de Valois. Translated by I. V. Shevlyagina. Introduction and comments by S. L. Pleshkova. French original: Mémoires de Marguerite de Valois. Paris, The Library of P. Jannet, MDCCCLVIII. Moscow University Press, 1995.

[525]. Methods of Studying the Oldest Sources on the History of the USSR Nations. Collected articles. Moscow, Nauka, 1978.

[526]. Methodical Research of Absolute Geochronology. Report Theses of the 3rd Methodical Symposium of 1976. Moscow, USSR AS Press, 1976.

[527]. Meshchersky, N. A. History of the Literary Russian Language. Leningrad, 1981.

[528]. Miceletti, Emma. Domenico Ghirlandio. Moscow, Slovo, 1996. Italian original: Italy, Scala, Istituto Fotografico Editoriale, 1995.

[529]. Miller, G. F. Selected Oeuvres on Russian History. The Monuments of Historical Thought series. Moscow, Nauka, RAS, 1996.

[530]. The World of the Bible. Magazine. 1993/1(1). Published by the Russian Society of Bible Studies.

[531]. The World of Geography. Geography and the Geographers. The Environment. Moscow, Mysl, 1984.

[532]. Meletinsky, E. M., ed. Dictionary of Mythology. Moscow, Sovetskaya Encyclopaedia, 1991.

[533]. Myths of the World. An Encyclopaedia. Vols. 1 and 2. Moscow, Sovetskaya Encyclopaedia, 1980 (Vol. 1) and 1981 (Vol. 2).

[534]. Mikhailov, A. A. The Eclipse Theory. Moscow, Gostekhteoretizdat, 1954.

[535]. Mikhailov, A. A. This Peculiar Radiocarbon Method. In Science and Technology, No. 8 (1983): 31-32.

[536]. Mokeyev, G. A. Mozhaysk – A Holy Town for the Russians. Moscow, Kedr, 1992.

[537]. Mokretsova, I. P., and V. L. Romanova. French Miniature Illustrations of the XIII century in Soviet Publications. 1270-1300. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1984.

[537:1]. Moleva, N. M. True Muscovite Stories. A Hundred Addresses of Russian History and Culture. To the 850-year anniversary of Moscow. Moscow, Znaniye, 1997.

[538]. Mommsen, T. The History of Rome. Moscow, 1936.

[539]. Mommsen, T. The History of Rome. Vol. 3. Moscow, Ogiz, 1941. English edition: London, Macmillan & Co, 1913.

[540]. Mongayt, A. L. The Writing upon the Stone. Moscow, Znanie, 1969.

[541]. Mongolian Sources Related to Dayan-Khan. A compilation. Moscow, Nauka, 1986

[541:1]. Mordovtsev, D. L. Collected works. Vols. 1-14. Moscow, Terra, 1995.

[542]. Morozov, N. A. The Revelation in Thunder and Storm. History of the Apocalypse. Moscow, 1907. 2nd edition Moscow, 1910. English translation: Northfield, Minnesota, 1941.

[543]. Morozov, N. A. The History of the Biblical Prophecies and their Literary Characteristics. The Prophets. Moscow, the I. D. Sytin Society Typography, 1914.

[544]. Morozov, N. A. Christ. History of Humanity in the Light of Natural Scientific Studies. Vols. 1-7. Moscow-Leningrad, Gosizdat, 1924-1932. Vol. 1: 1924 (2nd edition 1927), Vol. 2: 1926, Vol. 3: 1927, Vol. 4: 1928, Vol. 5: 1929, Vol. 6: 1930, Vol. 7: 1932. The first volume was published twice: in 1924 and 1927. Kraft Publications in Moscow made a reprint of all seven volumes in 1998.

[545]. Morozov, N. A. An Astronomical Revolution in Historical Science. The Novy Mir (New World) magazine, No. 4 (1925): 133-143. In reference to the article by Prof. N. M. Nikolsky.

[546]. Morozov, N. A. Linguistic Ranges. The AS Newsletter, Department of Russian Language and Literature. Books 1-4, Vol. XX, 1915.

[547]. Morozov, N. A. On Russian History. The manuscript of the 8th volume of the work Christ. Moscow, the RAS Archive. Published in Moscow by Kraft and Lean in the end of the year 2000, as A New Point of View on Russian History.

[547:1]. Morozov, N.A. The Asian Christs. (History of Humanity in the Light of Natural Scientific Studies). Vol. 9 of the work titled Christ. Moscow, Kraft+ Ltd., 2003.

[547:2]. Morozov, N.A. The Mirages of Historical Wastelands between Tigris and Euphrates. (History of Humanity in the Light of Natural Scientific Studies). Vol. 10 of the work titled Christ. Moscow, Kraft+ Ltd., 2002.

[548]. Fomenko A. T., and L. E. Morozova. Quantitative Methods in Macro-Textology (with Artefacts of the XVI-XVII “Age of Troubles” Used as Examples). Complex methods in the study of historical processes. Moscow, the USSR Institute of History, Academy of Sciences, 1987. 163-181.

[549]. Moscow. An album. Moscow, Avrora Press; St. Petersburg, 1996.

[550]. Illustrated History of Moscow. Vol. 1. From the dawn of time until 1917. Moscow, Mysl, 1985.

[551]. Moscow and the Moscow Oblast. City Plan. Topographical Map. 1:200000. 3rd edition. Moscow, The Military Typography Headquarters Department, 1998.

[552]. The Moscow Kremlin. Arkhangelsky Cathedral. Moscow, The Moscow Kremlin State Museum and Reserve for History and Culture, 1995.

[553]. The Moscow Kremlin. Ouspensky Cathedral. Moscow, The Moscow Kremlin State Museum and Reserve for History and Culture, 1995.

[554]. The Moscow Chronicler. Compilation. Issue 1. Moscow, Moskovskiy Rabochiy, 1988.

[555]. The Moscow Oblast Museum of History in Istra. A Guide-book. Moscow, Moskovskiy Rabochiy, 1989.

[556]. The Andrei Rublev Museum. A brochure. Published by the Central Andrei Rublev Museum of Ancient Russian Culture and Art in Moscow, 10, Andronyevskaya Square. n.d.

[557]. Mouravyev, M. V. Novgorod the Great. A Historical Account and Guidebook. Leningrad: The State Historical Material Culture Academy Art Edition Popularization Committee, n.d.

[558]. Mouravyev, S. History of the First Four Centuries of Christianity. St. Petersburg, 1866.

[559]. Murad, Aji. The Polovtsy Field Wormwood. Moscow, Pik-Kontekst, 1994

[560]. Murad, Aji. Europe, the Turkomans and the Great Steppe. Moscow, Mysl, 1998

[561]. Mouratov, K. I. Peasant War Led by E. I. Pougachev. Moscow, Prosveshchenie, 1980.

[562]. Mylnikov, A. S. A Picture of a Slavic World as Viewed from the Eastern Europe. Ethnogenetic Legends, Conjectures, and Proto-Hypotheses of the XVI – Early XVIII century. St. Petersburg, The Petersburg Oriental Studies Centre, 1996.

[563]. Mylnikov, A. S. The Legend of the Russian Prince (Russo-Slavic Relations of the XVIII century in the World of Folk Culture). Leningrad, Nauka, 1987.

[564]. Malory, Thomas. Le Morte d’Arthure. Moscow, Nauka, 1974. English original taken from The Works of Sir Thomas Malory edited by E. Vinaver, Oxford, 1947.

[565]. Najip, E. N. A Comparative Historical Dictionary of the XIV century Turkic Languages. Book I. Moscow, 1979.

[566]. The Land of Smolensk. Moscow, Moskovskiy Rabochiy, 1971.

[567]. Takeshi, Nagata. The Magnetic Field of the Earth in the Past. In Nauka i Chelovechestvo (Science and Humanity). 1965 annual edition. Moscow, Znaniye. 169-175.

[568]. Nazarevskiy, V. V. Selected Fragments of Muscovite History. 1147-1913. Moscow, Svarog, 1996.

[569]. Vyacheslav (Savinykh). Concise History of the Andronicus Monastery. Moscow, The Sudarium Temple of the Andronicus Monastery, 1999.

[570]. The Scientific Research Museum of Architecture. Moscow, 1962.

[571]. Neugebauer, O. The Exact Sciences in Antiquity. Moscow, Nauka, 1968. English edition in the series Acta Historica Scientiarum Naturalism et Medicinalium. Vol. 9. Copenhagen, 1957. New York, Harper & Bros., 1962.

[572]. Neuhardt, A. A., and I. A. Shishova. The Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. The USSR AS, the Leningrad Department of the History Institute. Moscow-Leningrad, Nauka, 1966.

[573]. Leping, A. A., and N. P. Strakhova, eds. German-Russian Dictionary. 80,000 words. Moscow, The State National and International Dictionary Publications, 1958.

[574]. Nemirovskiy, A. I. The Etruscans. From Myth to History. Moscow, Nauka, 1983.

[575]. Nemirovskiy, E. L. The Literary World from the Dawn of History until the Early XX century. Moscow, Kniga, 1986.

[576]. Nemoyevskiy, Andrei. Jesus the God. Petersburg, State Publishing House, 1920.

[577]. Nennius. History of the Brits. From: Geoffrey of Monmouth. History of the Brits. The Life of Merlin. Moscow, Nauka, 1984. English edition: Nennius. Historia Brittonum. Galfridus Monemutensis (Geoffrey of Monmouth). Historia Britonum. Vita Merlini. Six old English Chronicles. Edited by J.A.Giles. London, 1848.

[577:1]. Nersesyan, L. V. Dionysius the Icon Master and the Murals of the Feropontov Monastery. Moscow, Severniy Palomnik, 2002.

[578]. Nechvolodov, A. Tales of the Russian Land. Books 1 and 2. Moscow, Svarog, 1997. A new edition of the books published by the State Typography of St. Petersburg in 1913.

[579]. Niese, B. A Description of the Roman History and Source Studies. German edition: Grundriss der römischen Geschichte nebst Quellenkunde. St. Petersburg, 1908. German edition: Munich, 1923.

[579:1]. Nikerov, V. A. History as an Exact Science. (Based on the materials of A. T. Fomenko and G. V. Nosovskiy. The New Chronology). Moscow, Ecmo-Press, Yauza, 2002.

[580]. Nikolayev, D. The Weapon that Failed to Save Byzantium. In Tekhnika i Nauka (Science and Technology), No. 9 (1983): 29-36.

[581]. Nikolayeva, T. V. The Ancient Zvenigorod. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1978.

[582]. Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov. In Bibliography of the Scientists of the USSR. Moscow, Nauka, 1981.

[583]. Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov, the Encyclopaedist Scientist. A collection of articles. Moscow, Nauka, 1982.

[584]. Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov. Biographical Stages and Activities. The USSR AS Courier, Nos. 7 and 8 (1944).

[585]. Nikolskiy, N. M. An Astronomical Revolution in Historical Science. The Novy Mir (New World) magazine, Vol. 1 (1925): 157-175. (In re. N. Morozov’s œuvre Christ. Leningrad, 1924.)

[586]. Nikonov, V. A. Name and Society. Moscow, Nauka, 1974.

[586:1]. A Collection of Chronicles titled the Patriarchal, or the Nikon Chronicle. The Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles (CCRC), Vols. IX-XIV. Moscow, Yazyki Russkoi Kultury, 2000.

[587]. Novellino. Literary monuments. Moscow, Nauka, 1984.

[588]. Novozhilov, N. I. The Meteorological Works of N. A. Morozov. The Priroda (Nature) magazine, No. 10 (1954).

[589]. The New Testament of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Brussels, Life with God, 1965.

[590]. Nosovskiy, G. V. Certain Statistical Methods of Researching Historical Sources, and Examples of their Application. Source study methods of Russian social thinking; historical studies of the feudal epoch. A collection of academic publications. Moscow, The USSR History Institute, AS, 1989. 181-196.

[591]. Nosovskiy, G. V. The Beginning of Our Era and the Julian Calendar. Information processes and systems. Scientific and technological information, Series 2. Moscow, the National Science and Technology Information Institute, No. 5 (1992): 7-18.

[592]. Nosovskiy, G. V. The True Dating of the Famous First Oecumenical Counsel and the Real Beginning of the AD Era. An appendix of A. T. Fomenko’s Global Chronology. Moscow, The MSU Mathematical Mechanics Department, 1993. 288-394.

[593]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Determination of Original Structures in Intermixed Sequences. Works of a vector and tensor analysis seminar. Moscow, MSU Press, Issue 22 (1985): 119-131.

[594]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. Some Methods and Results of Intermixed Sequence Analysis. Works of a vector and tensor analysis seminar. Moscow, MSU Press, Issue 23 (1988): 104-121.

[595]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. Determining the Propinquity Quotient and Duplicate Identification in Chronological Lists. Report theses of the 5th International Probability Theory and Mathematical Statistics Conference. Vilnius, The Lithuanian AS Institute of Mathematics and Cybernetics, Vol. 4 (1989): 111-112.

[596]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. Statistical Duplicates in Ordered Lists with Subdivisions. Cybernetic Issues. Semiotic research. Moscow, Scientific Counsel for the Study of the General Problem of Cybernetics. The USSR AS, 1989. 138-148.

[597]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. Duplicate Identification in Chronological Lists (The Histogram Method of Related Name Distribution Frequencies). Problems of stochastic model stability. Seminar works. Moscow, The National System Research Institute, 1989. 112-125.

[598]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. Statistical Research of Parallel Occurrences and Biographies in British Chronological and Historical Materials. Semiotics and Informatics. Moscow, The National System Research Institute, Issue 34 (1994): 205-233.

[599]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The New Chronology and the Concept of the Ancient History of Russia, Britain and Rome. (Facts. Statistics. Hypotheses.) Vol. 1: Russia. Vol. 2: England, Rome. Moscow, the MSU Centre of Research and Pre-University Education, 1995. 2nd edition: 1996.

[600]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. Mathematical and Statistical Models of Information Distribution in Historical Chronicles. The Mathematical Issues of Cybernetics. Physical and Mathematical Literature (Moscow, Nauka), Issue 6 (1996): 71-116.

[601]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Empire (Russia, Turkey, China, Europe and Egypt. New Mathematical Chronology of Antiquity). Moscow, Faktorial, 1996. Re-editions: 1997, 1998 and 1999.

[602]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. Russia and Rome. The Correctness of Our Understanding of Eurasian History. Vols. 1 and 2. Moscow, Olimp, 1997. 2nd edition: 1999.

[603]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The New Chronology of Russia. Moscow, Faktorial, 1997. Re-editions: 1998 and 1999.

[604]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Mathematical Chronology of Biblical Events. Moscow, Nauka, 1997.

[605]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Biblical Russia. Vols. 1 and 2. Moscow, Faktorial, 1998.

[606]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. Horde-Russia as Reflected in Biblical Books. Moscow, Anvik, 1998.

[607]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. An Introduction to the New Chronology (Which Century is it Now?). Moscow, Kraft and Lean, 1999.

[608]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The New Chronology of Russia, Britain and Rome. Moscow, Anvik, 1999. A substantially revised and enlarged single-volume edition.

[608:1]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The New Chronology of Russia, Britain and Rome. Moscow, Delovoi Express Financial, 2001.

[609]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Biblical Russia. Selected Chapters I. (The Empire of Horde-Russia and the Bible. The New Mathematical Chronology of Antiquity. A History of Biblical Editions and Manuscripts. XI-XII century Events in the New Testament. The Pentateuch). Moscow, Faktorial, 1999.

[610]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. A Reconstruction of Global History (The New Chronology). Moscow, Delovoi Express Financial, 1999.

[611]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. Old Criticisms and the New Chronology. The Neva magazine (St. Petersburg), No. 2 (1999): 143158.

[612]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The Biblical Russia. Selected Chapters II. (The Empire of Horde-Russia and the Bible. History of the XIV-XVI century in the Final Chapters of the Books of Kings. XV-XVI century History of the Pages of the Books of Esther and Judith. Reformation Epoch of the XVI-XVII century). Moscow, Faktorial, 2000.

[613]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. A Reconstruction of Global History. The Research of 1999-2000 (The New Chronology). Moscow, Delovoi Express Financial, 2000.

[613:1]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. The New Chronology of Egypt. The Astronomical Dating of the Ancient Egyptian Monuments. The Research of 2000-2002. Moscow, Veche, 2002.

[613:2]. Fomenko, A. T., and Nosovskiy, G. V. The New Chronology of Egypt. The Astronomical Dating of the Ancient Egyptian Monuments. 2nd edition, re-worked and expanded. Moscow, Veche, 2003.

[614]. Newton, Robert. The Crime of Claudius Ptolemy. Moscow, Nauka, 1985. English original: Baltimore-London, John Hopkins University Press, 1977.

[615]. Olearius, Adam. A Detailed Account of the Moscovian and Persian Journey of the Holstein Ambassadors in 1633, 1636 and 1639. Translated from German by P. Barsov. Moscow, 1870.

[616]. Oleynikov, A. The Geological Clock. Leningrad, Nedra, 1975.

[617]. Orbini, Mavro. A Historiographical Book on the Origins of the Names, the Glory and the Expansion of the Slavs. Compiled from many Historical Books through the Office of Marourbin, the Archimandrite of Raguzha. Translated into Russian from Italian. Typography of St. Petersburg, 1722.

[618]. Orbini, Mavro. Kingdom of the Slavs. Sofia, Nauka i Izkustvo, 1983.

[618:1]. Oreshnikov, A. V. Pre-1547 Russian Coins. A reprint of the 1896 edition by the State Museum of History. Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts. Moscow, The Archaeographical Centre, 1996.

[619]. Orlenko, M. I. Sir Isaac Newton. A Biographical Aperçu. Donetsk, 1927.

[620]. Orlov, A. S. Certain Style Characteristics of Russian History Fiction of the XVI-XVII century. In Russian Philological News, Vol. 13, Book 4 (1908): 344-379.

[621]. The Ostrog Bible (The Bible, or the Books of the Old and the New Covenant, in the Language of the Slavs). Ostrog, 1581. Reprinted as The Ostrog Bible. The Soviet Culture Fund Commission for the Publication of Literary Artefacts. Moscow-Leningrad, Slovo-Art, 1988. “The phototypic copy of the 1581 text was supervised by I. V. Dergacheva with references to the copies from the Scientific Library of A. M. Gorky Moscow State University.”

[622]. National History from the Earliest Days and until 1917. Encyclopaedia, Vol. 1. Moscow, The Great Russian Encyclopaedia Publications, 1994.

[623]. Bavin, S. P., and G. V. Popov. The Revelation of St. John as Reflected in the Global Literary Tradition. The catalogue of an exhibition organized in Moscow by the Greek Embassy in 1994. A joint publication of the Greek Embassy and the State Library of Russia. Moscow, Indrik, 1995.

[623:1]. A postcard with an Egyptian zodiac. The Creation Scene. Egypt, El-Faraana Advertising & Printing, 2000.

[624]. Historical and Folk Tale Aperçus. From Cheops to Christ. A compilation. Translated from German. Moscow, 1890. Reprinted by the Moscow Int’l Translator School in 1993.

[625]. Pausanius. A Description of Hellas, or a Voyage through Greece in II century AD. Moscow, 1880. English edition: Pausanius. Guide to Greece. Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1979.

[626]. Makarevich, G. V., ed. The Architectural Monuments of Moscow. The Earthenware Town. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1989-1990.

[627]. Posokhin, M. V., ed. The Architectural Monuments of Moscow. KitaiGorod. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1982.

[628]. Makarevich, G. V., ed. The Architectural Monuments of Moscow. White Town. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1989.

[629]. Makarevich, G. V., ed. The Architectural Monuments of Moscow. Zamoskvorechye. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1994.

[630]. Artefacts of Diplomatic Relations with the Roman Empire. Vol. 1. St Petersburg, 1851.

[631]. Rybakov, B. A., ed. Artefacts of the Kulikovo Cycle. St. Petersburg, RAS, The Institute of Russian History. Blitz, the Russo-Baltic Information Centre, 1998.

[632]. Literary Artefacts of Ancient Russia. The XI – Early XII century. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1978.

[633]. Literary Artefacts of Ancient Russia. The XII century. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1980.

[634]. Literary Artefacts of Ancient Russia. The XIII century. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1981.

[635]. Literary Artefacts of Ancient Russia. The XIV – mid-XV century. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1981.

[636]. Literary Artefacts of Ancient Russia. Second Half of the XV century. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1982.

[637]. Literary Artefacts of Ancient Russia. Late XV – Early XVI century. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1984.

[638]. Literary Artefacts of Ancient Russia. Mid-XVI century. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1985.

[639]. Literary Artefacts of Ancient Russia. Second Half of the XVI century. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1986.

[640]. Literary Artefacts of Ancient Russia. Late XVI – Early XVII century. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1987.

[641]. Significant Works in Russian Law. Issue 2. Moscow, 1954.

[642]. Significant Works in Russian Law. Issue 3. Moscow, 1955.

[643]. Pannekuk, A. The History of Astronomy. Moscow, Nauka, 1966.

[644]. Parandowski, J. Petrarch. The Inostrannaya Literatura (Foreign Literature) magazine, No. 6 (1974). Also see: Parandowski, J. Petrarca. Warsaw, 1957.

[645]. Paradisis, Alexander. The Life and Labours of Balthazar Cossas (Pope John XXIII). Minsk, Belarus, 1980.

[646]. Pasek. A Historical Description of Simon’s Monastery in Moscow. Moscow, 1843.

[647]. Romanenko, A. The Patriarch Chambers of the Moscow Kremlin. Moscow, The Moscow Kremlin State Museum and Reserve for History and Culture, 1994.

[648]. Pahimer, George. The Story of Michael and Andronicus Palaeologi. The Reign of Michael Palaiologos. St. Petersburg, 1862.

[648:1]. Pashkov, B. G. Holy Russia – Russia – The Russian Empire. The Genealogical Tree of the Principal Russian Clans (862-1917). Moscow, TsentrKom, 1996.

[649]. The First Muscovite Princes. In Historical Portraits series. Moscow, Ganna, 1992.

[650]. Perepyolkin, Y. A. The Coup of Amenkhotep IV. Part 1. Books 1 and 2. Moscow, Nauka, 1967.

[651]. The Correspondence of Ivan the Terrible and Andrei Kurbskiy. In Literary Landmarks series. Leningrad, Nauka, 1979. 2nd edition: Moscow, Nauka, 1993.

[652]. The Song of Roland. International Literature Collection. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1976. English edition by J. M. Dent & Sons, 1972.

[653]. Petrov, A. M. The Great Silk Route. The Simplest, but Largely Unknown Facts. Moscow, Vostochnaya Literatura, RAS, 1995.

[654]. Petruchenko, O. Latin-Russian Dictionary. Moscow, published by the V. V. Dumnov and the Heirs of Silayev Brothers, 1914. Reprinted by the Graeco-Latin Department of Y. A. Shichalin, 1994.

