Part 6.
Ancient Russia, world history and geography in mediaeval Scandinavian geographical tractates.
Chapter 21.
The meanings of the familiar modern geographical names in the Middle Ages. The opinion of the Scandinavians.
9. Vina. Byzantium. Volga. Eastern Baltic regions.
Scandinavian texts also give us the following geographical synonyms:
River Vina =*= Northern Dvina ([523], page 35).
Byzantium =*= Grikland ([523], page 34) =*= Girkland ([523], page 65).
River Volga =*= Olkoga ([523], page 35).
Some mediaeval authors also called Volga Ithil ([517]) and Rha (from the Russian “reka”, or “river”, qv above).
Eastern Baltic regions =*= Ermland ([523], page 59).
10. Gardariki = Russia. Geon = Nile. Germany.
Gardariki =*= Russia, or the ancient Russian state (see below).
According to the mediaeval Scandinavian author, “Gardariki is located in the Eastern part of Europe” ([523], page 78). No other Eastern European countries are mentioned, so one gets the impression that they are all included in Gardariki as parts of the gigantic Russian state.
Modern commentators are also forced to point out this curious fact: “He [the Scandinavian author – Auth.] reports what he believes to be the most important information concerning this part of the world. He doesn’t utter a word about any of the different lands and nations of the Eastern Europe apart from mentioning a single state – Gardariki, or the ancient Russia, apparently regarding it as the greatest and most powerful in this region” ([523], page 80).
Another mediaeval Scandinavian author reports the same: “In the Eastern part of Europe we find Gardariki, with Grikland laying to its south – that is where Constantinople is” ([523], page 88). Two primary countries are named here: Gardariki, or Russia, and the Ottoman = Ataman Empire. The name Gardariki must have stood for “Garda-Riki”, or “Horde-Reich”, state of the Horde.
The synonyms we learn from the Scandinavian authors are therefore as follows:
Gardariki =*= Scythia =*= Russia =*= Rusia =*= Ruzkia =*= Ruzcia =*= Rusland ([523], page 226) = Gardar ([523], page 46) =*= Great City ([523], page 46) =*= Austrriki ([523], pages 87 and 89) = Austria = Africa = Thracia = Tartary = Turkey.
Geon =*= Nile, a river in Egypt ([523], page 32). The source of River Geon is reported to be in Paradise ([523], page 64). This mediaeval claim leads us to several thoughts. According to the standard and popular mediaeval conception, Paradise was located in the East, qv below in the corresponding section. However, the Nile flows from the south and not from the East. There appears to be some uncertainty here.
Germany =*= Saxland ([523], page 34) = Armenia.
According to the Scandinavian, “Germany is the name of the land that we call Saxland. It is a mighty state” ([523], page 65).
Let us also cite the names of Germany used in the mediaeval English sources (see [517] and the table that we compiled after the book of V. I. Matouzova found in CHRON4, Chapter 15:1.5).
Germany, or Germania = Gothia = Mesia. The last name resembles Amazonia (land of the Amazons - ?) = Theutonia = Allemania = Jermaine. See more on the Amazons below, in the section called “Scythia”.
The fact that Scandinavian and English sources identify Germany as Gothia demonstrates that there were close ties between Germany and Russia, formerly known as Gothia.
11. The City (“Gorod” in Russian) = Grad = The Gods. Scandinavians and Europeans in general called Russia “Land of the Great God” and “Land of the Giants”.
Let us provide a list of synonyms mentioned by the Scandinavian authors.
Gorod =*= Grad (ancient Slavic) =*= Grhas (“house”, ancient Indian) =*= Gardas (“fence”, Lithuanian”) =*= Gards (“house” or “family” – Gothic) =*= The Great City =*= Gardariki =*= Russia =*= Rusia =*= Scythia =*= Ruzcia =*= Russland =*= Ruzaland ([523], page 226) =*= Gardar ([523], page 46) =*= Austrriki ([523], pages 87 and 89) = Austria = Thracia = Africa.
