HISTORY: FICTION OR SCIENCE? ● BOOK 7

The Issue with

Russian History

Anatoly Fomenko

Gleb Nosovskiy

THE ISSUE WITH RUSSIAN HISTORY

By Anatoly Fomenko and Gleb Nosovskiy

Book 7 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: Viktor Vasnetsov. “The Knight at the Crossroads” (1878, fragment).

The State Russian Museum, 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

Overview of the e-Series

From the publisher

Foreword

Introduction

1. General considerations

2. Our conception in brief

3. The true identity of Mongolia and the Tartar and Mongol invasion. The Cossacks and the Golden Horde

4. Batu-Khan was known as the Great Prince

5. The Romanovs, the Zakharyins and the Yuryins. Their role in Russian chronography

PART ONE: Russian chronicles and the Millerian-Romanovian version of Russian history

1. The first attempts to write down the history of the ancient Russia

1.1. The XVI-XVII century and the edict of Aleksey Mikhailovich

1.2. The XVIII century: Miller

1.3. Brief corollaries

2. Consensual version of Russian history and its genesis. The reasons why all the founders of the Russian historical school were foreign

3. The Radzivilovskaya chronicle from Königsberg as the primary source of the Povest Vremennyh Let

3.1. The origins of the chronicle’s most important copies

3.2. The numeration of the chronicle’s pages and the “bull’s head” watermark

4. Forged fragments of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis – the copy that served as basis for the Povest Vremennyh Let

4.1. Publications of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis

4.2. History of the copy known as the Radzivilovskaya Letopis

4.3. A description of the chronicle

4.4. Story of a forgery. The mysterious “extra” page in the Povest Vremennyh Let

4.5.Who could have planted a page with the “Norman” theory into the Povest Vremennyh Let?

4.6. How the “scientific” Norman theory got dethroned and declared antiscientific

4.7. Having planted a page into the chronicle, the hoaxer prepared space for another, soon to be “fortunately found”. The chronology page of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis

4.8. The “Academic Moscow Copy” of the Povest Vremennyh Let

4.9. Other signs of forgery in the Radzivilovskaya Letopis

4.10.What is the chronicle that served as the original for the Radzivilovskaya chronicle, also known as the Königsberg chronicle?

4.11.Which city was the capital of the Polyane = Poles: Kiev or Smolensk?

4.12. The arrival of Peter in Königsberg

4.13. A brief summary of our analysis of the Radzivilovskaya chronicle

5. Other chronicles that describe the epochs before the XIII century

6. The publication rate of the Russian chronicles remains the same as time goes on

7. The traditional scheme of the ancient Russian history

7.1. The first period: from times immemorial to the middle of the IX century A.D.

7.2. The second period: from the middle of the IX century to the middle of the XII – the Kiev Russia starting with Ryurik and ending with Yuri Dolgoroukiy (of Rostov)

7.3. The third period: the Russia of Vladimir and Suzdal, starting with the middle of the XII century and ending with Batu-Khan’s conquest in 1237

7.4. The fourth period: the yoke of the Tartars and the Mongols, starting with the battle of Sit in 1238 and ending with the 1481 “Ougra opposition”, which is considered to mark the “official end of the Great Yoke” nowadays

7.5. The fifth period: the Moscow Russia starting with Ivan III and ending with the Great Strife, or the enthronement of the Romanovs in 1613

7.6. The sixth period: dynasty of the Romanovs

PART TWO: The two chronological shifts inherent in the history of Russia

8. A general scheme of the parallelism

9. A brief description of the 100-year shift manifest in Russian history

10. A 400-year shift in Russian history and the resulting dynastic parallelism

What mainstream historians say about the New Chronology?

Overview of the seven-volume print edition

Also by Analoly 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

Russia at the crossroads of western and eastern ways. Again?

Is the consensual Russian history a science at all? Well, the one that taught in Russian schools was cooked up by learned German historians brought to Russia by Herr Romanov alias Peter the Great alias Peter the First. Herren Miller, Bayer und Schleizer did quite a job of distorting into oblivion all of pre-Romanovs history of XIV-XVII centuries, i.e. invented Mongols yoke of 300 years, and destroyed the annals of old nobility! Verdict: Russian history is not a science per se but a successful performance of Art of the transformation of actual facts to order. Russian history was rewritten completely to help Europe to finally free itself completely from the clutches of Empire Eurasia.

The rewriting of Russian history was made in the framework of Antiquity and Dark Ages operation that saved Europe from the Evil Empire Eurasia.

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.

- 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.

After spending 3 years in Holland and Germany, Great First Peter returned as a lookalike stranger smoking a pipe and speaking with a German accent. Peter's wife and sister have not recognized him and were banned to the faraway monasteries. His own Streltsy (Musketeers) guard and Ancient Orthodox Russian Church have not recognized him as the true Czar. The Streltsy guard staged a revolt that failed and got decapitated en masse on the Red Square.

Thereby Great Peter has personally chopped off a couple of dozen stubborn heads. As the Ancient Church has called him the Antichrist, Czar Peter formed the Church Council and became its Head, named Nikon a new Patriarch, called old-fashioned Orthodox popes and their parishes the bunch of Raskolniki schismatics, and burned thousands of parishioners that stood in the way of the progress.

Czar Peter renamed himself Great, ordered the nobility to cut beards, smoke tobacco, dance menuetto, and reformed the Orthodox church into the total submission. As a reformer to the hilt, Peter the Great has nearly ruined Russia, lost at least a quarter of its population, tried to break into Europe, moved the capital of Russia from Moscow to St. Petersburg, failed to marry his son to a French princess, made from Russia an awkward upstart and a laughing stock of Europe. Czar Peter named himself an Emperor but did not quite succeed in his brazen reforms, so he left a testament ordering the Russian Empire to become Great and conquer Europe again.

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

Franck Tamdhu

September 2017

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

Foreword

In the present book we are operating within the framework of the New Chronology that was conceived and introduced with the use of mathematical methods and empirico-statistical results of our research as related in Chron1-Chron3, and also in Chron6, Chapter 19. Apart from that, one can find related materials in the mathematical and statistical Annex to Chron7. The primary chronological shifts as discovered in “ancient” and mediaeval history were presented as the Global Chronological Map (GCM) compiled by A. T. Fomenko in 1975-1979.

The present book is written in a manner that stipulates no special knowledge from the part of the reader. All it requires is a genuine interest in history as well as the wish to unravel its numerous conundrums. However, it has to be emphasised that everything we relate below was discovered as a result of long and arduous scientific research, which began with the denial of the consensual version of history by certain critically-minded scientists of the XVII-XIX century. We find Sir Isaac Newton among their ranks, whose primary works on chronology have been subjected to the policy of obmutescence up until relatively recently. However, it appears that these very works were the first attempt to rectify the errors of history with the use of natural scientific methods. Yet Sir Isaac himself proved incapable of solving this problem in full; he simply voiced a number of valuable observations in this respect. The problem of chronological rectification was addressed by N. A. Morozov, the Russian scientist and encyclopaedist (1854-1946) more successfully and in greater depth than by any of his predecessors; however, he never managed to construct a correct and final chronological scale – his reconstruction was rather sketchy and still erroneous, although less so than the consensual version.

Over the last 27 years, starting with 1973, the problem of reconstructing the correct chronology of the antiquity and the Middle Ages has been dealt with by a group of mathematicians (at the initiative of A. F. Fomenko and after his supervision), from the Moscow State University for the most part. Although this particular line of work isn’t our primary specialization (our main interests lay in the field of pure and applied mathematics), it has required a great deal of time and effort from our part.

Let us give a general overview of what we are referring to presently. Readers interested in the scientific aspect of the problem can study the history of the issue as well as the modern mathematical methods used for dating the ancient events if they turn to Chron1, Chron2 and Chron3.

The aim of the scientific project we call “the New Chronology” can be formulated as the discovery of independent methods used for the dating of ancient and mediaeval events. It is a complex scientific problem whose solution required the application of the most intricate methods offered by the modern mathematical science, as well as extensive computer calculations. Publications on this topic have been appearing in scientific journals ever since the 1970s, and books have been coming out ever since 1990. There are several monographs on the subject published in Russia to date (in several versions), and a few more abroad. Thus, the works on the new chronology have been coming out published by academic publishing houses for over twenty years now, although they may remain unknown to the general audience so far.

The “New Chronology” project is far from completion. However, the results that we came up with give us a right to claim that the version of ancient and mediaeval history that we’re taught in school contains substantial and numerous errors that stem from a false chronology. The New Chronology that we constructed with the aid of mathematical methods is often at great odds with the chronology of J. Scaliger and D. Petavius that is still being used by historians. The latter owes its existence to the scholastics of the XVI-XVII century, and contains very serious errors, as we discover nowadays. These errors, in turn, lead to a great distortion of the ancient and mediaeval history viewed as a whole.

One might wonder why professional mathematicians would develop an interest in chronology, which is considered a historical discipline nowadays. The answer is as follows: chronology belongs to the domain of applied mathematics, since it has the estimation of certain dates, or numbers, as its goal. Furthermore, chronology was considered a mathematical discipline at dawn of its creation, in the XV-XVI century. The problem is that the mathematical science of that epoch was incapable of solving chronological problems – very complex ones, as it turns out. They can only be solved by means of modern mathematics, with the aid of well-developed methods and powerful computational means, none of which had existed in the XVI century. This might be why the scholastics ended up dealing with chronological problems. Historians were the next ones to take charge of the discipline, which was declared auxiliary and therefore of minor importance. It was then “shelved” and presumed complete. We are attempting to revive an old tradition and marry chronology with applied mathematics yet again.

Dozens and dozens of people have helped us with this complex task. We are most grateful to them all for assistance and support.

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

Introduction

1. General considerations

1) We must warn the reader that the ancient and mediaeval history known to us today (including that of Russia) is the furthest thing from obvious and self-implied – it is extremely vague and convoluted. In general, history of the epochs that predate the XV-XVI century and the invention of the printing press is anything but accounts of real events based on, and implied by, authentic ancient documents. On the contrary, historical events that predate the XVI-XVII century in their consensual version came into existence courtesy of historians and chronologists – several generations of those, in fact. They all attempted to reconstruct the events of the past. However, the resulting picture is hardly indubitable. And yet most of us are certain that reconstruction of past events is rather easy in principle, believing that it suffices to take a chronicle and translate it into the modern language. The only complications that may arise presumably concern details of minor importance and little else. This is what the school course of history makes us assume. Sadly, this is not the case.

2) History known to us nowadays is written history – based on written documents, in other words. All of them have been edited, revised, recompiled etc for a very long time. Some of the things are written in stone – however, these morsels of information only begin to make sense after the entire edifice of chronology is already constructed – and chronicles are the main construction material of history.

When we say that Brutus killed Caesar with a sword, the only thing it means is that some written source that managed to reach our time says so, and nothing but! The issue of just how faithfully documented history reflects real events is very complex and requires a special study. It is really a problem posed by the philosophy of history rather than documented history per se.

Readers are prone to thinking that nowadays we have chronicles written by the contemporaries of Genghis-Khan and eyewitnesses of the events that took place in his epoch. This isn’t so. Nowadays we’re most likely to have a rather late version at our disposal, one that postdates the actual events by several centuries.

It goes without saying that written documents reflect some sort of reality. However, one and the same real event could be reflected in a multitude of written documents – and very differently so; at times the difference is so great that the first impression one gets precludes one from believing the two to be different reflections of the same event. Therefore, phrases like “such-and-such historical figure is a duplicate of another character” that the reader shall encounter in the present book by no means imply the existence of two real characters, one of which is the doppelganger of another. This would make no sense whatsoever, obviously enough.

We are referring to an altogether different phenomenon – namely, the fact that our “history textbook” may contain several reflections of the same real character – Genghis-Khan, for instance. These reflections will have different names and be ascribed to different epochs. However, the person in question only became “duplicated” on paper and not in reality; as for the issue of just when and where a given person had lived, it is anything but easy. Another extremely contentious issue is that of a person’s real name. The ancients would often have a multitude of names and nicknames; furthermore, they would receive new ones once they made their way into chronicles – names that their contemporaries had never used. Many factors may have come into play here – errors, confusion and distortions in translation. In the present work we do not envisage it as our goal to find out the exact names used by the contemporaries of historical figures for referring to the latter.

3) In one’s study of written history, one must always bear in mind that words in general and names of people or places in particular may have attained different meanings with time. The name “Mongolia” is an excellent example; we shall relate this in more detail below. Furthermore, many geographical names would migrate to new longitudes and latitudes with time. Geographical maps and the names inscribed thereupon have only become more or less uniform with the invention of the printing press, which made it feasible to produce many identical copies of the same map for the practical purposes of seafaring, learning etc. Before that epoch, each map had been unique, and usually at odds with other maps to some extent.

Characters that we’re accustomed to consider “ancient” nowadays are frequently manifest in mediaeval maps as mediaeval heroes. Even historians recognize this rather noteworthy tendency, writing that “ancient characters are drawn on maps as mediaeval townsmen and knights” ([953], page 21).

Ancient texts would often transcribe names without vocalizations – no vowels at all, just the consonant root. Back in those days vocalizations would be added by the reader from memory. This would be especially manifest in Arabic languages, where virtually all the vowel sounds are memorized, and subject to a certain degree of randomness. And seeing how Arabic letters were used for some other languages besides Arabic in the Middle Ages, vowels would frequently become dropped in those languages as well, even if they had originally been more or less constant. Obviously enough, names were the first to be affected by this process.

Quite naturally, with the course of time the vowels would become confused for one another, forgotten or replaced with other vowels. Consonants set down in writing demonstrate higher stability. For instance, we may recollect that many ancient texts frequently allude to the “Greek Faith”. However, it is possible that the word Greece is but a derivative of the name Horus, or Christos (Christ). In this case, the “Greek Faith” is nothing other than the Christian faith.

Russian history is naturally in close relation to global history. All kinds of chronological and geographical shifts one might find in Russian history invariably lead to the discovery of similar problems in history of other countries. The reader must let go of the opinion that ancient history rests upon an immutable foundation – it appears that chronological problems do exist in history of Rome, Byzantium, Italy and Egypt. They are of an even graver nature than the problems of Russian history. See Chron1, Chron2 and Chron3 for further reference.

4) The authors are naturally interested in the history of the ancient Russia, the Russian Empire and its closest neighbours the most. The knowledge of Russian history as a whole is extremely important and affects the very foundation of world civilization, and therefore its most crucial moments are to be studied with the utmost care and attention. Nowadays we are well familiar with numerous examples of how often certain historical facts become distorted to suit passing political trends. In Chron1, Chron2 and Chron3 we have exposed a great many cases when such distortions became rigidified as indisputable truths that migrated from textbook to textbook. One must invest a gigantic amount of labour into “chiselling off later glazing” in order to pour light onto the true nature of the ancient events.

Historical distortions are unacceptable in any state’s history – as for the authors’ very own native history, the investigation needs to be conducted with the utmost clarity, and we have to opt for a completely unbiased approach. No authority can be recognized as such in these matters.

Why do we have to mention all of the above? The reason is that the consensual chronology of Russian history is full of grave contradictions. They were initially pointed out by Nikolai Morozov ([547]). However, our analysis demonstrates that he wasn’t even aware of the actual scale of the problem.

Russian history is considered to be relatively “young” by many historians nowadays, who compare it to the “old cultures” – Rome, Greece etc. However, in Chron1, Chron2 and Chron3 we demonstrated that all of these “ancient chronologies” need to be made significantly shorter. It is most likely that the “old cultures” need to be shifted forwards, into the interval between the XI and the XVII century a.d. The consensual history of the X-XIII century is a product of collation and “summarization” of the real events dating from the epoch in question (which was described rather sparsely in the surviving documents) and the duplicates of events from the more eventful epoch of the XIII-XVII century. We are naturally referring to the amount of surviving accounts of events rather than eventfulness per se. The immutable period in history begins with the XVII century a.d.

It is presumed that documented Russian history begins with the IX-X century a.d. This means that about 300 years of its chronology fall over the “duplicate danger zone”. Our accumulated experience in this field leads us to the expectation of a chronological shift here, which will move some of the events forwards, into the epoch of the XIV-XVII century a.d. This expectation is fulfilled by the authors’ discovery of a 400-year shift, which had first become manifest in the statistical volume analysis of the ancient texts (see Chron1, Chapter 5:2), and was later discovered independently in our study of dynastic parallelisms, q.v. below.

5) We occasionally point out certain linguistic parallels and unexpected phonetic similarities between the ancient names encountered in various chronicles. Let us emphasise that such parallels are by no means presumed to prove anything at all; we merely allude to them in order to demonstrate that unvocalized ancient texts could be read in a great variety of ways. Nevertheless, such parallels are usually explained by our reconstruction quite well.

In the present introduction we shall give a brief outline of the main problems inherent in the Russian chronology and suggest our new conception thereof, which is radically different from both the Scaligerian-Romanovian version and N. A. Morozov’s reconstruction ([547]). In the chapters to follow we shall be providing an account of our systematic analysis of Russian history.

2. Our conception in brief

We shall encapsulate our hypothetic conception immediately, without preparing the readers for it in any special way. Such narration style might seem to be insufficiently convincing; nevertheless, we suggest that the readers should carry on reading instead of jumping to any conclusions. Factual data to validate our theory shall be presented in the following chapters.

Let us pay attention to the following facts, which we find very odd. However, this oddness is only based on consensual chronology and the version of ancient Russian history that we learnt in school. It turns out that a change in chronology eliminates a great many oddities and puts things into a more logical perspective.

One of the key moments in the history of the ancient Russia is the so-called “Mongol and Tartar yoke”. The Horde is presumed to have originated from the Far East, China or Mongolia, conquered a great many countries, enslaved all of Russia, and moved further westwards, reaching Egypt and establishing the Mameluke dynasty there. However, this version contains many inconsistencies even within the framework of Scaligerian history, and they are more or less well known.

We shall begin with the following observation. Had Russia been conquered from either the East or the West, there should be surviving accounts of conflicts between the invaders and the Cossacks who had lived near the western borders of Russia, as well as the lower Volga and Don regions. One must note that school history textbooks say that the Cossack troops only appeared in the XVII century – presumably formed from yeomen who had escaped and settled on the banks of the Don. However, historians themselves are well aware of the fact that the Cossack State of Don had existed as early as in the XVI century, with independent legislation and a history of its very own. Furthermore, it turns out that the origins of the Cossack history date to the XII-XIII century. See [183], for instance, as well as Sukhorukov’s publication by the name of “The History of the Don Troops”, Don magazine, 1989.

Thus, the Horde, wherever it came from, would inevitably move upwards along the Volga and attack the Cossack states – and yet there are no records of this anywhere. Why would this be? The natural hypothesis can be formulated as follows: the Horde didn’t fight the Cossacks because the Cossacks were a part of the Horde. This hypothesis is backed by some substantial argumentation in the book of A. A. Gordeyev ([183]). In his attempt to fit the hypothesis into the consensual Millerian version of Russian history, Gordeyev was forced to assume that the Tartar and Mongol Horde had taken to Russian ways very rapidly, and the Cossacks, or the warriors of the Horde, gradually turned Russian ethnically as well.

Our primary hypothesis (or, rather, one of our primary hypotheses) is as follows: the Cossack troops weren’t merely a part of the Horde, but also the regular army of the Russian state. In other words, the Horde was Russian from the very start. “Horde” (“Orda”) is the old Russian word for regular army. Later terms “voysko” and “voin” (“army” and “warrior”, respectively) are Church Slavonic in origin, and not Old Russian. They were only introduced in the XVII century. The old names were “orda” (horde or army), “kazak” (Cossack) and khan.

The terminology would alter eventually. A propos, as recently as in the XIX century, the words “czar” and “khan” were interchangeable in Russian folk sayings; this becomes obvious from the numerous examples that one finds in Dahl’s dictionary (such as “wherever the khan (czar) may go, the horde (or “the folk”) will follow” etc). See [223] for further reference (the “orda” entry).

By the way, the famous town of Semikarakorsk still exists in the Don region, and there’s also a village called Khanskaya in the Kuban. Let us remind the reader that the birthplace of Genghis-Khan is supposed to have been called Karakorum ([1078], Volume 1, pages 227-228).

According to the rather desperately-sounding hypothesis that our brave scholars have put forth, “the Erdinidsu monastery, founded in 1585 [several centuries later than Genghis-Khan had lived – Auth.] was erected upon the ruins of Karakorum” ([1078], Volume 1, page 228).

The name Karakorum can however be encountered in the Don region. For instance, in the map entitled “The Southern Part of the Great Russia” dating from 1720, the entire Cossack region of Don is called “The Lesser Tartaria”; we also see a river by the name of Semi Karak here, one of Don’s tributaries on the left-hand side. The full name of the map reads as follows: “Tabula Geographica qua Russiae Magnae Pontus Euxinus. Johan Baptist Homann. Nürnberg, ca 1720. The name Karak is therefore found in the area of the Cossack = Tartar Don. The name Karakorum may simply have meant “the Karak area”.