[654:1]. The Maritime Voyage of St. Brendan (Navigation Sancti Brendani Abbatis saec X AD). St. Petersburg, Azbuka-Klassika, 2002. English translation: Navigatio Sancti Brendani Abbatis from Early Latin Manuscripts. Ed., introd. and notes: C. Selmer, Notre Dame, 1959.

[655]. Plan of the Imperial Capital City of Moscow, Created under the Supervision of Ivan Michurin, the Architect, in 1739. The First Geodetic Plan of Moscow. The General Council of Ministers, Department of Geodetics and Cartography (the Cartographer Cooperative). Published together with a calendar for 1989.

[656]. Plano Carpini, G. del. History of the Mongols. William of Rubruck. The Journey to the Oriental Countries. The Book of Marco Polo. Moscow, Mysl, 1997. See also: The Journey of William of Rubruck to the Eastern Parts of the World, 1253-55. Prepared by W. W. Rockhill. 1900.

[657]. Plato. Collected Works. Vol. 3. Moscow, Mysl, 1972. English edition: The Works of Plato. Bohn’s Classical Library, 1848.

[658]. Pletnyova, S. A. The Khazars. Moscow, Nauka, 1976.

[659]. Pleshkova, S. L. Catherine of Medici. The Black Queen. Moscow, Moscow University Press, 1994.

[660]. Plutarch. Comparative Biographies. Vol. 1: Moscow, USSR AN Press, 1961; Vol. 2: Moscow, USSR AN Press, 1963; Vol. 3: Moscow, Nauka, 1964. English edition: Plutarch. The Lives of the Noble Graecians and Romans. In Great Books of the Western World series. Vol. 13. Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. Chicago, University of Chicago, 1952 (2nd edition 1990). See also: Plutarch. Plutarch’s Lives. London, Dilly, 1792.

[661]. Plyukhanova, M. B. Subjects and Symbols of the Muscovite Kingdom. St. Petersburg, Akropol, 1995.

[662]. Kremlin. A Brief Guide. Moscow, Moskovskiy Rabochiy, 1960.

[663]. The Yearly Chronicle. Part 1. Text and translation. Moscow-Leningrad, The USSR AN Press, 1950.

[664]. The Yearly Chronicle. Published in the Dawn of the Russian Literature series (XI – early XII century). Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1978. 23-277.

[665]. The Tale of Varlaam and Ioasaph. Leningrad, Nauka, 1985.

[666]. Likhachev, D. S., ed. The Tale of the Kulikovo Battle. The Text and the Miniatures of the Authorized Compilation of the XVI century. Published by the XVI century manuscript kept in the USSR Academy of Sciences Library (The Authorized Compilation of Chronicles, Osterman’s Vol. II, sheet 3 – 126 reverse). Leningrad, Aurora, 1984.

[666:1]. Podosinov, A. V., and A. M. Belov. Lingua Latina. Latin-Russian Dictionary. About 15,000 words. Moscow, Flinta, Nauka, 2000.

[667]. Pokrovskiy, N. N. A Voyage in Search of Rare Books. Moscow, Kniga. 2nd edition, 1988.

[668]. Polak, I. F. A Course of General Astronomy. Moscow, Gonti, 1938.

[669]. Polybius. History in 40 Volumes. Moscow, 1899.

[670]. The Complete Symphony of the Canonical Books of the Holy Writ. St. Petersburg, The Bible For Everybody, 1996.

[671]. The Complete Collection of Russian Chonicles. Vol. 33. Leningrad, Nauka, 1977.

[672]. The Complete Collection of Russian Chonicles. Vol. 35. Moscow, Nauka, 1980.

[673]. Polo, M. The Journey. Translated from French. Leningrad, 1940.

[674]. Poluboyarinova, M. D. Russians in the Golden Horde. Moscow, Nauka, 1978.

[674:1]. [Pompeii]. Pompeii. Album. Authors: Filippo Coarelli, Emilio de Albentiis, Maria Paola Guidobaldi, Fabricio Pesando, and Antonio Varone. Moscow, Slovo, 2002. Printed in Italy.

[674:2]. [Pompeii]. Nappo, Salvatore. Pompeii. Album. From the World Wonder Atlas series. Moscow, Bertelsmann Media Moskau, 2001. English original: Salvatore Ciro Nappo. Pompeii. White Star, 1998, Vercelli, Italy.

[675]. Popovskiy, M. A. Time Conquered. A Tale of Nikolai Morozov. Moscow, Political Literature, 1975.

[676]. The Portuguese-Russian and Russian-Portuguese Dictionary. Kiev, Perun, 1999.

[677]. The Successors of Marco Polo. Voyages of the Westerners into the Countries of the Three Indias. Moscow, Nauka, 1968.

[678]. Pospelov, M. The Benediction of Reverend Sergei. The Moskva magazine, 1990

[679]. Postnikov, A. V. Maps of the Russian Lands: A Brief Review of the History of Geographical Studies and Cartography of Our Fatherland. Moscow, Nash Dom – L’Age d’Homme, 1996.

[680]. Postnikov, M. M. A Critical Research of the Chronology of the Ancient World. Vols. 1-3. Moscow, Kraft and Lean, 2000. [A. T. Fomenko’s remark: This book is a publication of a manuscript of more than 1000 pages written by Doctors of Physics and Mathematics A. S. Mishchenko and A. T. Fomenko. It was edited by M. M. Postnikov, and came out signed with his name. He acknowledges this fact in the preface to Vol. 1, on page 6, albeit cagily.]

[681]. Fomenko A. T., and M. M. Postnikov. New Methods of Statistical Analysis of the Narrative and Digital Material of Ancient History. Moscow, Scientific Counsel for the Study of the General Problem of Cybernetics, USSR AS, 1980. 1-36.

[682]. Fomenko A. T., and M. M. Postnikov. New Methods of Statistical Analysis of the Narrative and Digital Material of Ancient History. Scientific note of the Tartu University, works related to sign symbols. XV, Cultural Typology, Cultural Influence Feedback. Tartu University Press, Release 576 (1982): 24-43.

[683]. Postnikov, M. M. The Greatest Mystification in the World? In Tekhnika i Nauka (Science & Technology), 1982, No. 7, pp. 28-33.

[684]. Potin, V. M. Coins. Treasures. Collections. Numismatic essays. St. Petersburg, Iskusstvo-SPb, 1993.

[685]. Potin, V. M. Ancient Russia and the European States of the X-XIII century. Leningrad, Sovetskiy Khudozhnik, 1968.

[685:1]. Pope-Hennessy, John. Fra Angelico. Album. Moscow, Slovo, 1996. Scala, 1995, Istituto Fotografico Editoriale.

[686]. Pokhlyobkin, V. V. The Foreign Affairs of the Holy Russia, Russia and the USSR over the 1000 Years in Names, Dates and Facts. A Reference Book. Moscow, Mezhdunarodnye Otnoshenya, 1992.

[687]. Merited Academician N. A. Morozov. Memoirs. Vols. 1 and 2. The USSR Academy of Sciences. Moscow, USSR AS Press, 1962.

[688]. Orthodox Art and the Savvino-Storozhevsky Monastery. Materials of scientific conferences dedicated to the 600th anniversary of the Savvino-Storozhevsky Monastery, 17 December 1997 and 22 September 1998. The Zvenigorod Museum of Architecture, History, and Arts. Zvenigorod, Savva Plus M, 1998.

[689]. Malinovskaya, N., ed. Prado. Paintings. Album. Translated from Spanish. Lunwerg Editores. Barcelona-Madrid, 1994. Russian translation: Moscow, MK-Import, 1999.

[690]. Reverend Joseph Volotsky. The Illuminator. Published by the Spaso-Preobrazhensky Monastery of Valaam. Blessed by the Holiest Patriarch of Moscow and the Entire Russia, Alexiy II. Moscow, 1993.

[691]. Priester, E. A Brief History of Austria. Moscow, IL, 1952. German edition: Kurze Geschichte Österreichs. Vienna, Globus, 1946.

[692]. Prishchepenko, V. N. The Pages of Russian History. Vol. 1: 1988. Vol. 2: 2000. Moscow, Profizdat.

[693]. Problems of Museum Collection Formation and Studies of the State Museum of Religious History. Leningrad, The RSFSR Ministry of Culture, publised by the State Museum of History of Religions, 1990.

[694]. Procopius of Caesarea. On the Buildings. The Vestnik Drevnei Istorii (Courier of Ancient History) magazine, No. 4 (1939): 201-298. See also: Procopius of Caesarea. On the Buildings of Justinian. London, Palestine Piligrim Society, 1888.

[695]. Procopius. The Gothic War. Moscow, The USSR AS Press, 1950.

[696]. Procopius. The Gothic War. On the Buildings. Moscow, Arktos, Vika-Press, 1996. See also: Procopius of Caesarea. Procopius. Vol. 7. London, William Heinemann; New York, Macmillan & Co. 1914-1940.

[697]. Procopius of Caesarea. The Persian War. The War with the Vandals. Arcane History. St. Petersburg, Aleteya, 1998.

[698]. Proskouriakov, V. M. Johannes Gutenberg. The Celebrity Biographies series. Moscow, the Literary Magazine Union, 1933.

[699]. Prokhorov, G. M. The Tale of Batu-Khan’s Invasion in Lavrenty’s Chronicle. Published as part of The Russian Literary History Research. XI-XVII centuries. Leningrad, Nauka, 1974.

[700]. Book of Psalms. Moscow, 1657. (Private collection.)

[701]. The book of Psalms with Appendices. Published in the Great City of Moscow in the Year 7160 [1652 AD], in the Month of October, on the 1st Day. New edition: Moscow, The Vvedenskaya Church of St. Trinity Coreligionist Typography, 1867.

[702]. Psellus, Michael. Chronography. Moscow, Nauka, 1978. English edition: The Chronographia of Michael Psellus. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1953.

[703]. Pskovskiy, Y. P. Novae and Supernovae. Moscow, Nauka, 1974.

[704]. Ptolemy, Claudius. Almagest, or the Mathematical Tractate in Thirteen Volumes. Translated by I. N. Veselovskiy. Moscow, Nauka, Fizmatlit, 1998.

[705]. Poisson, A., N. A. Morozov, F. Schwarz, M. Eliade, and K. G. Jung. The Theory and Symbols of Alchemy. The Great Work. Kiev, Novy Akropol, Bront Ltd., 1995.

[706]. Mashkov, I. P., ed. A Guide to Moscow. Moscow, The Muscovite Architectural Society for the Members of the V Convention of Architects in Moscow, 1913.

[707]. The Voyage of Columbus. Diaries, Letters, Documents. Moscow, The State Geographical Literature Press, 1952.

[708]. Putilov, Boris. Ancient Russia in Personae. Gods, Heroes, People. St. Petersburg, Azbuka, 1999.

[709]. Pushkin, A. Collected Works. Leningrad, The State Fiction Publishers, 1935.

[710]. Pushkin A. in the Recollections of Contemporaries. Two volumes. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1974.

[711]. Pushkin’s Memorial Places in Russia. A Guidebook. Moscow, Profizdat, 1894.

[711:1]. Pylyaev, M. I. The Old Petersburg. Accounts of the Capital’s Past. A reprint of A. S. Souvorov’s 1889 St. Petersburg edition. Moscow, IKPA, 1990.

[712]. Lukovich-Pyanovich, Olga. The Serbs . . . The Oldest of Nations. Vols. 1-3. Belgrade, Miroslav, 1993-1994.

[713]. Pietrangeli, Carlo. Vatican. From the Great Museums of the World series. Moscow, Slovo, 1998. A translation of the Italian edition by Magnus Editioni, Udine, 1996.

[714]. Five Centuries of European Drawings. The drawings of old masters from the former collection of Franz König. The 1.10.1995-21.01.1996 exhibition catalogue. The Russian Federation Ministry of Culture, The State A. S. Pushkin Museum of Fine Art. Moscow-Milan, Leonardo Arte (versions in Russian and in English).

[715]. The Radzivillovskaya Chronicle. The text. The research. A description of the miniatures. St. Petersburg, Glagol; Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1994.

[716]. The Radzivillovskaya Chronicle. The Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles, Vol. 38. Leningrad, Nauka, 1989.

[717]. Radiocarbon. Collected articles. Vilnius, 1971.

[718]. The Imprecision of Radiocarbon Datings. The Priroda (Nature) magazine, No. 3 (1990): 117. (New Scientist, Vol. 123, No. 1684 (1989): 26).

[719]. Radzig, N. The Origins of Roman Chronicles. Moscow University Press, 1903.

[720]. The Book of Rank. 1457-1598. Moscow, Nauka, 1966.

[721]. Razoumov, G. A., and M. F. Khasin. The Drowning cities. Moscow, Nauka, 1978.

[722]. Wright, J. K. The Geographical Lore of the Time of the Crusades. A Study in the History of Medieval Science and Tradition in Western Europe. Moscow, Nauka, 1988. English original published in New York in 1925.

[722:1]. Reizer, V. I. The Process of Joan of Arc. Moscow-Leningrad, Nauka, 1964.

[723]. Fomenko, A. T., and S. T. Rachev. Volume Functions of Historical Texts and the Amplitude Correlation Principle. Source study methods of Russian social thinking historical studies of the feudal epoch. A collection of academic publications. Moscow, The USSR History Institute, AS, 1989. 161-180.

[724]. Rashid ad-Din. History of the Mongols. St. Petersburg, 1858.

[725]. Renan, J. The Antichrist. St. Petersburg, 1907. English edition: Renan’s Antichrist. The Scott Library, 1899.

[726]. Rome: Echoes of the Imperial Glory. Translated from English by T. Azarkovich. The Extinct Civilizations series. Moscow, Terra, 1997. Original by Time-Life Books, 1994.

[727]. Rich, V. Was there a Dark Age? The Khimia i Zhizn (Chemistry and Life) magazine, No. 9 (1983): 84.

[728]. Riesterer, Peter P., and Roswitha Lambelet. The Egyptian Museum in Cairo. Cairo, Lehnert & Landrock, Orient Art Publishers, 1980. Russian edition, 1996.

[729]. Robert of Clari. The Conquest of Constantinople. Moscow, Nauka, 1986. English edition: McNeal, E. H. The Conquest of Constantinople of Robert of Clari. Translated with introduction and notes by E. Holmes McNeal. New York, 1936. Records of Civilization: Sources and Studies. Vol. XXIII. Reprint: New York, 1964, 1969.

[730]. Rogozina, Z. A. The Earliest Days of Egyptian History. Issue 2. Petrograd, A. F. Marx Typography, n.d.

[731]. Rozhdestvenskaya, L. A. The Novgorod Kremlin. A Guide-book. Lenizdat, 1980.

[732]. Rozhitsyn, V. S., and M. P. Zhakov. The Origins of the Holy Books. Leningrad, 1925.

[733]. Rozhkov, M. N. A. Morozov – The Founding Father of the Dimension Number Analysis. The Successes of the Physical Sciences, Vol. 49, Issue 1 (1953).

[734]. Rozanov, N. History of the Temple of Our Lady’s Birth in Staroye Simonovo, Moscow, Dedicated to its 500th Anniversary (1370-1870). Moscow, Synodal Typography on Nikolskaya Street, 1870.

[735]. Romanyuk, S. From the History of Small Muscovite Streets. Moscow, 1988.

[735:1]. Romanyuk, S. From the History of Small Muscovite Streets. Moscow, Svarog, 2000.

[735:2]. Romanyuk, S. The Lands of the Muscovite Villages. Part I. Moscow, Svarog, 2001.

[735:3]. Romanyuk, S. The Lands of the Muscovite Villages. Part II. Moscow, Svarog, 1999.

[736]. The Russian Academy of Sciences. Personae. Three books. Book 1: 1724-1917. Book 2: 1918-1973. Book 3: 1974-1999. Moscow, Nauka, 1999.

[737]. Rossovskaya, V. A. The Calendarian Distance of Ages. Moscow, Ogiz, 1930.

[738]. A Guide to the Paschalia for the Seminary Schools. Moscow, The V. Gautier Typography, 1853. Reprinted in Moscow by Grad Kitezh in 1991.

[739]. Bleskina, O. N., comp. An Illustrated book of Manuscripts of the USSR AS Library. Catalogue for an exhibition of illustrated chronicles of the XI-XIX century written with roman letters. Leningrad, The USSR AS Library, 1991.

[740]. Handwritten and Typeset Books. Collected Articles. Moscow, Nauka, 1975.

[741]. Manuscripts of the Late XV – early XVI century. The Kirillo-Belozersk Collection, 275/532. The M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin Public Library, St. Petersburg.

[742]. Roumyantsev, A. A. Methods of Historical Analysis in the Works of Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov. The Scientific Institute of P. F. Lesgaft Notes, Vol. 10. Leningrad, 1924.

[743]. Roumyantsev, A. A. The Death and the Resurrection of the Saviour. Moscow, Atheist, 1930.

[744]. Roumyantsev, N. V. Orthodox Feasts. Moscow, Ogiz, 1936.

[745]. The Russian Bible. The Bible of 1499 and the Synodal Translation of the Bible. Illustrated. 10 Vols. The Biblical Museum, 1992. Publishing department of the Muscovite Patriarchy, Moscow, 1992 (The Gennadievskaya Bible). Only the following volumes came out before the beginning of 2002: Vol. 4 (Book of Psalms), Vols. 7 and 8 (The New Testament), and Vol. 9 (Appendices, scientific descriptions). Vols. 7 and 8 were published by the Moscow Patriarchy in 1992; Vols. 4 and 9 published by the Novospassky Monastery, Moscow, 1997 (Vol. 4), 1998 (Vol. 9).

[746]. The Pioneer of Russian Printing. A Brief Biography. Ivan Fedorov’s “Alphabet” Published in 1578. In collaboration with Translesizdat Ltd. Blessed by the Editing Board of the Muscovite Patriarchy. Moscow, Spolokhi, 2000.

[747]. Russian Chronographer of 1512. The Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles, Vol. 22. St. Petersburg, 1911.

[748]. Knyazevskaya, T. B., comp. Russian Spiritual Chivalry. Collected articles. Moscow, Nauka, 1996.

[749]. Leyn, K., ed. Russian-German Dictionary. 11th stereotype edition. Moscow, Russkiy Yazyk, 1991.

[750]. Dmitriev, N. K., ed. Russian-Tartarian Dictionary. The USSR AS, Kazan Affiliate of the Language, Literature and History Institute. Kazan, Tatknigoizdat, 1955.

[750:1]. Mustaioki, A., and E. Nikkilä. Russian-Finnish Didactic Dictionary. Abt. 12,500 words. Moscow, Russkiy Yazyk, 1982.

[751]. Shcherba, L. V., and M. R. Matousevich. Russian-French Dictionary. 9th stereotype edition. Moscow, Sovetskaya Encyclopaedia, 1969.

[752]. Rybakov, B. A. From the History of Ancient Russia and Its Culture. Moscow, MSU Press, 1984.

[753]. Rybakov, B. A. The Kiev Russia and Russian Principalities. The XII-XIII century. Moscow, Nauka, 1982, 1988.

[754]. Rybakov, B. A. The Kiev Russia and Russian Principalities. Moscow, Nauka, 1986.

[755]. Rybnikov, K. A. History of Mathematics. Moscow, MSU Press, 1974.

[756]. Ryabtsevitch, V. N. What the Coins Tell Us. Minsk, Narodnaya Asveta, 1977.

[757]. Savelyev, E. P. Cossacks and their History. Vols. 1 and 2. Vladikavkaz, 1991. A reprint of E. Savelyev’s Ancient History of the Cossacks. Novocherkassk, 1915.

[758]. Savelyeva, E. A. Olaus Magnus and his “History of the Northern Peoples.” Leningrad, Nauka, 1983. [Olaus Magnus. Historia de gentibus septentrionalibus, 1555].

[759]. Prince Obolensky’s Almanach. Part 1, Sections 1-7. N.p., 1866.

[760]. Suetonius Caius Tranquillius. History of the Twelve Caesars. Moscow, Nauka, 1966. See also the English edition: New York, AMS Press, 1967; as well as the one titled The Twelve Caesars. London, Folio Society, 1964.

[760:1]. Collected Historical and Cultural Monuments of the Tatarstan Republic. Vol. 1. Administrative regions. Kazan, Master Line, 1999.

[761]. The General Catalogue of Slavic and Russian Handwritten Books Kept in USSR: The XI-XIII century. Moscow, 1984.

[762]. St. Stephen of Perm. The Old Russian Tales of Famous People, Places and Events series. Article, text, translation from Old Russian, commentary. St. Petersburg, Glagol, 1995.

[763]. Holy Relics of Old Moscow. Russian National Art Library. Moscow, Nikos, Kontakt, 1993.

[763:1]. Stogov, Ilya, comp. Holy Writings of the Mayans: Popol-Vukh, Rabinal-Achi. Translated by R. V. Kinzhalov. With The Report of Yucatan Affairs by Brother Diego de Landa attached, translated by Y. V. Knorozov. The Alexandrian Library series. St. Petersburg, Amphora, 2000.

[764]. Semashko, I. I. 100 Great Women. Moscow, Veche, 1999.

[765]. Sunderland, I. T. Holy Books as Regarded by Science. Gomel, Gomelskiy Rabochiy Western Regional, 1925.

[766]. Sergeyev, V. S. The History of Ancient Greece. Moscow-Leningrad, Ogiz, 1934.

[767]. Sergeyev, V. S. Essays on the History of the Ancient Rome. Vols. 1 and 2. Moscow, Ogiz, 1938.

[768]. Sizov, S. Another Account of the Three “Unidentified” Sepulchres of the Arkhangelsky Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. Materials and Research. Iskusstvo (Moscow), No. 1 (1973).

[768:1]. Shevchenko, V. F., ed. Simbirsk and its Past. An Anthology of Texts on Local History. Oulianovsk, Culture Studies Lab, 1993. The compilation includes the book by M. F. Superanskiy titled Simbirsk and its Past (1648-1898). A Historical Account, among others. Simbirsk, The Simbirsk Regional Scientific Archive Commission, The O. V. Mourakhovskaya Typography, 1899.

[769]. Sinelnikov, Vyacheslav (Rev. V. Sinelnikov). The Shroud of Turin at Dawn of the New Era. Moscow, Sretensky Friary, 2000.

[769:1]. Sinha, N. K., Banerjee, A. C. History of India. Moscow, Inostrannaya Literatura, 1954. English original: Calcutta, 1952.

[770]. Sipovskiy, V. D. Native Antiquity: History of Russia in Accounts and Pictures. Vol. 1: IX-XVI century. St. Petersburg, The V. F. Demakov Typography, 1879, 1888. Vol. 2: XIV-XVII century. St. Petersburg, D. D. Poluboyarinov Publishing House, 1904. Reprinted: Moscow, Sovremennik, 1993.

[771]. The Tale of the Mamay Battle. Facsimile edition. Moscow, Sovetskaya Rossiya, 1980.

[772]. A Tale of the Lord’s Passion. Part of the Russian handwritten collection of Christian works in Church Slavonic. Private collection. The XVIII-XIX century.