The word “Grad”, especially such forms thereof as Gardas, Gards and Garda are very distinctly similar to the famous word “Horde”.
Now let us consider a very interesting group of synonyms used by the mediaeval Scandinavians and reflecting the real opinion of Russia, or the Horde of the XIV-XVI century held by the mediaeval Europeans. As we shall see, it was respectful and quite unlike what we have seen on the pages of Scaligerian textbooks starting with the XVII-XVIII century.
The Goths =*= Gods =*= Godland (land of the gods) =*= Russia =*= Great Svitjod ([523], pages 98-99) =*= Godiot = Godtiod = Gothia (Gotia), part of Scythia =*= Gautar = Gothar = Jotaland (Sweden, see [523], page 205) = Land of the Giants = Jotunheim.
This is what we learn from Y. A. Melnikova. <<Godiot, or Godtiot – the name is found in the legend about the Scandinavians being descendants of the Aesir who came from Asia . . . It is used for referring to the descendants of the Asians led by Odin who settled in Scandinavia . . . We can think of a new meaning of the ethnicon Gautar (or Gotar), which can be a derivative of the word “god” . . . Godland is the mythical land in Northern Europe populated by the Asians led to Scandinavia by Odin. Gotia (Gothia) is an area to the north of the Black Sea, one of the three parts of Scythia according to the ‘Guidebook’. We find it in early mediaeval literature starting with the end of the IV century [or the XIII-XIV century, according to our reconstruction – Auth.] as an alias of Dakia, which was populated by the Goths back then>> ([523], page 205).
Here is another interesting piece of evidence found in an ancient Scandinavian manuscript: “A third of Gardariki [or ancient Russia, qv above – Auth.] is called Canguard; it is close to the chain of hills that separate Jotunheim [land of the Giants – Y. A. Melnikova] and Holmgardariki” ([523], page 210). Canguard was the Scandinavian name for Kiev, qv below.
It would be interesting to find out which part of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire was called Jotunheim, or Land of the Giants, by the mediaeval authors. It turns out that the Land of the Giants was also located in Scythia by the mediaeval English authors, qv in CHRON4, Chapter 15:1.5. The English also identified the giants as the nation of Gogmagog – the same old Goths and Mongols. Do the Scandinavian sources confirm this identification?
They do indeed. Apparently, another Scandinavian name for the Goths was Jotir, and their land was called Jotaland ([523], page 205) – quite the same as Jotunheim. Therefore, the fact that the Land of the Goths can be identified as the Land of the Giants is confirmed by the English sources as well as the Scandinavian.
Other Scandinavian names of the Ancient Russia used in the Middle Ages were Reidgotaland and Hreidgotar – Great Gothia or Gothia the Glorious ([523], page 214). Both can be translated as “Land of the Great God” – an obvious name, given that the Great = “Mongolian” conquest also became reflected in history as the famous crusades that spread the faith in Jesus Christ (Andronicus-Christ 1152-1185), or “Great God” all across the world, hence the association. The name “Great Svitjod” (“The Great Holy One”) must be of the same origin. As for “Holy Russia” – it was a formula used quite actively up until the XIX century.
The name Hreidgotar is encountered the most often in German sources. Y. A. Melnikova reports: “Reidgotaland is a toponym derived from the ethnicon Hreidgotar. There are more than 10 mentions of either name in German sources, primarily used in the epic context . . . As for the works unrelated to heroic epos . . . the toponym Reidgotaland is used separately from all the other geographical names and referred to as archaic” ([523], page 213).
The last remark is of a particular interest to us. It shows that the German and Scandinavian chronicles have fortunately preserved the archaic name of the Ancient Russia used in the XIV-XVI century, namely, Reidgotaland, or Great Goth-Land (alternatively, “Land of the Great God”).