Furthermore, in the map of Russia dating from 1670 (Tabula Russia vulgo Moscovia, Frederik de Wit, Amsterdam, ca 1670) we find a town called Semikorkor in this very region, near the Don. On yet another map, one that dates from 1736 (Theatre de la Guerre sur les Frontieres de Russie de Turquie, Reiner & Joshua Ottens, Amsterdam, 1736) one of Don’s tributaries bears the name of Semi Korokor. The authors have seen all of these maps personally, at the exhibition of old maps of Russia that took place in February 1999 in a private collection museum affiliated with the A. S. Pushkin Museum in Moscow.

Thus, we see several versions of the name Korokor in the Don region – in the name of a town and in that of a river. A Romanised version of the name could have had the suffix “um” at the end, which would transform the Cossack name of Korokor into Korokorum – the famous birthplace of the Conqueror of the World. In this case, the great conqueror Genghis-Khan was born in the Cossack town of Korokor near Semi Korokor, the tributary of Don.

Let us return to the issue of the Horde. According to our hypothesis, the Horde had borne no relation to any foreign conquering armies, but rather was the regular army of the Eastern Russia, an integral part of the ancient Russian state. Furthermore, the period of the “Tartar and Mongol yoke” is nothing but the time of military rule in Russia, when the commander-in-chief, or the Khan, effectively functioned as the king (czar); cities were governed by princes, who weren’t part of the army but collected taxes in order to support it. The ancient Russian state can therefore be regarded as a united Empire, where professional soldiers were a separate stratum of society and called themselves the Horde; other strata had no military formations of their own. We are of the opinion that the so-called “raids of the Tartars” were nothing but repressive actions against the areas of Russia that would refuse to pay taxes for one reason or another. The mutineers were punished by the regular Russian army. Typically, the prince would leave the town before such a raid.

3. The true identity of Mongolia and the Tartar and Mongol invasion. The Cossacks and the Golden Horde

Let us contemplate the etymology of the word Mongolia. It may have derived from the Russian word mnogo (a lot, a mass – of people etc), or the words mosch, mog (a possible precursor of the word “Magog”) and mogoushchestvo, translating as “might (noun)”, “could, was able to” and “power”, respectively. N. A. Morozov voiced the theory that the word “Mongolia” stemmed from the Greek word “Megalion”, or The Great One. However, the Greek word may just as well be a derivative of the Slavic “mog” and “mnogo”. In fig. 0.1 one sees a photograph of the ancient inlay from the Chora church in Istanbul. We see the word “Mongolia” spelt as “Mugulion” – virtually the same as Megalion, see fig. 0.2. Eastern Russia is still known as the Greater Russia, or Velikorossiya. According to our hypothesis, the “Mongolian” Empire is but another name for the Great Empire, or the mediaeval Russia.

Fig. 0.1. Mosaic from the Church of the Holy Saviour in Chora, Istanbul. Dated to the XIV century. We see “Melania the Nun, Queen of the Mongols”, according to the legend that we see above her head. The word “Mongolia” is written in Greek as “Mugulion”, or “Megalion”, which translates as “The Great”. This confirms the hypothesis that the words “Mongolia” and “Megalion” are derived from the Russian word “mnogo” (“many”), or “mnogo” + “vel” (“great”). Taken from [1207].

Fig. 0.2. Mosaic from the Church of the Holy Saviour in Chora, Istanbul. A fragment.

Is there any evidence that could back this hypothesis? There is, and a substantial amount of evidence at that. Let us see what the Western sources tell us about the so-called “Mongol and Tartar invasion”.

“The notes of the Hungarian king and a letter to the Pope that mentions Russian troops as part of Batu-Khan’s army serve as evidence of the latter’s structure and composition” ([183], Volume 1, page 31).

“Batu-Khan founded a number of military settlements on the right bank of the Dnepr for the purposes of observation and protection of the frontiers; they were populated by the inhabitants of Russian principalities … there were lots of Russians among the borderland settlers on the Terek line as well … the governing system created by the Golden Horde was implemented and maintained by the Russians predominantly” ([183], Volume 1, page 40-42).

Furthermore, it appears that “Russia was made a province of the Mongolian empire and became known as the Tartaro-Mongolia” ([183], Volume 1, page 35). Could it be that Tartaro-Mongolia was simply another name of Russia, or the Great Empire (Mongolia) whose population partially consisted of Muslims, or Tartars – just as we witness to be the case nowadays.

The more mediaeval sources are brought to our attention, the more we learn and understand once we break free from the confines of consensual historical paradigm as reflected in textbooks, complete with vivid imagery of the “Mongolian conquest”. For instance, it turns out that “at the very dawn of the Horde’s existence, [the very first days, mind you! – Auth.] an Orthodox church was built in the Khan’s headquarters. As military settlements were founded, Orthodox churches were built everywhere, all across the territory governed by the Horde, with the clergy called thereto and Metropolitan Cyril relocated to Kiev from Novgorod, thus completing the restoration of the pan-Russian ecclesiastical hierarchy” ([183], Volume 1, page 36).

Let us stop and reflect for a moment. All of the above is very odd indeed from the consensual point of view. Indeed, a Mongolian conqueror (who most probably didn’t even speak Russian, let alone share the Russian faith) builds Orthodox temples, which must be thoroughly alien to him, all across the newly conquered empire, and the Russian Metropolitan moves to Kiev as soon as the city is taken by Batu-Khan the “Mongolian”!

Our explanation is as follows. A foreign invasion is nothing but a fantasy. What we see is the Russian military government (a.k.a. “The Horde”) taking care of typical domestic affairs, such as the construction of imperial institutions. All of these events are perfectly typical for a developing state.

To quote from L. N. Gumilev:

“Let us take the veil of confusion away from our eyes and consider the situation in Russia during the epoch of the yoke. Firstly, every principality retained its boundaries and territorial integrity. Secondly, all institutes of administrative government consisted of Russians throughout the entire territory of the empire. Thirdly, every principality had an army of its own. Finally – and this may be the most important fact, the Horde destroyed no churches and demonstrated great religious tolerance, which is characteristic for such states. It is a fact that the Orthodox religion was supported in every which way. The church and the clergy were completely freed from all taxes and contributions. Apart from that, one of the Khan’s decrees declared that whoever dared to slander the Orthodox faith was to be executed with no right of appeal” ([214], pages 265-266).

We also learn that the Russian system of communication that had existed until the end of the XIX century – the coachmen service, was created by the Mongols. Coachmen were known as yamshchiki, and the very word is of a Mongolian origin: “there were stables with up to 400 horses along all the lines separated by 25-verst intervals [1 verst = 3.500 feet or 1.06 km] … there were ferries and boats on every river; these were also run by the Russians… Russian chroniclers stopped keeping chronicles when the Mongols had come, which is why all information concerning the internal structure of the Golden Horde comes from foreigners travelling through its lands” ([183], Volume 1, page 42).

In fig 0.3 we see a paize, or a token used by the representatives of the Horde’s governing structures in Russia. The word is apparently related to the Slavic poyti (“to go”), and possibly a precursor of the Russian word pogon (meaning “shoulder-strap”, among other things.) Even in Romanovian Russia, one needed a document called “pogonnaya gramota” in order to travel along the state-owned communication lines on state-owned horses”. In figs 0.4 and 0.5 we see two other “Mongolian” paize found in Siberia and the Dnepr region.

Fig. 0.3. Païza, a token of the Horde’s power in Russia. In its top part we see an octagonal star, which is a Christian symbol. It is likely that the modern military shoulder straps with stars upon them are related to the “Mongolian” païza. Taken from [331], Volume 1, page 78.

Fig. 0.4. A “Mongolian” païza discovered in Siberia. Taken from [1078], Volume 1, inset between pages 352-353.

Fig. 0.5. A “Mongolian” païza discovered in the vicinity of the Dnepr in 1845. Taken from [1078], Volume 1, inset between pages 352-353.

We see that foreigners describe the Golden Horde as a Russian state. Russians don’t describe it at all, for some reason, relating the most mundane things instead – built churches, weddings etc, as if they were “completely unaware” of their country being conquered and their lands made part of a gigantic foreign empire, with new and exotic systems of communications, ferries etc introduced all over the country. It is presumed that foreigners didn’t mention Russia during the time of the “Mongolian” conquest, since the country “had changed its name to Tartaro-Mongolia” ([183], Volume 1, page 35).

We are of the following opinion: “Tartaro-Mongolia” is a foreign term that was in use before the XVI century. From the XVI-XVII century and on, foreigners started to call Russia “Moscovia”, having simultaneously stopped making references to “Mongolia”. However, the territory of the Russian empire and even a somewhat larger area had remained known as “the Great Tartaria (Grande Tartarie)” among the Western cartographers up until the XVIII century. There are a great many such maps in existence. One of them, which we find very representative, can be seen in fig. 0.6. It is a French map from the Atlas of the Prince of Orange, dated to the XVIII century ([1018]).

Fig. 0.6. A map of Asia dating from the XVIII century. We see the Asian part of Russia referred to as “The Great Tartary” on this map; the country comprises Korea as well as parts of China, Pakistan and India. The name “Russian Empire” is altogether missing. According to our reconstruction, the name Great Tartary had once been used by foreigners for referring to the Great Russia. As we can see, the cartographers from the Western Europe had remembered this fact up until the XVIII century. Taken from a French atlas ([1018]).

We may encounter references to the invasion of the Tartars and the Mongols being reflected in Russian chronicles as counter-argumentation. The actual age of those chronicles shall be discussed below; the analysis of the latter demonstrates that the surviving chronicles were written or edited in the Romanovian epoch. Actually, historians have still got enough problems with chronicles as they are. For instance, G. M. Prokhorov, the famous researcher, writes the following: “the analysis of the Lavrentyevskaya chronicle (dating from 1337) demonstrated that the authors of the chronicle replaced pages 153-164 with new pages, some of them repeatedly. This interval includes all the data concerning the conquest of Russia by the Tartars and the Mongols” ([699], page 77).

According to what A. A. Gordeyev tells us, “historians remain silent about the historical evidence of the Cossacks amongst the ranks of the Golden Horde’s army, as well as the Muscovite armies of the princely predecessors of Ivan the Terrible” ([183], Volume 1, page 8).

Further also: “the very name ‘Cossacks’ referred to the light cavalry that comprised a part of the Golden Horde’s army” ([183], Volume 1, page 16.

The Russian word for Cossack (kazak) may be derived from the words “skok” and “skakat” used for referring to horseback-riding.

Let us now consider the figure of the famous Batu-Khan. After the “conquest” of Russia by Batu-Khan, “the clergy was exempted from paying taxes; this also covered ecclesiastical possessions and the populace in the church’s charge. Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, Prince of Suzdal, was made First Prince of the Russian Principalities by the Mongols” ([183], Volume 1, page 33).

Shortly afterwards, “prince Yaroslav had been summoned to Batu-Khan’s headquarters and sent to Karakorum in Mongolia, where the Great Khan was to be elected… Batu-Khan didn’t go to Mongolia himself, sending Prince Yaroslav as his representative [in other words, Batu-Khan didn’t care enough about the elections of the Great Khan to attend them personally – Auth.]. The sojourn of the Russian prince in Mongolia was described by Plano Carpini” ([183], Volume 1, page 33).

Thus, Plano Carpini is telling us that the Russian Prince Yaroslav went to represent Batu-Khan at the Great Khan’s elections for some bizarre reason. Could it be that the hypothesis about Batu-Khan sending Yaroslav in his stead was invented by modern historians with the sole purpose of making Carpini’s evidence concur with the obvious necessity of Batu-Khan’s presence at the elections of the Great Khan?

What we see here is merely documental evidence testifying to the fact that Batu-Khan is none other than the Russian prince Yaroslav. This is also confirmed by the fact that Alexander Nevsky, the son of Yaroslav, had also been the “adopted” son of Batu-Khan, according to historians! Once again we witness the two figures to be identical (Yaroslav = Batu-Khan). In general, it has to be said that “Batu” (“Batyi” in Russian) may be a form of the word “batya”, or “father”. A Cossack military commander is still called a “batka” (“father”, “dad” etc). Thus, Batu-Khan = the Cossack batka = Russian prince. Similar names are found in the bylini, or the Russian heroic epos – two of them are called “Vassily Kazimirovich Takes the Tribute Money to Batey Bateyevich” and “Vassily Ignatievich and Batyga” ([112]).

We are also told that “having conquered the northern Russian principalities, Batu-Khan placed his troops everywhere, together with his representatives (called the baskaks) whose function was to bring 1/10 part of property and the populace to the Khan” ([183], Volume 1, page 29). Our commentary is as follows.

It is a known fact that “the Tartar tribute is a tenth of the whole”. However, foreign invasion has got nothing to do with this. The Orthodox Church had always claimed the tribute called desyatina – literally, “tenth part”. As we have seen, a tenth part of Russian population was drafted in order to maintain the ranks of the Russian army, or the Horde. This is perfectly natural, given that the Horde was the name of the regular Russian army that never got disbanded and took care of border patrol, warfare etc; they would obviously have neither time nor opportunity for planting and harvesting crops, or indeed supporting themselves independently in general. Furthermore, agriculture had remained strictly forbidden for the Cossacks up until the XVII century. This is a well-known fact, and also a very natural one for a regular army. This is mentioned by Pougachyov in his Notes on Russian History and Gordeyev in [183], Volume 1, page 36. Therefore, the Horde had to draft every tenth member of the population as regular Russian army, and demand the ten per cent contribution in supplies and provision.

Furthermore, a regular army is constantly on the move, and requires depots for the storage of provision, weapons and ammunition. Therefore, a system of depots must have existed on the territory of Russia. One of the most commonly-used Russian words for “depot” (or “storage facility”) is saray. Military leaders, or khans, needed headquarters, which would normally be located right next to these depots. What do we see? The word “saray” surfaces very frequently in history of the “Golden Horde of the Tartars and the Mongols” – the word is often encountered in Russian toponymy. Many towns and cities have the root SAR as part of their name, especially in the Volga region. Indeed, we see Saratov, Saransk, Cheboksary, Tsaritsyn (Sar + Tsyn) here, as well as the episcopal town of Zaraisk in the Ryazan region of Russia and Zaransk in the West of Russia. All of them are large towns and cities, some of them also capitals of autonomous regions.

One may also recollect Sarayevo, the famous Balkan city. We often encounter the word Saray in old Russian and mediaeval Turkish toponymy.

We proceed to find out that “Sultan Selim wrote the following to the Khan of the Crimea [presumably in the early XVI century – Auth.]: ‘I heard about your intentions to wage war against the land of the Muscovites – beware; do not dare to attack the Muscovites, since they are great allies of ours … if you do, we shall raid your lands’. Sultan Seliman who ascended to the Turkish throne in 1521 confirmed these intentions and forbade campaigns against the Muscovites… Russia and Turkey exchanged embassies and ambassadors [in the XVI century – Auth.]” ([183], Volume 1, pages 161-163).

The relations between Russia and Turkey were severed already in the XVIII century.

One might wonder about the dislocation of the Russian troops when they fought the Tartars and the Mongols who had “raided Russia”? Right where the Russian “army of resistance” would congregate, as it turns out – for instance, in 1252 Andrei, Prince of Vladimir and Suzdal set forth from Vladimir to fight the Tartars and met them at river Klyazma, right outside the city gates of Vladimir! All the battles against the Tartars that were fought in the XVI century took place near Moscow, or near river Oka the furthest. One might find it odd that Russian troops always have a mile or two to go, whilst the Tartars have to cover hundreds of miles. However, our reconstruction explains all of the above – as the regular Russian army, the Horde was used for punitive expeditions against disobedient subject. It would naturally approach the rebellious town that tried to oppose the military government.

4. Batu-Khan was known as the Great Prince

We are accustomed to believe that the Tartar governors used to call themselves Khans, whereas the Russians were Great Princes. This stereotype is a very common one. However, we must quote rather noteworthy evidence from the part of Tatishchev, who tells us that the Tartar ambassadors called their ruler Batu-Khan Great Prince: “We were sent by the Great Prince Batu” ([832], Part 2, page 231). Tatishchev is rather embarrassed by the above, and tries to explain this title by telling us that Batu-Khan had not yet been a Khan back in those days. However, this is of minor importance to us. The thing that does matter is the fact that a Tartar governor was called Great Prince.

5. The Romanovs, the Zakharyins and the Yuryins. Their role in Russian chronography

Let us conclude the present introduction with an important question which needs to be answered before one can understand why the Russian history that we got used to from our schooldays had “suddenly” turned out incorrect. Who would distort the true history of Russia, and when did this happen?

In 1605, the Great Turmoil began in Russia. 1613 marks a watershed in Russian history – the throne was taken by the pro-Western dynasty of the Romanovs, the Zakharyins and the Yuryins. They are responsible for the “draft version” of the contemporary Russian history; this happened under Czar Mikhail and Patriarch Philaret, possibly later. We shall present our reconstruction of the Great Turmoil in the chapters to follow.

The Cossack Horde was banished from Moscovia under the Romanovs, the Zakharyins and the Yuryins. Its banishment symbolizes the end of the old Russian dynasty. The remnants of the old Empire’s resisting army, or the Horde, were chased away from the centre of the Muscovite kingdom. As a result, nowadays we see Cossack regions at the periphery of Russia and not the centre. All these regions are legacy of the Russian “Mongolian” Horde. Kazakhstan, for instance, can be interpreted as Kazak-Stan, which translates as “Cossack Camp” or “Cossack Region”; alternatively, the name may have derived from Kazak s Tana or Cossacks from the Don.

One may well wonder how the professional regular army of the Horde could have lost the civil war. This issue is indeed of great importance. One may theorize at length about this; we hope that the present book will help the future researchers of the Russian history to find the answer.

The defeat of Razin and later Pugachyov is the final defeat of the Horde. After this military success, the Romanovs edited official documents and declared the Horde “foreign”, “evil” and “an invader on the Russian land”. In the minds of their descendants the Horde was transformed into a hostile foreign invasion force and moved to the far and mysterious Orient to boot; this is how Mongolia (Megalion, or The Great, or the Russian Empire) transformed into an Eastern country. A propos, something similar happened to Siberia, which had moved there from the banks of Volga.

When the Romanovs came to power, they tried to erase as much of the old Russian history as they could. The historians of the Romanovian epoch received explicit or implicit orders to refrain from digging too deep. This was a mortal danger – they must have remembered the fate of Viskovatiy, q.v. below.

Our own impression of the works published by the XVIII-XIX century historians confirms this idea. They circumnavigate all rough corners and instinctively shun the very obvious parallels, questions and oddities. This point of view makes the books of Solovyov, Kluchevskiy and other historians of this epoch seem to be the most evasive of all – for instance, their laborious attempts to read the name “Kulichkovo field” as “Kuchkovo field” followed by lengthy hypothesising about the existence of mythical boyars by the name of Kuchki that the field had allegedly got its name from ([284]; see also Chron4, Chapter 6).

It is a known fact that the genealogical chronicles were burnt in the reign of Fyodor Alekseyevich, the older brother of Peter the Great and his precursor – this happened in Moscow in 1682, q.v. in [193], page 26). Our point of view is as follows: the Romanovs were destroying the real ancient genealogy in order to make place for their new dynasty. The “ranks from Ryurik” that have survived until the present and cited in M. V. Lomonosov’s Complete Works must have appeared later than that.

Let us point out a curious fact. During their entire history the Romanovs took brides from the same geographical region – Holstein-Gottorp near the city of Lübeck. It is known that the inhabitants of this part of Northern Germany are of Russian descent, q.v. in Herberstein’s book ([161], page 60).

It is obvious that the ascension of the Romanovs must have been declared to serve the country’s greater good during their reign. Although the duchy of Holstein had once been populated by Russians, they had lost a great part of their Russian populace starting with the XVII century. In general, the Romanovian policy was purely Teutonic for the most part, and their governing methods pro-Western. For instance, the oprichnina period between 1563 and 1572, when the Zakharyins and the Romanovs became the de facto rulers, is the time that the first mentions of religious persecution date back to. The Muslims and the Judeans who refused to convert to Christianity were destroyed. We know of no such occurrences in any earlier epoch of Russian history. Russia had adhered to the old “Mongolian” and Turkish principle of religious tolerance.

The reign of the first Romanovs – Mikhail, Aleksei and Fyodor Alekseyevich is characterized by mass burnings of books, destruction of archives, ecclesiastical schism and campaigns against the Cossacks, or the Horde. More or less well-documented Russian history begins with the reign of Peter I Romanov. His epoch was preceded by a time of strife, turmoil and civil war, with the Cossacks (the Horde) being the main enemy; they had settled in the Don area by that time. This is also the epoch that the beginning of agricultural activity in the Cossack regions dates to; it had been forbidden for them before that. We must also point out that the Romanovs had made lots of efforts to prove to the Westerners that the point of view about Stepan Razin being of royal blood, rather popular in the West, was “perfectly untrue”. Western sources call him Rex, or King. However, it is known that a certain “prince Aleksei” was part of Razin’s entourage, q.v. in Chron4, Chapter 9:4. Apparently, the epoch of Razin, the entire XVII and even the XVIII century is the epoch when the Romanovs had fought against the old dynasty, which was backed by the Horde and its Cossacks.

After the fall of the Romanovs in 1917, the spell of taciturnity ended. Indeed, many excellent works on ancient Russian history began to appear, written by Russian emigrants, exposing numerous oddities, which had remained hidden for a long time. For instance, the book by A. A. Gordeyev that we occasionally quote had first been published in the West; its Russian publication took place fairly recently. Of course, nowadays it is considered mauvais ton to mention the Romanovs in a critical context. However, scientific research cannot be limited by political considerations. The plaster is coming off, revealing parts of the original ancient artwork.