[772:1]. The Scythians, the Khazars and the Slavs. Ancient Russia. To the Centennary since the Birth of M. I. Artamonov. Report theses for the international scientific conference. St. Petersburg, State Hermitage, the State University of St. Petersburg, the RAS Institute of Material Culture History.

[773]. Skornyakova, Natalya. Old Moscow. Engravings and Lithographs of the XVI-XIX Century from the Collection of the State Museum of History. Moscow, Galart, 1996.

[774]. Skromnenko, S. (Stroev, S. M.) The Inveracity of the Ancient Russian History and the Error of the Opinions Deeming Russian Chronicles Ancient. St. Petersburg, 1834.

[775]. Skrynnikov, R. G. The Reign of Terror. St. Petersburg, Nauka, 1992.

[776]. Skrynnikov, R. G. Ivan the Terrible. Moscow, Nauka, 1975. The 2nd edition came out in 1983.

[777]. Skrynnikov, R. G. Boris Godunov. Moscow, Nauka, 1983.

[778]. Skrynnikov, R. G. The State and the Church in Russia. The XIV-XVI Century. Eminent Figures in the Russian Church. Novosibirsk, Nauka, Siberian Affiliate, 1991.

[779]. Skrynnikov, R. G. The Tragedy of Novgorod. Moscow, Sabashnikov, 1994.

[780]. Skrynnikov, R. G. Russia before the “Age of Turmoil.” Moscow, Mysl, 1981.

[781]. The Slavic Mythology. An Encyclopaedic Dictionary. Moscow, Ellis Luck, 1995.

[781:0]. Tsepkov, A., comp. The Slavic Chronicles. St. Petersburg, Glagol,1996.

[781:1]. A Dictionary of Russian Don Dialects, Vols. 1 and 2. Rostov-on-Don, Rostov University Press, 1991.

[782]. Dictionary of the Russian Language in the XI-XVII centuries. Edition 1. Moscow, Nauka, 1975.

[783]. Dictionary of the Russian Language in the XI-XVII centuries. Edition 2. Moscow, Nauka.

[784]. Dictionary of the Russian Language in the XI-XVII centuries. Edition 3. Moscow, Nauka.

[785]. Dictionary of the Russian Language in the XI-XVII centuries. Edition 5. Moscow, Nauka.

[786]. Dictionary of the Russian Language in the XI-XVII centuries. Edition 6. Moscow, Nauka, 1979.

[787]. Dictionary of the Russian Language in the XI-XVII centuries. Edition 7. Moscow, Nauka, 1980.

[788]. Dictionary of the Russian Language in the XI-XVII centuries. Edition 8. Moscow, Nauka.

[789]. Dictionary of the Russian Language in the XI-XVII centuries. Edition 11. Moscow, Nauka, 1986.

[790]. Dictionary of the Russian Language in the XI-XVII centuries. Edition 13. Moscow, Nauka, 1987.

[791]. Dictionary of the Russian Language in the XI-XVII centuries. Edition 19. Moscow, Nauka.

[792]. Smirnov, A. P. The Scythians. The USSR AS Institute of Archaeology. Moscow, Nauka, 1966.

[793]. Smirnov, F. Christian Liturgy in the First Three Centuries. Kiev, 1874.

[794]. Soboleva, N. A. Russian Seals. Moscow, Nauka, 1991.

[795]. A Collection of State Edicts and Covenants. Moscow, 1894.

[796]. The Soviet Encyclopaedic Dictionary. Moscow, Sovetskaya Encyclopaedia, 1979.

[797]. The Soviet Encyclopaedic Dictionary. Moscow, Sovetskaya Encyclopaedia, 1984.

[797:1]. The Great Treasures of the World. Gianni Guadalupi, ed. Moscow, Astrel, AST, 2001. Italian original: I grandi tresori – l’arte orafa dall’ antico egitto all XX secolo. Edizioni White Star, 1998.

[798]. Solovyov, V. Collected Works. Vol. 6. St. Petersburg, 1898.

[799]. Solovyov, S. M. Collected Works. Book 4, Vols. 7-8. Moscow, Mysl, 1989.

[800]. Solovyov, S. M. Collected Works. Book 6. Moscow, Mysl, 1991.

[800:1]. Solovyov, S. M. The History of the Ancient Russia. Moscow, Prosveshchenie, 1992.

[801]. Solonar, P. Most Probably Fiction… The Tekhnika i Nauka magazine, No. 4 (1983): 28-32.

[802]. The Reports of the Imperial Orthodox Society of Palestine. April 1894. St. Petersburg, 1894.

[803]. Palamarchuk, Pyotr, comp. Fourty Times Fourty. A Concise Illustrated History of All the Churches in Moscow. 4 volumes. Moscow, Kniga i Biznes Ltd., Krom Ltd., 1995.

[804]. Sotnikova, M. P. The Oldest Russian Coins of the X-XI century. Catalogue and Study. Moscow, Banki i Birzhi, 1995.

[805]. The Spaso-Andronikov Monastery. A scheme. The Central Andrey Roublyov Museum of Ancient Russian Culture and Art. Moscow, MO Sintez, 1989.

[806]. Spasskiy, I. G. The Russian Monetary System. Leningrad, Avrora, 1970.

[807]. Spasskiy, I. G. The Russian “Yefimki.” A Study and a Catalogue. Novosibirsk, Nauka, Siberian Affiliation, 1988.

[808]. Speranskiy, M. N. Cryptography in Southern Slavic and Russian Literary Artefacts. Published in the Encyclopaedia of Slavic Philology series. Leningrad, 1929.

[808:1]. Spiridonov, A. M., and O. A. Yarovoy. The Valaam Monastery: from Apostle Andrew to Hegumen Innocent (Historical Essays of the Valaam Monastery). Moscow, Prometei, 1991.

[809]. Spirina, L. M. The Treasures of the Sergiev Posad State Reserve Museum of Art and History. Ancient Russian Arts and Crafts. Nizhny Novgorod, Nizhpoligraf, n.d.

[810]. Contentious Issues of Native History of the XI-XVIII century. Report theses and speeches of the first readings dedicated to the memory of A. A. Zimin. 13-18 May, 1990. Moscow, The USSR AS, Moscow State Institute of Historical and Archival Science, 1990.

[811]. Brouyevich, N. G., ed. 220 Years of the USSR Academy of Sciences. 1725-1945. Moscow-Leningrad, The USSR AS Press, 1945.

[812]. Mediaeval Decorative Stitching. Byzantium, the Balkans, Russia. Catalogue of an exhibition. The XVIII Int’l Congress of Byzantine Scholars. Moscow, 8-15 August, 1991. Moscow, The USSR Ministry of Culture. State Museums of the Moscow Kremlin, 1991.

[813]. Sobolev, N. N., ed. The Old Moscow. Published by the Commission for the Studies of Old Moscow of the Imperial Archaeological Society of Russia. Issues 1, 2. Moscow, 1914 (Reprinted: Moscow, Stolitsa, 1993).

[814]. A Dictionary of Old Slavic (by the X-XI century Manuscripts). Moscow, Russkiy Yazyk, 1994.

[815]. Starostin, E. V. Russian History in Foreign Archives. Moscow, Vysshaya Shkola, 1994.

[815:1]. Stelletsky, I. Y. In Search of the Library of Ivan the Terrible. The Mysteries of Russian History series. Moscow, Sampo, 1999.

[816]. Stepanov, N. V. The New Style and the Orthodox Paschalia. Moscow, 1907.

[817]. Stepanov, N. V. The Calendarian and Chronological Reference Book (for the Solution of Chronographical Time Problems). Moscow, Synodal typography, 1915.

[817:1]. Pletneva, S. A., volume ed. The Eurasian Steppes in the Middle Ages. Collected works. In the USSR Archaeology series. B. A. Rybakov, general ed. Moscow, Nauka, 1981.

[818]. Stingl, Miloslav. Mysteries of the Indian Pyramids. Transl. from Czech by I. O. Malevich. Moscow, Progress, 1982.

[819]. Strabo. Geography. Moscow, Ladomir, 1994. English edition: Jones, H.L. The Geography of Strabo. With an English translation. I-VIII. London, 1917-1932.

[820]. Builders of the Burial Mounds and Dwellers of the Caves. The Extinct Civilizations encyclopaedia. Moscow, Terra, 1998. Translated from English by E. Krasoulin. Original edition: Time-Life Books BV, 1992.

[821]. Struyck, D. J. A Brief Account of the History of Mathematics. Moscow, Nauka, 1969.

[821:1]. Suzdalev, V. E. Kolomenskoye – “Memory for Ages.” Moscow, Praktik-A, 1993.

[822]. Sukina, L. B. History of Esther in the Russian Cultrure of the Second Half of the XVII century. Part of the compilation: Melnik, A. G., ed. History and Culture of the land of Rostov. 1998. Collected essays. Rostov, The Rostov Kremlin State Museum and Reserve, 1999.

[823]. Suleimanov, Olzhas. Az and Ya. Alma-Ata, Zhazushy, 1975.

[823:1]. Sukhoroukov, Alexander. From the History of Cards. The Cards Don’t Lie! The Bridge in Russia magazine, No. 1 (18) (2002), pp. 78-80. Moscow, Minuvsheye.

[824]. Sytin, P. V. From the History of Russian Streets. Moscow, Moskovskiy Rabochiy, 1958.

[825]. Sytin, P. V. The Toponymy of Russian Streets. Moscow, 1959.

[826]. Samuels, Ruth. Following the Paths of Hebraic History. Moscow, Art-Business-Centre, 1993.

[827]. Tabov, Jordan. The Decline of Old Bulgaria. Sofia, Morang, 1997. Russian transl.: Moscow, Kraft and Lean, 2000.

[828]. Tabov, Jordan. The New Chronology of the Balkans. The Old Bulgaria. Sofia, PCM-1, 2000.

[828:1]. Tabov, Jordan. When did the Kiev Russia Become Baptized? St. Petersburg, Neva. Moscow, Olma, 2003.

[829]. Rakhmanliev, R., comp. Tamerlane. The Epoch. The Person. The Actions. Collected works. Moscow, Gourash, 1992.

[830]. Tantlevskiy, I. R. History and Ideology of the Qumran Community. St. Petersburg, the RAS Institute of Oriental Studies, 1994.

[830:1]. Tate, Georges. The Crusades. Moscow, Olimp, Astrel, Ast, 2003.

[831]. Tartarian-Russian Didactic Dictionary. Moscow, Russkiy Yazyk, 1992.

[832]. Tatishchev, V. N. Collected Works in Eight Volumes. Moscow, Ladomir, 1994-1996.

[833]. Tacitus, Cornelius. Collected Works. Vols. I, II. Leningrad, Nauka, 1969. English ed.: The Works of Tacitus. London, Cornelii Taciti Historiarum libri qui supersunt. Published by Dr. Carl Heraeus. 4th ed.: Leipzig, G. Teubner, 1885.

[834]. The Works of Maxim the Confessor. The œuvres of the Holy Fathers in Russian translation. Vol. 69. The Moscow Seminary Academy, 1915.

[835]. The Works of Nicephor, the Archbischop of Constantinople. Moscow, 1904.

[836]. The Works of Nile, the Holy Pilgrim of Sinai. The œuvres of the Holy Fathers in Russian translation. Vols. 31-33. The Moscow Seminary Academy, 1858-1859.

[837]. The Works of St. Isidore the Pelusiote. The œuvres of the Holy Fathers in Russian translation. Vols. 34-36. The Moscow Seminary Academy, 1859-1860.

[838]. Tvorogov, O. V. Ancient Russia: Events and People. St. Petersburg, Nauka, 1994.

[839]. Tvorogov, O. V. The Ryurikovichi Princes. Short Biographies. Moscow, Russkiy Mir, 1992.

[840]. Tereshchenko, Alexander. A Final Study of the Saray Region, with a Description of the Relics of the Desht-Kipchak Kingdom. Scientific Notes of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, the 1st and 3rd Department. Vol. 2. St. Petersburg, 1854. 89-105.

[841]. Tikhomirov, M. N. Old Moscow. The XII-XV century. Mediaeval Russia as the International Crossroads. XIV-XV century. Moscow, Moskovskiy Rabochiy, 1992.

[842]. Tikhomirov, M. N. Russian Culture of the X-XIII century. Moscow, 1968.

[843]. Tikhomirov, M. N. Mediaeval Moscow in the XIV-XV century. Moscow, 1957.

[844]. Tokmakov, I. F. A Historical and Archaeological Description of the Moscow Stauropigial Monastery of St. Simon. Issues 1 and 2, Moscow, 1892-1896.

[845]. Lopukhin, A. P., ed. Explanatory Bible, or the Commentary to all of the Books of the Holy Writ, from both the Old and the New Covenant. Vols. 1-12. Petersburg, published by the heirs of A. P. Lopukhin, 1904-1913. (2nd edition: Stockholm, the Bible Translation Institute, 1987).

[846]. Toll, N. P. The Saviour’s Icon from K. T. Soldatenkov’s Collection. Moscow, 1933.

[847]. Tolochko, P. P. The Ancient Kiev. Kiev, Naukova Dumka, 1976.

[848]. Tolstaya, Tatyana. The River Okkerville. Short Stories. Moscow, Podkova, 1999.

[849]. Troels-Lund, T. The Sky and the Weltanschauung in the Flux of Time. Odessa, 1912. German edition: Troels-Lund, T. Himmelsbild und Weltanschauung im Wandel der Zeiten. Leipzig, B. G. Teubner, 1929.

[850]. Tronskiy, I. M. The History of Ancient Literature. Leningrad, Uchpedgiz, 1947.

[850:1]. Trofimov, Zhores. The N. M. Karamzin Memorial in Simbirsk. Known and Unknown Facts. Moscow, Rossia Molodaya, 1992.

[851]. Trojan Tales. Mediaeval Courteous Novels on the Trojan War by the Russian Chronicles of the XVI and XVII century. Leningrad: Nauka, 1972.

[851:1]. Thulsi Das. The Ramayana, or Ramacharitamanasa. The Multitude of Rama’s Heroic Deeds. Translated from Hindi by Academician A. P. Barannikov. Moscow-Leningrad, The USSR AS, Institute of Oriental Studies. Published by the USSR Academy of Sciences in 1948.

[852]. Tunmann. The Khans of Crimea. Simferopol, Tavria, 1991.

[853]. Turaev, B. A. The History of the Ancient Orient. Moscow, Ogiz, 1936.

[854]. Shcheka, Y. V. The Turkish-Russian Dictionary. Abt. 18,000 words. 3rd stereotype edition. Moscow, Citadel, 2000.

[855]. Turkhan, Gian. Istanbul. Gate to the Orient. Istanbul, Orient, 1996 (in Russian).

[855:1]. Turkey. The Book of Wanderings. A Historical Guide-book. Moscow, Veche, Khartia, 2000.

[856]. A Millennium since the Baptism of Russia. The materials of the International Ecclesian and Historical Conference (Kiev, 21-28 July, 1986). Moscow, Moscow Patriarchy, 1988.

[857]. Ouzdennikov, V. V. Russian Coins. 1700-1917. Moscow, Finances and Statistics, 1986.

[857:1]. The Ukrainian Books Printed in Cyrillics in the XVI-XVII century. A catalogue of editions kept in the V. I. Lenin State Library of USSR. Issue I. 1574 – 2nd half of the XVII century. Moscow, The State V. I. Lenin Library of the Lenin Order. Rare books department. 1976.

[858]. The Streets of Moscow. A Reference Book. Moscow, Moskovskiy Rabochiy, 1980.

[859]. The Ural Meridian. Topical Itineraries. A Reference Guide-book. Chelyabinsk, The Southern Ural Press, 1986.

[860]. Ousanovich, M. I. The Scientific Foresight of N. A. Morozov. The Successes of Chemistry, Vol. 16, Issue 3 (1947).

[861]. Ouspensky, D. N. Modern Problems of Orthodox Theology. The Moscow Patriarchy magazine, No. 9 (1962): 64-70.

[862]. The Writ. The Pentateuch of Moses (from the Genesis to the Revelation). Translation, introduction, and comments by I. S. Shifman. Moscow, Respublika, 1993.

[863]. Fyson, Nance. The Greatest Treasures of the World. An Atlas of the World’s Wonders. Moscow, Bertelsmann Media Moskau, 1996. Mondruck Graphische Betriebe GmbH, Güntherslau (Germany), 1996. Translated from the English edition published by AA Publishing (a trading name of Automobile Association Development Limited, whose registred office is Norfolk House, Priestly Road, Basing-stoke, Hampshire RG24 9NY).

[864]. Falkovich, S. I. Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov, His Life and Works on Chemistry. The Priroda (Nature) magazine, No. 11 (1947).

[865]. Falkovich, S. I. Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov as a Chemist (1854-1946). The USSR AS Courier, Chemical Studies Department, No. 5 (1947).

[866]. Fasmer, M. An Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language. Vols. 1-4. Translated from German. Moscow, Progress, 1986-1987.

[867]. [Fedorov]. Ivan Fedorov [The Alphabet]. A facsimile edition. Moscow, Prosveshchenie, 1974.

[868]. Fedorov, V. V., and A. T. Fomenko. Statistical Estimation of Chronological Nearness of Historical Texts. A collection of articles for the Problems of stochastic model stability magazine. Seminar works. The National System Research Institute, 1983. 101-107. English translation published in the Journal of Soviet Mathematics, Vol. 32, No. 6 (1986): 668-675.

[869]. Fedorov-Davydov, G. A. The Coins of the Muscovite Russia. Moscow, MSU Press, 1981.

[870]. Fedorov-Davydov, G. A. The Coins of the Nizhny Novgorod Principality. Moscow, MSU Press, 1989.

[870:1]. Fedorov-Davydov, G. A. Burial Mounds, Idols and Coins. Moscow, Nauka, 1968.

[871]. Fedorov-Davydov, G. A. Eight Centuries of Taciturnity. The Nauka i Zhizn (Science and Life) magazine, No. 9 (1966): 74-76.

[872]. Fedorova, E. V. Latin Epigraphics. Moscow University Press, 1969.

[873]. Fedorova, E. V. Latin Graffiti. Moscow University Press, 1976.

[874]. Fedorova, E. V. Imperial Rome in Faces. Moscow University Press, 1979.

[875]. Fedorova, E. V. Rome, Florence, Venice. Historical and Cultural Monuments. Moscow University Press, 1985.

[876]. Theophilactus Simocattas. History. Moscow, Arktos, 1996.

[876:1]. Fersman, A. E. Tales of Gemstones. Moscow, Nauka, 1974.

[877]. Flavius, Joseph. The Judean War. Minsk, Belarus, 1991.

[878]. Flavius, Joseph. Judean Antiquities. Vols. 1, 2. Minsk, Belarus, 1994.

[879]. Florentine Readings: The Life and Culture of Italy. Summer Lightnings. Collected essays, translated by I. A. Mayevsky. Moscow, 1914.

[880]. Florinsky, V. M. Primeval Slavs according to the Monuments of their Pre-Historic Life. Tomsk, 1894.

[881]. Voigt, G. The Renaissance of the Classical Literature. Vols. I and II. Moscow, 1885. German edition: Die Wiederbelebung des classischen Altertums oder das erste Jahrhundert des Humanismus. Berlin, G. Reimer, 1893.

[882]. Foley, John. The Guinness Encyclopaedia of Signs and Symbols. Moscow, Veche, 1996. Original by Guinness Publishing Ltd., 1993.

[883]. Fomenko, A. T. “On the Calculations of the Second Derivative of Lunar Elongation.” The problems of the mechanics of navigated movement. Hierarchic systems. The Inter-University Collection of Scientific Works. Perm, 1980. 161-166.

[884]. Fomenko, A. T. “Several Statistical Regularities of Information Density Disribution in Texts with Scales.” Semiotics and Informatics. Moscow, The National Scientific and Technical Information Institute Publication, Issue 15 (1980): 99-124.

[885]. Fomenko, A. T. Informative Functions and Related Statistical Regularities. Report theses of the 3rd International Probability Theory and Mathematical Statistics Conference in Vilnius, the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences Institute of Mathematics and Cybernetics, 1981, Volume 2, pages 211-212.

[886]. Fomenko, A. T. Duplicate Identification Methods and some of their Applications. In Doklady AN SSSR (The USSR Academy of Sciences), Vol. 256, No. 6 (1981): 1326-1330.

[887]. Fomenko, A. T. On the Qualities of the Second Derivative of Lunar Elongation and Related Statistical Regularities. The Issues of Computational and Applied Mathematics. A collection of academic works. The Academy of Sciences of the Soviet Republic of Uzbekistan. Tashkent, Issue 63 (1981): 136-150.

[888]. Fomenko, A. T. New Experimental Statistical Methods of Dating the Ancient Events and their Applications to the Global Chronology of the Ancient and Mediaeval World. Pre-print. Order No. 3672, No. BO7201. Moscow, State Committee for Radio and TV Broadcasting, 1981. 1-100. English translation: Fomenko, A. T. Some new empirical-statistical methods of dating and the analysis of present global chronology. London, The British Library, Department of Printed Books. 1981. Cup. 918/87.

[889]. Fomenko, A. T. Calculating the Second Derivative of Lunar Elongation and Related Statistical Regularities in the Distribution of Some Astronomical Data. In Operational and Automatic System Research, Issue 20 (1982): 98-113. Kiev University Press.

[890]. Fomenko, A. T. Concerning the Mystification Issue. In Science and Technology, No. 11 (1982): 26-29.

[891]. Fomenko, A. T. New Empirico-Statistical Method of Ordering Texts and Applications to Dating Problems. In Doklady AN SSSR (The USSR Academy of Sciences Publications), Vol. 268, No. 6 (1983): 1322-1327.

[892]. Fomenko, A. T. Distribution Geometry for Entire Points in Hyperregions. The Vector and Tensor Analysis Seminar works (Moscow, MSU Press), Issue 21 (1983): 106-152.

[893]. Fomenko, A. T. The Author’s Invariant of Russian Literary Texts. Methods of Qualitative Analysis of Narrative Source Texts. Moscow, The USSR History Institute (The USSR Academy of Sciences), 1983. 86-109.

[894]. Fomenko, A. T. The Global Chronological Map. In Chemistry and Life, No. 11 (1983): 85-92.

[895]. Fomenko, A. T. New Methods of the Chronologically Correct Ordering of Texts and their Applications to the Problems of Dating the Ancient Events. Operational and Automatic System Research (Kiev University Press), Issue 21 (1983): 40-59.

[896]. Fomenko, A. T. Methods of Statistical Processing of Parallels in Chronological Text and the Global Chronological Map. Operational and Automatic System Research (Kiev University Press), Issue 22 (1983): 40-55.

[897]. Fomenko, A. T. Statistical Frequency Damping Analysis of Chronological Texts and Global Chronological Applications. Operational and Automatic System Research (Kiev University Press), Issue 24 (1984): 49-66.

[898]. Fomenko, A. T. New Empirico-Statistical Method of Parallelism Determination and Duplicate Dating. Problems of stochastic model stability. Seminar works. The National System Research Institute, Moscow, 1984. 154-177.