The meaning of the Scandinavian terms Reidgotaland and Hreidgotar is crystal clear – land of the Goths, we agree with the historians here. The word “hreid” translates as “great” or “glorious” ([523], page 214). It is derivative of the Russia words for “horde” and “proud” – “orda” and “gordiy”, respectively.
Furthermore, it turns out that the famous Scandinavian author Snorri Sturulson “identifies it [Reidgotaland – Auth.] as the Gothland Isle in the ‘Ingling Saga’” ([523], page 214). Let us correct him a little – most probably, the Isle of Gothland is just a small Western remnant of the former glory of the enormous Land of the Goths – the Great = “Mongolian” Empire that comprised the whole of Europe in the XIV-XVI century.
Nowadays the Scaligerite historians find themselves confused attempting to locate the Great Land of the Goths, or Reidgotaland, on the map. It has no place in the Scaligerian geography of the Middle Ages, the glorious name notwithstanding.
Y. A. Melnikova concludes as follows: “Thus, the origin and the form of the toponym, its application and the lack of a precise localization (although the region in question, namely, Scandinavia and the Baltic States, happens to be studied very well) – all of the above lead us to the conclusion that it can be classified as an epic name, which has no parallel in real topography and therefore cannot be localized” ([523], page 214). In other words – pay no attention to such fairy tales as the above.
Indeed, there is no place for the Great = “Mongolian” Empire of the XIV-XVI century. Some things became obliterated, and the rest was cast into deep and nebulous antiquity.
12. Greece = Grikland = Land of St. George.
According to the Scandinavians, the names listed below all referred to the same geographical region.
Grikland =*= Byzantium ([523], page 34 =*= Girkland = Grikkland =*= Gricland (Grickland) =*= Grecia ([523], page 205).
The following claim of a mediaeval Scandinavian author is particularly interesting to us: “Girkland was named after Konung Girgia” ([523], page 65). The Scandinavian original runs as follows: “Heitir Girc land vid pat, er Girgia konungr kendr” ([523], page 205). Girgia is the same as Georgiy, though – St. George the Victorious, also known as Genghis-Khan and Ryurik, as we are beginning to realise.
Modern commentators raised on Scaligerian history are naturally sceptical about this Scandinavian claim. However, they admit the following: “The etymology of the name Grickland was borrowed from Isidore or Honorius . . . and can be traced back to Pliny” ([523], page 71). Therefore, it turns out that the “ancient” authors concurred with the Scandinavians about the name of Greece being a derivative of the name George, or Georgiy (Grigoriy). Let us repeat the question: could the person in question be identified as Georgiy Danilovich, perhaps, also known as Georgiy Danilovich and Genghis-Khan – the brother of Ivan Danilovich Kalita, or Batu-Khan?
The fact that Greece (Grecia) can be identified as “The Land of St. George” is confirmed by another mediaeval report. It is known perfectly well that the Caspian Sea was known as “Hircanum Saulum” ([523], pages 222 and 223) – possibly, also due to its being located in the land of Gyurgiy (Georgiy, or George). The sea next to Italy was also known as the Girkland Sea ([523], page 65). All of the above appear to be surviving traces of the Great, or “Mongolian” conquest of Europe by Gyurgiy (Genghis-Khan) and Ioann (Batu-Khan).
The tale of Andrew the Apostle preaching in Russia is a common mediaeval theme. It is completely at odds with the Scaligerian chronology. At the same time, according to a mediaeval Scandinavian author, “Andrew the Apostle preached in Girkland” ([523], page 65). Modern commentary is as follows: “In later literature the sphere of Andrew’s missionary activity grows and begins to include Thracia and Greece, eventually also the Ancient Russia” ([523], page 72).
Andrew the Apostle appears to have “reached the Great City of Sebastus (or Sevastopol)” ([500], Volume 1, page 92). Further on we find out the following: “His [the apostle’s – Auth.] journey continued – he reached Novgorod and even the Varangians” ([500], Volume 1, page 96). Furthermore, Andrew the Apostle turns out to have reached Poland as well and preached there ([500], Volume 1, page 97).