Part One

Russian chronicles and the Millerian-Romanovian version of Russian history

1.

The first attempts to write down the history of the ancient Russia

A good overview of the attempts to put Russian history down in writing is given by V. O. Klyuchevskiy ([396], pages 187-196). The facts that he relates aren’t known to a very wide audience, yet they are very interesting indeed. We shall cite them here according to Klyuchevskiy’s account.

1.1. The XVI-XVII century and the edict of Aleksey Mikhailovich

It is known that the origins of Russian history date to the XVIII century, and that it was written by Tatishchev, Miller and Schlezer. What did people know about the Kiev Russia before them? Virtually nothing, as it turns out. Nevertheless, it is known that Russians were demonstrating an interest in their ancient history already in the XVI-XVII century.

According to V. O. Klyuchevskiy, “the initial idea of studying our history collectively predates Schlezer by a great many years … the XVI century is particularly prominent in this respect, since it was the chronographical heyday … a great many individual chronicles were compiled into extensive and comprehensive works with detailed tables of contents and genealogical tables of Russian and Lithuanian rulers… We are beginning to see signs of historical criticism in the chronographical narrative, there are attempts of making it correspond to a methodical plan and even of introducing certain well-known political ideas into it… A gigantic collection of chronicles is compiled, beginning with the legend of Vladimir Monomakh crowned as the Byzantine emperor” ([396], page 188).

Apparently, the version of Russian history that began with Vladimir Monomakh was created around this time. We shall consider the process of its creation in the chapters to follow; for the meantime, let us just note that the early Kiev Russia, or Russian history before Vladimir Monomakh, appears to have been excluded from this version.

This was followed by a spell of inactivity ending around the middle of the XVII century, when “on 3 November 1657 King Aleksey Mikhailovich gave orders to create a special bureau known as the Chronicle Office and appoint a clerk named Koudryavtsev to “write down the royal orders and ranks, starting with the Great King Fyodor Ivanovich” – in other words, the clerk was to continue the Book of Ranks (Stepennaya Kniga), which ended at the reign of Ivan the Terrible. The head of the new bureau was supposed to be assisted by two scriveners and six minor officials…

This “historiographical commission”, for want of a better word, had faced a great many problems with establishing itself; when it finally happened, the historiographers moved into a cramped and squalid wooden hut, which they had to share with convicts and their guards. One finds this to be at odds with the royal edict. There were no minor officials appointed at all; the Ambassadorial Bureau also firmly refused to provide the commission with any paper. The search for sources had been a truly arduous task … [Koudryavtsev] would address one bureau after another, always getting the answer that there were no books available except for the regular clerical documentation, despite the fact that some very useful documents and manuscripts were found there later on…

Around the end of 1658 the Czar himself had turned his historiographer’s attention to an important archive of historical documents – the Patriarchal Library. Koudryavtsev got hold of the library catalogue and pointed out the manuscripts that he needed. However … the royal order remained unfulfilled once again … the Patriarchal bureau responded that there were “no records available” with the information on the patriarchs, metropolitans and bishops from the reign of Fyodor Ivanovich and on. None of the other offices and bureaus bothered with giving Koudryavtsev any response at all, despite his numerous reports…

When Koudryavtsev was being relieved of his office in the beginning of 1659, there were no fruits of his historiographical labours of 16 months to be found anywhere. His successor marked that “the Chronicle bureau didn’t even begin to fulfil the royal order”. Even the old Book of Ranks, which the bureau had been supposed to continue, was missing, and none of the officials had any idea of how it ended or what could be written in the new chapters. However, the second clerk didn’t manage to get any work done, either” ([396], pages 189-190).

All of the above leads us to the following obvious conclusions:

1. The first records of royal orders to “begin the writing of historical chronicles” date to the middle of the XVII century – the reign of Aleksey Mikhailovich Romanov.

2. The persons responsible for the fulfilment of this order didn’t manage to find any records covering so much as the last century of Russian history.

3. The disappearance of the famous Book of Ranks is very odd indeed.

4. The working conditions created for this first historiographical commission mysteriously failed to correspond with the status of the latter. The royal edict was de facto sabotaged!

It appears that V. O. Klyuchevskiy was right in his observation that “neither the minds of the Muscovites, nor the documents they’d had at their disposal in that epoch … were ready for a task such as this one” ([396], pages 189-190).

Of course, Klyuchevskiy appears to refer to the sources dating to the late XVI – early XVII century exclusively, or the documents of the epoch that preceded the reign of Aleksey Mikhailovich immediately. The conclusion he makes is that these documents appeared already after Aleksey Mikhailovich. In this case, it makes sense to assume that if the commission failed to have found any documents of the XVI-XVII century, the situation with earlier epochs was even worse. One may well wonder about whether the “large compilation of chronicles” with renditions of historical events starting with the reign of Vladimir Monomakh had really existed in Koudryavtsev’s epoch, likewise the “Book of the Czars” describing the epoch of Ivan the Terrible. Could they have been written, or at least heavily edited, already after Koudryavtsev’s time?

Apparently, we are fortunate enough to have stumbled upon the very time when most “ancient” Russian chronicles were created. Even the famous Povest Vremennyh Let (“Chronicle of Years Passed”) is most likely to have been created a while later, q.v. below. Nowadays it is extremely difficult to say what real historical evidence all these “ancient” chronicles-to-be were based upon. Such evidence must have existed in the epoch we are concerned with presently, yet most of them must have perished before our day. Nowadays the only means of studying the pre-Romanovian history is the distorting prism of the chronicles that were written or edited already after the epoch of Koudryavtsev.

We must jump ahead and tell the reader that a number of ancient documents dating from the XV-XVI century have nevertheless reached our epoch – edicts, contracts, printed books, ecclesiastical sources etc. However, their detailed study reveals an altogether different picture of Russian history that the one taught in schools nowadays. The latter owes its existence to the edict of Aleksey Mikhailovich and the works of the XVIII century historians – Tatishchev, Bayer, Miller and Schlezer. We shall discuss this in more detail below.

1.2. The XVIII century: Miller

After telling us about the clerk Koudryavtsev, Klyuchevskiy skips Tatishchev and proceeds to tell us about Miller, whose historical research commenced in the epoch of Yelizaveta Petrovna. Let us enquire about the reason why Klyuchevskiy fails to mention Tatishchev. After all, the latter had lived in the epoch of Peter the Great – earlier than Yelizaveta Petrovna, that is. It is common knowledge that Tatishchev was the first Russian historian. Why would Klyuchevskiy decide to omit him? It appears that he was perfectly right in doing so.

The matter is that Tatishchev’s book entitled Russian History from the Earliest Days to Czar Mikhail was first published after the death of Tatishchev – by none other than Miller! Therefore, the first version of Russian history was made public by Miller, a German, q.v. below. Let us quote another passage from Klyuchevskiy:

“Let us travel to the epoch of Empress Yelizaveta and the first years of her reign. It was in those days that Gerhard Friedrich Miller, a foreign scientist, was involved in laborious research of Russian history, working at the Academy of Sciences. He spent almost ten years travelling all over Siberia and studying local archives. He had covered more than thirty thousand verst, and brought a tremendous bulk of copied documents to St. Petersburg in 1743” ([396], page 191). Miller is known as one of the founders of the Russian historical school, together with Bayer and Schlezer.

Let us sum up:

1. Miller was the first to have published the complete version of Russian history in the very form that is known to us today.

2. It is very odd that Miller should bring historical documents “from Siberia” – not even the documents themselves, but rather handwritten copies that he had made himself. Does that mean he could find no old chronicles anywhere in Moscow or St. Petersburg – or, indeed, central Russia in general. Isn’t this a replay of the scenario with the edict of Aleksey Mikhailovich, when his own clerk could find no historical sources anywhere in the capital?

3. Starting with Miller and onwards, the consensual version of Russian history has remained virtually immutable. Therefore, later renditions done by Karamzin, Solovyov, Klyuchevskiy and others are of little interest to us in this respect. In reality, they were all processing Miller’s materials.

1.3. Brief corollaries

The consensual version of ancient Russian history was created in the middle of the XVIII century and based on sources that were either written or edited in the late XVII – early XVIII century. Apparently, the time between the end of the XVII century and the middle of the XVIII is the very epoch when the modern version of Russian history was created. In other words, Russian history in its present form came to existence in the epoch of Peter the Great, Anna Ioannovna and Yelizaveta Petrovna. After the publication of Karamzin’s History, this version became widely known (only a select few had been familiar with it before). It eventually became introduced into the school course of history.

Our analysis demonstrates this version of Russian history to be erroneous. See more about this in the following chapters.

2.

Consensual version of Russian history and its genesis. The reasons why all the founders of the Russian historical school were foreign

Above we have followed Klyuchevskiy’s account of the first steps in the creation of Russian history. Let us remind the reader of the following facts:

1. The XVI century was the heyday of historiography. The chronicles of the epoch apparently began with the legend of Vladimir Monomakh being crowned as the Byzantine emperor.

2. Bear in mind that on 3 November 1657 Czar Aleksey Mikhailovich gave orders for clerk Koudryavtsev to continue the Book of Ranks, which ended abruptly at the reign of Ivan the Terrible. Koudryavtsev couldn’t fulfil the royal order, since he couldn’t find any suitable sources in either the royal or the Patriarchal library. He hadn’t even managed to find the very Book of Ranks that he was supposed to continue.

In this case, how can it be true that in 1672 “the Ambassadorial bureau had prepared the “Great Stately Book, or the Roots of the Russian Rulers” (also known as the Titular Book, q.v. in [473], page 8)? This book had contained portraits of Great Princes and Czars, starting with Ryurik and ending with Aleksey Mikhailovich, all placed in chronological sequence. Let us consider the above more attentively. No century-old documents could be found anywhere, yet the book contained a portrait of Ryurik, presumably 800 years old.

This is the same time when a great many private genealogical books were verified and processed ([473], page 8). They were compiled into a single official source – “The Royal Book of Genealogy”. The official Romanovian version of Russian history appears to have been created around the same time; it is for a good reason that its first printed version, the so-called “Synopsis”, came out in 1674.

Next came the publication of the “Velvet Book”, which contained the genealogical trees of the Russian boyars and aristocracy ([473], page 8). This coincides with the period when books were widely confiscated for “correction”, as a result of Patriarch Nikon’s reforms.

The confiscation of books continued under Peter the Great. One must pay attention to the following important fact: on 16 February 1722, “Peter the Great addressed all churches and monasteries with the following decree. They were to “send all chronicles and chronographical materials that had been in their possession to the Muscovite Sinod, on parchment and paper alike”; it was forbidden to keep anything back. It was also promised that said materials would be returned after copying. Simultaneously, the Sinod received orders to send representatives to all parts, who would study and collect these chronicles” ([979], page 58). This must have been another purge of Russian libraries undertaken by the Romanovs, its goal being the destruction of all Russian historical sources. One may well wonder whether Peter had really kept his promise to “return the handwritten originals” to faraway monasteries and contended himself with the copies? We find this to be most doubtful indeed.

It is common knowledge that the consensual “scientific” version of Russian history can be traced back to Tatishchev, Schlezer, Miller and Bayer, who had all lived in the second half of the XVIII century. We shall give a brief rendition of their biographies.

Tatishchev, Vassily Nikitich – 1686-1750, Russian historian and state official. In 1720-1722 and 1734-1737 he had managed the state-owned factories in the Ural region; this was followed by the period of his Astrakhan governorship, 1741-1745 ([797], page 1303). However, it turns out that the exact nature of his writings, or indeed the very fact of his authorship, are an issue of the utmost obscurity, q.v. below as well as in [832] and [979]. Tatishchev’s portrait can be seen in fig. 1.1.

Fig. 1.1. V. T. Tatishchev. Engraving by A. Osipov, the XVIII century. Taken from [331], Volume 1, page 359. See also page 64.

Bayer, Gottlieb Siegfried – 1694-1738, German historian and philologist, member of the St. Petersburg Academy in 1725-1738, the “author of the pseudo-scientific Norman theory” ([797], page 100). His 12-year sojourn in Russia notwithstanding, he had never learnt the Russian language ([979], page 4). V. O. Klyuchevskiy wrote the following about Bayer and Miller: “The learned foreign academicians were forced to tackle the [Varangian – Auth.] issue … their familiarity with the Russian language and … its historical sources had been poor or nonexistent… Bayer … was ignorant of the fact that … the Synopsis had never actually been a chronicle” ([396], page 120).

Let us explain that the Synopsis is the first published version of the Romanovian history of Russia. It has got nothing in common with a chronicle, and was compiled to serve as a textbook of Russian history. The fact that Bayer couldn’t tell it apart from a chronicle tells us volumes about his familiarity with Russian historical sources.

Miller, Gerhard Friedrich – 1705-1783. German historian. He came to Russia in 1725. Miller had “collected a great number of copied documents [one wonders about the fate of the originals – Auth.] on Russian history (the so-called Miller’s portfolios)” – see [797], page 803.

Schlezer, Augustus Ludwig – 1735-1800. German historian and philologist. Remained in Russian service between 1761 and 1767. He became a honorary foreign member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences in 1769, having returned to Germany in 1768 ([797], page 1511). He was the first researcher of the original of the oldest Russian chronicle – the Radzivilovskaya Letopis, or the famous Povest Vremennyh Let ([715], Volume 2, page 7; see below).

It has to be said that it makes sense to exclude Tatishchev from the list of the first Russian historians due to the fact that his History, presumably written before Miller, had vanished. Tatishchev’s Drafts published by Miller remain the only written materials under Tatishchev’s name that we have at our disposal. See below and in [832].

Despite all this, already in the XX century, after the revolution of 1917, historians had found a number of manuscripts in private archives, which they suggested to be versions of the “real” Tatishchev’s History. However, historians themselves concede that all these copies are done in different handwriting. Tatishchev is supposed to have “edited” them, and possibly written several minor passages ([832], Volume 1, pages 59-70).

The creation of Tatishchev’s History and the reasons why he failed to have published it are documented in Schlezer’s memoirs ([979]; see also [832]). We are informed of the following: “V. N. Tatishchev … had received a copy of Nestor from Peter’s own archive in 1719 [a copy of the Radzivilovskaya chronicle manufactured for Peter the Great in Königsberg – Auth.], which he immediately copied for himself … in 1720… Tatishchev was sent to Siberia … where he found an old copy of Nestor in the possession of some old-believer. He was completely flabbergasted by the discovery that this copy was drastically different from the previous one. Like yours truly, he was of the opinion that there had only been one Nestor and a single chronicle” ([979], pages 52-53).

This opinion eventually “manifested as truth”, since nowadays all we have in our possession is but a single text describing the history of the ancient Russia – the Povest Vremennyh Let. Other sources, including the old originals, were apparently destroyed or concealed.

Let us proceed with quoting:

“Tatishchev eventually managed to collect ten copies. He used them, as well as other versions he learnt of, to compile the eleventh … in 1739 he brought it from Astrakhan to St. Petersburg… He demonstrated the manuscript to a number of persons; however, instead of encouragement and support, he would encounter bizarre objections and receive advice to keep well away from this endeavour” ([979], pages 52-53).

Shortly after that, Tatishchev fell under suspicion of being a freethinker and a heretic. We are told that “he was careless enough to have voiced a number of daring considerations, which could lead to an even more dangerous suspicion of political heresy. This is doubtlessly the reason why the fruit of his two decades of labour wasn’t published in 1740” ([979], page 54). Tatishchev tried to get his work published in England afterwards, but to no avail ([979], page 54).

Thus, the work of Tatishchev was lost and subsequently published by Miller in accordance with unidentified manuscripts. It is presumed that Miller published this very lost oeuvre written by Tatishchev using the “drafts” of the latter ([832], Volume 1, page 54).

“Miller writes about … the ‘poor copy’ that was at his disposal … and pledges having been unable to correct the numerous ‘slips of the pen’ that the chronicle presumably contained… In his foreword to the first volume Miller also mentions his editorship of Tatishchev’s text… All the subsequent criticisms of Miller were nothing but reiterations of what he was saying in these forewords, since none his critics ever came across the manuscripts [Tatishchev’s] used by Miller, nor indeed any other manuscripts of Tatishchev’s History; even the first ones [allegedly used by Miller – Auth.] disappeared and remain undiscovered until this day” ([832], Volume 1, page 56).

Further in [832], Volume 1, page 56). In other words, Tatishchev’s comments to Miller’s publication contradict the text.

Moreover, Miller’s publication of Tatishchev’s work doesn’t contain the first part of his oeuvre for some reason, one that describes Russian history before Ryurik. “Tatishchev’s text of the first part of The Russian History was omitted from the manuscript dating to 1746, where it was replaced … by a brief account of this part’s contents” ([832], Volume 1, page 59).

One cannot help pointing out that Tatishchev found Povest Vremennyh Let to be anything but trustworthy – its first part, at the very least. The manuscripts ascribed to him (the ones found in the private archives in the XX century) tell us explicitly that “the monk Nestor didn’t know much of the old Russian Princes” ([832], Volume 1, page 108). The information he did find reliable came from the manuscripts and folk tales declared preposterous by modern historians. Apparently, Tatishchev managed to understand a great deal more of Russian history than he was “supposed to”. His book was apparently destroyed, and the author declared a heretic; nevertheless, his name was cynically used post mortem.

The modern commentator writes the following in his attempt to find an “excuse” for Tatishchev:

“Can we really blame a historian who lived in the first part of the XVIII century for having believed the Ioakimovskaya Chronicle, when even in our days there are authors who rake through the fable-like tales of Artynov from Rostov searching for reflections of real events dating almost from the times of Kiev Russia?” ([832], Volume 1, page 51).

Finally, let us point out a vivid detail that makes our suspicions even more valid and demonstrates just how quickly the situation with Russian historical materials could change in the XVIII century. It turns out that “Tatishchev had used the very materials that didn’t survive until our day” ([832], Volume 1, page 53).

How did Tatishchev manage to choose the very sources for his work that would “mysteriously” perish shortly afterwards?

Here is a possible explanation. Apparently, Tatishchev had used the sources of the XIV-XVI century, which pertained to the history of Siberia and the Volga region, as well as “the archives from Kazan and Astrakhan which haven’t reached our time” ([832], Volume 1, page 53).

We are of the opinion that these archives were simply destroyed in the XVIII century, already after Tatishchev. As we understand today, the XIV-XVI century sources from the Volga region and Siberia must have related the true history of Russia-Horde. Even after the first purges of the archives by the Romanovs, some information must have remained there.

The archives contradicted Scaligerian and Romanovian history, and were therefore eradicated completely.

Let us now turn to the figure of the Professor of History and the official historiographer of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences – G. F. Miller, who had received an order to write the history of Russia. He also didn’t manage to find any historical sources in the capitals and thus had to undertake a journey through provincial Russia in 1733-1743. His itinerary lay through Siberia, which means that the chronicles that Russian history is based on nowadays were presumably “brought” from those parts. Nevertheless, it is commonly known that they possess distinctive stylistic characteristics of the Russian South-West.

After his return from Siberia, Miller was given the position of a historiographer. However, when he entered the service, he had to swear non-disclosure of what we would call classified information nowadays. This is what Schlezer tells us: “Miller was talking about secrets of the State, ones that must be made known to someone involved in the creation of Russian historiography; however, such a person would have to enter State service for life… Back then I wasn’t aware of the fact that Miller made this mistake himself … denying himself … the opportunity of a discharge” ([979], page 76).

A. L. Schlezer was hired by Miller as a private tutor for his children and also invited to take part in Miller’s historical and geographical research. This is what Schlezer writes about the archive of Russian chronicles that was at Miller’s disposal in his memoirs:

“The Kiev chronicle of Father Feodosiy and the anonymous chronicle of the XIII century … would be of the greatest utility if they were published … since … [they] describe the history of the most important rulers and princes, and also inform us of great land acquisitions from the ancient times” ([979], page 46).

Schlezer refused to give the oath of non-disclosure, and therefore didn’t receive access to Miller’s archives. The chronicles edited by Schlezer were found by the latter in the archives of the Academy of Sciences.

All of this means that the conception of Russian history that we’re accustomed to nowadays is of a very late origin. Apart from that, it turns out that the modern version of Russian history was created by foreigners exclusively. Modern historians demagogically use the name of Tatishchev, the first Russian historian, to “defend themselves”, as it were – after all, the first one was Russian, wasn’t he? The fact that Tatishchev’s work was in fact lost and then reconstructed by Miller from unidentified manuscripts is mentioned very seldom.

The atmosphere of the Romanovian-Millerian school of history was captured well by S. M. Stroyev, who wrote:

“These volumes betray signs of numerous efforts, all of them pursuing the same goal: to prove, validate, confirm and propagate the same postulations and the same hypotheses – only collective and prolonged works of all the scientists that worked in this field could make those hypotheses look like the kind of truth that would cater to the ambitions of researchers and readers alike … one’s objections aren’t met by counter-argumentation, but rather get buried under a pile of names under the assumption that they will secure taciturnity out of respect for the authority of said names” ([774], page 3-4).