[899]. Fomenko, A. T. Frequency Matrices and their Applications to Statistical Processing of Narrative Sources. Report theses of the “Complex Methods of Historical Studies from Antiquity to Contemporaneity” conference. The Commission for Applying Natural Scientific Methods to Archaeology. Moscow, The USSR History Institute (The USSR Academy of Sciences), 1984. 135-136.

[900]. Fomenko, A. T. Informative Functions and Related Statistical Regularities. Statistics. Probability. Economics. The Academic Statistical Notes series. Vol. 49. Moscow, Nauka, 1985. 335-342.

[901]. Fomenko, A. T. Duplicates in Mixed Sequences and the Frequency Damping Principle. Report theses of the 4th Int’l Probability Theory and Mathematical Statistics Conference in Vilnius, the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences Institute of Mathematics and Cybernetics, Vol. 3. 1985. 246-248.

[902]. Fomenko, A. T., and L. E. Morozova. Several Issues of Statistical Annual Account Source Processing Methods. Mathematics in mediaeval narrative source studies. Moscow, Nauka, 1986. 107-129.

[903]. Fomenko, A. T. Identifying Dependencies and Layered Structures in Narrative Texts. Problems of stochastic model stability. Seminar works. The National System Research Institute, 1987. 33-45.

[904]. Fomenko, A. T. Methods of Statistical Analysis of Narrative Texts and Chronological Applications. (The Identification and the Dating of Derivative Texts, Statistical Ancient Chronology, Statistics of the Ancient Astronomical Reports). Moscow, Moscow University Press, 1990.

[905]. Fomenko, A. T. Statistical Chronology. New facts in life, science and technology. The Mathematics and Cybernetics” series, No. 7. Moscow, Znanie, 1990.

[906]. Fomenko, A. T. Global Chronology. (A Research of Classical and Mediaeval History. Mathematical Methods of Source Analysis.) Moscow, MSU Department of Mathematics and Mechanics, 1993.

[907]. Fomenko, A. T. A Criticism of the Traditional Chronology of Antiquity and the Middle Ages (What Century is it Now?). A précis. Moscow, MSU Department of Mathematics and Mechanics, 1993.

[908]. Fomenko, A. T. Methods of Mathematical Analysis of Historical Texts. Chronological Applications. Moscow, Nauka, 1996.

[909]. Fomenko, A. T. The New Chronology of Greece. Antiquity in the Middle Ages. Vols. 1 and 2. Moscow, MSU Centre of Research and Pre-University Education, 1996.

[910]. Fomenko, A. T. Statistical Chronology. A Mathematical View of History. What Century is it Now? Belgrade, Margo-Art, 1997.

[911]. Fomenko, A. T. Methods of Statistical Analysis of Historical Texts. Chronological Applications. Vols. 1 and 2. Moscow, Kraft and Lean, 1999.

[912]. Fomenko, A. T. New Methods of Statistical Analysis of Historical Texts. Applications to Chronology. Vol. 1, Vol. 2. Vol. 3: Fomenko, A. T. Antiquity in the Middle Ages. (Greek and Bible History). Published in the series Russian Studies in Mathematics and Sciences. Scholary Monographs in Russian. Vol. 6-7. Lewiston-Queenston-Lampeter, The Edwin Mellen Press, 1999.

[912:1]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. Demagogism instead of Scientific Analysis. The RAS Courier, Vol. 9, No. 9 (2000): 797-800.

[912:2]. Fomenko, A. T., and G. V. Nosovskiy. In Re the “Novgorod Datings” of A. A. Zaliznyak and V. L. Yanin. The RAS Courier, Vol. 72, No. 2 (2002): 134-140.

[912:3]. Fomenko, T. N. The Astronomical Datings of the “Ancient” Egyptian Zodiacs of Dendera and Esne (Latopolis). In: Kalashnikov, V. V., G. V. Nosovskiy, and A. T. Fomenko. The Astronomical Analysis of Chronology. The Almagest. Zodiacs. Moscow, The Delovoi Express Financial, 2000. 635-810.

[913]. The Epistle of Photius, the Holy Patriarch of Constantinople, to Michael, Prince of Bulgaria, on the Princely Incumbencies. Moscow, 1779. See also: Photius. Patriarch of Constantinople, Epistola ad Michaelem Bulgarorum Regem. In: Roman Spicilegium. Rome, 1839-1844.

[914]. Cardini, Franco. Origins of the Mediaeval Knightage. A condensed translation from Italian by V. P. Gaiduk. La Nuova Italia, 1982. Moscow, Progress Publications, 1987.

[914:1]. France, Anatole. Selected Short Stories. Leningrad, Lenizdat, 1959.

[915]. Pototskaya, V. V., and N. P. Pototskaya. French-Russian Dictionary. 12th stereotype edition. Moscow, Sovetskaya Encyclopaedia. 1967.

[916]. Godfrey, Fr. O. F. M. Following Christ. Israel, Palphot Ltd., Millennium 2000, 2000.

[917]. Frazer, J. Attis. Moscow, Novaya Moskva, 1924. English ed.: Adonis, Attis, Osiris. London, Macmillan & Co, 1907.

[918]. Frazer, J. Golden Bough. Release 1. Moscow-Leningrad, Ogiz, 1931.

[919]. Frazer, J. Golden Bough. Releases 3, 4. Moscow, Atheist, 1928.

[920]. Frazer, J. The Folklore in the Old Testament. Studies in Comparative Religion. Moscow-Leningrad, Ogiz, The State Social Economics, 1931. English original: London, Macmillan & Co., 1918.

[921]. Fren, H. M. Coins of the Khans of Juchiev Ulus of the Golden Horde. St. Petersburg, 1832.

[922]. Frumkina, R. M. Statistical Methods of Lexical Studies. Moscow, 1964.

[923]. Thucydides. The History of the Peloponnesian War. Eight books. Translated by F. G. Mishchenko. Vols. 1, 2. Vol. 1: books 1-4. Vol. 2: books 5-8. Moscow, 1887-1888. English edition published in the series “Great Books of the Western World. Vol. 5. Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. Chicago, The University of Chicago, 1952 (2nd edition 1990). See also the Penguin Books edition. London, 1954.

[924]. Thucydides. History. Leningrad, Nauka, 1981.

[925]. von Senger, Harro. Stratagems. On the Chinese Art of Life and Survival. Moscow, Progress, 1995.

[926]. Herrmann, D. The Pioneers of the Skies. Translated from German by K. B. Shingareva and A. A. Konopikhin. Moscow, Mir, 1981. German edition: Herrmann, Dieter B. Entdecker des Himmels. Leipzig-Jena-Berlin, Urania-Verlag, 1979.

[927]. Chlodowski, R. I. Francesco Petrarch. Moscow, Nauka, 1974.

[928]. The Pilgrimage of Hegumen Daniel. Literary Monuments of Ancient Russia. XII Century. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 1980. 25-115.

[929]. Afanasy Nikitin’s Voyage over the Three Seas. 1466-1472. Moscow-Leningrad, the Academy of Sciences, Literary Masterpieces, The USSR AS Publications, 1948.

[930]. Hollingsworth, Mary. Art in the History of Humanity. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1989. Russian translation of the edition titled L’Arte Nella Storia Dell’Uomo. Saggio introduttivo di Giulio Carlo Argan. Firenze, Giunti Gruppo Editoriale, 1989.

[931]. The Kholmogory Chronicle. The Dvina Chronicler. The Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles, Vol. 33. Leningrad, Nauka, 1977.

[932]. Khomyakov, A. S. Collected Works in Two Volumes. A supplement to the Issues of Philosophy. Vol. 1. Works on historiosophy. Moscow, the Moscow Fund of Philosophy, Medium Press, 1994.

[933]. Aconiatus, Nicetas. History Beginning with the Reign of John Comnenus. St. Petersburg, 1860. Also see the Historia by Nicetas Aconiatus in J. P. Migne’s Patrologiae cursus completes. Series graeca. Vol. 140. Paris, 1857-1886.

[934]. Aconiatus, Nicetas. History Beginning with the Reign of John Comnenus (1186-1206). The Byzantine Historians series, Vol. 5. St. Petersburg, 1862. Also see the Historia by Nicetas Aconiatus in J. P. Migne’s Patrologiae cursus completes. Series graeca. Vol. 140. Paris, 1857-1886

[935]. Hogue, John. Nostradamus. The Complete Prophecies. First published in Great Britain in 1996 by Element Books Ltd., Shaftesbury, Dorset. Moscow, Fair-Press, The Grand Publishing and Trading House, 1999.

[935:1]. Boutenev, Khreptovich. Florence and Rome in Relation to Two XV-century Events in Russian History. A Concise Illustrated Account Compiled by Khreptovich Boutenev, Esq. Moscow, 1909.

[936]. Christianity. An Encyclopaedic Dictionary. The Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron. New Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron. The Orthodox Encyclopaedia of Theology. Vols. 1-3. Moscow, The Great Russian Encyclopaedia, 1993.

[937]. Pokrovskiy, N. N., ed. Christianity and the Russian Church of the Feudal Period (Materials). Novosibirsk, Nauka, Siberian Affiliation, 1989.

[938]. Istrin, V. M., ed. The Chronicle of John Malalas (A Slavic Translation). St. Petersburg, 1911.

[939]. The Chronographer. Russian National Library, the Manuscript Section. Rumyantsevsky Fund, 457.

[940]. The Lutheran Chronographer. Private collection, 1680.

[941]. Rantsov, V. L., comp. The Chronology of Global and Russian History. St. Petersburg, Brockhaus-Efron, 1905. Reprinted in Kaliningrad: Argument, Yantarny Skaz, 1995.

[942]. The Chronology of Russian History. An Encyclopaedic Reference Book. Moscow, Mezhdunarodnye Otnosheniya, 1994.

[943]. Prakhov, Adrian, ed. The Treasures of Russian Art. A Monthly Almanac of the Imperial Society for Supporting Fine Arts. Year IV, No. 2-4, No. 5 (1904). Issue 5: The Relics of the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery. Historical review by Alexander Ouspensky. Reprinted in Moscow, Severo-Print Typography, 1998. To the 600th anniversary of the Savvino-Storozhevsky stauropigial friary.

[944]. Khoudyakov, M. G. Accounts of the History of the Kazan Khanate. Kazan, State Publishing House, 1923. Reprinted in: On the Junction of Continents and Civilizations. Moscow, Insan, 1996. Published separately: Moscow, Insan, SFK, 1991.

[945]. Kjetsaa, G., S. Gustavsson, B. Beckman, and S. Gil. The Problems of the “Quiet flows the Don’s” Authorship. Who Wrote the “Quiet flows the Don”? Moscow, Kniga, 1989. Translated from the Solum Forlag edition. Oslo-New Jersey, Humanities Press.

[946]. Zeitlin, Z. Galileo. The Celebrity Biographies series, Issue 5-6. The Literary Magazine Association, Moscow, 1935.

[947]. Petrov, Leonid, comp. The Dictionary of Ecclesial History. (A Referential Theological Dictionary, Predominantly Oriented At Ecclesial History). St. Petersburg, the Province Department Typography, 1889. Reprinted: the Sretenskiy Monastery, 1996.

[948]. Cicero, Marcus Tullius. Dialogues. On the State. On the Laws. Moscow, Nauka, 1966. English edition: Cicero, Marcus Tullius. Works. Cambridge, Mass; Harvard University Press; London, Heinemann, 1977.

[949]. Cicero, Marcus Tullius. Three Tractates on the Art of Rhetoric. Moscow, Nauka, 1972. English edition: Cicero, Marcus Tullius. Works. Cambridge, Mass; Harvard University Press; London, Heinemann, 1977.

[950]. Cicero, Marcus Tullius. On the Old Age. On Friendship. On Responsibilities. Moscow, Nauka, 1972. English edition: Cicero, Marcus Tullius. Old Age and Friendship… London, Cassel’s National Library, 1889.

[951]. Cicero, Marcus Tullius. Philosophical Tractates. Moscow, Nauka, 1985. English edition: Cicero, Marcus Tullius. Works. Cambridge, Mass; Harvard University Press; London, Heinemann, 1977.

[952]. Chagin, G. N. The Ancient Land of Perm. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1988.

[953]. Chekin, L. S. The Cartography of the Christian Middle Ages in the VIII-XIII century. Moscow, Oriental Literature, RAS, 1999.

[953:1]. Chernetsov, A. V. The Gilded Doors of the XVI century. The Cathedrals of the Moscow Kremlin and the Trinity Cathedral of the Ipatyevsky Monastery in Kostroma. Moscow, The RAS, Nauka, 1992.

[954]. Chernin, A. D. The Physics of Time. Moscow, Nauka, 1987.

[955]. Chernykh, P. Y. A Historical and Etymological Dictionary of the Modern Russian Language. Vols. 1, 2. Moscow, Russkiy Yazyk, 1993.

[955:1]. Chernyak, E. B. The Mysteries of France. Conspiracy, Intrigue, Mystification. Moscow, Ostozhye Press, 1996.

[955:2]. Chernyak, E. B. The Time of the Conspiracies Long Forgotten. Moscow, Mezhdunarodnye Otnosheniya, 1994.

[956]. Chertkov, A. D. On the Language of the Pelasgians that used to Inhabit Italy, and its Comparison to Ancient Slavic. The periodical edition of the Moscow Society for the Historical Studies of Russian Antiquities, Book 23. Moscow, 1855.

[957]. Chertkov, A. D. A Description of Ancient Russian Coins. Moscow, Selivanovsky Typography, 1834.

[958]. Cinzia, Valigi. Rome and the Vatican. Narni-Terni, Italy, Plurigraf, 1995.

[959]. Chistovich, I. Textual Corrections of the Slavic Bible Before the 1751 Edition. (Article 2). The Orthodox Review, Vol. 2 (May Book, 1860): 41-72.

[960]. Chistyakov, A. S. The Story of Peter the Great. Reprint. Moscow, Buklet, Dvoinaya Raduga, 1992.

[961]. Chistyakova, N. A., and N. V. Voulikh. The History of Ancient Literature. Moscow, Vyshaya Shkola, 1972.

[962]. Imperial Society for History and Russian Antiquities Readings. Book I, Part 5. 1858.

[963]. The Miraculous Icons of Our Lady. Sisterhood of the Holy Martyr Elizabeth, the Great Princess. 103287. Moscow, 40, 2nd Khutorskaya St., 1998.

[964]. [Champollion] J. F. Champollion and Egyptian Hieroglyphs Deciphered. Collected works under the general editorship of I. S. Katznelson. Moscow, Nauka, 1979.

[965]. Chantepie de la Saussaye, D. P. Illustrated History of Religions. Moscow, 1899. English edition: Manual of the Science of Religion. London-New York, Longmans, Green and Co., 1891.

[966]. Chantepie de la Saussaye, D. P. Illustrated History of Religions. Vols. 1 and 2. Moscow, Spaso-Preobrazhensky Stauropigial Monastery of Valaam, reprinted in 1992.

[967]. Shakhmatov, A. A. Manuscript Description. The Radzivilovskaya Chronicle, or the Chronicle of Königsberg. Vol. 2. Articles on the text and the miniatures of the manuscript. St. Petersburg, Imperial Antiquarian Bibliophile Society, CXVIII, 1902.

[968]. Shevchenko, M. Y. The Star Catalogue of Claudius Ptolemy: Special Characteristics of Ancient Astronomical Observations. Historico-Astronomical Research. Issue 17. Moscow, Nauka, 1988. 167-186.

[969]. Masterpieces among the Paintings in the Museums of the USSR. The Art of Ancient Russia. The Renaissance Art. Issue 1. Moscow, Goznak, 1974.

[970]. Sheynman, M. M. Belief in the Devil in the History of Religion. Moscow, Nauka, 1977.

[971]. Shakespeare. Collected Works in Five Volumes. From the Library of Great Writers series under the editorship of S. A. Vengerov. St. Petersburg, Brockhaus-Efron, 1902-1904.

[972]. Shakespeare, William. The Complete Works in Eight Volumes. Under the editorship of A. Smirnov and A. Anixt. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1960.

[973]. Shakespeare, William. King Richard III. Tragedy in Five Acts. Translated by Georgy Ben. St. Petersburg, Zvezda, 1997.

[974]. 600th Anniversary of the Kulikovo Battle. Brochure. Vneshtorgizdat, Moscow State Museum of History. 1980.

[975]. Shilov, Y. A. The Proto-Homeland of the Aryans. History, Tradition, Mythology. Kiev, Sinto, 1995.

[976]. Shiryaev, A. N. Consecutive Statistical Analysis. Moscow, Nauka, 1976.

[977]. Shiryaev, E. E. Belarus: White Russia, Black Russia and Lithuania on the Maps. Minsk, Science & Technology, 1991.

[978]. Shklovsky, I. S. Supernovae. Moscow, 1968 (1st edition). Moscow, Nauka, 1976 (2nd edition). English edition: London-New York, Wiley, 1968.

[979]. Schlezer, A. L. Public and Private Life of Augustus Ludwig Schlezer as Related by Himself. In the Imperial Academy of Sciences, Russian Language and Literature Department series, Vol. 13. St. Petersburg, 1875.

[980]. Shlyapkin I. A. Description of the Manuscripts of the Spaso-Yefimiev Monastery in Suzdal. The Masterpieces of Ancient Literature, Issue 4, No. 16. St. Petersburg, 1881.

[981]. Spilevskiy A. V. The Almagest and Chronology. The Ancient History Courier, No. 3 (1988): 134-160.

[982]. Schulmann, Eliezer. The Sequence of Biblical Events. Translated from Hebrew. Moscow, the Ministry of Defence Publications, 1990.

[983]. Shchepkin, V. N. Russian Palaeography. Moscow, Nauka, 1967.

[984]. Shcherbatov, M. M. Russian History from the Dawn of Time. St. Petersburg, 1901.

[985]. Eulia, Chelebi. The Book of Travels. Campaigns of the Tatars and Voyages through the Crimea (1641-1667). Simferopol, Tavria, 1996.

[985:1]. Eisler, Colin (Leman, Robert). The Museums of Berlin. Moscow, Colin Eisler and Little, Brown and Company, Inc. Compilation. Slovo, the World’s Greatest Museums series, 2002 (1996).

[985:2]. Eisler, Colin. The Art of the Hermitage. Moscow, Biblion, 2001.

[986]. Aitken, M. J. Physics and Archaeology. Moscow, IL, 1964. English original: New York, Interscience Publishers, 1961.

[987]. Ehlebracht, Peter. Tragedy of the Pyramids. Egyptian Shrines Plundered for 5000 Years. Moscow, Progress, 1984. German original: Haltet die Pyramiden Fest! 5000 Jahre Grabraub in Ägypten. Düsseldorf-Vienna, Econ, 1980.

[987:1]. Englund, Peter. Poltava. How an Army Perished. Moscow, Novoye Literaturnoye Obozrenie, 1995. Original: Stockholm, Bokförgalet Atlantis, 1988.

[988]. The Encyclopaedic Dictionary. Vols. 1-82; supplementary volumes 1-4. St. Petersburg, Brockhaus and Efron, 1890-1907.

[988:0]. Brockhaus, F. A., and I. A. Efron. The Encyclopaedic Dictionary. St. Petersburg, 1898. Reprinted: St. Petersburg, Polradis, 1994.

[988:1]. Encyclopaedia for Children. Vol. 7: Art. Moscow, Avanta-plus, 1997.

[989]. The Encyclopaedia of Elementary Mathematics. Book 1. Arithmetics. Moscow-Leningrad, the State Publishing House of Theoretical Technical Literature, 1951.

[990]. Artamonov, M. I., ed. The Hermitage. Album. Leningrad, Sovetskiy Khudozhnik, 1964.

[991]. Ern, V. The Revelation in Thunder and Storm. Anatomy of N. A. Morozov’s Book. Moscow, 1907.

[991:1]. The Art of Goldsmithery in Russia. Album. Moscow, Interbook-Business, Yural Ltd, 2002.

[992]. Yuvalova, E. P. German Sculpture of 1200-1270. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1983.

[993]. Yanin, V. L. I Sent You a Birch-Rind Epistle. Moscow, MSU Press, 1965. A revised edition: Moscow, 1998.

[993:1]. Jannella, Cecilia. Simone Martini. Album. Moscow, Slovo, 1996. Scala, 1995, Istituto Forografico Editoriale.

[994]. Ponomaryov, A. M., ed. Yaroslavl. History of the City in Documents and First-Hand Materials from First References to 1917. Yaroslavl, Upper Volga Publications, 1990.

[995]. Yaroslavl. Map 0-37 (1:1,000,000). The General Council of Ministers, Department of Geodetics and Cartography, 1980.

[996]. Yaroslavl. Monuments of Art and Architecture. Yaroslavl: Upper Volga Publications, 1994.

Sources in foriegn languages

[997]. Chrysostomos, Abbot. The Holy Royal Monastery of Kykko Founded with a Cross. Limassol, Cyprus, Kykko Monastery, printed by D. Couvas & Sons, Ltd., 1969.

[998]. ABC kulturnich pamatek Ceskoslovenska. Prague, Panorama, 1985.

[999]. Abulafia, David. Frederick II. A Medieval Emperor. New York-Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1988.

[1000]. Abu Mashar. De magnis coinctiombus. Augsburg, Erhard Ratdolt (The Pulkovo Observatory Library), 1489.

[1001]. Adam, L. North-West American Indian Art and its Early Chinese Parallels. Man, Volume 36, No. 2-3 (1936): 45.

[1002]. Puech, Aime. St. Jean Chrisostome et les mœurs de son temps. Paris, 1891.

[1003]. Albright, W. F. From the Stone Age to Christianity. 7th edition. New York, 1957.

[1004]. Albumasar. De Astrú Scientia. 1515. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library.)

[1005]. Alibert, Louis. Dictionnaire Occitan-Francais. Selon les parles languedociens. Toulouse, Institut d’études Occitanes, 1996.

[1006]. A List of Books on the History of Science. 2nd supplement, Part 3. Astronomy. Chicago, The J. Crerar Library, 1944.

[1007]. Allen, Phillip. L’Atlas des Atlas. Le monde vu par les cartographes. Brepols, 1993.

[1008]. Almagestu Cl. Ptolemaei Phelusiensis Alexandrini. Anno Virginei Partus, 1515.

[1009]. America. Das frühe Bild der Neuen Welt. Ausstellung der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München. Munich, Prestel Verlag, 1992.

[1009:1]. Silverman, David P., ed. Ancient Egypt. New York, Oxford University Press, 1977.

[1010]. Thorpe, B., ed. Ancient Laws and Institutes of England… Volume 1. London, 1840. 198.

[1011]. Anke, Victor. The Life of Charlemagne. Aachen, Einhard Verlag, 1995.

[1012]. Annales de la Société Royale d’Archéologie de Bruxelles. Fondée a Bruxelles en 1887. Mémoires, rapports et documents. Publication périodique. Tome 41e. Secrétariat Général. Musée de la Porte de Hal Bruxelles. 1937.

