Part 5.
Ancient Egypt as part of the Great “Mongolian” Ataman Empire of the XIV-XVI century.
Chapter 17.
The Trojan War of the XIII century and Pharaoh Ramses II. “Ancient” Egypt of the XIII-XVI century.
The Trojan War of the XIII century and Pharaoh Ramses II. “Ancient” Egypt of the XIII-XVI century.
We shall presently discuss a famous pharaoh dynasty of the alleged XIII century B. C. Egyptologists count it as the nineteenth. As we have discovered, the history of the dynasty does in fact reflect the “real history” of the XIII-XIV century A. D. According to the New Chronology, it is the epoch of the Trojan War.
Let us list the pharaohs of the so-called XIX dynasty according to [99], page 728.
1) Ramessu I, 2) Mineptah I & Seti I, 3) Miamun I & Ramessu II, 4) Mineptah II Khotephim, 5) Seti II & Mineptah III, 6) Sethnakht Merer Miamun II.
The most famous pharaoh of this dynasty is Ramessu II, whose name is most likely to stand for “Rome-Jesus”. He is also known as Ramses - once again, Ram Jesus or Ram-Jesus.
1. The nation of Heta or the Cossack Goths. Russia, or the Horde, in Egyptian texts found upon Egyptian monuments.
1.1. The Hitians, ot the Mongols.
Brugsch begins his account of the XIX dynasty with the description of Hita or Heta, a great nation - the Goths, as we are beginning to realise, or the Russians.
However, it is possible that Brugsch himself suspected the blood relations of the Hita nation and the “Mongols”, without realising just how correct he was really. This is what G. K. Vlastov tells us about this matter: “Brugsch was referring to the Hiksos dynasty and the Hita (or the Heta), especially the latter, whom he suspects of having Mongolian blood, as we shall see later on ([99], page 75).
In Greek, Megalion means “The Great”, which once again identifies the Hittites (or the Goths) as the “Mongols”.
Apparently, Egyptian sources are referring to the history of relations between the Ottoman = Ataman Empire, or Russia (the Horde) of the XIV-XVI century. The Pharaohs are the Ottoman = Ataman Sultans, and the nations of the Heta nations are the Great Princes of Russia, also known as the “Mongolian” Great Khans.
As we already mentioned in in CHRON1, Chapter 7:7.3, according to Scaligerian history, the Hittites were “discovered in Asia Minor” as late as in 1880. Professor Archibald Sayes (and then William Wright) suggested to consider the land to the North of Palestine the “land of the ancient Hittites” ([291], page 21), basing their suggestion on the Bible and being certain that the Biblical “promised land” was located in the modern Palestine and not anywhere else. After that, some of the archaeological findings made here were attributed to “those very Hittites”.
N. A. Morozov wrote: <<Edward Meier believed that the Hittites were one of the ‘primary ethnic groups in Asia Minor’. He believes that their culture left behind the reliefs with lengthy noses, pointed hats and shoes with toes pointing upwards. But what made him identify these figures in such a manner? . . . The most interesting local emblems are as follows: the winged solar disc and the snakes similar to the Egyptian ones. Apart from those, we have the bicephalous eagle of the Byzantine kind, a two-sided axe and winged gods, clearly prototypes of the cherubs . . .
However, another discovery was made recently, which was thoroughly amazing . . . A study of the burial mounds in the Southern Russia yielded a number of similar findings. Thus, in the burial mound of the Chertomlytskaya Queen in the Kuban region of Russia archaeologists found a pointed hat of the Hittite sort. The nation that created such objects lived in the Maikop region, while in the Kiev province researchers discovered a bronze belt “doubtlessly” identifiable as belonging to a culture closely related to that of the Hittites. See G. I. Borovka, “Female Head-dresses of the Chertomlytskiy Burial Mound”, Courier of the Material Culture History Academy, 1921.
G. I. Borovka says the following in this respect: “The influence of the Hittite culture was still great enough to manifest for a long time and on a great distance . . . after the nation and the culture that created it had long perished” (2100 years later!) (as Morozov points out – Auth.).
Indeed, how can we withhold from being amazed at such great influence of the Hittite culture?>> ([544], Volume 6, page 1053).
1.2. King of the Goths.
Here are several examples of the names borne by the kings of the Heta nation: Maurosar (the Maur Czar, or the Black Czar, or the Little Czar (Mal-Czar), qv in [99], page 431. The last name is well familiar to us from the Russian chronicles. Let us once again recollect the confusion of R and L in Egyptian texts.
Another example is Hitasar - Goth-Czar, or Czar of the Goths ([99], page 431).
This Czar of the Goths, or Hitasar was “a friend, an ally and the father-in-law of Pharaoh Ramses II” ([99], page 431). This is perfectly natural - the Ottoman, or Ataman Sultans and the “Mongolian” Khans, also known as the Russian Great Princes, were often related, qv in CHRON4.
“Their influence [the influence of the Heta nation, that is - Auth.] grew with every year, becoming so strong that the Egyptian inscriptions make references to the Czars of the Heta nation and respectfully mention their gods” ([99], page 431).