Our analysis of Russian history, which discovered the gravest errors in the version of Bayer/ Miller/ Schlezer, leads us to an altogether different opinion of their entire “scientific work”. The latter may be partially explained by the fact that Russia had been under a dominant foreign influence in that epoch, which was instigated by the Romanovs, which means that the distortion of the true Russian history in the version of Schlezer/ Miller/ Bayer can be easily explained as one of the most important ideological objectives of the Romanovs themselves as a dynasty. The German professors simply carried out the order, and quite conscientiously at that. Had the orders been different, they would have written something else.

One is perfectly right to enquire about Russian historians and there whereabouts in that epoch. Why was the Russian history written by foreigners? Are there any other European countries where the history of the State would be written by foreigners exclusively?

The most commonly suggested answer is known quite well – Russian science is presumed to have been in a rudimentary state back in that epoch, therefore one had to rely on the enlightened Germans. We are of a different opinion. It is most likely that after the Tatishchev debacle, the Romanovs decided that foreigners would handle secrets of the State that concerned Russian history better, being more obedient, unfamiliar with the language and unattached to Russian history emotionally.

M. V. Lomonosov was one of Miller’s principal opponents. He had claimed that the Slavs had a history, which was just as long as that of any other nation, and backed his claim with a number of sources. He wrote the following in his Brief Chronicle, basing it on the works of the “ancient” authors:

“In the beginning of the sixth century from Christ the name of the Slavs had spread far and wide; not only did Thracia, Macedonia, Istria and Dalmatia fear the might of their nation – they had played an important part in the very decline of the Roman Empire” ([493], page 53).

In the early XIX century, a new “sceptical” school of Russian historians emerged. It was led by Professor M. T. Kachenovskiy. The essence of the contentious issues was encapsulated well in the preface to P. Boutkov’s book that was eloquently enough entitled The Defence of Nestor’s Chronicle from the Slander of the Sceptics ([109]).

According to the sceptics, the ancient Russian chronicles were “an eclectic mixture of real facts and myths based on distant repercussions of historical events found in folk tales, as well as forgery, unauthorised apocrypha, and the application of foreign events to Russia. In other words, the sceptics want us to think of Ryurik, Askold, Dir and Oleg as of myths, and also to limit what we know of Igor, Olga, Svyatoslav, Vladimir and Yaroslav to what foreigners tell us of these rulers, simultaneously refusing to date the epoch of our Northern Slavic migration and the foundation of Novgorod to an earlier period than the first half of the XII century” ([109], pages ii-iii).

Jumping ahead, we may as well mention that the reconstruction of Russian history that we suggest provides a perfect explanation of the fact that the Russian sceptics who had criticized the Millerian-Romanovian version of history were insisting on the Slavs being an ancient nation, quoting “ancient” sources as proof, on the one hand, and vehemently resisted the arbitrary extra age ascribed to Russian history on the other. This contradiction stems from great chronological shifts inherent in the entire edifice of Scaligerian history; it disappears completely as soon as we move the “ancient” history into the Middle Ages, as per our reconstruction.

Let us conclude the present paragraph with another quotation, which demonstrates that the deliberate destruction of the Old Russian sources continued well into the XVIII and even the XIX century. It refers to the manuscript archive of the Spaso-Yaroslavskiy Monastery:

“Among the manuscripts that were kept in the library of the monastery there were … three chronicles of a secular nature – namely, historical works: two Paleias and the famous Spaso-Yaroslavskiy Khronograph. All of them … disappeared from the Spasskaya Library around the middle of the XVIII and in the XIX century” ([400], page 76).

3.

The Radzivilovskaya chronicle from Königsberg as the primary source of the Povest Vremennyh Let

3.1. The origins of the chronicle’s most important copies

The modern version of the ancient Russian history was initially based on a single chronicle – the Radzivilovskaya Letopis. This is what historians themselves are telling us in a very straightforward manner, calling this copy the oldest Russian chronicle ([716], page 3).

Let us turn to the fundamental multi-volume edition entitled The Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles published by the USSR Academy of Sciences. In the foreword to its 38th volume the historian Y. S. Lourie informs us of the fact that “the Radzivilovskaya Letopis is the oldest chronicle to have reached our time” ([716], page 3).

We must instantly note that this chronicle looks like a standard handwritten book, with pages made of paper and a XVIII century binding, q.v. in [715], as well as fig. 1.2. This isn’t an archaic scroll of parchment like the ones that artists frequently portray the Russian chroniclers with.

Fig. 1.2. The Radzivilovskaya Chronicle: a general view. We see a typical book of the XVII – early XVIII century. Taken from [715].

We know the following about the Radzivilovskaya chronicle (according to [716], pages 3-4):

1. The copy of the chronicle that we have at our disposal nowadays is presumed the oldest to have reached our age, q.v. in [716], page 3. It dates from the alleged XV century. It is presumed that the chronicle describes historical events that took place in Russia from the earliest days and up until the alleged year 1206, which is where it ends abruptly.

2. It is the very Radzivilovskaya chronicle that the entire modern concept of the history of Kiev Russia is based upon. This concept was born in the XVIII century.

3. The Radzivilovskaya chronicle becomes known and introduced into scientific circulation in the early XVIII century. We find the following passage in [716], page 4).

4. Just one of the chronicle’s copies is dated to the XV century – this is the actual Radzivilovskaya Letopis as it is known to us today.

5. There are other copies of the same chronicle in existence – however, they all date from the XVIII century, thus being substantially more recent in their origins. Historians presume them to be copies of the XV-century Radzivilovskaya Letopis.

We must note right away that the intermediate copies of the Radzivilovskaya chronicle didn’t reach us for some reason – where are the copies made in the XVI-XVII century?

3.2. The numeration of the chronicle’s pages and the “bull’s head” watermark

Let us study the copy of the Radzivilovskaya chronicle that dates from the alleged XV century. For this purpose we shall turn to the description of the manuscript that is given in the Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles ([716]). It turns out that this copy has distinctive marks that betray a more recent origin – namely, the XVIII century. Therefore, the “oldest copy” of the Povest Vremennyh Let that we have at our disposal was made around the same time as its so-called “copies” – or, in other words, the copies that were made around the same epoch, the XVIII century.

Take a close look at how the pages of the chronicle are numbered. We see two kinds of numeration at once – Arabic and Church Slavonic. The latter is presumed to have been the original predating the Arabic numeration by a long period of time. It is written that “one finds the old Cyrillic numeration in the bottom right corner of every page” ([716], page 3).

Furthermore, it is presumed that the Church Slavonic numeration was present in the chronicle from the very manufacture – nothing extraordinary about it, since a published chronicle should contain page numeration.

However, we immediately encounter the following amazing comment of the modern commentator: “The Church Slavonic numeration was made after the loss of two pages from the chronicle… Furthermore, some of the pages at the end of the book were put in the wrong order before the numeration ([715]). Therefore, both numerations were introduced after the book had already been bound – otherwise the misplaced pages would be restored to their correct places before the binding. Seeing as how the chronicle still exists in this form, it must have only been bound once – when it was created.

Furthermore, we learn that “the three first pages of the chronicle are marked with the Roman letters a, b and c” ([716], page 3), and also that these pages are dated to the XVIII century by the watermarks that they contain (ibid). Could this mean that the entire manuscript was written and bound in the XVIII century? It is possible that the manuscript was created just before it was shown to Peter, and specifically for this purpose – see more on this below. In fig. 1.3 one can see page a. It is the first page in the chronicle. By the way, it begins from a foreword in German.

Fig. 1.3. The first page of the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle – allegedly the “oldest chronicle in Russia”. It is most likely to have been written in Königsberg around the XVII-XVIII century. In the first pages of the chronicle we see a foreword, which is in German, surprisingly enough. Taken from [715].

Other pages of the chronicle are dated to the XV century by watermarks; historians justify this with the hypothesis that the “bull’s head” watermark dates from the XV century. However, the “watermark dating”, much like the palaeographical dating, quite obviously cannot be considered an independent dating method, since it is completely dependent on the chronology of the sources used for reference and identification of old handwriting styles and watermarks. Any change in the source chronology will immediately affect the entire system of palaeographical and watermark-based dating.

In other words, in order to date written sources by handwriting style and/or watermarks, one needs reference materials, which are presumed to contain the correct datings. Newly found texts are dated by the watermarks they contain, which ties them to the reference materials used for past datings. If these prove incorrect, other datings are also likely to be erroneous.

Moreover, it is possible that stocks of XVI-XVII century paper were used in the XVIII century in order to create manuscripts that would “look old”. Also, the “bull’s head” watermark found on the sheets of the chronicle and the variations thereof could be used by the factory that made paper in the XVI, the XVII and the XVIII century – especially seeing how historians themselves date the first three pages to the XVIII century using the same general principle – the watermark method.

N. A. Morozov had apparently been correct in his opinion that the copy of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis brought by Peter the Great served as the base for all the other copies of the Povest Vremennyh Let. He wrote that “after the seven-year war had broken out, our Academy of Sciences purchased the Königsberg original in 1760 and published it six years later in St. Petersburg – in 1767 … this is the true origin of the Russian chronicles, and should someone care to tell me that Nikon’s manuscript had existed before Peter, I shall require proof of this declaration” ([547]).

4.

Forged fragments of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis – the copy that served as basis for the Povest Vremennyh Let

4.1. Publications of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis

Historians write that “The Radzivilovskaya Letopis is one of the most important chronographical sources of the pre-Mongolian epoch … this chronicle is the oldest to have survived until our day; its text ends with the beginning of the XIII century” ([716], page 3).

We proceed to learn of the following important circumstance: “The Radzivilovskaya Letopis hadn’t come out as an academic publication” until 1989 ([716], page 3).

It was as late as 1989 that the 38th Volume of the Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles was published, which contained the Radzivilovskaya Letopis.

4.2. History of the copy known as the Radzivilovskaya Letopis

According to the historical overview of the information we have about the copy known as the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle that one can find published in [715], Volume 2, page 6).

However, historians tell us that the origins of the copy can presumably be traced to the mid-XVII century; however, every mention of the chronicle that predates the alleged year 1711 is based on considerations of an indirect nature, which is made obvious by the description given in [715], Volume 2, page 5).

After that, in 1758, during the Seven-Year War with Prussia (1756-1763), Königsberg was taken by the Russians once again. The Radzivilovskaya Letopis was brought to Russia and given to the library of the Academy of Sciences, where it remains until the present day ([715], Volume 2, page 3).

“When the original became property of the Academy’s library in 1761 … its study was conducted by A. L. Schlezer, Professor of History who had just arrived from Germany” ([715], Volume 2, page 7).

The Russian edition was presumably in preparation, but never got published. It had “remained unfinished and was destroyed in the fire of 1812” ([715], Volume 2, page 7). This seems rather odd – the destruction is most likely to have simply been ascribed to “the evil French invaders”.

Next we learn that, for some bizarre reason, “the original of the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle came into the private possession of N. M. Mouravyov, the Secret Counsellor … in 1814, after the death of Mouravyov, the chronicle was taken by A. N. Olenin, the famous archaeographer and the director of the Imperial Public Library, who would refuse to return it to the Academy of Sciences despite the demands of the latter” ([715], Volume 2, page 7).

It would be interesting to know just why Olenin refused to return the manuscript. This story is rather abstruse; the manuscript had already been prepared for publication “owing to the labours of A. I. Yermolayev, a keeper of the Public Library” ([715], Volume 2, page 7). Instead of publishing, Olenin asked the Academy of Sciences for three thousand roubles, presumably to make the edition a more expensive one. His request was complied with – he did receive the money. Nevertheless, he kept holding the manuscript back. This publication never took place.

We learn nothing of how the manuscript was returned to the library of the Academy of Sciences from [715]. Nevertheless, this is a very important moment – after all, the chronicle in question is the oldest known Russian chronicle, and one that never got published at that.

Apart from that, we are confronted with a very important issue – namely, the fate of the chronicle during the time when it was kept in private collections. We shall provide our hypothetical reconstruction thereof below.

4.3. A description of the chronicle

Let us now turn to the academic description of the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle. We learn the following: “The manuscript consists of 32 sections, 28 of which contain 8 pages, with two more 6-page section (pages 1-6 and 242-247), one 10-page section (pages 232-241) and one 4-page section (pages 248-251)” ([716], page 4).

This academic description of the chronicle makes the initial impression of being precise and is supposed to give us an idea of which sections constitute the manuscript. It should tell us about the pages that comprise a section, each one of them being a spread, or a single sheet of paper. Several such spreads form a section, and several sections add up to a book. As a rule, there are an equal number of sheets in every section – in the present case, the standard number is four spreads, or eight pages. Having studied the structure of the sections that the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle consists of, A. A. Shakhmatov tells us the following: “it is obvious that each section should contain eight pages” ([967], page 4).

However, as we have seen, due to an error in the binding of the chronicle, some of the pages ended up in different section; as a result, there are sections of 4, 6 and 10 pages at the end of the book.

The first section of the book stands alone; although it consists of a mere 6 pages rather than 8, or is undersized, we see no oversized sections anywhere near; it is followed by standard 8-page sections that constitute most of the book. Where are the missing two sheets from the first section?

4.4. Story of a forgery. The mysterious “extra” page in the Povest Vremennyh Let

Let us pay close attention to the following strange circumstance. According to the academic description, the manuscript consists of sections, each of which has an even number of pages 4, 6 or 10, q.v. above.

Therefore, the total number of the pages in the chronicle must be even. However, the first page is numbered 1, and the last one 251 – we are talking about Arabic numeration here, which contains no gaps or glitches. The book turns out to contain an odd number of pages; this becomes quite obvious from the photocopy of the chronicle ([715]).

The implication of the above is that one of the sections contains an odd “extra” page, which may have been put there later – or, alternatively, that one of the pages got lost, whereas the other part of the spread remained. In this case, we must find a gap in the narrative, which will definitely be manifest, unless the lost page was the first or the last one in the book – for instance, the foreword or the table of contents.

And so we see that the Radzivilovskaya Letopis contains omissions or insets. Why does the academic description tell us nothing about this fact? This description keeps strangely silent about the exact location of the odd page, as well as whether it is a single such page (strictly speaking, there may be an indefinite random odd amount of such pages which hasn’t been estimated).

Let us mark that this incompleteness of description renders the latter void of practical utility, since it is easy enough to understand that the location of the odd page will affect the distribution of other pages across the spreads, it becomes unclear which page numbers mark the end of one section and the beginning of another etc. If the description of a chronicle’s section cannot answer such questions, it becomes rather useless.

We shall try and find the location of the mysterious odd page, as well as the information written thereupon. The very fact that the academic description remains taciturn about it spurs our interest.

A simple calculation demonstrates that the odd sheet should be somewhere in the first or the second section. Indeed, the first section consists of 6 pages, followed by 28 8-page sections, the 30th section of 10 pages etc. We know that the number of the first page in the 10th section is 232. Therefore, the first 29 sections contain 231 pages. The number is an odd one, which means that the odd page should be somewhere in the first 29 sections.

However, there is nothing to arouse our suspicion in sections 3-28; each of them contains 8 full pages, and they’re in a good condition. According to photographs from [715], all the spreads are whole, and none of them fell apart.

This isn’t the case with the first two sections – almost every spread found there fell apart into two separate pages, which makes this part of the manuscript particularly suspicious.

Can we claim the odd page to be located here? Apparently, yes. Fortunately, the manuscript also contains remnants of the old section numeration in addition to the numerated sheets; this is common for old books – the first page of every section was numbered.

A. A. Shakhmatov writes that “the ancient count of sections remains; however, most of the Church Slavonic numeric markings made in the bottom margins were cut off when the book was bound. The first surviving marking is the figure of 5 [the Church Slavonic “e” – Auth.] is found on page 32 [33 in Church Slavonic numeration – Auth.], the second, number 9 [Church Slavonic “phita” – Auth.] – on the 64th [65th in Church Slavonic numeration – Auth.] etc. It is obvious that each section consisted of 8 pages” ([967], page 4).

Thus, the 33rd page in Church Slavonic numeration falls over the beginning of the 5th section. Page 65 in Church Slavonic numeration falls over the 1st page of the 9th section, and so on. The implication is that every section, including the first, had once contained eight pages, and the last page of every section had possessed a number divisible by eight in Church Slavonic numeration.

Let us turn to the actual chronicle. The page with the Church Slavonic number of 8 is simply absent from the chronicle. The page numbered 16 is present, but it is the fifteenth page of the manuscript de facto. At the same time, its number must make it the last page of the second section, or the sixteenth page of the manuscript. Consequently, a page is missing from one of the first two sections.

However, according to the academic description, the first section contains exactly 6 pages. It turns out that two pages are missing – yet we have seen that the first two sections combined lack a single page; could this mean that two pages were lost and one inserted? Maybe. At any rate, we have localized the part of the chronicle with obvious signs of alterations. It is the first two sections.

Let us take a look at the chronicle. In fig. 1.4 we see a diagram that refers to the condition of the Arabic and the Church Slavonic numeration in the first two sections of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis. The Arabic numeration is in the first line, and the Church Slavonic in the second. The third line refers to signs of wear affecting the Church Slavonic numeration, or traces of changes in the latter. If an Arabic or Church Slavonic number is missing from a page, it is indicated in the respective cell.

Fig. 1.4. A scheme of the alterations introduced in the numeration of the first and the second gathering of the Radzivilovskaya chronicle. The first row indicates the Arabic numeration, the second – its Church Slavonic equivalent, and the third refers to traces of alterations affecting the Church Slavonic numeration. Missing Arabic and Church Slavonic numerals are represented by the word “none”.

Once we studied the Church Slavonic numeration of the first two sections attentively, it turned out that the numbers of three pages (10, 11 and 12 in Church Slavonic numeration) must have been retouched by someone – namely, made greater by a factor of one. Their previous Church Slavonic numbers had been 9, 10 and 11, respectively, q.v. in the photocopy from [715].

In fig. 1.5 we demonstrate how this was done; this is most obvious from the page with the Church Slavonic number 12, q.v. in fig. 1.6. One needs to write “вi” in order to transcribe the number 12 in Church Slavonic; the chronicle page in question was numbered “ai”, or 11. Someone had drawn two lines on the Church Slavonic “a”, which made it resemble “в”. This retouching was done in a rather sloppy manner, and is therefore very difficult to overlook ([715]).

Fig. 1.5. Falsified page numbers in the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle.

Fig. 1.6. Slavonic number on the eleventh page of the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle. It stands for “twelve”. An obvious forgery. Taken from [715].

In figs. 1.7-1.10 one sees the Church Slavonic numbers on pages 7, 9, 10 (formerly 9) and 11 (formerly 10). It is perfectly obvious that something wasn’t quite right with the numbers of the pages. They must have been altered several time; one can clearly see traces of retouching.

Fig. 1.7. Slavonic number on the seventh page of the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle. Taken from [715].

Fig. 1.8. Slavonic number on the eighth page of the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle. It stands for “nine”. A forgery. Taken from [715].

Fig. 1.9. Slavonic number on the ninth page of the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle. It stands for “ten”. A forgery. Taken from [715].

Fig. 1.10. Slavonic number on the tenth page of the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle. It stands for “eleven”. A forgery. Taken from [715].

On the first page of the three the Church Slavonic figure of ten, or “i”, was obviously “manufactured” from the Church Slavonic figure of nine that used to be here before – the “phita”, which had simply lost its entire right side. However, one can clearly see the remains of its horizontal line, q.v. in fig. 1.8. Changing 10 for 11 in the second page of the three was hardly a problem – one would simply have to add the numeric letter “a”. This is why the Church Slavonic number on page 11 looks clean.

We see that the Church Slavonic numeration of three pages was shifted forward by a value of one, making place for the Church Slavonic figure of nine, which we shall consider below.

However, in case of such a numerical shift one would expect to see two pages with the Church Slavonic number of 12 – the original, and the one “converted” from 11, whereas in reality we only have the latter. Where did the other one go?

The “extra” page with the original Church Slavonic figure of twelve is most likely to have been removed; we see a gap in the narrative where it used to be. Indeed, the page with the Church Slavonic number of 12 begins with a miniated (red, done in cinnabar) letter of the new sentence. Yet the last sentence of the previous page (number 12 after the alterations were introduced, and originally 11) isn’t finished – it ends abruptly.

Of course, the person who had torn the page out tried to make the gap in the narrative as inconspicuous as possible; still, making it impossible to notice turned out impossible. This is why the modern commentators point out this strange place; they are forced to write that the letter was miniated by mistake: “The manuscript … contains a red led letter that was miniated by mistake” ([716], page 18, see the commentary to the beginning of the page with the Arabic number of 12, or page 13 in the Church Slavonic numeration.

Let us linger here for a while. First of all let us remind the readers who are compelled to study the photocopy from [715] themselves that the full stop mark in the chronicle plays the part of a modern comma. The modern full stop that marks the end of a sentence looks like three triangular points in most cases. Apart from that, the beginning of every new sentence is marked by a red (miniated) letter.

Let us take a look at page 11 in Arabic numeration, where someone had changed the Church Slavonic number for 12.

The text at the end of the page followed by the gap that we are referring two ends with the words “the reign of Leon, son of Vassily, who had also called himself Leo, and his brother Alexander, who had reigned…” ([715], the page with the Arabic number 11, reverse. Next we find a comma.