In Scaligerian chronology we would have the state of Poland existing as early as in the I century A. D., which is the Scaligerian dating of Andrew’s lifetime. According to our reconstruction, Andrew the Apostle lived in the XII century A. D. – not the first (emperor Andronicus-Christ 1152-1185, also called Russian Prince Andrey Bogolyubsky, idem Apostle Andrew the First, see our book "The Czar of the Slavs ").
13. Dnepr. Don. The Danube. Europe. Egypt. The Western Dvina.
According to the Scandinavians, River Dnepr (or Nepr in some sources – see [523], page 35) =*= Danpr ([523], page 212).
River Don =*= Tanais (see [523], page 32) =*= Tanakvisl ([523], pages 40 and 111) = the Danube =*= Danubius ([523], page 222) =*= Dun ([523], page 40) =*= Danubium =*= Dyna =*= Hister (Hyster) =*= Istr = Dniester = Don = Tanais ([523], page page 32) =*= Tanakvisl ([523], page 40) = Duna =*= Northern Dvina ([523], page 35) = Dan =*= Jordan (or Iordan as per the Scandinavian sources, qv in [523], page 201) =*= Jor + Dan ([523], page 208).
Scandinavians believed that Europe was populated by the descendants of Japheth ([523], page 32).
Also: Egypt =*= Egiptaland =*= Mitzraim.
According to Y. A. Melnikova, “Egiptaland was the original dwelling place of Mitzraim, son of Ham, grandson of Noah” ([523], page 96). Isidore also refers to “Mezraim, the legendary forefather of the Egyptians” ([523], page 139).
The name Mitzraim obviously contains “Rome” as its part. N. A. Morozov, for example, suggested that it might translate as “Rome the Arrogant” ([544]). We aren’t quite as interested in the translation of the word’s first part – it is more important to us that the name Rome was directly associated with the “ancient” Egypt by the ancient authors. It is nevertheless possible that Mitz or Mis can be translated as Meshech, or Moscow, in which case Mitzraim shall mean “Muscovite Rome”. We shall come back to this issue in CHRON6.
Furthermore, it turns out that the following names were also synonymous to the Scandinavians:
The Western Dvina =*= Duna ([523], page 35) = Danube (Scandinavian “Danubis”) = Don =*= Tanais.
14. India.
14.1. The three Indias as the three Hordes.
The Scandinavians believed that India included the Caucasus, or the Capagus Mountains ([523], page 63) as well as River Idus (the name could be related to “Judea”). We have already demonstrated that the initial India (a derivative of the ancient Russian word “inde”, or “over there”, which simply translates as “faraway land”) used to be the Great = “Mongolian” Empire = Scythia = Russia, or the Horde. The Latin word “inde” (“far away”) is of the same origin.
Apparently, Scandinavian chronicles reveal the initial conception of India being Russia, despite the layers of Scaligerian plaster. According to Melnikova, “in the mind of the mediaeval geographers, India occupied the better part of Asia . . . It was divided into three parts: Greater India, Lesser India and Third India (Sind, Hind and Zini in Arabic sources). The first two are located in Asia; the third is African [or Scythian? See above for Africa and Scythia identified as two names of the same land – Auth.]” ([523], page 207).
Further also: “The division of India into three parts . . . is traditional for the mediaeval European geography” ([523], page 79). This division corresponds to the traditional division of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire into three Hordes. Namely, Lesser India identifies as the Lesser Russia, Greater India = as Greater Russia, whereas the Third India is the Russian Tartary. It is possible that the word “third” (TRD) as used in certain chronicles really stood for Tartary.
The fact that the Scandinavian author locates the Third India (or the Tartar India) in Africa means that it was really part of the TRK land – Turkey or Tartary. This fact is explained perfectly well by our reconstruction.