1.3. The land of Tana, or Tini.
In CHRON6 we shall demonstrate that Egypt as described in the Bible isn’t the African Egypt, but rather Russia, or the Horde, of the XIV-XVI century. Therefore, it is little wonder that the artefacts from African Egypt have preserved a great deal of information concerning Biblical Egypt, or Russia (the Horde).
The “ancient” history of Egypt contains many references to “the land of Tini, which must have been one of the most ancient settlements in Egypt and the capital of a local principality” ([99], page 103). It was also known as Tinis ([99], page 103).
This land is most likely to identify as the famous Tana, or the Cossack Don in Russia, or the Horde. Above we mention that River Don was also known as Tana, whereas the form “Tinis” sounds similar to “Tanais” - another name of the Don, qv above. Apparently, when the names pertaining to the Horde were transferred to Egypt, the name Tanais transformed into “Tunisia”.
It turns out that “the first two dynasties [of the Egyptian Pharaohs - Auth.] hailed from Tinis, or Tini; the first pharaoh of the first Tinitian dynasty was known as Menes” ([99], page 104).
Everything is perfectly correct. The first Mameluke dynasties to reign in African Egypt were of a Cossack origin, and must have hailed from the Don in particular, qv above.
Further it turns out that “the main city of the fourteenth nomos [an administrative region in Egypt - Auth.], Tanis . . . bore another name as well - Tsar (or Tsal), which was foreign in origin [once again we see the Egyptian confusion between R and L - Auth.], which was also occasionally put in the plural - Tsaru, or ‘city of the Tsars’, in a way” ([99], page 220). The “ancient” Egyptian texts thus tell us that the Egyptian Czars came from the city or the land of Tana (Don).
1.4. The Don Cossacks.
According to Brugsch, “the name used in the Egyptian writings for referring to the land . . . reigned by the Heta is Katsautana, which is a reference to the region of Gozan (Gautsanitinis). See Ptolemy V, 18, and Migdonius Strabon, XVI, 1 & 23” ([99], page 432). Further also: “The army of the Hita nation was ruled by the Katsans” ([99], page 433).
It is hard to shake off the impression that we see a direct reference to the Cossacks (as Gozan or Katsan), as well as the Don (or Tana) Cossacks (the Cossacks from the Azov region, that is) - Katsau-Tana or Gautsa-Tinis (Cossack Tanais, or the Don).
1.5. Don as the “river of the Mongols”.
We also see the land of Migdonia here (qv in the above reference of Brugsch to the “ancient” Strabon). It is likely to stand for Magdonia, which can be translated as “Mighty Don”, or, alternatively, “Don of the Moguls” (Mongols), or the Mongol River, seeing as how “Don” could simply stand for “river”. This fact is discussed in CHRON5, Chapter 3:9.2.
Further on, Brugsch reports: “Among the cities of the Hita known to us we have Tunep (Daphne) and Khilibu (Khaleb)” ([99], page 432). It is likely that we see yet another reference to the city of Azov = Tana (Tunep). Above we mention that Azov was also known as Tana.
1.6. Khaleb = Aleppo can be identified as Lipetsk, a city in Russia, or, alternatively, as Apulia in Italy or the Russian word for “bread” (“khleb”).
The city of Khilibu, or Khaleb, is also referred to as Aleppo by Egyptian sources ([99], page 522). This name can obviously be associated with the Russian word “lepo” (“beautiful”) or “lyubiy” (“dear”). There is the famous Russian city of Lipetsk in the west of the Don and Oka Plain - the same region as Tana, or Don. River Vorona that Lipetsk stands on flows right into the Don. Lipetsk was built on the site of one of the oldest Russian settlements.
Its old name is “Malye Studenki Lipskiye”, and the nearby river was formerly known as “Lipovka” ([185], pages 238-239). The traditional history of Lipa, or Lipetsk, begins in the alleged III millennium B. C. ([185], pages 238-239). Of course, this “dating” must be rectified and transferred into the Middle Ages, just like every other dating.
Egyptian chronicles point out that “the Czar of Hita sits in the Land of Khilibu [Aleppo - Auth.]” ([99], page 471). Everything is perfectly correct - the centre of the Goths, or the Don Cossacks, used to be located in the “land of the Don”.
Nowadays one finds the city of Aleppi in the very south of India, whereas the city of Khalaib is in Egypt, on the shores of the Red Sea. Tunisia, or the Egyptian land of Tanu, can be found on the map of North Africa today. Nevertheless, this does not imply that our parallels between the Hittite (or Gothic) names and those of the Russian cities are of an arbitrary nature.
The matter is that, according to our conception, a great many geographical names were spread all across the world during the Great = “Mongolian” Conquest, originating from Russia. In particular, they ended up in the Western Europe, Egypt, India, China and America. Moreover, as we have already witnessed, even after the dissolution of the Great Empire in the XVII century, West Europeans unwittingly continued the expansion of the Russian and Turkic names, which we can find in India, China and Egypt. We have already mentioned this in the chapter dedicated to Marco Polo.