[1013]. Apianus, P. Cosmographicus Liber Petri Apiani mathematici studiose collectus. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library). Landshutae, impensis P. Apiani, 1524.

[1013:1]. Arellano, Alexandra. All Cuzco. Peru. Fisa Escudo de Oro. Centre of Regional Studies of the Andes Bartolomé de las Casas, Lima, Peru. Instituto de Investigacion de la Facultad de Turismo y Hotelria, Universidad San Martin de Porres. 1999.

[1014]. Arnim, H. Sprachliche Forschungen zur Chronologie der platonischen Dialoge. Volume 269. Appendix 3. Sitzungen Wiener Akademie, 1912.

[1015]. Wolff, Arnold. Cologne Cathedral. Its history – Its Works of Art. Greven Verlag Köln GmbH, 1995.

[1016]. Wolff, Arnold, Rainer Gaertner, and Karl-Heinz Schmitz. Cologne on the Rhine with City Map. Cologne, Verlagsgesellschaft GmbH, 1995.

[1017]. Wolff, Arnold. The Cologne Cathedral. Cologne, Vista Point Verlag, 1990.

[1017:0]. Sachs, Abraham J. Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia. Compiled and edited by Hermann Hunger. Volume 1: Diaries from 652 BC to 262 BC. Volume 2: Diaries from 261 BC to 165 BC. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-Historische Klasse Denkschriften, 195. Bad. Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Vienna, 1988.

[1017:1]. Walker, Christopher, ed. Astronomy before the Telescope. Foreword by P. Moore. British Museum Press, 1996.

[1018]. Palairet, Jean. Atlas Méthodique, Composé pour l’usage de son altesse sérénissime monseigneur le prince d’Orange et de Nassau stadhouder des sept provinces unies, etc. etc. etc. Se trouve à Londres, chez Mess. J. Nourse & P. Vaillant dans le Strand; J. Neaulme à Amsterdam & à Berlin; & P. Gosse à La Haye. 1755.

[1019]. Atlas Minor sive Geographia compendiosa in q.v. a Orbis Terrarum pavcis attamen novissimis Tabvlis ostenditvr. // Atlas Nouveau, contenant toutes les parties du monde, Où font Exactement Remarquees les Empires Monarchies, Royaumes, Etats, Republiques, &c, &c, &c. Receuillies des Meilleurs Auteurs. Amsterdam: Regner & Josue Ottens, n.d.

[1020]. Auè, Michèlé. Discover Cathar country. Le Pays Cathare. Toulouse, MSM, 1992.

[1021]. Bacharach. Astronomia. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library), 1545.

[1022]. Bailly, J. S. Histoire de l’astronomie ancienne depuis son origine jusqu’à l’établissement de l’école d’Alexandrie. Paris, 1st edition 1775, 2nd edition 1781.

[1023]. Baily, F. An account of the life of Sir John Flaemsteed. London, 1835.

[1024]. Baily, F. The Catalogues of Ptolemy, Ulugh Beigh, Tycho Brahe, Halley and Hevelins, deduced from the best authorities. Royal Astr. Soc. Memoirs, XIII (1843): 1-248.

[1025]. Bakker, I., I. Vogel, and T. Wislanski. TRB and other C-14 Dates from Poland. Helinium, IX, 1969.

[1025:1]. Baldauf, Robert. Historie und Kritik. (Einige kritische Bemerkungen.). Basel: Friedrich Reinhardt, Universitäts-buchdruckerei, 1902.

[1026]. Bartholomaeus, Angicus. De proprietatibus rerum. lib. XV, cap. CXXXI. Apud A. Koburger. Nurenbergi, 1492,

[1027]. Barron, Roderick. Decorative Maps. With Forty Full Colour Plates. London, Bracken Books, 1989.

[1028]. Basilica, Sainte Cécile. Albi. As de Cœur Collection. Guided Visit. Albi, France: Apa-Poux S. A. Albi, 1992.

[1028:1]. Bély, Lucien. Discovering the Cathars. France, Éditions Sud Ouest, 2001.

[1029]. Bennet, J.A. The Divided Circle. A History of Instruments for Astronomy Navigation and Surveying. Christie’s, Oxford, Phaidon, 1987.

[1030]. de Sainte-Maure, Benoit. Chronique des ducs de Normandie par Benoit. Publee... par C. Fahlin, t. I. In: Bibliotheca Ekmaniana universitatis regiae Upsaliensis, Uppsala, 1951. 8-11.

[1031]. del Castillo, Conquistador Bernal Días. The Discovery and Conquest of Mexico. New Introduction by Hugh Thomas. New York, Da Capo Press. 1996.

[1032]. Bernard, Lewis. The Middle East. A brief History of the Last 2000 Years. New York, Simon & Schuster, 1997.

[1033]. Bibliography of books and papers published in 1963 on the History of Astronomy. Moscow: Nauka, 1964.

[1034]. Binding, Rudolf G. Der Goldene Schrein. Bilder deutschen Meister auf Goldgrund. Leipzig, 1934.

[1035]. Blaeu, Joan. Novus Atlas Sinensis, 1655. Faksimiles nach der Prachtausgabe der Herzog von der August Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel. Herausgegeben von der Stiftung Volkswagenwerk Hannover. Mit Beiträgen von Hans Kauffmann und Yorck Alexander Haase, und einem Geleitwort von Gotthard Gambke. Verlag Müller und Schindler, 1973.

[1036]. Le Grand Atlas de Blaeu. Le Monde au XVIIe siècle. Introduction, descriptions et choix des cartes par John Goss. Ancient conseiller-expert cartographe chez Sotheby’s. Avant-propos de Peter Clark. Conservateur à la Royal Geographical Society. Adaptation Française de Irmina Spinner. Publié avec le concours de la Royal Geographical Society. Paris: Gründ, 1992. Les cartes originales de Grand Atlas de Blaeu. Le monde au XVIIe siècle ont été publiées par Blaeu dans son Atlas Major publié à Amsterdam en 1662. L’édition originale 1990 par Studio Editions sous le titre original Blaeu’s Grand Atlas of the 17th Century World. Première édition francaise 1992 par Librairie Gründ, Paris.

[1037]. Bloch, M. La societe féodale. Paris, 1968.

[1038]. Blöss, Christian, and Hans-Ulrich Niemitz. C14-Crash. (Das Ende der Illusion mit Radiokarbonmethode und Dendrochronologie datieren zu können). Gräfelfing, Mantis Verlag, 1997.

[1039]. Blöss, Christian, and Hans-Ulrich Niemitz. The Self-Deception of the C14 Method and Dendrochronology. Zeitensprünge 8 (1996) 3 361-389. Mantis Verlag, January 1997.

[1040]. Bode, J.E. Claudius Ptolemäeus, Astronom zu Alexandrien im zweyten Jahrhundert. Beobachtung und Beschreibung der Gestirne und der Bewegung. Vergleichnungen der neuern Beobachtungen von J.E.Bode. With a historical review and commentary. Berlin und Stettin, 1795.

[1041]. Boll, F. Studien über Claudius Ptolemäus. Leipzig, 1894.

[1042]. Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. Das Geheimnis der Heiligen Nacht. Kiefel Verlag, Wuppertal/Gütersloh, Germany, 1995.

[1043]. Bonnet, C. Geneva in Early Christian times. Geneva, Foundation des Clefs de Saint-Pierre, 1986.

[1044]. Boquet, F. J. C. J. Historie de l’Astronomie. Paris, Payot, 1925.

[1045]. Borman, Z. Astra. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library). 1596.

[1045:1]. [Bosch] Tout l’œuvre peint de Jerôme Bosch. Introduction par Max J.Friedländer. Documentation par Mia Cinotti. Paris, Flammarion, 1967.

1045:2 [Bosch] Fraenger, Wilhelm. Hieronymus Bosch. VEB Verlag der Kunst Dresden, 1975.

[1046]. Boszkowska, Anna. Tryumf Luni i Wenus. Pasja Hieronima Boscha. Wydawnictwo Literacklie, Krakow, 1980.

[1047]. Bourbon, Fabio. Lithographien von Frederick Catherwood. Die Mayas. Auf den Spuren einer versunkenen Kultur. White Star, Via Candido Sassone, 22/24 13100, Vercelli, Italien, 1999. Deutschsprachige Ausgabe: Karl Mükker Verlag, Danziger Strasse 6, 91052 Erlangen.

[1048]. Brahe, T. Tychonis Brahe Dani Opera omnia. Ed. J. L. E. Dreyer. 15 Volumes. Copenhagen, 1913-1929.

[1049]. Brahe, T. Equitis Dani Astronomorum Coryhaei Vita. Authore Petro Gassendo. Regio ex Typographia Adriani Vlac. MDCLV.

[1049:1]. Lehane, Brendan (texte), Richard Novitz (photographies). Irlande. London, Flint River, 1997; Paris, Booking Int’l, 1997.

[1050]. Brenon, Anne. Le vrai visage du Catharisme. Toulouse, Ed. Loubatières, 1988.

[1050:1]. British Museum. A Guide to the First, Second and Third Egyptian Rooms. Predynastic Human Remains, Mummies, Wooden Sarcophagi, Coffins and Cartonnage Mummy Cases, Chests and Coffers, and other Objects connected with the Funerary Rites of the Ancient Egyptians. Third Edition, Revised and Enlarged. With 3 coloured and 32 half-tone plates. British Museum, 1924.

[1050:2]. British Museum. A Guide to the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Egyptian Rooms and the Coptic Room. A series of Collections of Small Egyptian Antiquities, which illustrate the Manners and Customs, the Arts and Crafts, the Religion and Literature, and the Funeral Rites and Ceremonies of the Ancient Egyptians and their Descendants, the Copts, from about B.C. 4500 to A.D. 1000. With 7 plates and 157 illustrations in the text. British Museum, 1922.

[1050:3]. British Museum. A Guide to the Egyptian Collections in the British Museum. With 53 plates and 180 illustrations in the text. British Museum, 1909.

[1051]. Brodsky, B. E., and B. S. Darkhovsky. Nonparametric Methods in Change-Point Problems. The Netherlands, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993.

[1051:1]. Brodrick, M., and A. A. Morton. A Concise Dictionary of Egyptian Archaeology. A handbook for students and travellers. London, 1902. 2nd edition 1923, 3rd edition 1924. Reprint: Chicago, Aries, 1980.

[1052]. Brooke, Christopher. From Alfred to Henry III. 871-1272. The Norton Library History of England. New York, London, W. W. Norton & Company, 1961, 1968, 1969.

[1053]. Broughton, T. R. S. The Magistrates of the Roman Republic. Volumes 1, 2. London, 1951-1960.

[1053:1]. [Bruegel] Gerhard W. Menzel. Pieter Bruegel der Ältere. Leipzig, VEB E. A. Seemann, Buch- und Kunstverlag, 1966; 2 Auflage, 1974.

[1053:2]. Bovi, Arturo. Bruegel. The life and work of the artist illustrated with 80 colour plates. A Dolphin Art Book. London, Thames and Hudson, 1971. Reprinted 1974.

[1054]. Brugsch, H. Recueil de Monuments Egyptiens, dessinés sur lieux. Leipzig, 1862-1865.

[1055]. Buck, C. E., W. G. Gavanagh, and C. D. Litton. Bayesian Approach to Interpreting Archaeological Data. Series: Statistics in Practice. John Wiley & Sons, 1996.

[1056]. Bustos, Gerardo. Yucatan and its Archaeological Sites. Mexico, Monclem; Florence, Casa Editrice Bonechi, 1992.

[1057]. Cagnat, R. Cours d’épigraphie latine. 4e éd. Paris, 1914.

[1058]. Campbell, Tony. Early Maps. New York, Abbeville Press Publishers, 1981.

[1059]. Campos, José Guerra, and Jesús Precedo Lafuente. Guide to the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela. Spain, Aldeasa, División Palacios y Museos, 1993.

[1060]. Cantacuzeny, Ioannis. Opera Omnia. Patrologiae curcus completus. Series graeca. T. CLIII, CLIV. J.-P. Migne, 1866.

[1060:1]. Carcassonne (The City of Carcassonne. Cathar Castles). Production Leconte. Editions Estel-Blois. B. P. 45 - 41260 La Chaussée-Saint-Victor. Printed in E.E.C.

[1060:2]. Cathares. Les ombres de l’Histoire. Carcassone: Histoire d’une Cité unique. In: Pyrénées (Magazine). Une publication de Milan Presse. 2001. Éditions Milan et les auteurs. Ariège Pyrenées. (A special edition of the magazine dedicated to Cathar history).

[1061]. Cathedral and Metropolitan Church of St. Stephen in Vienna. Germany, Verlag Schnell & Steiner Regensburg, 1995.

[1061:1]. Cathédrale de l’Annonciation. Le Kremlin de Moscou. Les Musées d’Etat du Kremlin de Moscou, 1990.

[1062]. Cauville, S. Le Zodiaque d’Osiris. Peeters, Uitgeverij Peeters, Bondgenotenlaan 153, B-3000 Leuven.

[1062:1]. Cauville, S. Dendara. Les chapelles osiriennes. (5 vols.) Institut francais d’archeologie orientale du Caire, 1977.

[1063]. Chabas, F. Mélanges égyptologiques. Deuxième série. Ägyptolog. Zeitschrift. 1868. S. 49.

[1064]. Champfleury. Historie de la Caricature au Moyen Age. Paris, 1867-1871.

[1064:0]. Chapront-Touze, M., and J. Chapront. Lunar ephemere des computation software. (Program ELP2000-85, version 1.0, Fortran 77). Bureau des Longitudes, URA 707. 1988. Available online.

[1064:1]. Château de Chillon. Booklet. Château de Chillon, Veytaux (www.chillon.ch), 2000.

[1065]. Childress, David Hatcher. Lost Cities of Atlantis, Ancient Europe & the Mediterranean. Stelle, Illinois 60919 USA, Adventures Unlimited Press, 1996.

[1066]. Chirikov, B. V., and V. V. Vecheslavov. Chaotic dynamics of comet Halley. Astronomy and Astrophysics, Volume 221, No. 1 (1989): 146-154.

[1067]. Chmelarz, Eduard. Die Ehrepforte des Kaisers Maximilian I. Unterscheidheim 1972. Verlag Walter Uhl. Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses. Herausgegeben unter Leitung des Oberstakämmerers seiner Kaiserlichen und Königlichen Apostolischen Majestät. Ferdinand Grafen zu Trauttmansdorff-Weinsberg vom K. K. Oberstkämmerer-Amte. Vierter Band. Mit 39 Kupfertafeln in Heliogravure und Radierung, 100 Holzschnittafeln und 56 Text-Illustrationen in Heliogravure, Holzschnitt und Zinkographie. Als Beilage: 16 Holzschnitte der Ehrenpforte des Kaisers Maximilian I. Wien, Druck und Verlag von Adolf Holzhausen, K. K. Hofbuchdrucker, 1886.

[1068]. Stubbs, W., ed. Chronica magistri Rogeri de Houedone. RS, N 51, Volume II. London, 1869, page 236. English translation: The Annals of Roger de Hoveden, comprising the history of England and of other countries of Europe from A.D. 732 to A.D. 1201. Tr. H. T. Riley, Volumes 1-2. London, Bohn’s Antiquarian Library, 1853.

[1069]. Pestman, P.W. Chronologie égyptienne d’après les textes démotiques. Papyrologia Lugduno-Batava edidit Institutum Papyrologicum Universitatis Lugduno-Batavae Moderantibus M.David et B. A. von Groningen. Volume 15. Lugdunum Batavorum, 1967.

[1070]. Cipolla, Carlo M. Money, Prices and Civilization in the Mediterranean World. 5-17 century. Princeton, Princeton Univ. Press, 1956.

[1071]. Claudii Ptolemaei Magnae Constructionis, id est perfectae coelestium motuum pertractationis. Lib. XIII. Theonis Alexanrini in eosdem Commentariorum Libri XI; Basileal apud Ioannem Waledrum. C. priv. Caes. ad Quinquennium. 1538.

[1072]. Claudii Ptolemaei Phelusiensis Alexandrini. Anno Salutis, 1528.

[1073]. Claudii Ptolemaei Pelusiensis Alexandrini omnia quac extant opera. 1551.

[1074]. Clemens, Jöcle. Speyer Cathedral. Regensburg, Verlag Scgnell & Steiner GmBH Regensburg, 1997.

[1075]. Clinton, H.F. Fasti Hellenici, a Civil and Literary Chronology from the Earliest Times to the Death of Augustus. Oxford, 1830-1841.

[1076]. Copernici, N. Revolutionibus Orbium Caelestium. Lib. VI. Ed. by G. Loachimi. Thoruni, 1873.

[1077]. Corbinianus. Firmamentum Firmianum. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library). 1731.

[1078]. Cordier, H. Marco Polo and His Book. Introductory notices. In: The Travels of Marco Polo. The complete Yule-Cordier. Volumes 1 and 2. New York, Dover, 1993.

[1078:1]. Wytfliet, Cornelius. Descriptionis Ptolemaicae Augmentum sive Occidentis notitia brevis commentario. Louvain 1597. With an introduction by R. A. Skelton. Theatrvm Orbis Terrarvm. A Series of Atlases in Facsimile. 1st Series, Vol. V. Amsterdam, N. Israel, Meridian, 1964.

[1079]. Costard, G. The History of Astronomy with its Application to Geography, History and Chronology. London, J. Lister, 1967.

[1080]. Harmon, Craig. The Natural Distribution of Radiocarbon and the Exchange Time of Carbon Dioxides between Atmosphere and Sea. Volume 9. Tellus. 1957. 1-17.

[1081]. Harmon, Craig. Carbon-13 in Plants and the Relationships between Carbon-13 and Carbon-14 Variations in Nature. J. Geol., 62 (1954): 115-149.

[1081:1]. El Mahdy, Christine. Mummies, Myths and Magic in Ancient Egypt. Thames and Hudson, 1989.

[1082]. Crowe, C. Carbon-14 activity during the past 5000 years. Nature, Volume 182 (1958): 470.

[1083]. Danit Hadary-Salomon, ed. 2000 Years of Pilgrimage to the Holy Land. Israel, AC Alfa Communication Ltd., 1999.

[1084]. Das Münster zu Bonn. The Bonn Minster. Former Collegiate Church of SS. Cassius and Florentius. Series: Kleine Kunstfürer. Achnell, Art Guide No. 593 (of 1954). Second English edition 1997. Regensburg, Germany, Verlag Schnell & Steiner GmbH Regensburg, 1997.

[1085]. David, Daniel. Let There be Light. William Tyndale and the Making of the English Bible. A British Library Exhibition at The Huntington. 19 November, 1996 - 7 February, 1997. London, The British Library, 1994.

[1086]. Davidovits, Joseph. Alchemy and Pyramids. The Book of Stone. Vol. 1. France-USA, Geopolymer Institute, 1983.

[1087]. Davidovits, Joseph. Alchemy and Pyramids. Translated from French by A. C. James and J. James. Rev. ed. Que le Khnoum protège Khéops constructeur de pyramide. Saint Quentin, France, 1983; Miami Shores, Fla., USA, Institute for Applied Archaeological Science, Barry University, 1984.

[1088]. Davidovits, Joseph. Amenhotep, Joseph and Solomon. 1st ed. Miami Shores, Fla., U.S.A., Geopolymer Institute, Institute for Applied Archaeological Science, Barry University, 1984.

[1089]. Davidovits, Joseph. Que le dieu Khnoum protège Khéops constructeur de pyramide: histoire de la civilisation Égyptienne de 3500 é 1500 ans avant J.-C. Saint-Quentin, 1978.

[1090]. Davidovits, Joseph. Le calcaire des pierres des Grandes Pyramides d’Égypte serait un béton géopolymére vieux de 4.600 ans. Résumé des cours-conférences tenus en 1983 et 1984. Revue des Questions Scientifiques, Volume 156(2) (1986): 199-225.

[1091]. Davidovits, Joseph. No more than 1,400 workers to build the Pyramid of Cheops with manmade stone. 3rd Int. Congress of Egyptologists. Toronto, Canada: paper AA-126, publié dans Appendix 3 de Davidovits, 1983.

[1092]. Davidovits, Joseph, and Margie Morris. The Pyramids: an Enigma Solved. New York, Hippocrene Books, 1988. New York, Dorset Press, 1989, 1990.

[1093]. Davidovits J., J. Thodez, and Gaber M Hisham. Pyramids of Egypt Made of Man-Made Stone, Myth or Fact? Symposium on Archeometry 1984, Smithsonian Institution, abstract 26-27. Washington, D.C., USA, 1984.

[1094]. Davies, Nartin. The Gutenberg Bible. London, The British Library, 1996.

[1095]. Degrassi, A. Fasti Capitolini. 1954; I Fasti consolari dell’impero romano, 1952.

[1096]. Delambre, J. B. Histoire de l’Astronomie. 2 Volumes. Paris, 1817.

[1097]. Delambre, J. Histoire de l’Astronomie moderne. 2 Volumes. Paris, 1821.

[1098]. Della origine et ruccessi degli Slavi, oratione di M. V. Pribevo, Dalmatino da Lesena, etc. et hora tradotta della lingua Latina nell’Italiana da Bellisario Malaspalli, da Spalato. Venetia, 1595.

[1099]. Der Marienschrein im Dom zu Aachen. Die Publikation dieses Sonderheftes erfolgt durch die Grünenthal GmbH, Aachen. Domkapitel, 2000.

[1100]. Description de l’Égypte. Publiée sous les ordes de Napoléon de Bonaparte. Description de l’Égypte ou recueil des observations et des recherches qui ont été faites en Égypte pendant l’expédition de l’Armée francaise publié sous les ordes de Napoléon Bonaparte. Bibliothèque de l’Image. Inter-Livres. 1995.

[1101]. Desroches-Noblecourt, Christiane. Life and Death of Pharaoh Tutankhamen. London, Penguin Books, 1963.

[1101:1]. Deutschland. Germany. Allemagne. Germania. Euro Map. Halwag AG, Bern, Printed in Switzerland-Germany 4-26 AK.

[1102]. Dheily, J. Dictionaire Biblique. Ed. Desclec. Tournai, 1964. 193.

[1103]. Dialogus Historicus Palladii episcopi Helenopolis cum Theodoro. Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Patrologiae Graecae. T. LVII. J.-P. Migne, 1858.

[1104]. Die Bibel. Oder die Ganze Heilige Schrift des Alten and Neuen Testaments. Nach der Überzetzung Martin Luthers. Württembergische Bibelanstalt, Stuttgart. 1967.

1105. Die Weihnachtsgeschichte. Nacherzählt in Bildern aus der Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. Stuttgart, Zürich, Belser Verlag, 1993.

[1106]. Dom Betrachtung. Die Hochgräber im Kölner Dom. 4. Herausgeber, Dompfarramt – Dompfarrer Rolf Breitenbruch, Domkloster 3, 50667, Köln.

[1107]. Douais, C. L’Inquisition, ses origines, sa procédure. Paris, 1906.

[1108]. Dreyer, J. L. E. On the Origin of Ptolemy’s Catalogue of Stars. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, No. 77 (1917): 528-539.