Our hypothesis about the three Indias (or “three faraway lands”) identified as the three Hordes of the Great Empire is also confirmed by the following passage of a Scandinavian chronicle:
“There are three Indialands: one is right next to Blaland [or Africa = TRK = Turkey = Tartary – Auth.], the other – near Serkland [Scythia, qv below – Auth.], and the third – at the edge of the world, between the sea the Land of Darkness” ([523], page 207).
The Land of Darkness and the sea must be referring to the polar and adjacent regions of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire and the Arctic Ocean. The long winter nights (Polar night) observed here became reflected in the name “Land of Darkness” – therefore, it is futile to look for one in the tropical India; it is more likely that the reference in question was made to northern regions.
14.2. The horrendous and dangerous India.
Late authors of the XVI-XVII century, such as Isidore, already got into the habit of scaring their simple-minded readers telling them about the “horrible and dangerous tribes” allegedly inhabiting India ([523], page 66).
The text found on one of the world maps cited in [523] (page 108) directly refers to India as to “India the Monstrous”. Modern commentators are confounded by this fact, suggesting several interpretations of the word “monstrous” – such as “India, the Land of Monsters”, “the monsters of India” and the “birthplace of the monsters” – hardly all that different from the initial definition. The meaning is quite clear – the mediaeval cartographer saw some danger in India – the modern commentator is perfectly correct to note that “the mention of the ‘dangerous tribes’ reflects the popular mediaeval legend of the nations Gog and Magog” ([523], page 67).
Let us recollect how the frightened Matthew of Paris described the “Satanic nation of Gog and Magog”, and the horrified tones of the English chronicles telling us about the Tartars (possibly edited in the XVII-XVIII century, qv in CHRON4, Chapter 18:17).
Therefore, the mediaeval sources call India, or “faraway land”, the home of Gog and Magog. However, in CHRON4 we already gave a detailed account of there Gog and Magog, or the Goths and the Mongols, lived in reality – the Great = “Mongolian” Empire, being none other than the Cossacks and the Russians in general. Once again, it turns out that India as mentioned by the authors of the Middle Ages identifies as Russia, or the Horde, of the XIV-XVI century.
15. Cairo = Babylon. The Kama. The Caspian Sea. Kiev. Constantinople. Kanugardr = Kiev. Kylfingaland. Lake Ladoga.
According to the Scandinavians, Cairo, or the modern capital of the African Egypt, was known as New Babylon ([523], page 79).
Further also: River Kama = Kuma ([523], page 35) =*= Kinna ([523], page 208).
The Caspian Sea =*= Hircan Sea ([523], page 148).
The Russian city of Kiev =*= Kanugardr ([523], pages 45 and 223) =*= Kio =*= Kiu ([523], page 111). See the corresponding section below for more details.
The mediaeval English sources (see [517]) also mention Kiev under the names of Chyo, Cleva and Riona.
According to the Scandinavians, Constantinople =*= Miklagardr ([523], page 45).
Kanugardr =*= Kiev =*= Kio =*= Kiu is a Russian city ([523], pages 45, 210 and 223) =*= Cleva =*= Riona ([517).
Y. A. Melnikova reports: “The most realistic assumption is that the name in question happens to be a transcription of the archaic Russian name of Kiev . . . possibly, it its form of ‘Kian Gorod’, or ‘City of the Kievites’, particularly close to the transcription ‘Kiaenugardr’” ([523], page 210). The very word Kanugardr may be derived from Kan-Gardr, or “City of the Khans”.
We have become accustomed to the idea that Kiev was the capital of the ancient Russian state. This is true for some periods of Russian history – more precisely, Kiev was the capital of one of the Hordes. However, Kiev wasn’t the primary capital in the epoch of the Great = “Mongolian” Empire, or the XIV-XVI century. Moreover, it was conquered by the Mongols, or the Great Ones. The capital was in Novgorod the Great, or the area around Yaroslavl, according to our reconstruction. Shall we find this confirmed by the Scandinavian texts? The answer is in the positive. This is what Y. A. Melnikova tells us further on: “Ancient Scandinavian sources seldom mention Kiev; its leading position amongst the Russian cities is hardly referred to anywhere – as far as the Scandinavians were concerned, the capital of Russia was in Novgorod, or Holmgardr” ([523], page 210).