The next page after the gap (12 in Arabic numeration and 13 in Church Slavonic) begins with a list of dates: “In such-and-such year” etc.

Whoever was responsible for the forgery must have thought this place convenient for bridging the gap. His presumption had been that the words “had reigned” can be linked with the beginning of the Church Slavonic page 13, which would give us a more or less proper-sounding sentence as a result – “had reigned in the year” etc.

However, this would require declaring the first miniated letter to have been highlighted in red by mistake – and, possibly, altering some parts of the text, which is the only way in which a proper sentence could appear.

The gap was thus bridged, albeit poorly – however, whoever was responsible for the forgery didn’t care much about which page to remove; a minimal disturbance of the narrative was the only criterion, which is why this page had been chosen.

The main objective of the forgery was to make place for the page with the Church Slavonic number 9. The previous page 9 was transformed into page 10 to make space, q.v. below.

Thus, it appears as though we found the place in the chronicle where somebody had planted an extra page. It is the page with the Church Slavonic number 9 and the Arabic number 8.

It has to be noted that this page is immediately conspicuous, since its corners are the most ragged of all; it is quite obviously a separate page and not a part of a spread, q.v. in figs. 1.11 and 1.12.

Fig. 1.11. The eighth page of the Radzivilovskaya chronicle (an insert). Front side. Taken from [715], page 8.

Fig. 1.12. The eighth page of the Radzivilovskaya chronicle (an insert). Reverse. Taken from [715], page 8, reverse.

Moreover, we find a later note attached to one of its missing corners, which tells us that the page in question should be numbered 9 and not 8; this note is making a reference to a book that came out in 1764, which is therefore the earliest date that the note could be written (see fig. 1.13).

Fig. 1.13. The lettering glued to the missing upper corner of the eighth page of the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle. Taken from [715].

Let us proceed to read this eighth page. What shall we find here? Why would someone prepare a place for this page and insert it into the book? Was it necessary to discuss it at this great a length?

4.5. Who could have planted a page with the “Norman” theory into the Povest Vremennyh Let?

What we find in this page is the story about the Varangians summoned to govern Russia, no less – the basis of the famous Norman theory, in other words. Basically, the Slavophils and the Occidentalists had argued about this very page for the duration of the entire XIX century. If we are to remove this page from the chronicle, the Norman theory shall immediately vanish. Ryurik shall become the first Prince of Russia – and one who came from Rostov at that.

However, the planted page mentions the Ladoga lake, which rather conveniently indicates that the first capital of Ryurik was somewhere in the Pskov region, amidst the swamps.

If we are to remove this page, we shall see that the geographical roots of Ryurik and his brothers can be traced to the Volga region – namely, Beloozero, Rostov and Novgorod; no sign of the Pskov region. As we shall explain in the chapters to follow, the name Novgorod was used for referring to Yaroslavl on the Volga. The meaning of the above shall be made even clearer by the chapters to follow.

Corollary. By having planted the page with the Church Slavonic number 9 in the book (Arabic number 8), the falsifier had provided a base for two fundamental hoaxes at once:

- First hoax. The alleged summoning of the princes from the North-West, which was later transformed into modern Scandinavia. This was clearly done for the benefit of the Romanovs, since their dynasty came from the North-West – Pskov and Lithuania.

- Second hoax. Novgorod the Great was allegedly located in the Pskov region near Ladoga. This served as the a posteriori “validation” of what had already been a fait accompli as a political action – the false transfer of the Great Novgorod upon the Volga to the Pskov Region. This served as the “chronographical basis” for depriving Yaroslavl of its former name, that of the Great Novgorod.

It becomes clear why the academic description of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis ([715]) is strangely silent about the section with the odd page. This is most likely to be the section with the “Norman” page, or some odd page right next to it – and traces of forgery and mystification surrounding the page in question also make it fall under suspicion.

This criminal fact must have been made known to as few people as possible in the Romanovian epoch – just imagine the XIX century Slavophils learning of the fact that the notorious Norman theory in its Romanovian version, one that they had battled against with such vehemence, was based on a single suspicious page, and possibly a planted one at that. The scientific circles would have gone amok.

However, we have already seen that no “strangers” were allowed to access the original of the manuscript – only “trusted persons”, or those who were prepared to keep silent. It becomes clear why now.

It would make sense to remind the reader of the strange story with the dispute between the Academy of Sciences and A. N. Olenin, the archaeographer and the director of the Imperial Public Library who would obstinately refuse to return the manuscript to the Academy. He is supposed to have “intended to publish it”, and, according to A. A. Shakhmatov, “asked the Academy for three thousand roubles; the request was complied with. The outcome of Olenin’s endeavour remains unknown, as well as the reasons why the publication of the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle had stopped… In 1818, S. Ouvarov, the new president of the Conference, enquired about this … the conference replied that ‘it could not be held responsible for the delay in publication, which resulted from the fact that Mr. Olenin was greatly occupied and involved in numerous affairs’” ([967], pages 15-16).

So, Mr. Olenin was too busy and had no time for explanations – yet he did take the money, and a hefty sum at that - three thousand roubles. Why didn’t he publish anything? What was happening to the manuscript? As we realise now, it is most likely that the “incorrect” pages were being replaced by the “correct” ones.

4.6. How the “scientific” Norman theory got dethroned and declared antiscientific

As we already mentioned, the authorship of the “scientific Norman theory” belongs to Bayer ([797], page 100). Today we already understand that this “theory” was based on blatant misinterpretation aided by artful falsification of real historical facts. The real Russian Prince (or Khan) called Ryurik, also known as the Great Prince Georgiy Danilovich according to our reconstruction, whose another double is Genghis-Khan – the founder of the cyclopean Great = “Mongolian” Empire and the first one to unite the numerous Russian principalities, was declared foreign and a native of the modern Scandinavia. (We demonstrate it in “The Origins of Russia as the Horde” that the image of Ryurik incorporates data pertaining to the Trojan King Aeneas, who fled from the burning city of Troy (or Czar-grad) in the early XIII century and came to Russia.)

The Great Novgorod = Yaroslavl, which had once been the capital of Ryurik (or, rather, his brother and successor Ivan Kalita = Batu-Khan), was moved (on maps) into the swampy wilderness of the Pskov region, closer to Scandinavia – the alleged “homeland” of Ryurik.

The general plot of this “theory” must have been invented by the first Romanovs. However, a scientist was required for transforming this political theory into a “scientific” one – someone who would prove it with the aid of “old documents”.

Such a scientist was found. It might have been Bayer, which is what the Encyclopaedia is telling us ([797], page 100). Yet the creation of the “scientific basis” for this theory, or the insertion of the “Norman page”, must be credited to Schlezer, who had worked with the actual Radzivilovskaya Letopis, or one of his predecessors. The Romanovian academic science had been defending the Norman theory for many years to follow – Miller, Karamzin, Solovyov, Klyuchevskiy etc, Lomonosov’s attempt to refute the theory long forgotten ([493]). However, after the fall of the Romanovs, the necessity to keep the “theory” alive became obsolete, and it transformed from “scientific” into “antiscientific” without too much publicity. It appears as though the Russian historians took an unbiased look at the chronicle and discovered that the page with the “Norman theory” was in fact an inset.

In general, the whole section in question turns out to consist of overlapping fragments predominantly – Academician B. A. Rybakov is perfectly correct to note that “one cannot help noticing the lack of thematic and even grammatical correlation between certain fragments [the ones that Rybakov had divided the first section into – Auth.]… Each one of said fragments fails to demonstrate any kind of logical connexions with the preceding fragment, nor does any of the fragments constitute a finished whole by itself. The eclectic terminology also attracts one’s attention instantly” ([753], pages 129-130).

B. A. Rybakov found gaps, anachronisms and shifts in the very first section ([753], page 120). There was no opportunity of discussing any of them openly in the time of the Romanovs. However, the “work methods” used by the founders of the Russian historical science that were summoned by the Romanovs from Germany in the XVIII century (arbitrary insets and so on) are usually omitted from the texts of the modern commentators. It isn’t just a question of the “Norman theory” – the entire foundation of the Russian history was shaped in the pro-Romanovian way by these German “founding fathers”; their involvement in the numerous forgeries will inevitably cast a shadow of suspicion over their entire body of work, or the basics of the Russian history itself.

Nowadays we can easily understand the true reasons why the publication of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis had been delayed in this odd a manner and for so long; the first edition of 1767 wasn’t based on the original, but rather the copy made for Peter the Great in 1716 ([967], page 14). According to A. A. Shakhmatov, this edition even accounted for pencil markings in Peter’s copy; he claims that it wasn’t a scientific edition at all, since the latter had a priori allowed for numerous corrections, sizeable insertions etc. ([967], pages 13-14).

The next publication only took place in 1902! It was a photomechanical replica of the manuscript, already detailed enough for the discovery of the forgeries mentioned above. However, public interest in the “Norman theory” and Russian history in general had dwindled by that time, and no one would care to dig up old manuscripts in order to disprove Miller’s version, which had already become consensual and backed by the voluminous academic publication of Solovyov, Klyuchevskiy and other “specialists in the field of Russian history”.

Another 87 years passed by. The Radzivilovskaya Letopis finally became published in the Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles. This happened in 1989, when Russian history had already been long past the turmoil and the disputes with the Slavophils. The Norman theory was declared antiscientific – in Russia, at least. No more obstacles for publication.

The 1989 edition came out without stirring any controversy whatsoever, and an excellent colour photocopy of the chronicle was published in 1995 ([715]). This can truly be seen as an important event in academic life; nowadays everyone can witness the fact that the Radzivilovskaya Letopis contains phenomena even more fascinating that the inset with the “Norman page”. We shall be discussing them shortly.

4.7. Having planted a page into the chronicle, the hoaxer prepared space for another, soon to be “fortunately found.” The chronology page of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis

There is a peculiar note attached to one of the missing corners of the “Norman page” ([715]). According to several embarrassed comments, the handwriting it is written in dates to one of the three following epochs:

- the late XVIII century ([716], page 15, comment “x-x”),

- the XIX century ([715], Volume 2, page 22),

- the XX century ([715], Volume 2, page 22).

The note tells us the following: “this place is preceded by a missing page” ([716], page 3).

And so we have an anonymous commentator who is kind enough to tell us about a whole page that is missing from the book. Let us examine the text of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis ([715]) and see what we can find there. Oddly enough, there is no gap in the narrative; the preceding page ends with an explicit full stop, which is transcribed as three triangular dots in the chronicle. The last sentence in this page is complete.

As for the next page, it begins with a red miniated letter, which marks a new sentence. This sentence can be considered to continue the previous one – there is no gap of any kind in the narrative. See for yourselves – both the end of the page and the beginning of the next one are cited below.

“They have found the Khazars dwelling in these hills, and the Khazars said: ‘You must pay us tribute’. The Polyane pondered this, and each house gave a sword. Upon seeing this, the Bulgars realised they could provide no resistance, and implored to be baptised, conceding to surrender to the Greeks. The king had baptised their prince, and all their nobility, and made peace with the Bulgarians” ([715], Volume 2, pages 22-23).

Where is the gap in the narrative? One sees no missing pages anywhere – what we have in front of us is coherent text. Nevertheless, a certain complaisant hand writes that some page is presumably missing from this part of the book. This page was “finally found”, courtesy of Schlezer and his “scientific” school. Its contents have been included in all the editions of the Povest Vremennyh Let ever since, the photocopy ([716]). What do we see on this page?

We see nothing short of the entire chronology of the ancient Russian history and the way it relates to the global chronology, which is why we are calling this “subsequently discovered” page the “chronology page”.

The page informs us of the following, in particular: “In the year 6360 of the 8th indiction, the reign of Mikhail began, and the land became known as the Russian land. We possess knowledge of this fact, since the Russian army had come to Czar-Grad under this ruler, as [the name of the author one expects to find here is missing for some reason – Auth.] writes in his Greek chronicle; therefore, let us begin henceforth, and use the following numbers:

- 2242 years passed between Adam and the Deluge;

- 1082 years between the Deluge and Abraham;

- 430 years between Abraham and the Exodus of Moses;

- 601 years between Moses and David;

- 448 years between David, as well as the beginning of Solomon’s reign, and Jerusalem falling captive;

- 318 years between the captivity and Alexander;

- 333 years between Alexander and the Nativity of Christ;

- 318 years between the Nativity and Constantine;

- another 452 years stand between Constantine and this Mikhail,

- 29 years passed between the first year of this Mikhail’s reign and the first year of Oleg, the Russian prince;

- 31 years between the first year of Oleg, who reigned in Kiev, and the first year of Igor;

- 83 years between the first year of Igor and the first year of Svyatoslav;

- 28 years between the first year of Svyatoslav and the first year of Yaropolk;

- Yaropolk had reigned for 8 years;

- Vladimir had reigned for 27 years;

- Yaroslav had reigned for 40 years;

- thus, we have 85 years between the deaths of Svyatoslav and Yaroslav;

- a further 60 years passed between the deaths of Yaroslav and Svyatopolk” ([716], page 15).

What we see related here is the entire chronology of the Kiev Russia in relation to its chronology of Byzantium and Rome.

If we are to remove this page, the Russian chronology of the Povest Vremennyh Let becomes suspended in the thin air, losing its connexions with the global Scaligerian history. This leaves room for all kinds of interpretation – such as different versions of reading the dates found in the chronicle.

The hoaxers were perfectly aware of just how important this “missing” page would be for someone faced by the task of creating the chronology of the Russian history. It was therefore treated with a great deal more care and attention than the “Norman page”; the latter must have been planted in the book rather haphazardly, with the task of making heads or tails of Ryurik’s origin left to the Romanovs as the interested party.

As for chronology, the task proved to be a great deal more serious; this is becoming more and more obvious to us today. The issue at hand was that of falsifying global history, and not just that of Russia. Apparently, Schlezer and his XVIII century colleagues were well aware of this, remembering the labours it took to introduce the Scaligerian chronology and concept of history and knowing them to be an arbitrary version, propagated by force and still recent in that epoch.

Therefore, there had been no hurry with the “chronology page” – the hoaxers simply prepared space for it, making the sly margin announcement concerning the missing page. Could another chronicle (the so-called Moskovsko-Akademicheskaya Letopis, or the “Academic Moscow Chronicle”) have been manufactured with the whole purpose of justifying the “missing” page? It is contained therein – possibly to preclude anyone from declaring it apocryphal.

4.8. The “Academic Moscow Copy” of the Povest Vremennyh Let

The doubtless relation between the next copy of the Povest Vremennyh Let that was discovered (the so-called “Academic Moscow Copy”) with the one known as the Radzivilovskaya Letopis was mentioned by Academician A. A. Shakhmatov. He wrote that “the similarity between large and continuous parts of the two had led me to the initial hypothesis about the first part of the Moskovsko-Akademicheskaya Letopis being … but a copy of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis” ([967], page 44).

Shakhmatov was absolutely right. However, he must have subsequently become aware of the danger inherent in this postulation ([967], page 45). It would automatically mean that the Radzivilovskaya Letopis was the prototype of the Moskovsko-Akademicheskaya Letopis, and that there were numerous errors and “corrections” in the latter, such as the abovementioned “chronology page”.

The implication is that someone had “touched up” the Radzivilovskaya Letopis. When did that happen? Could it be the XVIII century? Apparently, Shakhmatov was well aware of the fact that this presumption casts a shadow of suspicion over the Moskovsko-Akademicheskaya Letopis – a copy including later falsifications.

Furthermore, one learns that “the Moskovsko-Akademicheskaya Letopis is suspicious at any rate – for instance, the fact that it possesses distinctive characteristics of a copy made from an illustrated original (the actual chronicle hasn’t got any illustrations in it)” ([967], page 46). The example cited by Shakhmatov implies that the miniatures contained in the illustrated original were the same as the ones in the copy known as the Radzivilovskaya Letopis. Moreover, we learn that “the Moskovsko-Akademicheskaya Letopis confuses the sequence of events in the exact same manner … as the Radzivilovskaya Letopis” ([967], page 46). In other words, it was copied from the latter – complete with the mistakes in pagination introduced randomly in the process of binding!

At the same time, the chronicle in question contains “many insertions and corrections”.

Our opinion is that all the subsequent full copies of the Povest Vremennyh Let that repeat the Radzivilovskaya Letopis almost word for word date from the eighteenth century and not any earlier – their authorship is most likely to be credited to Schlezer and his colleagues.

4.9. Other signs of forgery in the Radzivilovskaya Letopis

It turns out that the first eight pages of the manuscript that relate the very beginning of Russian history – the chronology, the origins of the Russian tribes, the foundation of Novgorod and Kiev etc, either contain no numeration whatsoever, or have it indicated in obviously different styles. Moreover, these pages are odd, meaning that they don’t fit into the folding of the section, q.v. in [715].

One gets the impression that this part of the chronicle was “corrected” by someone, which is also implied by B. A. Rybakov’s research. By the way, Rybakov bases his corollaries on the analysis of text exclusively, neither mentioning the odd pages, nor the gaps in numeration. Yet what he states in re the introductory part of the chronicle being an assortment of odd and poorly put together passages of a fragmentary nature is in perfect correspondence with the fact that the first section of the manuscript is indeed a collection of individual pages, with distinct marks of corrections present in the Church Slavonic numeration. These figures are absent in half of the cases, q.v. in [715].

It appears as though the first part of the Radzivilovskaya chronicle was subjected to heavy editing in the second half of the XVIII century, when the forgery of Russian history had already been a fait accompli courtesy of Miller, Schlezer, Bayer et al. The barebones version of their “scientific” theory was structured in accordance with the Romanovian court version of the XVIII century (in order for the latter to receive validation “from the position of the scientific avant-garde”, as it were); however, some of the details would subsequently undergo substantial modification. This must be why the “original source” needed to be edited upon the completion of the entire body of work.

4.10. What is the chronicle that served as the original for the Radzivilovskaya chronicle, also known as the Königsberg chronicle?

Historians themselves claim the Radzivilovskaya chronicle to be a copy of a long-lost ancient original – miniatures as well as the text:

“All the researchers are of the same opinion about the fact that the illustrators of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis were copying illustrations that predated their time” ([715], Volume 2, page 5).

We are being told explicitly that the Königsberg copy, or the actual Radzivilovskaya Letopis, was manufactured in the early XVIII century. The original’s identity is of the utmost interest to us.

The research of the miniatures contained in the manuscript led the experts to the opinion that the Radzivilovskaya Letopis is a copy of a certain chronicle originating from Smolensk and dated to the XV century ([715], Volume 2, page 300). This doesn’t contradict what we were saying above – on the contrary, it makes the general picture somewhat clearer.

Our hypothesis is as follows. Some chronicle was indeed written in the XV century; it contained the descriptions of XV century events contemporary to the creation of the manuscript – in particular, the famous dispute of the epoch between Smolensk, or Western Russia = Lithuania = the White Horde = Byelorussia and the Golden Horde = Velikorossiya, or the Great Russia, whose centre had remained in the Volga region. Moscow would become capital a lot later.

This chronicle wound up in Königsberg, where it had served as the prototype of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis, also known as the Königsberg copy. The copy was naturally far from exact. The scribes introduced a new chronology thereinto, as well as the new interpretation of the Russian history – already understood in the Romanovian spirit; the Romanovs had been rulers of Russia for a century in that epoch, after all. If the manufacturers of the copy were indeed trying to please Peter, they must have introduced political considerations of some sort into the chronicle.

The implication is that the Radzivilovskaya Letopis must have been based on the real events of Russian history, which were seriously distorted by the editors of the XVII-XVIII century.

4.11. Which city was the capital of the Polyane = Poles: Kiev or Smolensk?

One mustn’t overlook the fact that historians themselves are of the opinion that some of the miniatures contained in the Radzivilovskaya chronicle depict Smolensk as the centre (or the capital) – see [715], Volume 2, page 304.

The question mark belongs to the historians themselves, since the city of Smolensk could in no way have been a capital around that time, since the epoch in question is the very dawn of the Kiev Russia. The foundation of Kiev is still in process – yet, lo and behold, we already have a capital in Smolensk!

This isn’t the only miniature that ascribes excessive importance to Smolensk, according to the modern commentators, who are irritated by this fact to a great extent ([715], Volume 2, page 300).

Au contraire, we find nothing surprising about this. As we shall discuss below, Smolensk had really been the capital of the White Horde. This is why one of the miniatures draws it together with Novgorod and Kiev – the respective capitals of the Golden Horde and the Blue Horde ([715], Volume 2, page 300).

Poland (or the Polyane tribe) was part of this very White Horde in the XV century, which must be why the Radzivilovskaya Letopis ended up in Königsberg. The manuscript was therefore written from the position of the Polyane, or the Poles.

As for the Golden Horde, it is called Bulgaria, or Volgaria – “region of the river Volga”; the entire beginning of the chronicle is concerned with the struggle between the Polyane and the Bulgarians. The text is telling us that the Polyane come from Kiev; however, the miniatures betray their Smolensk origins. It is possible that when the text had been edited for the Radzivilovskaya Letopis, many references to Smolensk were replaced by those to Kiev; however, the more succinct indications that one finds in the miniatures were left unnoticed, and the necessity to alter a few illustrations didn’t occur to the editors. Nowadays researchers notice the discrepancies between the text and the illustrations and shake their heads in confusion.