[1109]. Dreyer, J. L. E. On the Origin of Ptolemy’s Catalogue of Stars. Second Paper. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, No. 78 (1918): 343-349.

[1110]. Duden. Ethymologie: Herkunfswörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. Mannheim, Wien; Dudenverlag, Zürich, 1989.

[1111]. Duncan, A.J. Quality Control and Industrial Statistics. NY, Irwin, 1974.

[1112]. Dupont-Sommer, A. Les écrits essentiens decouverts près de la Mer Morte. Paris, 1957.

[1113]. Dupuis, C. The Origin of All Religious Worship. New Orleans, 1872.

[1114]. Duvernoy, Jean. Le catharisme. Volume I: La religion des Cathares. Volume II: Histoire des Cathares. Toulouse, Private, 1976 and 1979. Re-published 1986.

[1115]. Duvernoy, Jean, Paul Labal, Robert Lafont, Philippe Martell, and Michel Roquebert. Les Cathares en Occitanie. Fayard, 1981.

[1116]. Van Ermen, Eduard. The United States in Old Maps and Prints. Wilmington USA, Atomium Books, 1990.

[1116:1]. Égypte. Large album with photographs. Paris, Molière, Art Image, 1998.

[1117]. Eichler, Anja-Franziska. Albrecht Dürer. 1471-1528. Cologne, Könemann Verlagsgesellschaft GmbH, 1999.

[1118]. Encyclopaedia Britannica; or, a Dictionary of Arts and Sciences, compiled upon a new Plan. In which the different Sciences and Arts are digested into distinct Treatises or Systems; and the various Technical Terms, etc. are explained as they occur in the order of the Alphabet. Illustrated with one hundred and sixty copperplates. By a Society of Gentlemen in Scotland. In 3 volumes. Edinburgh, A. Bell and C. Macfarquhar, 1771.

[1118:1]. Encyclopaedia Britannica. On-line version, 2001.

[1119]. Evans, James. On the Origin of the Ptolemaic Star Catalogue. Part 1. Journal for the History of Astronomy, Volume 18, Part 3, No. 54 (August 1987): 155-172.

[1120]. Evans, James. On the Origin of the Ptolemaic Star Catalogue. Part 2. Journal for the History of Astronomy, Volume 18, Part 4, No. 55 (November 1987): 235-277.

[1121]. Liebermann, F., and R. Pauli, Eds. Ex Annalibus Melrosensibus. MGH SS, T.XXVII. Hannoverae, 1885. 439.

[1121:1]. Winship, Betsy, and Sheila Stoneham, eds. Explosives and Rock Blasting. Field Technical Operations. Atlas Rowder Company. Dallas, Texas, Marple Press, 1987.

[1122]. Fatih, Cimok. Hagia Sophia. Istanbul, A turizm yayinlari, 1995.

[1123]. Fatih, Cimok. Hagia Sophia. Istanbul, A turizm yayinlari, 1985.

[1124]. Fergusson, G. I. Reduction of Atmospheric Radiocarbon Concentration by Fossil Fuel Carbon Dioxide and the Mean Life of Carbon Dioxide in the Atmosphere. London, Proc. Royal Soc., 243 A, pages 561-574. 1958.

[1125]. Filarete, Antonio Averlino. Tractat über die Baukunst. Vienna, 1890.

[1126]. Fischer, Fr. Thucydidus reliquiae in papyris et membranis aigiptiacis servatae. Lipsiae, 1913.

[1127]. Verlag, Dr. Ludwig Reichert. Flüsse im Herzen Europas. Rhein-Elbe-Donau. Kartenabteilung der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin. Preussischer Kulturbesitz. Wiesbaden, 1993.

[1128]. Fomenko, A.T. The Jump of the Second Derivative of the Moon’s Elongation. Celestial Mechanics, Volume 29 (1981): 33-40.

[1129]. Fomenko, A. T. Some New Empirico-Statistical Methods of Dating and the Analysis of Present Global Chronology. The British Library. Department of Printed Books. Cup. 918/87. 1981.

[1130]. Fomenko, A.T. New Empirico-Statistical Dating Methods and Statistics of Certain Astronomical Data. The theses of the First International Congress of the International Bernoulli Society for Mathematical Statistics and Probability Theory. Volume 2. Moscow, Nauka, 1986. 892.

[1131]. Fomenko, A.T. Duplicates in Mixed Sequences and a Frequency Duplication Principle. Methods and Applications. Probability theory and mathematical statistics. Proceeding of the 4th Vilnius Conference (24-29 June 1985). Volume 16. Utrecht, Netherlands, VNU Science, 1987. 439-465.

[1132]. Fomenko, A.T. Empirico-Statistical Methods in Ordering Narrative Texts. International Statistical Review, Volume 566, No. 3 (1988): 279-301.

[1133]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G.V. Nosovskiy. When was Ptolemy’s Star Catalogue in “Almagest” Compiled in Reality? Preprint. No. 1989-04, ISSN 0347-2809. Dept. of Math., Chalmers Univ. of Technology, The University of Goteborg. Sweden.

[1134]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G.V. Nosovskiy. When was Ptolemy’s Star Catalogue in “Almagest” Compiled in Reality? Statistical Analysis. Acta Applicandae Mathematical. Volume 17. 1989. 203-229.

[1135]. Fomenko, A. T. Mathematical Statistics and Problems of Ancient Chronology. A New Approach. Acta Applicandae Mathematical. Volume 17. 1989. 231-256.

[1136]. Fomenko, A. T., Kalashnikov V. V., Nosovskiy G. V. Geometrical and Statistical Methods of Analysis of Star Configurations. Dating Ptolemy’s Almagest. USA, CRC Press, 1993.

[1137]. Fomenko, A. T. Empirico-Statistical Analysis of Narrative Material and its Applications to Historical Dating. Volume 1: The Development of the Statistical Tools. Volume 2: The Analysis of Ancient and Medieval Records. The Netherlands, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994.

[1138]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G.V. Nosovskiy. The dating of Ptolemy’s Almagest based on the coverings of the stars and on lunar eclipses. Acta Applicandae Mathematicae. Volume 29. 1992. 281-298.

[1139]. Fomenko, A. T., V. V. Kalashnikov, and G.V. Nosovskiy. Statistical analysis and dating of the observations on which Ptolemy’s “Almagest” star catalogue is based. In: Probability theory and mathematical statistics. Proc. of the Fifth Vilnius Conference. Volume 1. Moklas, Vilnius, Lithuania. VSP, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 1990. 360-374.

[1140]. Fomenko, A. T., and S. T. Rachev. Volume Functions of Historical Texts and the Amplitude Correlation Principle. Computers and the Humanities. Vol. 24. 1990. 187-206.

[1141]. Manuel, Frank E. Isaac Newton, the Historian. Cambridge, Massachusetts, The Belknap Press, 1963.

[1142]. Franke, Peter Robert, and Ilse Paar. Die Antiken Münzen der Sammlung Heynen. Katalog mit Historischen Erläuterungen. Landschaftsmuseum Krefeld-Burglinn. Rheinland-Verlag, Köln, in Kommission bei Rudolf Habelt Verlag, Bonn. 1976.

[1143]. de Landa, Friar Diego. Yucatan before and after the Conquest. Translated with notes by William Gates. San Fernando, Atrio de San Francisco, 1993.

[1144]. Fricke, W., and A. Koff FK4. No.10. Heidelberg, Veröf. Astr. Inst., 1963.

[1145]. Fuchs, W. Nach allen Regeln der Kunst. Diagnosen über Literatur, Musik, bildende Kunst. Die Werke, ihre Autoren und Schöpfer. Stuttgart, Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt., 1968.

[1146]. Fuchs, W. Mathematical Theory of Word-Formation. London, 1955.

[1147]. Fulton, Alexander. Scotland and her Tartans. The Romantic Heritage of the Scottish Clans and Families. Colour Library Books Ltd., Sandbach, Cheshire; Godalming, Surrey, 1991.

[1148]. Fussbroich, Helmut. St. Maria Lyskirchen in Köln. Rheinische Kunststätten. Heft 60. Rheinischer Verein für Denkmalpflege und Landschaftsschutz. Köln, Neusser Druckerei und Verlag GmbH, 1992.

[1149]. Gabovitsch, Eugen. Newton als geistiger Vater der Chronologiekritik und Geschishtsrekonstruktion (neben Hardoin). Bemerkungen zum Artikel von Uwe Topper in Synesis Nr. 4/1999. Efodon-Synesis (Germany) Nov/Dez. 1999, Nr. 6/1999, S. 29-33.

[1150]. Gabovitsch. Eugen. Die Grosse Mauer als ein Mythos: Die Errichtungsgeschichte der Chinesischen Mauer und ihre Mythologisierung. Efodon-Synesis (Germany), Nov/Dez. 1999, Nr.6/1999, S. 9-21.

[1151]. Gadol, J. Leon Battista Alberti. Chicago, London, 1969.

[1152]. Gassendi. Nicolai Coppernici vita. A supplement to the edition titled Tychonis Brahei, equitis Mani, astronomorum copyrhaei vita. XDCLV.

[1152:1]. El Gayar, El Sayed, and M. P. Jones. Metallurgical Investigation of the Iron plate found in 1837 in the Great Pyramid at Gizeh, Egypt. In: Journal of the Historical Metallurgy Society, Volume 1 (1989): 75-83.

[1153]. Gingerich, O. Ptolemy Revisited: A Reply to R. R. Newton. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, No.22 (1981): 40-44.

[1154]. Ginzel, F. K. Spezieller Kanon der Sonnen- und Mondfinsternisse für das Ländergebiet der klassischen Altertumswissenschaften und den Zeitraum von 900 vor Chr. bis 600 nach Chr. Berlin, Mayer & Müller, 1899.

[1155]. Ginzel, F.K. Handbuch der Mathematischen und Technischen Chronologie. Bd. I-III. Leipzig, 1906, 1911, 1914.

[1156]. Ginzel, F. K., and A. Wilkens. Theorie der Finsternisse. Encykl. der Wissenschaftten. Bd. VI, 2. S. 335. 1908.

[1157]. Girou, Jean. Simon de Monfort. Paris: La Colombe, 1953.

[1158]. Della Fina, Giuseppe M., Luoghi e tempi Etruschi schede di ricerca. Firenze: Fatatrac, 1989.

[1159]. Gladwin, H. Men out of Asia. NY, 1949.

[1160]. Goss, John. Kartenkunst: Die Geschichte der Kartographie. Deutsche Asgabe: Georg Westermann Verlag, Braunschweig, 1994. German translation of the English edition: Goss, John. The Mapmaker’s Art. A History of Cartography. London, Studio Editions Ltd.

[1160:1]. Granier, J., and S. Gagnière. Avignon. (The city at Sunset. The Popes’ Palace. The Saint Benezet bridge). English edition. Éditions du Boumian, Monaco.

[1161]. Grasshoff, Gerd. The History of Ptolemy’s Star Catalogue. New York, Springer Verlag, 1990.

[1162]. Grienberger, C. Catalogus Veteres affixarum longitudiues et latitudines cum novis conferens. Romae apud B. Zannetum, 1612. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library.)

[1163]. Grierson, Philip. Coinage and Money in Byzantine Empire. Spoleto, 1961.

[1164]. Grierson, Philip. Monnaies du Moyen Âge. Fribourg, 1976.

[1165]. Grimme, Ernst Günther. Der Dom zu Aachen. Architektur und Ausstattung. Aachen, Einhard-Verlag, 1994.

[1166]. Grollenberg, L. N. Atlas of the Bible. NY, 1956.

[1167]. Gualberto, Zapata Alonzo. An Overview of the Mayan World. With a Synthesis of the Olmec, Totonac Zapotec, Mixtec, Teotihuacan, Toltec and Aztec Civilizations. Mexico, Merida, 1993.

[1167:1]. Guide to Edo-Tokyo Museum (English edition). Edited by Edo-Tokyo Museum. Japan Broadcast Publishing Co., Ltd. Printed in Japan by Toppan Printing Co., Ltd.

[1168]. Gutenberg-Bibel. Geschichtliche Bücher des Alten Testaments. Die bibliophilen Taschenbücher. Dortmund, Harenberg Kommunikation, 1977.

[1169]. Gutenberg Bibel (1452-1455). Reprinted 1968 by Verlag Konrad Köbl. 8022 Grünwald bei München, Huberttusstrasse 13. Firma Elektra, Reprografischer Betrieb, Kjeld Höjring, Niedernhausen/Ts. Printed in Germany.

[1170]. Schneider, Dr. Cornelia. Gutenberg-Dokumentation. Information Mittelalter. Das Buch vor Gutenberg (I). Gutenberg-Museum Mainz, 1990.

[1171]. Schneider, Dr. Cornelia. Gutenberg-Dokumentation. Information Mittelalter. Das Buch vor Gutenberg (II). Gutenberg-Museum Mainz, 1990.

[1172]. Haack Geographisch-Kartographischer Kalender. Germany, Haack Gotha, VEB Hermann Haack Geographisch-Kartographische Anstalt Gotha, 1983.

[1172:1]. Haack Geographisch-Kartographischer Kalender. Germany, Haack Gotha, VEB Hermann Haack Geographisch-Kartographische Anstalt Gotha, 1988.

[1173]. Hagek, W. Kronyka Czeska. Prague, 1541.

[1174]. Hans, Peter. Der Dom zu Köln. 1248-1948. Düsseldorf, Verlag L. Schwann, 1948.

[1175]. Hansen, P. Ecliptische Tafeln für die Konjunktionen des Mondes und der Sonne. Leipzig, 1857.

[1176]. Hansen, P. Theorie der Sonnenfinsternisse und verwandten Erscheinungen. Leipzig, 1859.

[1177]. Harley, J. B., and David Woodward. The History of Cartography. Volume 1. Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient and Medieval Europe and the Mediterranean. Chicago & London, The University of Chicago Press, 1987.

[1178]. Harvey, Arden. Who Owns Our Past? National Geographic, Volume 175, No.3 (March 1989): 376-393.

[1179]. Hauvette, A. Herodote historien des guerres midiques. Paris, 1894.

[1180]. Haveta, E. La modernité des prophètes. Paris, 1891.

[1181]. Hazirlayan, H. H. Aliy Yalcin (Hz. Yusa Camii Imam-Hatibi). Hazreti Yusa (Aleyhisselam). Istanbul. Brochure written by the prior of the temple at the grave of St. Iusha at the outskirts of Istanbul.

[1182]. Hearnshaw, J .B., and D. Khan. An Analysis of the Magnitude Data in Ptolemy’s Almagest. Southern Stars. Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of New Zealand (Wellington), Volume 36, Nos. 5-6 (December 1955): 169-177.

[1183]. Heath, T. L. Aristarchus of Samos, the Ancient Copernicus; a History of Greek Astronomy to Aristarchus, together with Aristarchus’ Treatise on the Sizes and Distances of the Sun and Moon. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1913.

[1184]. Heine-Geldern, R., and G.Ekholm. Significant parallels in the symbolic arts of Southern Asia and Middle America. In: Selected Papers of the 29th International Congress of Americanists, Volume 1. Chicago, 1951. 306.

[1185]. Heinsohn, Gunnar. Assyrerkönige gleich Perserherrscher! (Die Assyrienfunde bestätigen das Achämenidenreach). Gräfelfing, Mantis Verlag, 1996.

[1186]. Heinsohn, Gunnar, and Heribert Illig. Wann lebten die Pharaonen? (Archäologische and technologische Grundlagen für eine Neuschreibung der Geschichte Ägyptens and der übrigen Welt.) Gräfelfing, Mantis Verlag, 1997.

[1187]. Heintze, C. Objects rituels, croyances et dieux de la Chine antique et de l’Amérique. Antwerpen, 1936.

[1188]. Heis. Die Finsternisse während des pelop. Krieges. Progr. d. Fried. Wilh. Gimn. Köln, 1834.

[1189]. Herbert, Ewe. Abbild oder Phantasie? Schiffe auf historischen Karten. Rostock, VEB Hinstorff Verlag, 1978.

[1190]. [Herodotus]. The History of Herodotus. London, 1858.

[1191]. Hignett, C. Xerxes Invasion of Greece. Oxford, 1963.

[1192]. Hincks, E. The Egyptian Dynasties of Manetho. The Journal of Sacred Literature. London, 1864.

[1193]. Hipparchus. Hipparchi in Arati et Eudoxi Phenomena Commentarium. Ed. and German trans. C. Manitius. Leipzig, 1894.

[1194]. Historiae bysantinae scriptores post Theophanem. Patrologiae cursus completus. Series graeca posterior. T.CIX. J.-P. Migne, 1863.

[1195]. Hochart. De l’authenticité des Annales et des Histoires de Tacite. Paris, 1890.

[1196]. Hodge, K.C., and G.W.A. Newton. Radiocarbon Dating. Manchester Museum Mummy Project. Multidisciplinary Research on Ancient Egyptian Mummified Remains. Edited by A. Rosalie David. Published by Manchester Museum. Manchester, England, 1979. 137-147.

[1197]. Hofflit, D. The Bright Star Catalogue. New Haven Connecticut, USA, Yale Univ. Obs., 1982.

[1198]. Hoffman. Sämtliche bei griechishen und lateinschen Schriftstellern des Altertums erwähnte Sonnen- und Mondfinsternisse. Trieste, 1885.

[1199]. Horster, M. Brunelleschi und Alberti in ihrer Stellung zur römischen Antike. Florence, 1973.

[1200]. Horus. The Enigma Surrounding the Sphinx. An Egyptian Magazine, April/June 1999.

[1201]. Hoster, Joseph. Der Dom zu Köln. Köln, Greven Verlag, 1965.

[1202]. Huddleston, L.E. Origin of the American Indian. European Concepts, 1492-1729. Austin, 1967.

[1203]. Hütt, Wolfgang. Altdorfer. Maler und Werk. Eine Kunstheftreihe aus dem VEB Verlag der Kunst. Dresden, 1976.

[1204]. Hugot, Leo. Aachen Cathedral. Aachen, Germany, Einhard Verlag, 1988.

[1205]. Ideler, L. Handbuch der mathematischen und technischen Chronologie. Band 1-2. Berlin, 1825-1826.

[1206]. Ilhan Aksit. The Topkapi Palace. Istanbul, Aksit Kultur Turism Sanat Ajans Ltd., 1995.

[1207]. Ilhan Aksit. The Museum of Chora. Mosaics and Frescoes. Istanbul, Aksit Kultur Turism Sanat Ajans Ltd., 1995.

[1208]. Illig, Heribert. Hat Karl der Große je gelebt? (Bauten, Funde und Schriften im Widerstreit). Gräfelfing, Mantis Verlag, 1996.

[1208:1]. Irish Dictionary. Collins Gem. English-Irish. Irish-English. Seamus Mac Mathuna and O Corrain (University of Ulster). Harper Collins, 1999.

[1209]. Isidori Junioris. Hispalensis episcopi: De responsione mundi. 1472. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library.)

[1210]. Islam. Kunst und Architektur. Herausgegeben von Markus Hattstein und Peter Delis. Köln, Könemann, 2000.

[1211]. Istanbul and the Marmara Region. A Tale of two Continents. Turkey, The Ministry of Tourism, Istanbul, 1994.

[1212]. Janin, R. Constantinople Byzantine. Paris, 1950.

[1213]. Jirku, A. (Jurku, A.) Ausgrabungen in Palästina-Syrien. Halle, 1956.

[1214]. Johnson, Edwin. The Rise of English Culture. Williams and Norgate. London-New York, Putnam, 1904.

[1215]. Johnson, Edwin. The Rise of Christendom. London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner, & Co. Ltd., 1890.

[1215:1]. Johnson, Paul. The civilization of Ancient Egypt. London, Seven Dials, Cassel & Co., 2000.

[1216]. Joubert, Pierre. L’Heraldique. Les guides practiques. Editions Ouest-France, 1984.

[1217]. Keegan, John. A History of Warfare. New York, Vintage Books, 1994.

[1218]. Katalog dawnych map Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej w kolekcji Emeryka Hutten Czapskiego i w innych zbiorach. Wroclaw, Warszawa, Krakow, Gdansk: Zaklad Narodowy im. Ossolinskich, Wyd. Polskiej Akademii Nauk. Instytut Geografii i Przestrzennego Zagospodarowania. Ossolineum. N.1. Mapy XV-XVI wieku. 1978.

[1219]. Keller, W. Und die Bibel hat doch Recht. Düsseldorf, 1958.

[1220]. Kenyon, K. M. Digging in Jericho. London, 1957.

[1221]. Kings & Queens of England. A set of picture cards. Great Britain, Fax Pax Ltd., 1988.

[1222]. Kinoshita, H. Formulas for Precession. Smithsonian Inst. Astrophys. Observatory. Cambridge, Massachussets, 1975.

[1223]. Sale, Kirkpatrick. The Conquest of Paradise. Christopher Columbus and the Columbian Legacy. New York, Penguin Books, 1990.

[1224]. Knobel, E.B. British School of Archaeology in Egypt and Egyptian Research Account. London, 1908.

[1225]. Knobel, E.B. The Chronology of Star Catalogues. Memoirs of the Royal Astronomical Society. No.43 (1877): 1-74.

[1226]. Kobold, H. Finsternisse. Handwörterbuch der Astronomie. Herausg. von W. Valentiner. Bd. I. Breslau, 1897.

[1227]. Koeva, Margarita. Rila Monastery. Sofia, Borina, 1995.

[1228]. Köln in historischen Stadtplänen. Die Entwicklung der Stadt seit dem XVI Jahrhundert. Berlin, Argon, 1995.

[1229]. Kostbarkeiten der Buchkunst. Illuminationen klassischer Werke von Archimedes bis Vergil. Herausgegeben von Giovanni Morello. Stuttgart-Zürich, Belser Verlag, 1997.

[1230]. Krishnaiah, P. and B. Miao. Review about Estimation of Change-Points. In: Handbook of Statistics, Volume 7. 1988. 375-402.

[1231]. Krönungen, Könige in Aachen. Geschichte und Mythos. Vom 12. Juni bis 3.Oktober 2000 in Rathaus, Domschatzkammer und Dom, Aachen. (Annette Fusenig M. A. und Barbara Jacobs M. A.). From 12th of June to 3rd October 2000 in Town Hall, Cathedral Treasury and Cathedral, Aachen. Kurzführer zur Ausstellung. Guide to the exhibition. Printed in Germany by Verein Aachener Krönungsgeschichte e. V.

[1232]. Mittelstädt, Kuno. Albrecht Dürer. Henschelverlag Kunst und Gesellschaft. Arkady, Warszawa-Berlin, 1977.

[1232:1]. Kunst des Mittelalters in Armenien. Burchard Brentjes, Stepan Mnazakanjan, Nina Stepanjan. (Kultur. Architektur. Plastik. Wandmalerei. Buchmalerei. Angewandte Kunst). Union Verlag, Berlin, 1981

[1233]. Lafuente, Jesús Precedo. Visitor’s Guide. The Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela. Spain: Aldeasa, División Palacios y Museos, Estudios Gra’ficos Europeos, 1998.