Furthermore, the Scandinavians believed that Kylfingaland =*= Land of Bells =*= Gardariki =*= Ancient Russia ([523], page 138).
Y. A. Melnikova gives us several possible translations of the name Kylfingaland ([523], page 209). The root “Kylf” translated as “clapper of a bell” or “rod” = therefore, the name of Kulfingaland translates as “land of bells”.
According to Y. A. Melnikova, the related word “huskolfr” stood for “group of people gathered with bell toll”, and has cousin words in Russian and Greek ([523], page 209). Also: “In this case, it becomes clear why the toponym Kylfingaland (lands of the Kylfing nation) was associated with Gardariki, or Russia” ([523], page 209).
One must note that “Fingaland” forms a part of the above word – it could also be the prototype of the former word Finland, another part of the Horde’s domain.
The Russian city of Ladoga became Aldeigjuborg (see [523], page 36).
16. Miklagard in Thracia and Rome in Scythia (Russia).
According to the Scandinavian authors:
Miklagardr =*= Constantinople ([523], page 45). It is named as a Thracian city. Also, “the very same Thracia that was named after Thiras [the Turk – Auth.], son of Japheth . . . In its eastern [part], great in power and glory, there stands the city of Rome, known as one of the most magnificent cities” ([523], page 147).
The claim of the Scandinavians about Rome laying to the east of Thracia – in Scythia, or Russia, contradicts Scaligerian history drastically. The modern commentary is therefore brief and dry: “The Eastern European location of Rome isn’t repeated in any other ancient Scandinavian works on geography” ([523], page 150).
“Embarrassing” reports of the mediaeval chroniclers are usually treated in the following manner: it is declared that the scribe made a mistake, or simply too ignorant. That method can be used to explain pretty much everything.
We will offer another explanation, without accusing the chroniclers of ignorance.
Do we not meet here with yet another reflection of the well-known medieval point of view that MOSCOW is the THIRD ROME? Moving the center of political power in the XIV century from the weakened Tsar-Grad to the east - to the capital of the Great = "Mongolian" Empire of that time, first to Novgorod, and then to Moscow (in the middle of the 16th century), probably served as the basis to the emergence of the political formula "Moscow is the Third Rome."
Then the words of the Scandinavian author, that the country, whose capital is ROME IN THE EAST, "has great power and the great honor" sound good. We talk here about the Great = "Mongolian" Empire.
As we already realise, the power of the empire was truly great = up to the very American continent, both its Northern and its Southern part (see CHRON6).
In general, it would make sense to contemplate the origins of the formula “Great Rome”, which was introduced in the Middle Ages. If we are to read “Great” in Greek, we shall come up with “Megalion”, in which case it will be reasonable to suggest that “Mongolian” Rome was located at the very centre of the “Mongolian” Empire, or Russia. This is precisely what we learn from the Scandinavian authors, qv above. Incidentally, the word “Megas” (Megalion) might be derived from the Russian words “moguchiy” and “moshch” – “mighty” and “might”, respectively. The word “Magog” is of a similar origin.
Once again we are led to the idea that the famous mediaeval formula “Moscow, or Third Rome” must have meant a great deal more than what Scaligerite historians suggest (according to them, it was a Russian term invented with some obscure political purpose).
Our opponents might suggest that the word “Rome” is of a Latin origin. Are there any of its traces in Russia? Our response shall be as follows. The word “Rome” may be derived from the Russian word “ramo”, translated as “shoulder” or “confined space” (likewise the word “armour” and the Greek “Romea”, apparently). The common opinion about Rome being an “ancient” word of a purely Roman origin is directly implied by the erroneous Scaligerian chronology.