4.12. The arrival of Peter in Königsberg

It is possible that the Radzivilovskaya Letopis was prepared specifically for the arrival of Peter the Great in Königsberg in 1711, who had seen it before. After that it has transformed into the primary source of knowledge on the Russian history.

In general, the manuscript bears distinct marks of being unfinished and written against a tight deadline ([715], Volume 2, page 5). This is particularly obvious in comparison with the excellent miniatures from the Litsevoy Svod. The two schools of art are obviously very different from each other.

Apparently, apart from the deadline, the Königsberg artists were affected by the need to copy a style that was alien and only vaguely familiar to them.

The incomplete nature of the Radzivilovskaya Letopis is especially manifest in the fact that the red miniated letters are missing from every single page that follows page 107, with the sole exception of page 118 ([716], page 4). One gets the impression that the final stages of the chronicle’s manufacture were greatly affected by the hurry factor, and the chronicle was left unfinished for some reason. The work was interrupted when it had been going full steam, and never resumed. Even the miniated letters were omitted, let alone the signs of coarse corrections in the miniatures.

We are of the opinion that this is easily explained. The Königsberg artists were in a hurry to have the chronicle ready for Peter’s arrival in Königsberg. Such situations usually mean hectic work. Peter was approaching the city, and the miniatures had still looked rather raw; some irate official commanded the artists to hurry up and paint the capital letters red in the beginning of the chronicle at least, since the latter had to be presented to Peter at once, and the lack of the miniated letters would look conspicuous.

The artists only got as far as the 107th page; the miniature was left unfinished and coarse, possibly bound immediately, with nobody to notice the fact that the paper used in this process had had a new type of watermarks upon it; those betrayed its XVIII century origin. The chronicle must have been given to Peter some thirty minutes after its completion.

The chronicle caught Peter’s attention and ignited his interest at once, and he demanded a copy. The original had no longer been of any use to anyone, with the manufacture of the copy having become a new priority. It was abandoned.

How was anyone to know that the war with Russia would begin in 50 years, which would result in Königsberg captured, and the priceless “ancient” original triumphantly claimed as a Russian trophy? Had the Königsberg hoaxers foreseen this, they would have certainly painted every single capital letter red.

4.13. A brief summary of our analysis of the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle

We are therefore of the opinion that the history of the “most ancient” Radzivilovskaya Chronicle is as follows. It was manufactured in Königsberg in the early XVIII century, apparently in preparation for the arrival of Peter the Great, right before it. Some really old chronicle of the XV-XVI century must have been used as a prototype; however, this ancient copy had undergone a substantial transformation before it became the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle. The old original was destroyed.

The Königsberg “Nestors” of the XVIII century were adhering to the Romanovian version of the old Russian history for the most part, as related in the official Synopsis dating from the middle of the XVII century. Their goal had been the creation – or, rather, the forgery of the missing original source, the presumably ancient chronicle that would confirm the Romanovian version of Russian history. Peter had approved of the Königsberg chronicle, and the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle has been known as the “oldest Russian chronicle” ever since. The original source that would serve as foundation for the entire edifice of Russian history finally came into existence.

However, the foundations of court Romanovian history aren’t limited to the chronicle in question; the Romanovs invited foreign professors of history in order to make their version “conform to international standards” – Bayer, Schlezer, Miller and others. The latter carried out their order and dutifully wrote the “cosmetic” version of the Romanovian history that would meet the stipulations of the historical science of that epoch. The Romanovian “court” version had undergone its transformation into a “scientific” one.

Apparently, when the German professors were approaching the completion of their work, they conscientiously decided to “correct” the original source, and therefore some of the pages were planted in the chronicle, and others removed therefrom. Special attention was naturally paid to the “Norman” and the “chronological” pages. Apparently, these pages needed to be re-written or even written from scratch in order to correspond to their new version; consider the process equivalent to putting the final layer of varnish on the product.

However, numerous signs of corrections remained in the Radzivilovskaya Letopis; this could lead to many unwanted questions. Therefore, the original had to be kept further away from prying eyes. Its publication took place a whole century later, when everyone had already forgotten about the taboo.

5.

Other chronicles that describe the epochs before the XIII century

Apart from the Radzivilovskaya Letopis, we have several other copies of ancient Russian chronicles at our disposal to date. The following ones are considered the most important:

- the Lavrentyevskaya Letopis,

- the Ipatyevskaya Letopis,

- the Academic Moscow Chronicle (also known as the Troitse-Sergievskiy copy),

- the Novgorodskaya Letopis,

- the Chronograph of Pereyaslavl-Suzdalskiy, also known as the Archive Chronograph or the Judean Chronograph.

There are many other chronicles whose first part describes the Kiev Russia, or spans the historical periods before the alleged XIII century. However, it turns out that all the copies known to us nowadays that contain descriptions of this epoch somewhere in the beginning are variants of the Povest Vremennyh Let – or the Radzivilovskaya Letopis, in other words.

A detailed comparison of the existing copies of the Povest Vremennyh Let was made by N. A. Morozov ([547]). All of these copies turned out virtually identical, which had been known before. However, Morozov came to the conclusion that we feel obliged to cite herein:

“Apart from minor stylistic corrections … the main body of text is virtually the same, notwithstanding the fact that the three copies were ‘discovered’ at a great distance from each other: the Radzivilovskaya Letopis was found in Königsberg, the Lavrentyevskaya Letopis – presumably in Suzdal, and the Troitse-Sergievskiy copy was discovered in the Province of Moscow. If all of them are copies of the same older original that predated the invention of the printing press, one must think that said original was common for the entire territory between Königsberg and the Province of Vladimir or even a vaster one, which makes it a mystery how the surviving copies, being distant in territory and in relation to one another, fail to contain substantially greater textual alterations. One must therefore come to the conclusion that both the anonymous scribe responsible for the Troitse-Sergievskiy chronicle and Lavrentiy, the monk from Suzdal, were using the popular edition of 1767; thus, the texts date from the end of the XVIII century, a short while before their discovery by the laborious searchers of ancient chronicles like Moussin-Pushkin … this explains the fact that none of them stops at 1206, which is the case with the Radzivilovskaya Letopis, but rather carries on with relating the chronology of the events … and so we discover that the further sequence of events in one of the copies isn’t repeated in any of the others … not a single common word, which is quite normal for independent records of one and the same event” ([547]).

Above we cite another observation in favour of Morozov’s opinion – apparently, all the copies of the Povest Vremennyh Let known to us today were written on the same kind of paper with identical watermarks – the “bull’s head” and the variations thereof. It appears that they all came out of the same workshop. Could it have been the one in Königsberg?

We come to the three following conclusions.

1. Nowadays we have but a single text at our disposal that describes the events of the ancient Russian history before 1206. Let us remind the reader that this oldest epoch in the history of Russia is known as that of the Kiev Russia. In the Millerian version, the ancient Kiev lost its status of a capital after Batu-Khan had captured it in 1238.

2. This text exists in copies that are unlikely to predate the XVIII century, which is when it became known. The important thing is that the Russian sources that predate this time contain no references to the Povest Vremennyh Let whatsoever; apparently, this text had still been unknown in the beginning of the XVII century.

3. 3) All the copies of the Povest Vremennyh Let were apparently written around the same time (late XVII or the XVIII century), and in the same geographical location to boot.

6.

The publication rate of the Russian chronicles remains the same as time goes on

The publication of the Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles began as early as in 1841 ([797], page 1028). 24 volumes were published over the course of the 80 years that had passed between 1841 and 1921. This was followed by a 27-year break; then, in 1949, the publication had resumed. The last volume in the series to date is the 39th. Fantastic publication speed, isn’t it?

Despite the fact that the publication has been going on for over 150 years, many Russian chronicles haven’t been published yet – for instant, the Karamzinskaya Letopis from Novgorod, q.v. in [634], page 540.

The grandiose compilation of chronicles known as the Litsevoy Letopisniy Svod, usually dated to the XVI century, was only published in 2006. Its volume amounts to 9000 pages. It spans the period between the Genesis and 1567 ([797], page 718). In particular, it contains sixteen thousand excellent miniatures, many of which are often reproduced. There are many references to the Litsevoy Svod – and yet not a single complete edition in existence to predate 2006! The illustrations were available to the public, but not the text.

The facsimile edition of the Litsevoy Svod was published by the Akteon publishing house in Moscow as a result of it being discussed at length by a large number of people. This was an event of paramount importance.

A propos, the Radzivilovskaya Letopis, presumably the oldest one, was published as late as 1989 – in the 38th volume of the Complete Collection. Bear in mind that the publication of the series began in 1841!

What could possibly be the reason for such bizarre procrastination in the publication of the Russian chronicles? Judging by the publication speed of the Complete Collection, we shall have to wait until the year 3000 to see printed copies of all the other Russian chronicles that remain unpublished to this day.

Let us mention another thing about the Litsevoy Svod. Below we shall demonstrate that some of the allegedly “ancient” Russian chronicles are most likely to have been created in the XVIII century. This fact makes us reconsider the Litsevoy Svod as seen in the context of other Russian chronicles. It may have been created in the XVII century, thus being the first version of the Russian history written at the order of the Romanovs. In this case it is one of the earliest chronicles to have survived until our day, rather than one of the more recent ones – see chapters 8 and 9.

7.

The traditional scheme of the ancient Russian history

In this referential section we shall remind the reader of the chronology and the primary landmarks of the ancient Russian history in the version suggested by Miller and his colleagues. We shall be citing their datings herein; our own datings, as given in the chapters to follow, shall be substantially different.

7.1. The first period: from times immemorial to the middle of the IX century A.D.

The Povest Vremennyh Let begins with a short section that relates Biblical history, starting with the deluge and ending with the Byzantine emperor Michael. Nowadays this emperor is supposed to have reigned in the middle of the IX century A. D. This brief introductory part of the chronicle hardly gives us any information concerning the history of Russia at all.

7.2. The second period: from the middle of the IX century to the middle of the XII – the Kiev Russia starting with Ryurik and ending with Yuri Dolgoroukiy (of Rostov)

This is the epoch of the Great Princes who had ruled the Kiev Russia, q.v. in the Radzivilovskaya Chronicle ([362]).

We are of the opinion that the existence of numerous discrepancies between various sources – namely, different reign durations, occasionally also different names specified by different chronicles, gaps in dynastic sequences and a general lack of consensus in the descriptions of riots and civil disturbances, should be telling us that we are dealing with genuine ancient documents primarily. They have naturally undergone heavy editing in the XVII-XVIII century, but nevertheless relate real historical events. Had Russian history been a mere fantasy of Miller and his colleagues, they would have streamlined it and avoided such obvious discrepancies. All of it leaves one with the hope that we can yet reconstruct the true Russian history from the chronicles available to date.

- Ryurik, 862-879, reigned for 17 years, capital in Novgorod the Great (Velikiy Novgorod).

- Igor, 879-945 or 912-945, reigned for 66 or 33 years, capital in Kiev since 882.

- Oleg, 879-912, reigned for 33 years, capital in Kiev.

- Olga, 945-955 or 945-969, reigned for 10 or 24 years, capital in Kiev.

- Svyatoslav, 945-972 or 964-972, reigned for 27 or 8 years, capital in Kiev. Transferred the capital to Pereyaslavl. Let us point out the lacuna in the chronicle that spans the years 955-964; it is unclear whether it had been Olga’s or Svyatoslav’s reign. Hence the different reign durations.

- Oleg II in 972, reigned for 1 year, capital in the land of the Drevlyane (Ovrouch?).

- Yaropolk, 972-980, reigned for 8 years, capital in Kiev. Prince of Velikiy Novgorod before 980.

- Boris in 1015, reigned for 1 year, capital in Murom.

- Gleb in 1015, reigned for 1 year, capital in Vladimir.

- Svyatopolk, 1015-1019, reigned for 4 years, capital in Kiev.

- Yaroslav (= Georgiy) the Wise, 1019-1054, reigned for 35 years. Prince of Velikiy Novgorod before 1019, moved to Kiev thereafter.

- Mstislav Khrabriy (the Brave) in 1035, reigned for 1 year, capital in Tmutarakan. It must be said that according to the XVI century sources described in [183], Volume 2, page 28, Tmutarakan used to be another name of Astrakhan. Certain historians are still trying to find the famous Tmutarakan – these efforts are quite futile, since the learned scholars are searching in the wrong place.

- Izyaslav (= Dmitriy), 1054-1078, reigned for 24 years, capital in Kiev.

- Vsevolod, 1078-1093, reigned for 14 years, capital in Kiev. Originally a Prince of Pereyaslavl; his reign was preceded by that of his brother Izyaslav, which is considered to have been a time of embroilment and strife. The years of Vsevolod’s reign could therefore have been counted from the date of Yaroslav’s death. In this case, his reign covers the 39-year period between 1054 and 1093.

- Svyatopolk (= Mikhail), 1093-1113, reigned for 20 years, capital in Kiev.

- Vladimir Monomakh, 1113-1125, reigned for 12 years; alternatively, 1093-1125, in which case his reign duration shall equal 32 years. Capital in Kiev.

- Mstislav, 1125-1132, reigned for 7 years, capital in Kiev.

- Yaropolk, 1132-1139, reigned for 7 years, capital in Kiev.

- Vsevolod, 1139-1146, reigned for 7 years, capital in Kiev. Igor in 1146, reigned for 1 year, capital in Kiev.

- Izyaslav, 1146-1155, reigned for 8 years, capital in Kiev.

- Youri (= Georgiy) Dolgoroukiy, starting with the death of his father in 1125 or with 1148, the year when he was crowned Great Prince in Kiev ([716], page 117). Alternatively, he could have come to power in 1155, at the end of Izyaslav’s reign, and reigned until 1157. We get three versions of his reign duration as a result – 30 years, 9 years or 2 years. The main version is the 9-year one: starting with the beginning of his reign in Kiev and until the actual end of his reign. The capital is Rostov originally, and then Kiev; next it gets transferred to Suzdal.

- Andrei Bogolyubskiy, 1157-1174, reigned for 17 years, or 1169-1174 and a 5-year reign, accordingly. Here 1169 is the year when Andrei had conquered Kiev; his capital was in Suzdal or Vladimir. It is presumed that the capital was transferred elsewhere from Kiev in his reign.

Commentary. Up until the conquest of Kiev by Andrei, the city had been the capital of the following Great Princes, which can be regarded as his co-rulers:

- Izyaslav Dadidovich, 1157-1159, reigned for 2 years, capital in Kiev.

- Rostislav Mikhail, 1159-1167, reigned for 8 years, capital in Kiev.

- Mstislav Izyaslavich, 1167-1169, reigned for 2 years, capital in Kiev.

This epoch is only known to us in the rendition of the Povest Vremennyh Let. Nowadays Kiev (the modern city on the Dnepr) is presumed to have been the capital of the state. The epoch of Kiev Russia ends with the transfer of the capital to Suzdal first, and then to Vladimir – under Youri Dolgoroukiy and Andrei Bogolyubskiy. This happens in the middle of the alleged XII century. The circumstances of the transfer of the capital from Kiev to Vladimir are described differently in various chronicles, with several datings of said events specified. The transfer is credited to Youri Dolgoroukiy in some cases, and to Andrei Bogolyubskiy in others. Youri Dolgoroukiy is also said to have founded Moscow in the alleged year 1147.

7.3. The third period: the Russia of Vladimir and Suzdal, starting with the middle of the XII century and ending with Batu-Khan’s conquest in 1237

- Mikhail, 1174-1176, reigned for 2 years, capital in Vladimir.

- Vsevolod “Bolshoye Gnezdo” (“The Great Nest”), 1176-1212, reigned for 36 years, capital in Vladimir.

- Georgiy, 1212-1216, reigned for 4 years, capitals in Vladimir and Suzdal.

- Mstislav of Novgorod, reigned from 1212 according to [362], Volume 1, page 103. His reign duration therefore equals 7 years.

- Constantine, 1212-1219, reigned for 7 years, capitals in Yaroslavl and Rostov before 1216, Vladimir and Suzdal after that.

- Youri (= Georgiy), 1219-1237, reigned for 18 years ([36], page 30). Capital in Vladimir.

Once again, the beginning of this epoch is only known to us in the version of the Povest Vremennyh Let; the sequence of events related therein ends with 1206 – a few years before Batu-Khan’s invasion, that is. The last year covered by the chronicles is in close proximity to the fall of Constantinople in 1204; however, this famous event is absent from the Povest Vremennyh Let for some reason. This omission is very odd indeed, since this chronicle pays a lot of attention to Byzantine events. We shall get back to this later.

The end of the third period is marked by the well-known “collation” of two different groups of Russian chronicles. Some of them cease their narration here, whereas others only start with this epoch. There are a few chronicles that don’t interrupt at this point formally – the Arkhangelogorodskiy Letopisets, for instance; however, some of the chronicles manifest a chronological shift here, q.v. below. For instance, the Oustyuzhskiy Letopisets of Lev Vologdin, compiled in 1765, survived in its original form; there are also 22 copies of this chronicle kept in the archives of Moscow, St. Petersburg, Kiev and Oustyug Velikiy ([36], page 8). All of the editions (the original as well as the copies) contain “wrong” A.D. datings for the entire interval between 1267 and 1398. The rate of the chronological shift accumulated, amounting to a hundred years by 1398 – namely, the chronicle refers to 1398 instead of 1299, which is the “correct” dating. This year is reflected in a large fragment of text; after that, the chronicle leaps to 1415, and the chronological shift disappears. Thus, according to the Romanovian-Millerian chronology of the manuscript, the latter contains a gap between 1299 and 1415. Apparently, Lev Vologdin, a priest of the Uspenskaya Cathedral in Velikiy Oustyug, was still poorly familiar with the consensual chronology of the Russian history, which had still been “polished” by Miller in St. Petersburg.

The fact that the gap in Vologdin’s chronicle is a centenarian one has an explanation, which will be related in detail below.

7.4. The fourth period: the yoke of the Tartars and the Mongols, starting with the battle of Sit in 1238 and ending with the 1481 “Ougra opposition”, which is considered to mark the “official end of the Great Yoke” nowadays

- Batu-Khan from 1238 and on.

- Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, 1238-1248, reigned for 10 years, capital in Vladimir. Came from Novgorod ([145], he had reigned in 1237-1247 (10 years altogether).

- Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, 1248-1249, reigned for 1 year, capital in Vladimir ([145], page 165. He ruled in Suzdal between 1252 and 1262, after the capture of Suzdal by Nevruy, q.v. below.

- Lacuna or Nevruy Saltan, 1252-1259, reigned for 7 years ([36]).

- Alexander Vassilyevich of Novgorod, 1259-1264, reigned for 5 years ([36], page 70). This character might be a duplicate of Alexander Nevskiy for all we know, in which case Yaroslav’s alias “Vassily” really stands for “Basileus”, or “King”. It turns out that the Arkhangelogorodskiy Letopisets doesn’t mention Alexander Yaroslavich (Nevskiy!) at all, telling us about Alexander Vassilyevich instead – this must be the same person as Alexander Nevskiy. The latter is considered to have been a stepson of Batu-Khan; the Arkhangelogorodskiy Letopisets, on the other hand, refers to Alexander Nevskiy as to an actual son of Batu-Khan, whom we already identified as Yaroslav, q.v. below. Other sources collate the reigns of Nevruy and Alexander, suggesting that the latter had reigned in Suzdal all the while.

Could “Nevruy” be the “Tartar” name of Nevskiy? For instance, we have discovered that Batu-Khan was merely the “Tartar” name of Yaroslav. The Vologodskiy Letopisets, for instance, is telling us about Alexander Nevruy who came from the Horde when it relates the events of 1294. According to the text, this Alexander Nevruy (Nevskiy?) had presided over the council of the Princes and been in charge of the division of principalities. One must note that the names NEV-ruy and NEV-skiy only differ in suffixes; also bear in mind that Nevruy was known as “Saltan”, or simply “Sultan”! The next event mentioned in [145] after the 1294 assembly of the Princes led by Alexander Nevruy is the death of “Fyodor, the Great Prince of Yaroslavl and Smolensk” in 1299. This prince must be yet another double of Alexander Nevruy, since the assembly didn’t appoint any other prince. Fyodor, the Great Prince of Yaroslavl and Smolensk, is a well-known prince who was canonized as a saint, q.v. in the Russian Orthodox monthly books of psalms under 19 September and 5 March (old style). This must be another reflection of Alexander Nevskiy.

- Mikhail Khrabriy (The Brave) of Kostroma, 1249-1250, reigned for 1 year ([36]), capital in Vladimir.

- Andrei of Suzdal, 1250-1252, reigned for 2 years ([36]), capital in Vladimir.

- Yaroslav of Tver, 1263-1272, reigned for 9 years according to [36]).

- Mikhail Yaroslavich, 1267-1272, reigned for 5 years according to [36]. Some of the other chronicles don’t mention him at all.

- Vassily I of Kostroma with his sons Boris and Gleb ([362] – 4 years, that is. Capital in Vladimir.

- Dmitriy I of Pereyaslavl, 1276-1294, reigned for 18 years according to [145], page 165.

- Andrei Gorodetskiy, 1294-1304, reigned for 10 years according to [36], which mentions Ivan Kalita as the next Great Prince to have succeeded Andrei in 1328.