[1234]. Kurth, Willi. The Complete Woodcuts of Albrecht Dürer. With an introduction by Campbell Dodgson, M.A., C.B.E. New York, Dover Publications, Inc., 1963.

[1235]. Lajta, Edit. Malarstwo Francuskie od Gotyku do Renesansu. Wydawnictwa Artystyczne i Filmowe-Warszawa. Drukowano na Wegrezech, 1979. Drukarnia Kossuth, Budapeszt. Wspolne wydanie wydawnictw Corvina, Budapest i WAiF, Warszawa.

[1236]. L’art de vérifier les dates faites historiques. Ed. par des Bénédictines. 1 ed., Paris, 1750; 2 ed., Paris, 1770; 3 ed., Paris, 1783, 1784, 1787.

[1237]. Laclotte, Michel (Director, Musée du Louvre). Treasures of the Louvre. New York, London-Paris, Abbeville, 1993.

[1238]. Langeteau, C. Tables pour le calcul des syzygies ecliptiques, Connaissanse des Temps pour 1846. Paris, 1843, 1850.

[1239]. Layamon. Brut, or the Chronicle of Britain. Ed. F. Madden. Volume II. London, 1847. 525-526, vv. 22589-22602.

[1240]. Stegena, Lajos, ed. Lazarus Secretarius. The First Hungarian Mapmaker and His Work. Budapest, Akademiai Kiado, 1982.

[1240:1]. Lecoq-Ramond, Sylvie, and Béguerie Pantxika. Le Musée d’Unterlinden de Colmar. Musées et Monuments de France. Paris, Schongauer & Albin Michel, 1991.

[1241]. Leland, C. Fusang or discovery of America by Chinese Buddhist priests in the 5th century. London, 1875.

[1242]. Dal Maso, Leonardo B.. Rome of the Caesars. Firenze, Bonechi Editioni Il Turismo, 1974, 1992.

[1243]. Le Saint voyage de Jérusalem de seigneur d’Anglure. Paris, F. Bonnardot and A. Longnon, 1878.

[1244]. Le Wallraf-Richartz Museum de Cologne. Munich, Scala, C. H. Becksche Verlagbuchhandlung (Oscar Beck), 1992.

[1245]. Lehmann, P. Tafeln zur Berechnung der Mondphasen und Sonnen- und Mondfinsternisse. Berlin, 1882.

[1245:1]. Les Grandes Civilisations Disparues. Sélection du Reader’s Digest. Paris-Bruxelles-Montréal-Zurich, 1980.

[1246]. Les Manuscripts de la Mer Morte. Aux origines du christianisme. Les Dossiers d’Archéologie, No. 189 (Janv. 1994).

[1247]. de Austria, Leupoldus. Compilatio de Astrorum Scientia, cuts. 1489. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library.)

[1248]. Lhotsky, A. Auf Satze und Vortrage. Halle, 1970-1972.

[1249]. Lichtheim, Miriam. Ancient Egyptian Literature. Volumes 1-3. USA, University of California Press, 1975.

[1250]. Libby, W.F. Radiocarbon dating. 2nd edition. Chicago, Univ. of Chicago Press, 1955.

[1251]. Lilly, W. An Introduction to Astrology. London, G. Bell, 1939.

[1252]. Linde, A. v. d. Gutenberg. Geschichte und Erdichtung. Stuttgart, 1878.

[1253]. Linde, A. v. d. Geschichte der Buchdruckerkunst. Berlin, 1886.

[1254]. Lokotsch, K. Etymologisches Wörterbuch der europäischen Wörter. Heidelberg, 1927.

[1255]. Longhi, Roberto. Caravaggio. Die Italienische Malerei. Dresden: Editori Riuniti Rom, VEB Verlag der Kunst, 1968

[1256]. Lubienietski, S. Theatrum Cometicum, etc. Amstelodami, 1666-1668. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library.)

[1257]. Lubienietski, S. Historia universalis omnium Cometarum. Lugduni Batavorum, 1681. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library.)

[1258]. Lucas Cranach d. Ä. Herausgegeben von Heinz Lüdecke. Welt der Kunst. Henschelvarlag Kunst und Gesellschaft. Berlin, 1972.

[1259]. Magi, Giovanna, and Giuliano Valdes. All of Turkey. Firenze, Casa Editrice Bonechi, 1990.

[1260]. Manuel, Chrisoloras. Manuels Chrisolorae Vita et scripta. Patrologiae cursus completus. Series graeca posterior. T.CLVI. J.-P. Migne, 1866.

[1261]. Manuel II Palaeologus. Laudatio funebris fratris sui Theodori Palaeologi Despotae. Patrologiae cursus completus. Series graeca posterior. T. CLVI. J.-P. Migne, 1866.

[1261:1]. Maps of the Ancient World. 2002 Calendar. From The Huntington Library. Avalanche Publishing, Inc., 2001.

[1262]. Mapy severni a jizni hvezdne oblohy. Praha, Kartografie Praha, 1971.

[1263]. Marco Polo. Le Livre des Merveilles. La Renaissance du Livre. Collection Références. Extrait du Livre des Merveilles du Monde (Ms. fr. 2810) de la Bibliotheque nationale de France. 1999 Ultreya srl, Milan. 1996 Faksimile Verlag Luzern pour les textes et les images. 1999 La Renaissance du Livre, Tournai pour l’edition francaise. Belgique.

[1264]. Marco Polo. The Travels of Marco Polo. The Complete Yule-Cordier Edition. With a Total of 198 Illustrations and 32 Maps and Site Plans. Three Volumes Bound as Two. Volumes 1,2. Including the unabridged third edition (1903) of Henry Yule’s annotated translation, as revised by Henry Cordier; together with Cordier’s later volume of notes and addenda (1920). New York, Dover Publications, Inc., 1993.

[1265]. Maria Da Villa Urbani. Basilica of San Marco. Milan, Editions KINA, 1993.

[1266]. Martin Behaim’s 1492 Erdapfel. A paper version of our earliest surviving terrestrial Globe. First made in Nuremberg in 1492. Follow Marco Polo and the quest for spice on this unique medieval relic. Greaves & Thomas, London, England. Registered design & Patents Pending. Artwork & Globe Gores, 1997. (A selection of facsimile globes from the Greaves & Thomas collection. Spanning cartographic history from 1492 to the present day.)

[1267]. Maso Finiguerra. A Florentine Picture-Chronicle. Reproduced from the originals in the British Museum by the Imperial Press, Berlin. A critical and descriptive text by Sidney Colvin, M. A. Keeper of the prints and drawings of the British Museum. New York, Benjamin Blom, 1970.

[1268]. [Paris, Matthew] The Illustrated Chronicles of Matthew Paris. Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, 1993.

[1268:1]. McKenzie, John L., S. J. Dictionary of the Bible. G. Chapman, London, 1985 (1965 by Macmillan Publishing).

[1269]. Meier, H. Deutsche Sprachstatistik. Hildesheim, 1964.

[1270]. de la Garza, Mercedes. The Mayas. 3000 years of civilization. Mexico, Monclem Ediciones; Florence, Casa Editrice Bonechi, 1994.

[1271]. Germany. Michelin et Cie, 1996.

[1272]. Paris. Michelin et Cie, 1996.

[1273]. Michell, J. A. Little History of Astro-Archaeology: Stages in the Transformation of a Heresy. London, 1977.

[1273:0]. Michov, H. Weitere Beiträge zur älteren Kartographie Russlands. Mit 1 Textabbildung und 5 Karten. Sonderabzug aus den Mitteilungen der Geographischen Gesellschaft in Hamburg, Band XXII. Hamburg: L.Friederichsen & Co. Inhaber: Dr. L. Friederichsen, 1907.

[1273:1]. Migne, J.-P. Patrologiae Cursus Completus etc. Paris: Petit-Montrouge, 1800-1875.

[1274]. Miller, W. The Latins in the Levant. A History of Frankish Greece in 1204-1566. London, 1908.

[1275]. Mommsen, T. Die Römische Chronologie bis auf Caesar. Berlin, 1859, 2 Aufl.

[1276]. Montucla, J. E. Histoire des Mathématiques. T.IV. Paris, 1802.

[1277]. Montucla, J. E. Histoire des Mathématiques. 4 vols. Paris. 1799-1802.

[1278]. Musée Royal de Naples: Peintures, bronzes et statues érotiques du cabinet secret, avec les explanations de M. C. F. (César Famin). Paris, 1857.

[1279]. Museum. Gutenberg Museum Mainz. Braunschweig, Georg Westermann Verlag, 1980. (3 Auflage 1994.)

[1280]. Myres, J. Herodotus. Father of History. Oxford, 1953.

[1281]. Ahmed Kardy. Finding a Pharaoh’s Funeral Bark. National Geographic, Vol. 173, No. 4 (April 1988): 513-546.

[1282]. Peter Miller. Riddle of the Pyramid Boats. National Geographic, Vol. 173, No. 4 (April 1988): 534-546.

[1282:1]. Rick Gore. The Eternal Etruscans. National Geographic, Volume 173, No. 6 (June 1988): 696-743.

[1283]. National Geographic, Volume 176, No. 4 (October 1989).

[1284]. Nelli René. Ecritures cathares. Complete Cathar writings translated into French. Planete, 1968.

[1285]. Neugebauer, O. Astronomische Chronologie. Berlin and Leipzig, 1929.

[1286]. Neugebauer, O. Specieller Kanon der Sonnenfinsternisse. Ergänzungsheft, Astron. Nachr. 8, 4. Kiel, Verlag der Astronomischen Nachrichten, 1931.

[1287]. Neugebauer, O. A History of Ancient Mathematical Astronomy. 3 Vols. New York-Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 1975.

[1288]. Neugebauer, O. The Exact Sciences in Antiquity. 2nd edition. Providence, Rhode Island, Brown University Press, 1957.

[1289]. Neugebauer, Otto and Richard A. Parker. Egyptian Astronomical Texts. 3 vols. Providence and London: Lund Humphries for Brown University Press, 1960-1969.

[1290]. Neugebauer, O., and H. B. Van Hoesen. Greek Horoscopes. Philadelphia, The American Philosophical Society, 1959.

[1290:1]. Neugebauer, O., and R. A. Parker. Egyptian Astronomical Texts. Vols. 1-3. London, Brown University Press, 1964.

[1291]. Neugebauer, O., R. A. Parker, and D.Pingree. The Zodiac Ceilings of Petosiris and Petubastis. Denkmäler der Oase Dachla. Aus dem Nachlass von Ahmed Fakhry. Bearbeitet von J. Osing, M. Moursi, Do. Arnold, O. Neugebauer, R. A. Parker, D. Pengree und M. A. Nur-el-Din. Archäologische Veröffentlichungen 28 Deutsches Archäologisches Institut. Abteilung Kairo. Mainz am Rhein, Verlag Philipp von Zabern, 1982.

[1292]. Neugebauer, P. V. Tafeln zur astronomischen Chronologie. 3 Volumes. Leipzig, 1912.

[1293]. Neugebauer, P. V. Abgekürzte Tafeln der Sonne und großen Planeten. Berlin, 1904.

[1294]. Newcomb, S. On the reccurence of solar eclipses with tables of eclipses. Astronomical Papers (Washington). Vol. 1, No. 1 (1882).

[1295]. Newcomb, S. Tables of the Motion of the Earth on its Axis and around the Sun. Astronomical Paper. V.VI, Pt.1. 1898.

[1296]. Newmann, Dianne. The Pergamon Altar. Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Preussischer Kulturbesitz, 1993.

[1297]. Newton, Isaac. Abregé de la chronologie de I. Newton fait par lui-mème, et traduit sur le manuscript Angloise [par Nicolas Freret]. Paris: Gavelier, 1725.

[1298]. Newton, Isaac. The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended. To which is Prefix’d, A Short Chronicle from the First Memory of Things in Europe, to the Conquest of Persia by Alexander the Great. London: J. Tonson, 1728. Re-edited in 1988 by Histories and Mysteries of Man Ltd.

[1299]. Newton, Isaac. La Chronologie des Ancien Royalmes Corrigée, Martin u.a. Translation F. Granet. Paris, 1728.

[1300]. Newton, Isaac. Kurzer Auszug aus der weltberühmten Isaac Newtons Chronologie derer alten Königreiche: worinnen 4 Haupt-Periodi veste gestellt u. aus d. Antiquität eruiert werden...; wobei zugl. gezeiget wird, wie d. dunckle Histoire d. alten verfallenen Königreiche... in e. richtige chronolog. Ordnung zu bringen sei... Aus d. Engl. Von Philipp Georg Hübner. Meiningen, 1741.

[1301]. Newton, Isaac. Abrégé de la chronologie des ancien royaumes. Trad. Deel Anglois de Mr. [Andrew] Reid. Geneve, 1743.

[1302]. Newton, Isaac. Kurzer Auszug aus der I.Newtons Chronologie. Von Pf. Georg Hübner, Hilburgshausen u. a. 1745.

[1303]. Newton, R. R. “Astronomical evidence concerning non-gravitational forces in the Earth-Moon system.” Astrophysics and Space Science, Volume 16 (1972): 179-200.

[1304]. Newton, R. “Two Uses of Ancient Astronomy.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series A., 276 (2 May 1974): 99-115. DOI: 10.1098/rsta.1974.0012.

[1305]. Newton, Robert R. The Origins of Ptolemy’s Astronomical Tables. The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. The Center for Archaeoastronomy, University of Maryland. USA, 1985.

[1306]. Newton, R. R. Ancient Astronomical Observations and the Accelerations of the Earth and Moon. Baltimore and London, John Hopkins University Press, 1970.

[1306:1]. Newton, R. R. The Moon’s Acceleration and Its Physical Origin. Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press, 1979.

[1307]. Newton, Robert R. On the fractions of degrees in an ancient star catalogue. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, Volume XX (1979): 383-394.

[1308]. Newton, Robert R. The origins of Ptolemy’s planetary parameters. The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab. The Center for Archaeoastronomy. 1982. 86-90.

[1309]. Nicolai Copernici Thorunensis de Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium Libri VI. Ex. auctoris autographio recudi curavit Societas Copernicana Thorunensis. Berolini, 1873.

[1310]. Nikulin, N. Lucas Cranach. Masters of World Painting. Leningrad, Aurora Art, 1976.

[1311]. Nilsson, M. P. Primitive Time-Reckoning. A Study in the Origins and the First Development of the Art of Counting Time among the Primitive and Early Culture Peoples. Lund, Gleerup, 1920.

[1312]. Noth, M. Die Welt des Alten Testaments. Berlin, 1957.

[1313]. Oertel, F. Herodots ägyptischen Logos und die Glaubwürdigkeit Herodots. Berlin, 1970.

[1314]. Olston, A. B. The Story of Time. Chicago, Jarvis Universal Clock Co., 1915.

[1315]. Oppolzer, Th. Kanon der Sonnen- und Mondfinsternisse. Wien: K. K.Hof- und Staatsdruckerei, 1887.

[1316]. Oppolzer, Th. Tafeln zur Berechnung der Mondfinsternisse. Wien, 1883.

[1317]. Oppolzer, Th. Syzygientafeln für den Mond. Leipzig, Astronomische Gesellschaft, 1881.

[1318]. Orbini, Mauro. Origine de gli Slavi & progresso dell’Imperio loro. Pesaro, 1606.

[1319]. Orontij, Finai Delphinatus. Canonum Astronomicum. 1553. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library.)

[1320]. Orontii, Finaei Delphinatis. Fine Oronce, etc. 1551. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library.)

[1321]. Orr, M. A. Dante and the Early Astronomers. London, Gall and Inglis, 1913.

[1321:1]. Otero, Gloria. El Arte Romanico en España. Romanesque Art in Spain. Subdireccion General de Promocion Exterior del Turismo. Turespaña, Spain, 1995.

[1322]. Otero, José Carro. Santiago de Compostela. Second edition. Leon, Spain, Editorial Everest S.A., 1999.

[1323]. Ostrowski, W. The ancient names and early cartography of Byelorussia. London, 1971.

[1324]. Owen, G. F. Archaeology and the Bible. NY, 1961.

[1325]. Page, E. S. Continuous inspection schemes. Biometrika, Volume 41, No.1 (1954): 100-115.

[1326]. Page, E. S. A test for a change in a parameter occurring at an unknown point. Biometrica, Vol. 42, No.4 (1955): 523-527.

[1327]. Paladilhe, Dominique. Simon de Monfort et le Drame Cathare. France: Librairie Académique Perrin, 1997.

[1328]. Pannekoek, A. A History of Astronomy. New York, 1961.

[1329]. Paris. Tourist Guide. Paris: Guide Michelin, 1992.

[1330]. Parker, Richard A. Ancient Egyptian Astronomy. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Ser. A, 276 (1974): 51-65.

[1331]. Pastoureau, Michel. Traité d’Héraldique. Bibliothèque de la Sauvegarde de l’Art Francais. 3e éd. Paris, Grands manuels Picard, 1997.

[1332]. Venetus, Paulus. Philisiphiae naturalis compendium clarissimi philosophi Pauli Veneti: una libro de compositione mundi, etc. Paris, J. Lambert (s. d.), n.d.

[1333]. Pearce, A. The science of the stars. London, Glen & Co., 1898.

[1334]. Pearce, A. The text-book of Astrology. London, Glen & Co., 1911.

[1335]. Pedersen, O. A survey of the Almagest. Odence, 1974.

[1335:1]. Pelloutier, S. Histoire des Celtes. Paris: Quillan, 1771.

[1336]. Perrier, Jacques. Notre-Dame de Paris. Association Maurice de Sully, Paris, 1996.

[1337]. Petavius, D. De doctrina temporum. Vol. 1. Paris, 1627. (Petau, D. Opus de doctrina temporum, etc. Volume 1. Antwerpiae, M. DCCV.)

[1338]. Petavius, D. Petavii Avrelianensis e Societate Iesu, Rationarium Temporum in Partes Dvas, Libros tredecim distributum. Editio Ultima. Parisiis, Apud Sebastianum Cramoisy, Regis, & Reginae Architypographum: Gabrielem Cramoisy. M.DC.LII. Cvm Pivilegio Regis.

[1339]. Peters, C. H. F., and E. B. Knobel Ptolemy’s Catalogue of Stars. A Revision of the Almagest. Publ. No. 86. Washington, The Carnegie Inst. of Washington, 1915.

[1340]. Petrarca, Francesco. Familiarum rerum libri. Editione critica per cura di Vittorio Rossi. Firenze, 1968.

[1340:1]. Petrie, Flinders W. M. Athribi Mem. of British School of Archaeology in Egypt. Volume 14. 1902.

[1340:2]. Petrie, Flinders. Wisdom of the Egyptians. London, British School of Archaeology in Egypt and Bernard Quaritch Ltd., 1940.

[1341]. Pfeil, Ulrich. Trier. A tour of the most famous sights. Kunstverlag Weick. Passau, 1996.

[1342]. Philip, A. The Calendar: Its History, Structure and Improvement. Cambridge University Press, 1921.

[1343]. Philipp Apian und die Kartographie der Renaissance. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek. Anton H. München, Konrad Verlag, 1989.

[1344]. [Phrantzae, Georgius] De Vita et Acriptus Georgii Phrantzae. Patrologiae cursus completus. Series graeca posterior. T. CLVI. J.-P. Migne, 1866.

[1345]. Pingre, A. Chronologie des eclipses qui ont été visibles depuis le pole boréal jusque vers l’equateur pendant les dix siècles qui ont précedé l’ére Chrétienne. Paris, 1787.

[1346]. Pogo, A. Additions and corrections to Oppolzer’s Kanon der Mondfinsternisse. Astron. Journal, V. 43 (1937): 45-48.

[1347]. Pokorny, J. Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. In 2 Bd. Tübingen. Basel: Francke Verlag, 1994 (3. Aufl.).

[1348]. Goetz, Delia and Sylvanus G. Morley. Popol Vuh. The Sacred Book of the Ancient Quiché Maya. From the translation of Adrian Recinos. Volume 29 in the “Civilization of the American Indian” series. Norman and London, Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1950. (13th edition in 1991).

[1349]. Portal, Charles. Histoire de la ville de Cordes (Tarn), 1222-1799. Toulouse, 1902.

[1350]. Priese, Karl-Heinz. The Gold of Meroe. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Mainz, Verlag Philipp von Zabern, 1993.

[1351]. Prowe, L. Nicolaus Copernicus. 3 Bde. Berlin, 1883-1884.

[1352]. [Ptolemaeus, Claudius]. Phelusiensis Alexandrini philosophi et matematici excellentissimi Phaenomena stellarum 1022 fixarum ad hanc aetatem reducta, atque seorsum in studiosorum gratiam. Nunc primum edita, Interprete Georgio Trapezuntio. Excessum Coloniai Agrippinae. Anno 1537, octavo Calendas 5 Septembers.

[1353]. [Ptolemaeus, Claudius]. Geographia. Ed. Sebastian Münster. Basel, 1540. Reprint: Series of Atlases in Facsimile. Amsterdam: Theatrum Orbis Terrarum Ltd., 1966.

[1354]. [Ptolemaeus, Claudius]. Clavdii Ptolemaei Pelusiensis Alexandrini omnia quae extant opera, praeter Geographiam, etc. Baseliae, 1551.

[1355]. Ptolemy. The Almagest. (Great Books of Western World, V. 16). Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1952.

[1356]. Ptolemy, C. Claudii Ptolemaei opera quae exstant omnia. Ed. J. L.Heiberg et al. 3 volumes. Leipzig, 1898-1903,.

[1357]. Ptolemy. Tetrabiblos. Ed. and trans. F. E. Robbins. Harvard, 1940.

[1358]. Ptolemy’s Almagest. Transl. and annot. by G. J. Toomer. London, 1984.

[1359]. Putnam, James. Mummy. London, New York, Eyewitness Books. 1993.

[1360]. Putnam, James. Pyramid. London, New York, Eyewitness Books. 1994.

[1361]. Radini (Radinus), Tedeschi. Sideralis abyssus. Luteciae, Impressum opa T. Kees. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library). 1514 (1511 ?).

[1362]. Ramet, Henri. Histoire de Toulouse. Toulouse, Le Pérégrinateur Editeur, Queray, 1994.

[1363]. Ranson, C. L. A Late Egyptian Sarcophagus. Bulletin of the Metropolitian Museum of Art. 9 (1914): 112-120.

[1364]. Raska. Chronologie der Bibel. Berlin, 1878.

[1365]. Rawlins, Dennis. An investigation of the ancient star catalog. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific. Volume XCIV. 1982. 359-373.

[1365:1]. Reade, Julian. Assyrian Sculpture. British Museum. British Museum Press, London, 1983, 1988.

[1366]. Reeves, Nicholas. The Complete Tutankhamun. The King. The Tomb. The Royal Treasure. New York, Thames and Hudson, 1990, 1995.