Also, Rome was considered the name of the Roman state as a whole. In Latin, this fact was reflected as the two words “Urbis” and “Orbis” (“the city” and “the world”, respectively). The Russian equivalent is “mir” – we know of many cases when old names were read in different directions, depending of the language that a given chronicle was written in. This is how “the Mongol World” could transform into “The Great Rome” etc.
Obviously, we do not insist on the correctness of these hypotheses – however, everything we already know about ancient history tells us they shouldn’t be rejected offhandedly.
17. The city of Murom. The Neva. Nepr. Novgorod = Holmgard. River Olkoga and the city of Olonets.
Scandinavians report the following:
The Russian city of Murom =*= Moramar ([523], page 38).
River Neva =*= River Niya ([523], page 35).
River Nepr =*= River Dnepr ([523], page 35).
The Egyptian River Nile =*= River Geon ([523], page 32).
The Russian city of Novgorod =*= Holmgard (or Holmgardr) =*= Holmgardar ([523], page 44).
In CHRON4 we demonstrate that the term “Novgorod” was more than a name of a single city – it referred to a whole urban agglomerate comprised of Yaroslavl, Rostov etc, a rather large territory. Our reconstruction is confirmed by the Scandinavian authors – it turns out that the Scandinavian sources really report that Novgorod was a whole “nest of settlements”. This is what we learn from Y. A. Melnikova: “All of the above gives us reason to believe that the name Holmgardar initially applied to a territory with a ‘nest of settlements’ located thereon and not just a single city – possibly, the region that eventually grew into Novgorod the Great, or an even larger area” ([523], page 47).
Further more, Scandinavians report the following:
River Olkoga =*= Alkoga =*= Volga, the great river ([523], pages 35 and 155) =*= Olga ([523], page 155) =*= Manga, or “Mongolian River” ([523], page 156).
Therefore, the Scandinavians were perfectly correct to use the word “Manga” for referring to River Volga – a “Mongolian” river indeed. Also, bear in mind that the “ancient” authors also called Volga “Ra” and “Ithil” ([517]; this issue is also discussed in CHRON4).
Also, the Russian city of Olonets =*= Alaborg ([523], page 36).
18. Parthia.
Scandinavians suggest the following identification:
Parthia =*= Parthialand ([523], page 213) =*= “PRT-land”). Unvocalized, it reads as PRF = PRT = Prutenia = Russia (P + Russia).
The latter identification is known quite well – not a theory of ours; one might find it in V. I. Matouzova’s book, for instance ([517]). Let us also recollect River Prut in this respect. At any rate, Parthia and Russia = Scythia were closely related in the Middle Ages, according to our reconstruction. This is confirmed by the “ancient” European and mediaeval Scandinavian texts.
Let us quote: “Parthia was conquered by the nation of the Parthians, who came from Great Svitjod [the Great Holy Land = Russia = Scythia – Auth.], and named their country after themselves. To the east of Parthia we have the Red Sea” ([523], page 145).
However, it is commonly known that the ancient Russian word for “red” was “chermnoye”, which could be easily confused with “сhernoye”, or “black”. Therefore, it is likely that the chronicler was really referring to the Black Sea, which was in Scythia. This state of confusion became reflected in mediaeval geography; this is why the issue of which sea was meant in reality has to be treated individually in each case.
This is what we learn from Y. A. Melnikova: “the thought that Parthia was populated by the Scythians (the ‘Guidebook’ uses the local ‘academic’ term ‘Great Svitjod’ instead of the toponym ‘Scythia’) is common for the ancient and mediaeval literature” ([523], page 148).
Therefore, all of the above is just a reiteration of the legend of the first European settlers, or the XIV century Scythians – told by the Scandinavians as well, as we see. The ancient Scandinavians had many correct ideas, after all.