- Mikhail Svyatoi (The Holy), Prince of Tver and Vladimir, 1304-1319, reigned for 6 years according to [145]. Capital in Vladimir.

- Youri of Moscow (Moskovskiy), Uzbek-Khan’s son-in-law, 1319-1325, reigned for 6 years according to [36] Youri isn’t called the Great Prince.

- Dmitriy of Vladimir the Bodeful-Eyed (“Groznye Ochi”), 1325-1326, reigned for 1 year according to [145].

- Alexander, 1326-1328, reigned for two years with his capital in Vladimir, according to [145].

The title of the Great Prince goes over to the Muscovite princes, beginning with Ivan I Kalita.

- Ivan Danilovich Kalita the 1st – 1328-1340, reigned for 12 years according to [145] we find two datings marking the possible beginning of his reign – 1322 and 1328. The beginning of his reign as the Great Prince is indicated as 1328 the second time. The capital is in Moscow. Actually, the name Kalita is most likely to be a derivative of “Caliph” or “Khalif”, which is a well-known title. Bear in mind the flexion of T and Ph (phita).

- Simeon Gordiy (The Proud), 1340-1353, reigned for 13 years according to [145]. Capital in Moscow.

- Ivan II Krotkiy (or Krasniy) – “The Humble” or “The Red”, 1353-1359, reigned for 6 years according to [145], between 1354 and 1359. Capital in Moscow.

- Dmitriy of Suzdal, 1359-1363, reigned for 4 years according to [145]. Capital in Moscow.

- Dmitriy Ivanovich Donskoi, 1363-1389, reigned for 26 years according to [145]. Capital in Moscow.

- Vassily I Dmitrievich, 1389-1425, reigned for 36 years according to [145], with his capital in Moscow.

- Youri Dmitrievich, 1425-1434, reigned for 9 years according to [145], pages 169-170. Capital in Moscow.

- Vassily II Tyomniy (The Dark), 1425-1462 according to [365] specify his reign as 1450-1462.

- Dmitriy Shemyaka the Cross-Eyed (“Kosoi”), 1446-1450, reigned for 4 years according to [362], his reign spans the years between 1445 and 1450.

Formally, the independence of Russia from the Horde begins with the reign of the next ruler, Ivan III. The “Great Yoke” of the Mongols and the Tartars ends. This dating is however of an arbitrary nature.

The epoch between Ivan Kalita and Ivan III is a very special period in Russian history, which we shall discuss in detail below.

It is presumed that Russia had lost independence in this epoch, transforming into the “Mongol Tartaria” in the eyes of the foreigners.

Let us jump ahead and share our opinion that this very epoch opens the most important period in the entire history of Russia (Horde); earlier epochs are most likely to be phantom reflections of the XIV-XVI century, and are obscured by impenetrable tenebrosity for the most part. We can virtually say nothing at all about the real history of Russia before the XIII century.

7.5. The fifth period: the Moscow Russia starting with Ivan III and ending with the Great Strife, or the enthronement of the Romanovs in 1613

- Ivan III Vassilyevich the Great, 1462-1505 (according to [36] dates the end of his reign to 1507. His son and co-ruler is Ivan Ivanovich Molodoi (The Young, or The Junior), 1471-1490 – 19 years altogether ([794], page 158). Moscow is the capital.

- Vassily III, also known as Ivan = Varlaam = Gavriil ([145], he reigned in 1507-1534.

- Youri Ivanovich, 1533, reigned for 1 year according to [776]. The capital is Moscow.

- Yelena Glinskaya + Ivan Ovchina, 1533-1538, reigned for 5 years according to [775], with their capital in Moscow.

- The Semiboyarshchina, or the Reign of the Seven Boyars (the Guardian Council) – 1538-1547, 9 years altogether according to [775]. Moscow is the capital.

- Ivan IV the Terrible (Grozniy), 1533-1584, reigned for 51 years according to [775]; capital in Moscow.

- Simeon Beckboulatovich, 1575-1576, reigned for 1 year according to [775] with his capital in Moscow. The alleged “co-ruler” of Ivan the Terrible.

- Fyodor Ioannovich, 1584-1598, reigned for 14 years according to [362]. Capital in Moscow.

- Boris Fyodorovich Godunov, 1598-1605, reigned for 7 years according to [362]. Capital in Moscow.

- Fyodor Borisovich, 1605, reigned for 1 year according to [362]. Capital in Moscow.

- Dmitriy Ivanovich, or the so-called “False Dmitriy” (“Lzhedmitriy”), 1605-1610, reigned for 5 years with his capital in Moscow first, and then Tushino. He was presumably killed in 1606; however, in the very same year Dmitriy comes to power again – historians are of the opinion that this second Dmitriy was a different person ([436], pages 362-363). This is why we indicate Dmitriy’s reign as ending with his murder in 1610; one may also consider this period to be “the sum of the two Dmitriys”.

- Vassily Shouyskiy, 1606-1610, reigned for 4 years according to [362]. Capital in Moscow.

- The Great Strife, 1610-1613, lasted for three years.

According to our hypothesis, the epoch between Ivan III and the Great Strife is the primary source for all the phantom duplicates inherent in Russian history and dated to the epochs before the XIV century. All the epochs in question and a rough scheme of chronological duplicates in Russian history can be seen in the illustrations at the beginning of the next chapter.

7.6. The sixth period: dynasty of the Romanovs

What we have here is a radical change of dynasty; the new ruling dynasty of the Romanovs comes to power. The first king of the dynasty is Mikhail Romanov, 1613-1645. We shall refrain from listing the other Romanovs herein, since Russian history of the Romanovian epoch is already beyond our concern; that is the epoch when the consensual version of the ancient Russian history was created.

Part Two

The two chronological shifts inherent in the history of Russia

8.

A general scheme of the parallelism

In the present chapter we shall relate the statistical parallelism between the dynasties of the Russian rulers that we discovered in the course of our research, as a result of applying the methods of ancient dynasty analysis that we have already used extensively, q.v. in Chron1 and Chron2.

The consensual version of the Romanovian-Millerian “Russian history textbook” is represented schematically in fig. 2.1.

Fig. 2.1. A chronological scheme of Russian history in its Scaligerian and Millerian version.

In fig. 2.2 one sees the real construction of this “textbook” unravelled by our research and the primary chronological shifts present therein, whereas fig. 2.3 represents a very general scheme of Russian chronology in our reconstruction.

Fig. 2.2. The structure of the shifts inherent in the erroneous chronology of the Russian history. The Scaligerian and Millerian “Russian history textbook” is compiled of three different versions of a single chronicle.

Fig. 2.3. A general chronological scheme of the Russian history after the rectification of the errors inherent in the Scaligerian and Millerian version. Our reconstruction.

In fig. 2.4 we see the scheme of the 400-year parallelism inherent in Russian history as discussed below. The formal empirico-statistical result of our research is presented in figs. 2.1-2.6.

Fig. 2.4. A chronological shift of 410 years inherent in Russian history in its Millerian and Scaligerian version. First part of the parallelism.

Fig. 2.5. A chronological shift of 410 years inherent in Russian history in its Millerian and Scaligerian version. Second part of the parallelism.

Fig. 2.6. The general view of the chronological shift of 410 years inherent in Russian history.

1. The period between 1300 and 1600 served as the original for the ancient and mediaeval history of Russia.

2. The period between the middle of the IX and the beginning of the XIII century is a phantom duplicate of the above.

3. The period between 1200 and 1600 is a “sum” of the two chronicles, the first one being the original that spans the period between 1300 and 1600, and the second – the very same original, but shifted backwards by some 100 years. The superimposition of the two chronicles gives us the 1200-1600 chronicle extended by a 100 years.

The entire period between 1327 and 1600 is referred to as “the Moscow Russia” in modern textbooks; however, according to our reconstruction, this name only applies to the end of this epoch. We have discovered the period of the XIV-XVI century to contain the originals of all three epochs that Russian history is divided into nowadays:

- the ancient Kiev Russia,

- the ancient Vladimir Russia,

- the mediaeval Moscow Russia.

Below we cite comparative tables of events for the discovered dynastical parallelisms inherent in the history of Russia. It has to be said that the events listed below are related in accordance with the consensual Millerian version as opposed to our reconstruction; nevertheless, we occasionally refer to the results described in detail in Chron4, which we expect the readers to be familiar with for a more fundamental understanding of the tables and their content.

9.

A brief description of the 100-year shift manifest in Russian history

a = Russian history of the XIV century.

■ b = Russian history of the XIII century.

1a = The XIV century. Takhta-Khan, 1291-1313, reigned for 22 years, and Daniel of Moscow, 1281-1303, reigned for 22 years.

■ 1b = The XIII century. Genghis-Khan, the alleged years 1205-1227, reigned for 22 years, and Vsevolod Bolshoye Gnezdo, the alleged years 1176-1212, reigned for 36 years.

1.1a. The XIV century. Daniel of Moscow is the founder of the Muscovite dynasty. His reign was followed by the conflict between the princes of Moscow and Tver.

■ 1.1b. The XIII century. Vsevolod Bolshoye Gnezdo is the founder of a dynasty, succeeded by his sons and their offspring. His very name translates as “The Great Nest” and refers to his foundation of the Vladimir-Suzdal dynasty.

2a. The XIV century. Uzbek-Khan, 1312-1340, reigned for 28 years, and Mikhail, 1304-1319, reigned for 15 years. Next we have Youri, 1319-1328, with a reign duration of 9 years, followed by Ivan I Kalita, or Caliph (Khalif), who had reigned for 12 years between 1328 and 1340.

■ 2b = The XIII century. Batu-Khan (the name Batu relates to the Russian dialect forms of the word “father” – batya and batka), 1227-1255, reigned for 18 years, and Constantine, 1212-1219, reigned for 7 years. After that we see Youri’s 18-year reign in the alleged years 1219-1237, followed by the 8-year reign of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich (1238-1246).

2.1a. The XIV century. Unlike his predecessors, Uzbek-Khan left a significant mark in Russian history, having become a relation of Youri the Muscovite (the latter was his son-in-law). It is presumed that Uzbek-Khan had been greatly influenced by Ivan Kalita (Caliph), who remained in the Horde all the time; another presumption is that the power of the Muscovite princes was entirely based on the military potential of the Horde, which is the only reason why they could unite and conquer the entire Russia ([435], pages 189-190).

■ 2.1b. The XIII century. Batu-Khan conquers Russia, which marks the beginning of the Tartar rule in Russia. The Tartars had presumably ruled by proxy of the Great Princes of Vladimir. Batu-Khan made Yaroslav Vsevolodovich prince, and became his relation, since Alexander Nevskiy, the son of Yaroslav, became Batu-Khans adopted son. Batu-Khan had helped the princes of Vladimir to conquer the whole of Russia; prior to that, other independent princes and principalities had also existed. The title of the Great Prince of Kiev also ceased to exist around that time. The dynasty of the Kiev princes ended with the conquest of Kiev by Batu-Khan.

2.2a. The XIV century. This is the end of the Vladimir-Suzdal dynasty of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, the son of Vsevolod Bolshoye Gnezdo, and also the beginning of the new Moscow dynasty.

■ 2.2b. The XIII century. This period marks the end of the Kiev dynasty of Yaroslav the Wise, which is also the end of the Kiev Russia. Next we have the Vladimir-Suzdal period as well as the “yoke of the Tartars and the Mongols”.

3a. The XIV century. Chanibek-Khan, 1341-1357, reigned for 16 years, and Simeon Gordiy (“the Proud”), 1340-1353, reigned for 13 years.

■ 3b. The XIII century. Berke-Khan, the alleged years 1255-1266, reigned for 11 years, and Alexander Nevskiy, the alleged years 1252-1263, reigned for 11 years.

3.1a. The XIV century. The reign of Simeon is the time of the conflict between Pskov and the Germans from Livonia. Prince Alexander Vsevolodovich (whose “origins remain unknown to us”, according to Karamzin, q.v. in [362], Volume 4, page 157), appears in Pskov around the same time. This prince defeated the Germans and laid the entire South-East of Livonia waste. This took place in 1342; we see a good parallelism with the deeds of Alexander Nevskiy.

■ 3.1b. The XIII century. The most famous deed of Alexander Nevskiy is presumed to be the defeat of the Livonian knights on the Choudskoye Lake in the alleged year 1242. The Livonians are assumed to have been a German military order. Alexander set forth to fight the Livonians from Pskov, q.v. in [435], pages 162-164. Bear in mind that Alexander Nevskiy is a descendant of Vsevolod Bolshoye Gnezdo (his grandson, to be precise), and can therefore be referred to as “Vsevolodovich”, or “descendant of Vsevolod”. What we see is a manifestation of the chronological shift that equals 100 years in this case.

3.2a. The XIV century. After this victory, prince Alexander leaves Pskov. “The natives of Pskov implored him to return, but to no avail … their pleas to the Novgorod government to provide them with a local ruler and an army were also in vain” ([362], Volume 4, page 157).

■ 3.2b. The XIII century. Shortly after the victory the relationship between the people of Novgorod and Alexander deteriorates, and the latter moves to Pereyaslavl ([435], page 164).

3.3a. The XIV century. The dispute between Simeon and Novgorod. The people of Novgorod had bound Simeon in chains and declared to him that the city should elect princes autonomously and tolerate no alien rulers. Simeon reacted by preparing his army for the battle. The townsfolk called to arms as well, and a military conflict was escaped very narrowly. However, the commonality revolted, supported Simeon and had some of the boyars banished, with one of their number, and a very distinguished boyar, at that, killed ([362], Volume 4, pages 155-156). The dispute had ended, and Simeon disbanded the army.

■ 3.3b. The XIII century. The dispute between Alexander Nevskiy and the city of Novgorod ranks among his most important biographical episodes; the denizens of the city banished his son Vassily in a humiliating fashion, and the situation was approaching the stage of an armed conflict. Alexander had tried to take Novgorod by force, but the city capitulated, having demoted the vicegerent Ananiya in 1255 ([362], Volume 4, pages 45-47).

Commentary. In general, Simeon’s reign was characterised by wars waged against Novgorod and Pskov by the Swedes and the Germans, according to N. A. Karamzin ([362], Volume 4, pages 163 and 158). Alexander Nevskiy’s reign is marked by similar events, and famous for his wars with the Livonian order and disputes with Novgorod primarily. The relations between the Horde and Alexander, likewise Simeon, are described in the same words; both knights were known as pillars of the Khan’s power and frequent visitors in the Horde, where they were considered figures of great authority.

4a. The XIV century. The embroilment of 1359-1381. 25 khans had reigned over these 22 years.

■ 4b. The XIII century. Mentutenir-Khan (possibly Mengutimur-Khan), the alleged years 1266-1291, reigned for 25 years. Strife and struggle between the sons of Alexander Nevskiy in 1281-1328 (according to [649], pages 18-19, 32-34 and 53), which equals 47 years, or, alternatively, in 1299-1328, 29 reign years altogether starting with the death of Fyodor, Great Prince of Yaroslavl and Smolensk, and ending with Ivan Kalita.

5a. The XIV century. Tokhtamysh-Khan, 1381-1395, reigned for 14 years; in his reign we see Mamai the warlord and Dmitriy Donskoi (1363-1389), who had reigned for 26 years. Tokhtamysh-Khan defeated Mamai in 1381.

■ 5b. Takhta-Khan, the alleged years 1291-1313, reigned for 22 years, and Nogai the military leader, defeated by the khan in the alleged year 1299. Takhta-Khan is accompanied by Dmitriy of Pereyaslavl, 1276-1295.

Commentary. Apart from the parallelisms between events, we see a distinct similarity between how the names sound:

- Takhta-mysh = Takhta,

- Mamai = Nogai,

- Dmitriy of Don (or Donskoi) = Dmitriy of Pereyaslavl (or Pereyaslavskiy).

5.1a. The XIV century. Mamai is the “custodian” of the khans; he was the de facto ruler who could enthrone khans. Tokhtamysh-Khan defeated Mamai.

■ 5.1b. The XIII century. Nogai is the fiduciary of the small Takhta-Khan. When Takhta had grown up, he crushed Nogai. Nogai had also possessed the power to enthrone the Khans, and would “keep making their power more and more nominal” ([362], Vol. 4, Chapters 5-6).

5.2a. The XIV century. Mamai is a military leader of high rank ([216], page 159).

■ 5.2b. The XIII century. Nogai is also a top military leader ([216], page 137).

5.3a. The XIV century. Mamai usurps power ([216], page 159).

■ 5.3b. The XIII century. Nogai also usurps power ([216], page 137).

5.4a. The XIV century. Mamai becomes a leader of a “pro-Western political party” in the Horde ([216], page 159).

■ 5.4b. The XIII century. Nogai rules over the Western parts of the Horde ([216], page 137).

5.5a. The XIV century. Mamai’s army consisted of Osetians, the Cherkesi, the Polovtsy and the natives of Crimea, q.v. in [216], pages 160-165.

■ 5.5b. The XIII century. The main contingent of Nogai’s army is characterised as the natives of the steppes adjacent to the Black Sea and the Northern Crimea, see [216], page 137.

5.6a. The XIV century. Mamai is defeated by the Russian troops that fought alongside the Tartars from Siberia and the Volga region ([216], pages 162-163).

■ 5.6b. The XIII century. Nogai is defeated by the Tartars from the Volga region supported by the Russian army, as well as the Tartars from Siberia and Central Asia ([216], page 138).

5.7a. The XIV century. Tokhtamysh-Khan defeated Mamai in alliance with Dmitriy Donskoi, a Russian prince.

■ 5.7b. The XIII century. Takhta-Khan defeats Nogai in alliance with Andrei Aleksandrovich, a Russian prince ([216], page 137).

10.

A 400-year shift in Russian history and the resulting dynastic parallelism

The second chronological shift inherent in Russian history amounts to roughly 410 years and comprises the following two epochs:

1. The epoch between 945 and 1174, or the so-called Kiev Russia – starting with Great Prince Svyatoslav and ending with the transfer of the capital under Andrei Bogolyubskiy.

2. The epoch between 1363 and 1598. It is referred to as the “Moscow Russia”; it begins with the Great Prince Dmitriy Donskoi and ends with the Czar Fyodor Ivanovich.

For the cases with several variants of a single king’s reign, we only cite the one that corresponds with the parallelism the best. However, there are few such variants, and all of them are rather close to each other in general. We also omit references to sources herein, since all of them were already indicated above. The formal aspects of our empirico-statistical methods as used in the discovery of dynastic parallelisms and the principles of comparison applied to the latter are related in Chron1 and Chron2. A demonstrative graphical representation of the dynastic parallelism discussed herein is given in fig. 2.4.

Bear in mind that the comparative tables cited herein make references to results related in the chapters to follow; they contain our brief commentary of certain episodes that comprise the parallelism, and indications of the most interesting coincidences in the description of historical events one is traditionally accustomed to deem separated from each other by several centuries, which duplicate each other nonetheless, as estimated by our mathematical methods.

The beginning of the Kiev Russia dynasty, by which we understand the epoch of Ryurik, Olga and Oleg, is usually said to predate 945. The next series of dynastic founders (Ivan Kalita, Simeon the Proud and Ivan the Humble (or the Red), comes before 1363. The early XIV century must therefore be the very springhead of the Russian history. We are referring to Georgiy Danilovich, followed by Ivan Danilovich Kalita, his brother (1318 or 1328-1340). Ivan Kalita = Caliph = Khalif is the double of Batu-Khan, also known as Uzbek-Khan, Yaroslav Vsevolodovich and Yaroslav the Wise. He was also known as Georgiy-Yaroslav, q.v. in the epistle to the Swedish king written by “Ivan the Terrible” ([639], page 136).

a = The Kiev Russia.

■ b = The Moscow Russia.

1a. The Kiev Russia. The legendary founders of the dynasty – Ryurik, Oleg and Olga. The alleged years 862-955.

■ 1b. Russia-Horde. The founders of the real dynasty – Georgiy Danilovich, his brother Ivan Kalita = Caliph or Khalif, Simeon the Proud and Ivan the Humble (or the Red) in the alleged years 1318-1359.

Commentary to 1b. There is another shift inherent in the history of Russia – a centenarian one, q.v. discussed above. It superimposes the founders of the real dynasty (see 1b) over the beginning of the Great = “Mongolian” invasion. This superimposition is constructed in the following manner:

1. Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, aka Batu-Khan, 1238-1248 = Ivan Kalita (Caliph), aka Uzbek-Khan, 1328-1340.

2. Alexander Nevskiy, 1252-1263 = Simeon the Proud (“Gordiy”), 1340-1353.

3. Yaroslav of Tver, 1262-1272 = Ivan the Humble (“Krotkiy”), 1353-1359.

4. Vassily I of Kostroma, 1272-1276 = Dmitriy of Suzdal, 1359-1363.

5. Dmitriy I of Pereyaslavl, 1276-1294 = Dmitriy Donskoi, 1363-1389.

2a. The Kiev Russia. Svyatoslav, 945-972, reigned for 27 years.

■ 2b. Russia-Horde. Dmitriy Donskoi, 1363-1389, reigned for 26 years. Their reign durations are in good correspondence.

2.1a. The Kiev Russia. The transfer of the capital to Pereyaslavl in 969.