Thus, the Russian name “lepo” (“beautiful”) may have ended up in Italy, which was conquered by the “Mongols”, transforming into the modern Apulia. The only difference between the unvocalised versions of the two names is the direction we read them in.
However, it may also be that the “ancient” Egyptian Khilibu is a slight distortion of the Russian word “khleb” - “bread”, and stands for “a land where bread is abundant”. It is said that “King Hita sits in the Land of Khilibu” ([99], page 471). And we know that Russia, or the Horde, was one of the world’s main exporters of bread up until the XIX century.
1.7. The Land of Canaan as the Land of the Khans.
The nation of Hita (Heta) was in close relation to the nation of Canaan. According to Brugsch, they were allies; other scientists believe the two to identify as one and the same nation ([99], page 432).
Here we see the word Khan transcribed as “Canaan”. This is perfectly natural - if we see the Goths, or the Cossacks, on the walls of the Egyptian monuments, we should also see the Khans.
1.8. Russian names on Egyptian stones.
We also have to point out that among the Hittite names that one often finds upon Egyptian monuments there are many words whose origins are likely to be traceable back to the following Russian (or Turkic) names:
Samarius = Sarmatia (or Samara).
Targatha = Tartar-Goth (Turkish Goth).
Artha = Horde.
Mashawa = Meshech (Moscow).
Taniros = Tan-Russia, Russian Tana or Russian Don.
Yurima (Iurima) = Youriev or Yourievets.
Atini = Tana or the Don once again.
Ares = Ross or Russ.
Karshua = Kerch.
Taritsa = Staritsa or Turtsia (Turkey).
Sur = Czar or Rus (read in reverse); alternatively, River Sura, a tributary of the Oka.
Amarseki = Mars or “morskoi” (“marine”).
Magnas = “mighty”, Megalion and Mongolia (“the great”).
Khata’ai = Katai or Kitai (“China” or Scythia).
Artsakaka = Russ-Khana, or “Russian Khan’s Domain”, or “Astrakhan”.
Athur = Tartar or Turkish.
Maurmar = Sea of Marmara or the city of Murom.
Pukiu = Pskov. Let us point out the following: “The inhabitants of Pskov were known to all the ancient historians under the names of Peucini” ([388], page 65).
Khaleb = Aleppo ([99], page 522), also known as Khalbu, Teleb, Talaba = “lepo” (“beautiful”) = Lipetsk or Apulia (or, alternatively, the Russian word for “bread”, “khleb”).
Let us reiterate that during the Great = “Mongolian” conquest many of the Russian and Turkic names spread all across the map, winding up in distant parts of the Western Europe, Asia, America, Africa etc.
Brugsch points out that the nation of the Hita is of an unknown origin ([99], page 435). Citing the list of cities inhabited by the nation of Hita, which is where the abovementioned names were taken from, Brugsch writes: “The readers should attentively consider the names suggested herein, since they offer a key to the understanding of the Hita language (apart from the names of Semitic origin), one that we shall have to use in order to define the place of the Hita nation in the history of other ancient peoples” ([99], page 436).
We have followed Brugsch’s recommendation, and, hopefully, managed to define such a place - it is that of Russia, or the Horde.
1.9. Scaligerian history admits the existence of “armies hailing from the Caucasus” in the “ancient” Egypt.
It turns out that in the epoch of the 19th dynasty there were “armies of mercenaries from the Caucasus and Pontus Euxinus fighting in Egypt; they moved to Lybia around that very time” ([99], page 545). Thus, even the Egyptologists themselves admit that the “ancient” Egypt was populated by nations from the Caucasus. As for the name Caucasus, we have already mentioned that it is derived from the word “Cossack”. Let us remind the readers that the Cossack Army from the Caucasus (the Terskie Cossacks) is believed to rank among the most important Cossack armies ([183], Volume 1, page 4).
“They reappear on the Egyptian historical arena in the epoch of Ramses III. Their armies were aided by certain other tribes and nations, whose names were partially preserved by the Greeks in correct transcription. Herein we shall provide . . . a list of those, in order to find out about the origins of these circumcised [as Brugsch appears to believe - Auth.] tribes, much respected by the Egyptians:
1. Kaikasha - tribes from the Caucasus [according to Brugsch himself! - Auth.],
2. Akaiwasha - Achaeans from the Caucasus [AK-Iusha, or the Tribe of Jesus? - Auth.],
3. Shardana, the Sardons or the Khartanoi [Czars from the Don - Auth.],
4. Tursha - residents of the Tauris [the Turks - Auth.],
5. Tsakkar, Tsakkari, Tsigi and Tsigrita [the Guz, or the Cossacks, given the reverse reading of the name Tsig or Zig - Auth.],
6. Leku, or the Lygians [possibly, Lacaedemonians, or the Greek Spartans - Auth.],
7. The Washash, or the Ossetians [as Brugsch himself is telling us! Basically, we have yet another reference to the Cossacks - Auth.] ([99], pages 545-546).
One must point out that the Egyptologist Maspero ([99], page 546) cites some data according to which the nation of Tursha identifies as the Tirsenians or the Tirrenians, or the Etruscans, qv above. This is in perfect correspondence with our reconstruction.