[1367]. Reeves, Nicholas, and Nan Froman. Into the Mummy’s Tomb. The Real-Life Discovery of Tutankhamun’s Treasures. Toronto: A Scholastic/Madison Press Book, 1993, 1994. 1st published in the United States by Scholastic, 1992.

[1368]. Rembrandt Harmensz van Rijn. Tableaux dans les musées de l’Union Soviétique. Leningrad, Aurora, 1981, 1987.

[1369]. Robert, C. Archäologische Hermeneutik. Berlin, 1919.

[1370]. Roberts, J. M. The Pelican History of the World. England, Penguin Books, 1984.

[1371]. Robertson, J. M. Pagan christs; studies in comparative hierology. London, Watts & Co, 1911.

[1372]. Roche, Déodar. Le Catharisme. 2 Volumes. Narbonne, Cahiers d’Études Cathares, 1973 and 1976.

[1373]. Rogov, Alexander. Alexandrov. (Alexandrovskaya Sloboda, or, literally, “The Freemen’s Village of Alexander”). Museum Cities. Leningrad, Avrora, 1979.

[1374]. Grafton, Anthony, ed. Rome Reborn. The Vatican Library and Renaissance Culture. Washington: Library of Congress; New Haven, London: Yale University Press; Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1993.

[1375]. Romero, Anne-Marie. Saint-Denis. La montée des pouvours. Caisse Nationale des Monuments Historiques et des Sites. Paris, CNRS, 1992, 1993.

[1376]. Roquebert, Michel. Cathar Religion. Toulouse, Editions Loubatières, 1994.

[1377]. Roquebert, Michel. L’épopée Cathare, 1209-1229. (On the Crusade against the Albigeois). 3 volumes. Toulouse: Private, 1970, 1977 and 1986.

[1378]. Rosalba, Manzo. New Castle Museum. Naples City Hall. Joint to the major for culture. D. E. C. Artistical and Museums Patrimony Service. Naples, n.d.

[1378:1]. Rose-Marie, Rainer Hagen. Egypt. People, Gods, Pharaohs. Köln: Benedikt Taschen Verlag GmbH, 1999.

[1379]. Ross. Tacitus and Bracciolini. The Annals forged in the XVth century. London, 1878.

[1380]. Rostovzeff, M. Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire. Paris, 1957.

[1381]. Rowley, H. H. The Old Testament and Modern Study. Oxford, 1961.

[1382]. Rundsicht der Stadt Wien zur Zeit der Türkenbelagerung, 1529, Niklas Meldemann, Nürnberg 1530. HM Inv. Nr. 48068. Faksimile 1994, Museen der Stadt Wien Druckerei Gert Herzig, Wien. (Mediaeval plan of Vienna of the XVI c. depicting the siege of Vienna by the Turks in 1529.)

[1383]. Sacro, Bosco J. de. Opusculum Johannis de Sacro busto spericum, cu figuris optimus ei novis textu in se, sive ambiguitate declarantibus. Leipzig, 1494. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library.)

[1384]. Sacro, Bosco J. de. Sphera materialis. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library). Nürnberg, Gedruckt durch J. Getkneckt, 1516.

[1385]. Sacro, Bosco J. de. Opusculu de Sphaera . . . clarissimi philosophi Ioannis de Sacro busto. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library). Viennae Pannoniae, 1518.

[1386]. Sayce. Herodotus I-III. The ancient empire of the East. London, 1883.

[1387]. Scaliger, I. Opus novum de emendatione temporum. Lutetiac. Paris, 1583. (Thesaurum temporum, 1606).

[1388]. Schaarschmidt, K. Die Sammlung der Platos Schriften zur Schreidung der echten von den unechten untersucht. Bonn, 1866.

[1389]. Schäfer, Heinrich. Ägyptische und heutige Kunst und Weltgebäude der alten Ägypter. Zwei Aufsätze. Berlin, Walter de Greyter, 1928.

[1390]. Schlafke, Jakob. La Cattedrale di Colonia. Editione Italiana. Bonechi Verlag Styria, Casa Editrice Bonechi, Graz, Lahn Verlag, Limburg/Lahn, 1990.

[1391]. Schliemann, Heinrich. Ilios. Stadt und Land der Trojaner. Forschungen und Entdeckungen in der Trojas und besonders auf der Baustelle von Troja. Leipzig, 1881.

[1392]. Schliemann, Heinrich. Troja. Ergebnisse meiner neuesten Ausgrabungen auf der Baustelle von Troja, in der Heldengräbern Bunarbaschi and an anderen Orten in der Trojas im Jahre 1882. Leipzig, 1884.

[1393]. Schilgen, Jost, and Martina Wengierek. So schön ist Trier. Grasberg, Sachbuchverlag Karin Mader, 1994.

[1394]. Schjellerup, H. C. F. G. Description des étoiles fixes composée au milieu du Xe siècle de notre ère par l’astronome persan abd-Al-Rahman Al-Sufi. St. Petersburg, 1874.

[1395]. Schram, R. Tafeln zur Berechning der naheren Umstände der Sonnenfinsternisse. Wien, 1886.

[1396]. Schram, R. Reductionstafeln für den Oppolzerischen Finsternis Kanon zum Übergang auf die Ginzelschen Correctionen. Wien, 1889.

[1396:1]. Schedel, Hartmann. La chronique universelle de Nuremberg. L’édition de Nuremberg, colorée et commentée. (L’édition 1493, colorée et commentée). Introduction et Appendice par Stephan Füssel. Taschen GmbH. (Köln). Köln, London, Madrid, New York, Paris, Tokyo, 2001.

[1397]. Schram, R. Kalendariographische und chronologische Tafeln. Leipzig, 1908.

1398 Schroter, J. Spezieller Kanon der zentralen Sonnen- und Mondfinsternisse. Kristiania, 1923.

[1399]. Schulten, Walter. Der Schrein der Heiligen drei Könige im Kölner Dom. Luthe-Druck Köln, 1995.

[1400]. Schwahn, P. Mathematische Theorie der astronomischen Finsternisse. Leipzig, 1910.

[1401]. Schwegler, T. Die Biblische Urgeschichte. München, 1960.

[1402]. Serrus, Georges. Montségur. Toulouse, Editions Loubatières, 1994.

[1403]. Serrus, Georges, and Michel Roquebert. Cathare Castles. Toulouse, Editions Loubatières, 1993.

[1404]. Severy, Merle. The world of Suleyman the Magnificent. National Geographic, Volume 172, No.5 (1987): 552-601.

[1405]. Siebeck, H. Zur Chronologie der platonischen Dialoge. Halle, 1873.

[1405:1]. Simon, J. L., P. Bretagnon, J. Chapront, M.,Chapront-Touze, G. Francou, and J. Laskar. Software for the calculation of heliocentric coordinates, radial vectors and immediate speeds for the 8 main planets of the Solar System (the PLANETAP program, Fortran 77) Astron. Astrophys., 282, 663 (1994).

1405:2 Sivaramamurti, Calambur. The Art of India. India Book House, Bombay, 1977. Published by Harry N. Abrams, Inc., New York.

[1406]. Shaban, S. Change-point problem and two-phase regression: annotated bibliography. International Statistical Review, Volume 48 (1980): 83-86.

[1407]. Speyer. Die Kaiserstadt am Rhein. KINA Italia Mailand, Kaiserdom-Pavillon Renate Hahn am Domplatz, ATD Mailand, 1994.

[1408]. Speyer Cathedral. Regensburg, Verlag Schnell & Steiner GmbH Regensburg, 1997.

[1409]. Spielberg, W. Die Glaubwürdigkeit von Herodots Bericht über Ägypten. Berlin, 1926.

[1410]. Staccioli, Romolo A. Storia e cività degli Etruschi. Origine apogeo decadenza di un grande popolo dell’Italia antica. Rome, Newton Compton editori, 1981.

[1411]. Stancheva, Magdalina. Veliki Preslav. Sofia, Zlatostrouy, 1993.

[1412]. Steeb, J. Coelum sephiroticum Hebraeorum, etc. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library). Mainz, 1679.

[1413]. Stephan, Beissel S. J. Kunstschätze des Aachener Kaiserdomes. Werke der Goldschmiedekunst, Elfenbeinschnitzerei und Textilkunst. M. Gladbach. Druck und Verlag von B. Kühlen. Anstalt für Christliche Kunst. 1904.

[1414]. Stevens, Henry N. Ptolemy’s Geography. A brief account of all printed editions down to 1730. Amsterdam, Theatrum Orbis Terrarum Ltd. Meridian Publishing Company, 1972.

[1415]. Stierlin, Henri. The Pharaohs Master-Builders. Paris, Finest S.A./Éditions Pierre Terrail, 1992.

[1416]. St. Lorenz. Sagen + Geschichten. 73. Verein zur Erhaltung der St. Lorenzkirche in Nürnberg (E.V.). Herausgegeben von Gerhard Althaus und Georg Stolz. Nürnberg. Nr. 15/3, unveränderte Auflage, 1998.

[1417]. St.Lorenz. Türme + Glocken. 81. Verein zur Erhaltung der St. Lorenzkirche in Nürnberg (E. V.). Herausgegeben von Gerhard Althaus und Georg Stolz. Nürnberg. Nr.25/2, verbessterte Auflage, 1998.

[1418]. St. Lorenz. Wappen in Fülle. Wappenkunde. Wappenkunst und Wappenrecht. 86. Verein zur Erhaltung der St. Lorenz-kirche in Nürnberg (E.V.). Herausgegeben von Gerhard Althaus und Georg Stolz. Nürnberg. NF.Nr.31, 1986.

[1419]. St. Lorenz. Ich bin das Licht der Welt. Grosse und kleine Lichter. 90. Verein zur Erhaltung der St. Lorenzkirche in Nürnberg (E.V.). Herausgegeben von Gerhard Althaus und Georg Stolz. Nürnberg. NF.Nr.35, 1990.

[1420]. St. Lorenz. Sand-Sandstein. Steinsand-Sand. 91. Verein zur Erhaltung der St. Lorenzkirche in Nürnberg (E. V.). Herausgegeben von Gerhard Althaus und Georg Stolz. Nürnberg. NF. Nr. 36, 1991.

[1421]. St. Lorenz. Behelmt, behütet und bedacht. 92. Verein zur Erhaltung der St. Lorenzkirche in Nürnberg (E. V.). Herausgegeben von Gerhard Althaus und Georg Stolz. Nürnberg. NF. Nr. 37, 1992.

[1422]. St. Lorenz. Mein Auge schauet was Gott gebauet. 93. Was Verein zur Erhaltung der St. Lorenzkirche in Nürnberg (E. V.). Herausgegeben von Gerhard Althaus und Georg Stolz. Nürnberg. NF. Nr. 38, 1993.

[1423]. St. Lorenz. Ecce Panis Angelorum. Das Sakramentshaus des Adam Kraft. Verein zur Erhaltung der St. Lorenzkirche in Nürnberg (E. V.). Herausgegeben von Gerhard Althaus und Georg Stolz. Nürnberg. NF. Nr. 39, 1994.

[1424]. St. Lorenz. 500 Jahre Sakramentshaus: Erklärung – Verklärung, Deutung – Umdeutung. 96. Verein zur Erhaltung der St. Lorenzkirche in Nürnberg (E. V.). Herausgegeben von Gerhard Althaus und Georg Stolz. Nürnberg. NF. Nr. 41, 1996.

[1425]. St. Lorenz. Türen. Tore. Portale. 97. Verein zur Erhaltung der St. Lorenzkirche in Nürnberg (E.V.). Herausgegeben von Gerhard Althaus und Georg Stolz. Nürnberg. NF. Nr. 41, 1997.

[1426]. St. Lorenz. Wandfresken. Bestand. Restaurierung. Erhaltung. 98. Verein zur Erhaltung der St. Lorenzkirche in Nürnberg (E. V.). Herausgegeben von Gerhard Althaus und Georg Stolz. Nürnberg. NF. Nr. 43, 1998.

[1427]. St. Lorenz. Im Blickpunkt das Kreuz. Kruzifix-Darstellungen. 99. Verein zur Erhaltung der St. Lorenz-kirche in Nürnberg (E. V.). Herausgegeben von Gerhard Althaus und Georg Stolz. Nürnberg. NF. Nr. 44, 1999.

[1428]. Struve, O. Libroram in biblioteca Speculae Pulcovensis catalogus systematicus. Petropoli, 1860.

[1429]. Stryjkowski, Maciej. O Poczatkach, wywodach.... Of the Beginnings, Sources, the Deeds of the Knights and the Home Affairs of the Glorious Peoples of Lithuania, Zhmuda, and Russia, an Original Tale Inspired by the Lord and the Author’s Own Experience. Warszawa, 1978.

[1430]. Suckow, Hähel. Stadtführer Halle. Sehenswertes in Halle. Halle, Druckhaus Schütze, 1998.

[1431]. Suess, H. Secular variations. Journal of Geophysical Research, Volume 70, No. 23 (1965).

[1432]. Suess, H. Bristlecone Pine. Radioactive Dating and Methods. Vienna, 1968.

[1433]. Suess, H. Bristlecone Pine Calibration of the Radiocarbon. XII Nobel Symposium on Radiocarbon Variations and Absolute Chronology. Uppsala, 1969.

[1434]. Sueton. Die zwölf Caesaren, nach der Übersetzung v. A. Stahr neu hrsg. München, Leipzig, 1912.

[1435]. Suhle, A. Mittelalteriche Brakteaten. Leipzig, 1965.

[1436]. Swerdlow, N. M., and O. Neugebauer. Mathematical Astronomy in Copernicus’ De Revolutionibus. 2 vols. Berlin, 1984.

[1437]. Sztuka Egipska. Piramidy i mastaby. Mala Encyklopedia Sztuki. 23. Warszawa, Arkady, 1976.

[1438]. Sztuka Egipska. Luksor. Opracowal Kazimierz Michalowski. Mala Encyklopedia Sztuki. 25. Warszawa, Arkady, 1976.

[1438:1]. Tabov, Jordan. Chronological Distribution of Information in Historical Texts. Computers and the Humanities, 2003, Volume 37, pages 235-240.

[1439]. Targuebayre, Claire. Cordes en Albigeois. Toulouse, Editions Privat, 1988.

[1440]. Tesnierio, Ioanne. Opus Matematicum octolibrum. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library.) Coloniae Agrippinae, apud J. Birckmannum & W. Richwinum, 1562.

[1441]. Teutsch Astronomei. Astronomia. Woodcuts, 1545. (The Pulkovo Observatory Library.)

[1442]. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. London: Everyman’s library, J. M. Dent. Sons Ltd., 1990.

[1443]. Wright, G. E., ed. The Bible and the Ancient Near East. Essays in Honour of W.F.Albright. NY, 1961.

[1444]. The Cambridge medieval history. IV. The Byzantine Empire. Cambridge Univ. Press, 1966-1967.

[1445]. The Cathedral of St.Stephen in Vienna. Graz, Verlag Styria, Casa Editrice Bonechi, 1992.

[1446]. Gransden, A., ed. The Chronicle of Bury St. Edmunds, 1212-1301. London-Edinburgh, 1964.

[1447]. The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia. USA, Columbia University Press, 1983.

[1448]. The Egyptian Book of the Dead. The Book of Going Forth by Day. The first authentic presentation of the complete papyrus of Ani. Featuring full color images. Transl. by Dr. R. Faulkner. San Francisco, Chronicle Books, 1994.

[1449]. The English version of the polyglot Bible with a copies and original selection of references to parallel and illustrative passages. London, S. Bagster and Sons.

[1450]. The Holy Bible, containing Old and New Testaments: Translated out of the original tongues; and with the former translations diligently compared and revised, by His Majesty’s special command. Appointed to be read in Churches. London, British and Foreign Bible Society, Instituted in London in the Year 1804.

[1451]. The Holy Bible, containing Old and New Testaments: Translated out of the original tongues; and with the former translations diligently compared and revised, by His Majesty’s special command. Authorized King James version. Salt Lake City, Utah, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 1992.

[1452]. The New Encyclopaedia Britannica. Volume 16. 1987.

[1453]. The place of astronomy in the ancient world. A discussion organized jointly for the Royal Society and the British Academy. Philos. Trans. of the Royal. Soc. of London, Ser. A., Volume 276 (1974): 1-276.

[1454]. Farid, Shafik, ed. The Pyramids of Giza. Book 1. Simpkins Splendor of Egypt. Salt Lake City, Utah, Simpkins Souvenirs, 1982.

[1455]. The R. C. Church of St. Karl. Vienna. Salzburg, Christiche Kunststätten Österreichs, Nr.20 E. Verlag St. Peter, 1994.

[1456]. Werber, Eugen. The Sarajevo Haggadah. Svjetlost, Sarajevo. Printed by Mladinska Knjiga, Ljubljiana, 1999.

[1457]. The Shrine of Torreciudad. Guide. Oficina de Información, 22391 Torreciudad (Huesca), España.

[1458]. Farid, Shafik, ed. The Temple of Luxor. Book 3. Simpkins Splendor of Egypt. Salt Lake City, Utah, Simpkins Souvenirs, 1982.

[1458:1]. The Treasures of the Valley of the Kings. Tombs and Temples of the Theban West Bank in Luxor. Edited by Kent R.Weeks. The American University in Cairo Press. Cairo, Egypt, 2001. White Star, S. r. l. Vercelli, Italy.

[1459]. The World Encompassed. An exhibition of the history of maps held at the Baltimore Museum of Art October 1 to November 23, 1952. Baltimore, Maryland, The Trustees of the Walters Art Gallery, 1952.

[1460]. Thierry, Amedee. St. Jean Chrysostome et l’impératrice Eudoxie. Paris, 1872.

[1460:1]. Thoren, Victor E. The Lord of Uraniborg. A Biography of Tycho Brahe. With contributions by John R. Christianson. Cambridge, New York, Port Chester, Melbourne, Sydney, Cambridge University Press (1994 ?).

[1461]. Thorndike, L. H. D. A History of Magic and Experimental Science. (During the first thirteen centuries of our era). Volumes 1,2. NY, 1923., New York, Columbia University Press, 1943, 1947, 1958.

[1462]. Topper, Uwe. Die Große Aktion. Europas Erfundene Geschichte. Die planmäßige Fälschung unserer Vergangenheit von der Antike bis zur Aufklärung. Tübingen, Grabert-Verlag, n.d.

[1463]. Topper, Uwe. Erfundene Geschichte. Unsere Zeitrechnung ist falsch. Leben wir im Jahr 1702? München, F. A. Herbig Verlagsbuchhandlung GmbH, 1999.

[1464]. Turhan, Can. Istanbul, Gate to the Orient. Istanbul, Orient, 1995.

[1465]. Turhan, Can. Topkapi Palace. Istanbul, Orient, 1995.

[1466]. Eco, Umberto. Serendipities. Language and Lunacy. Weidenfeld & Nicolson (UK). NY, Orion/Columbia Univ. Press. 1999.

[1467]. Venice. Venezia, Storti Edizioni, 1993.

[1468]. Vesconte, Pietro. Seekarten. Mit einem Geleitwort von Otto Mazal. Einfürung von Lelio Pagani. Edition Georg Popp Würzburg. 1978. Grafica Gutenberg, Bergamo, 1977.

[1469]. Vidal-Quadras, José A. Torreciudad. Imprenta Moises Barbasto, Spain, 1987.

[1470]. Vidal-Quadras, José A. Torreciudad. A shrine to Our Lady. Office of Information Torreciudad, Spain, n.d.

[1471]. Villehardouin, Geoffroy de. La conquète de Constantinople. Historiens et chroniqueurs du Moyen Âge. Ed. A. Pauphilet. Paris, 1963.

[1472]. Virgil, Mocanu. Tintoretto. Clasicii Picturii Universale. Bucuresti, Editura Meridiane, 1977.

[1473]. Vries, Hesselde. Variation in concentration of radiocarbon with time and location on Earth. Koninkl. Nederlandse Akad. Wetensch. Proc. 1958, ser. B. 61, pages 1-9.

[1474]. Wallraf-Rischartz-Museum der Stadt Köln. Vollständliges Verzeichnis der Gemäldesammlung. Köln/Mailand, 1986.

[1475]. Waterfield, R. L. A Hundred Years of Astronomy. NY, Macmillan, 1938.

[1476]. Wehli, Tünde. A Középkori Spanyolország Festészete. Budapest, Corvina Kiadó, 1980.

[1477]. Wenzler, Claude. L’Héraldique. Rennes, Editions Ouest-France, 1997.

[1478]. Werner, H., and F. Schmeidler. Synopsis der Nomenklatur der Fixsterne. Wissensch. Stuttgart, Verlags-Gesellschaft 1986.

[1478:1]. Wigal, Donald. Anciennes Cartes Marines. A la Découverte des Nouveaux Mondes. 1290-1699. New York, Parkstone Press, 2000.

[1479]. Williams, John. Observations of Comets from B.C.611 A.D. to 1640, extracted from the Chinese Annals. 1871.

[1480]. Willis, E. H., H. Tauber, and K. O. Münnich. Variations in the atmospheric radiocarbon concentration over the past 1300 years. Radiocarbon, Volume 2 (1960): 1.

[1481]. Wissowa, Pauly. Real-Encyclopädie der Klassischen Altertumwissenschaft in alphabetischer Ordnung. Hrsg. von Kroll. Stuttgart, 1839-1852.

[1482]. Wittkower, R. Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanism. Paris, 1960.

[1483]. Wolf, R. Handbuch der Astronomie, ihrer Geschichte und Literatur. Bd. II. Zürich, 1892.

[1484]. Wooley, L. Excavation at Ur. NY, 1955.

[1485]. Woronowa, Tamara, and Andrej Sterligov. Westeuropäische Buchmalerei des 8. bis 16. Jahrhunderts in der Russischen Nationalbibliothek, Sankt Petersburg. (Frankreich. Spanien. England. Deutschland. Italien. Niederlande). Augsburg: Bechtermünz. Genehmigte Lizenzausgabe für Weltbild Verlag, 2000. England, Parkstone/Aurora, 1996.

[1486]. Wright, G. E. Biblical Archaeology. Philadelphia, London, 1957.

[1487]. Altet, Xavier Barral. Compostelle de Grand Chemin. Découvertes Gallimard Réligions. Gallimard, 1993.

[1488]. Zadkiel. The Grammar of Astrology. London, J. Cornish, 1849.

[1489]. Zarnecki, George, Florence Deucher, and Irmgard Hutter. Neue Belser Stilgeschichte. Band IV. Romantik, Gotik, Byzanz. Stuttgard, Zürich, Belser Verlag, 1986.

[1490]. Zech, J. Astronomische Untersuchungen über die wichtigeren Finsternisse, welche von den Schriftstellern des klassischen Altertums erwähnt werden. Leipzig, 1853.

[1491]. Zeitensprünge. Interdisziplinäres Bulletin. Sonderdruck. September 1996. Thema Absolutdatierung. Mantis Verlag, Germany.

[1492]. Zevi, B., E. Battisti, E. Garin, and L. Malle. Alberti. Enciclopedia universale dell’arte. Vol. I. Venezia, Roma, 1958.