■ 2.1b. Russia-Horde. Pereyaslavl is captured by Holgerd, while Dmitriy lays the foundations of the Moscow Kremlin and its walls in 1368. This date corresponds to the real foundation of Moscow in our reconstruction. However, Moscow isn’t yet a capital at this point, and Kremlin won’t be built until the XVI century – see below (Chron4, Chapter 6) and in Chron6.

3a. The Kiev Russia. Vladimir, 980-1015, reigned for 35 years.

■ 3b. Russia-Horde. Vassily I, 1389-1425, reigned for 36 years. Their reign durations correspond to each other very well.

3.1a. The Kiev Russia. The famous baptism of Russia in 989.

■ 3.1b. Russia-Horde. The reign of Vassily I is known as the period of the so-called Great Schism (1378-1415), which is when virtually every country in the world was faced with “the choice of faith”.

Commentary to 3.1. According to our reconstruction, the early XV century was the time of religious discord and confessional granulation in the countries of Europe and Asia. The custom of baptising brides into a different confession dates to this very epoch, as well as religious disputes in general and the use of the word latinstvo (literally “Latinry”, which refers to the Unionist leanings of the Orthodox populace in the West of Russia – Lithuania in particular). Russian chronicles contain no prior memory of any substantial religious contentions, which was duly noted by N. A. Morozov ([547]).

The ensuing Union of 1439, which had temporarily united the Byzantine Church with its Roman counterpart, would lead to the severance of relations between Constantinople and Russia; the latter had refused to recognize the union. It is presumed that the Russian Church became independent around that time, q.v. below. See Chron6 for our discussion of the legend about the “baptism in the Dnepr” and its possible original.

4a. The Kiev Russia. Svyatopolk, 1015-1019, reigned for 4 years.

■ 4b. Russia-Horde. Youri Dmitrievich, 1425-1431, reigned for 6 years with intermissions. There is a good correspondence between the reign durations of the two.

4.1a. The Kiev Russia. Power struggle and the death of Svyatopolk, presumably an usurper.

■ 4.1b. Russia-Horde. Youri Dmitrievich had been forced to struggle for power all his life; he was deposed a number of times, but kept returning. He was the alleged usurper of power in the time of Vassily I.

5a. The Kiev Russia. Yaroslav the Wise, 1019-1054, reigned for 35 years.

■ 5b. Russia-Horde. Vassily II the Dark (Tyomniy), 1425-1462, reigned for 37 years. Their reign durations are in good correspondence with each other.

5.1a. The Kiev Russia. In the alleged year 1037 Yaroslav founds the Russian archdiocese, which is independent from Constantinople. This is where the de facto history of the Russian Church begins; chronicles leave one with the impression that “there had been an absence of events” prior to that ([372]). This is the time of the Russian Archdeacons (Metropolitans), who had presumably been Greek before.

■ 5.1b. Russia-Horde. In 1448 the Russian Metropolitan Iona is appointed without the consent of Constantinople; such appointments had been the prerogative of the latter up until then. The Russian Church severs all ties with the Unionist Church or Constantinople; it is presumed that the former has been independent from the latter ever since ([372]).

5.2a. The Kiev Russia. In 1097, Vassilko, Prince of Terebovl, was blinded in the course of the fratricidal war between the children of Yaroslav.

■ 5.2b. Russia-Horde. Vassily II the Dark (Tyomniy) was blinded. We have a very obvious parallelism between the names (Vassily = Vassilko), as well events (both have been blinded). See below for more extensive commentary.

5.3a. The Kiev Russia. The name is Vassilko. Blinded.

■ 5.3b. Russia-Horde. The name is Vassily. Blinded.

5.4a. The Kiev Russia. Vassilko is presumably a prince.

■ 5.4b. Russia-Horde. Vassily is presumably a Great Prince.

5.5a. The Kiev Russia. The conspiracy against Vassilko is masterminded by Svyatopolk, the Great Prince of Kiev.

■ 5.5b. Russia-Horde. The leader of the plot against Vassily is Boris, the Great Prince of Tver.

5.6a. The Kiev Russia. The blinding was preceded by the council of the princes “where they signed a truce” ([632], page 248). Both princes kissed a cross in order to demonstrate their good faith.

■ 5.6b. Russia-Horde. Vassily reminds the plotter about the recent truce and the kissing of the cross before the blinding: “For we have both kissed the Holy Cross … and sworn ourselves brothers … and, verily, one guardeth not against one’s brother” ([635], page 508).

5.7a. The Kiev Russia. We have a plot here led by David, Prince of Vladimir.

■ 5.7b. Russia-Horde. Also a plot, actually led by Prince Dmitriy Shemyaka.

5.8a. The Kiev Russia. Svyatopolk, the Great Prince of Kiev, takes no part in the actions of the cabal, which is emphasised in the chronicle.

■ 5.8b. Russia-Horde. Boris, the Great Prince of Tver and the leader of the conspiracy, doesn’t take part in the plot as it is carried out, either ([635], page 504).

5.9a. The Kiev Russia. Svyatopolk repents, and eventually sets forth to fight against David ([632], page 260).

■ 5.9b. Russia-Horde. It is none other but Boris of Tver who later helps Vassily II to regain his throne in Moscow ([635]).

5.10a. The Kiev Russia. Vassilko is accused of striving to deprive Svyatopolk of his throne ([632], page 248).

■ 5.10b. Russia-Horde. Vassily II is accused of plotting to become the Prince of Tver ([635], page 504).

5.11a. The Kiev Russia. Despite the fact that the plot is led by Great Prince Svyatopolk himself, the plotters “tremble in terror” ([632], page 250). This is somewhat odd; apparently, the Great Prince must mastermind a plot only to dethrone some perfectly insignificant “Prince Vassilko”.

■ 5.11b. Russia-Horde. The conspiracy turns out as one against the monarch himself. The plotters are trying to exonerate themselves: “Prince Ivan has told him: ‘Sire, if we wish you ill, may this ill befall ourselves as well, but we are doing it for the sake of Christianity and the tribute that you must pay to the Tartars, which they will cut down … upon seeing this’ ” ([635], page 509).

Commentary. For some reason, chronicles are anything but eloquent when it comes to Terebovl, the town where Vassilko had ruled. The only time we see this town mentioned in a chronicle is the legend about the blinding of Prince Vassilko. If this town had really been of such importance, why don’t any chronicles mention it in any other context? On the other hand, we know the story of Vassilko the Terebovlian to be a phantom duplicate of real events surrounding an attempted coup d’état in Tver. Could the “town of Terebovl” be a corrupted reference to the city of Tver that became recorded in chronicles in this form? The sounds B and V often transform into one another in the course of flexion, in which case the unvocalized root of the name is virtually the same – TRB vs. TVR.

5.12a. The Kiev Russia. Prior to his blinding, Vassilko had come to a monastery to pay his dues to the halidoms concealed therein; after that he was summoned to Kiev and got blinded ([632], page 250).

■ 5.12b. Russia-Horde. Vassily II was captured in the Troitskiy monastery, where he had come to pray at the ossuary of St. Sergiy. He was taken to Moscow and subsequently blinded ([635], pages 508-510).

5.13a. The Kiev Russia. Vassilko was forewarned, but refused to believe, saying: “How could it be they want to slay me? We have kissed the cross together and made peace; whosoever breaks it shall go against the cross and the rest of us” ([632], page 250).

■ 5.13b. Russia-Horde. Vassily II had received a warning about the plot in preparation, but refused to believe it: “They want to confuse us. I have kissed the cross together with my brothers; how can this be true?” ([635], page 506).

5.14a. The Kiev Russia. The Prince’s cabal had left the princely dwelling so as not to participate in the actual blinding, which is when Vassilko was seized by the servants ([632], page 250).

■ 5.14b. Russia-Horde. Prince Ivan of Mozhaysk, the capturer of Vassily II, had also left the church so as not to participate in the blinding personally right before the servants laid their hands on Vassily ([635], page 508).

5.15a. The Kiev Russia. Vassilko was incarcerated and blinded the next day after a lengthy counsel ([632], page 152). Then he got transferred to Vladimir for his subsequent imprisonment.

■ 5.15b. Russia-Horde. Vassily II was taken to Moscow on Monday and blinded on Wednesday ([635], page 511); after that, he was sent prisoner to Ouglich.

5.16a. The Kiev Russia. The blinding of Vassilko leads to a civil unrest; however, the war comes to a halt just as it starts ([632], page 254).

■ 5.16b. Russia-Horde. A strife begins after the blinding of Vassily II; however, it fails to evolve into a full-scale war and ends shortly ([635], pages 513-514).

5.17a. The Kiev Russia. The chronicle contains a detailed account of how Svyatopolk and David conferred with the blinded Vassilko in their attempts to nip the war in the bud. They promised Vassilko freedom for assistance, as well as a new domain to rule over – however, the domain in question is not the town of Terebovl, which is emphasised in the chronicle ([632], page 258).

■ 5.17b. Russia-Horde. Prince Shemyaka had made the decision to set Vassily II free and to give him Vologda as a new domain ([635], page 514). It is clear that Shemyaka didn’t have a single intention of returning Vassily to his rightful ex-domain of Moscow, since he had seized the throne for himself; however, the phantom reflection of this episode in the history of the Kiev Russia looks rather odd – indeed, what could possibly have been the problem with letting Vassilko have his old insignificant domain back so as to stop the war?

5.18a. The Kiev Russia. A war begins.

■ 5.18b. Russia-Horde. Here we also have the beginning of a war.

5.19a. The Kiev Russia. David proves incapable of resistance and flees without fighting.

■ 5.19b. Russia-Horde. Shemyaka fled the battlefield as soon as the war began.

5.20a. The Kiev Russia. The siege of Vsevolozh and the slaughter of its inhabitants. David isn’t in the city. Next we see him under siege in Vladimir.

■ 5.20b. Russia-Horde. The capture of Moscow and the punishment of the boyars held responsible. The plotters are absent from Moscow. Next comes the siege of Ouglich.

5.21a. The Kiev Russia. The Great Prince Svyatopolk chased David away to Poland ([632], page 260).

■ 5.21b. Russia-Horde. Shemyaka fled to Galich, towards the Polish border ([36], page 88).

5.22a. The Kiev Russia. Wars against David. David returns to Vladimir a couple of times, but eventually dies in Dorogobouzh ([632], pages 262-265).

■ 5.22b. Russia-Horde. Shemyaka rules over Oustyug for a while, but the troops of Vassily II chase him out. Died in Novgorod, presumably poisoned ([35], pages 88-89).

5.23a. The Kiev Russia. The story about the blinding of Vassilko is considered an independent piece of narration introduced into the Povest Vremennyh Let apocryphally ([632], page 448).

■ 5.23b. Russia-Horde. There is a separate literary work in existence entitled Story of the Blinding of Vassily II.

5.24a. The Kiev Russia. The narrative text in question is credited to a certain Vassily ([632], page 448).

■ 5.24b. Russia-Horde. It is assumed that the Story was dictated by Vassily II himself ([635], page 593).

6a. The Kiev Russia. Vsevolod, 1054-1093, reigned for 39 years.

■ 6b. Russia-Horde. Ivan III, 1462-1505, reigned for 43 years. We see the two reign durations to be in good correspondence with each other.

6.1a. The Kiev Russia. Vsevolod was married to a Greek princess; the first mention of the famous “Monomakh’s Hat” is associated with his reign; he presumably received it from the King of the Greeks “as a ransom”, according to the legend. Nowadays the legend in question is naturally presumed “erroneous”, since there had allegedly been no large-scale campaigns against Constantinople in Vsevolod’s reign. The Greek emperor who had given him the hat was called Constantine Monomakh, hence the name.

■ 6.1b. Russia-Horde. Ivan III is married to Sophia Palaiologos, the Greek princess. He introduces such attributes of royal power as the orb and Monomakh’s hat. This hat is drawn on the head of Metropolitan Iona as represented in an icon; it distinguishes him from the rest of the Muscovite metropolitans. In 1453 Constantinople falls into the hands of the Ottomans, or the Atamans, whose troops set forth from Russia (see Chron5 for more details). The legend of “the ransom” as related above instantly becomes understandable.

7a. The Kiev Russia. Vladimir Monomakh, 1093-1125, reigned for 32 years. He was baptised Vassily ([632], page 392).

■ 7b. Russia-Horde. Vassily III, 1505-1533, reigned for 28 years. Note the coinciding names and the good correspondence between their reign durations.

7.1a. The Kiev Russia. Vladimir Monomakh was the son of a Greek princess, which is emphasised by his actual nickname. Vladimir Monomakh would be drawn wearing Monomakh’s Hat and holding a royal orb; he was called “Czar”.

■ 7.1b. Russia-Horde. Vassily III is the son of a Greek princess who used to wear Monomakh’s Hat and was often drawn wearing it.

8a. The Kiev Russia. The two brothers Mstislav and Yaropolk, 1125-1139, reigned for 14 years.

■ 8b. Russia-Horde. The Reign of the Seven Boyars (Semiboyarshchina), 1533-1547, lasted for 14 years. We see a good correspondence in the reign durations.

9a. The Kiev Russia. Vsevolod, 1139-1146, reigned for 7 years.

■ 9b. Russia-Horde. Ivan IV, 1547-1553, died in 1557, reigned for 6 or 10 years. This is the first part of the period known as the reign of the “Terrible King” (see Chapter 8 for details). The durations of these reigns are rather similar.

10a. The Kiev Russia. Izyaslav, 1146-1155, reigned for 9 years.

■ 10b. Russia-Horde. Dmitriy, an infant, 1553-1563, reigned for 10 years. This is the second part of the period known as the reign of the “Terrible King”. The reign durations correlate with each other well.

11a. The Kiev Russia. Youri Dolgoroukiy, 1148-1157, reigned for 9 years.

■ 11b. Russia-Horde. Ivan, an adolescent, together with the Zakharyins, the Yourievs and the oprichnina terror of 1563-1572, 9 years altogether. This is the third part of the period known as the reign of the “Terrible King”. The reign durations are in good correspondence.

12a. The Kiev Russia. Izyaslav Davydovich + Mstislav Izyaslavich, 1157-1169, reigned for 12 years in Kiev. Next came a period of civil unrest, marking the end of Kiev as a capital. This pair of rulers (father and son) appears to comprise a separate short dynasty of their own.

■ 12b. Russia-Horde. Simeon-Ivan, 1572-1584, reigned for 12 years. This is the fourth and final part of the period known as the reign of the “Terrible King’s” reign, and we notice a good correspondence between the reign durations.

13a. The Kiev Russia. Andrei Bogolyubskiy, 1157-1174, reigned for 17 years. The end of the Kiev Russia.

■ 13b. Russia-Horde. Fyodor Ioannovich (Ivanovich), 1484-1498, reigned for 14 years. His reign was followed by the famous strife of the XVI century. This is the end of the Yaroslavichi dynasty (the descendants of Yaroslav). The reign durations are in good concurrence. However, this is where the biographical parallelism ends. As we demonstrate in the “King of the Slavs”, the biography of Andrei Bogolyubskiy, or Andronicus Comnene, the Constantinople emperor, served as the basis for the Evangelical rendition of the life of Christ.

Commentary. The shift of dates equals 350 years here and not 400; nevertheless, the blinding of Prince Vassilko of Terebovl is an obvious duplicate of the blinding of Great Prince Vassily II. Bear in mind that the chronicle pays a great deal of attention to this event for some reason, despite the fact that Prince Vassilko of Terebovl isn’t famous for any actions at all. Moreover, the Povest Vremennyh Let even interrupts its brief annual narration here, and devotes a whole four pages and nineteen illustrations to the “blinding of Vassilko” ([635], pages 504-521).

Our motion forward along the historical timeline of the Moscow Russia has brought us to the epoch when the power in the state was seized by the Romanovs. Let us jump ahead and relate our reconstruction of this epoch in brief.

Fyodor was succeeded by Boris Godunov; the XVII-XX century historians describe him as an old and experienced politician who had enjoyed a great influence even in the time of Ivan the Terrible. He is presumed to have been the de facto ruler of the country on behalf of Fyodor Ioannovich over the 14 years of the latter’s reign. Our analysis also demonstrates that the biography of Godunov became seriously distorted under the Romanovs, q.v. in Chron4, Chapter 9.

According to our reconstruction, Czar Boris (“Godunov”) had been a very young man – miles away from his Romanovian image of the “old and seasoned politician”, which belongs to an altogether different prototype, namely, his maternal uncle by the name of Dmitriy Godunov. According to our reconstruction, the latter had been the brother of Irina Godunova, the wife of Czar Fyodor Ioannovich. Queen Irina was therefore the mother of Boris “Godunov”, and not his sister, which makes Boris Fyodorovich “Godunov” the most likely candidate for the lawful son and heir of the previous Czar, Fyodor Ivanovich. This means that he had died at a much earlier age than it is presumed by the adherents of the Millerian-Romanovian history. A propos, this explains the strange fact that his heir, Fyodor Borisovich, had still been an infant guarded by his mother at the time of Boris’s death.

It is common knowledge that a great civil unrest began in the reign of Boris “Godunov”. Dmitriy Godunov, old and experienced in court affairs, had already been dead by that time; according to our reconstruction, the throne was occupied by the young king Boris “Godunov” at the time. This is when we see the advent of another contender to the royal title – Prince Dmitriy, the so-called “False Dmitriy” (Lzhedmitriy).

Romanovian historians declared him an impostor who had borne no relation to the royal family whatsoever; however, our reconstruction makes it likely that he had been the son of one of the previous Czars – namely, Ivan Ivanovich, therefore a rightful claimant. Our hypothesis makes Czar Ivan Ivanovich one of the several Czars that became collated into a single figure of “Ivan the Terrible” by later Romanovian historians, q.v. in Chron4, Chapter 8. The “False Dmitriy-to-be” was raised in the family of the Zakharyins-Romanovs, who were the rulers during this period. Ivan Ivanovich was subsequently dethroned and had accompanied Czar Ivan-Simeon; his death came in 1581, q.v. in Chron4, Chapter 8.

Further events unfurled in the following manner. Prince Dmitriy = “The False Dmitriy” had attempted to seize the throne; the attempt was successful. Although Dmitriy had suffered defeat in open military confrontation, he must have had allies in Moscow, since Czar Boris “Godunov” had apparently been poisoned (died as he stood up from the table). Therefore, Dmitriy’s enthronement is a result of the boyar conspiracy. The boyars had killed the infant monarch Fyodor Borisovich and his mother, letting Dmitriy into Moscow. We agree with the standard version for the most part in this particular instance.

It is presumed that about a year after his enthronement, Dmitriy got killed as a result of yet another boyar conspiracy organised by Vassily Shouyskiy, who makes himself Czar.

However, we are of the opinion that Dmitriy had really managed to survive; his re-appearance is considered to have been the advent of another “False Dmitriy” by the modern historians – the so-called “Thief from Tushino”, after the name of his royal residence. By the way, some of the most distinguished boyars had been members of his court. He got killed eventually.

The Zakharyins-Romanovs had originally supported Dmitriy, but betrayed him after his first enthronement, declaring their support of Shouyskiy. Filaret Nikitich Romanov was chosen Patriarch in the camp of the “impostor”, despite the fact that there had already been a living patriarch by the name of Iov in Moscow. After the death of Dmitriy, the civil war raged on even harder; the Polish troops had remained in Moscow for a long time.

When the Poles were finally ousted, the Romanovs succeeded in making Mikhail Romanov Czar. The circumstances of this election are very obscure indeed, likewise the entire reign of this ruler. Let us simply point out that Filaret was made Patriarch twice, the second time already after the election of Mikhail. Someone must have tried to hush up his alliance with Dmitriy, but to no avail; thus, Filaret’s first Patriarchal election is a well-known fact ([372]).

It is easy to understand why the Romanovs became supporters of the version about “prince Dmitriy being an impostor” when they had come to power, despite their having been in the camp of his supporters initially. They may even be the authors of this version! The supporters of Czar Boris (“Godunov”) may have accused Dmitriy of having been a “renegade priest”, or someone who had given monastic vows and broken them – this would invalidate a person’s claims to the throne in their opinion. They would have no reasons to doubt his being a prince; it is a well-known fact that Dmitriy’s mother, Maria Nagaya, confessed to her motherhood several times, with many people present. It is usually presumed that she made a denouncement after the murder of Dmitriy; however, her real words testify to the opposite ([372]). However, declaring Dmitriy an impostor was vital for the Romanovs, since Dmitriy’s four-year-old son had still been alive when Mikhail Romanov was elected – the lawful heir to the throne, unlike the Romanovs.

On the other hand, the supporters of Boris “Godunov” would hardly benefit from planting this rumour, seeing as how Boris had been a perfectly legitimate ruler and heir to the throne with no reasons to accuse Dmitriy of being an impostor. Having come to power, the Romanovs started to use the name Godunov for referring to Boris (his mother’s maiden name). They also ascribed to him a political ploy of their very own, namely, spread the rumour that Dmitriy was called impostor by Boris himself. They also removed all possible obstacles to the throne, having disposed of the young son of “the impostor Dmitriy”, and, possibly, of Czar Dmitriy Ivanovich himself, q.v. in Chron4, Chapter 9.

Despite the fact that the four-year-old prince had really been the rightful heir to the throne, he was hanged on the Spasskiye Gates; his death was thus made known to the general public ([436], page 778).

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 print 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 qva 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.