TARTARY
"Tartary, a vast country in the northern parts of Asia, bounded by Siberia on the north and west: this is called Great Tartary. The Tartars who lie south of Muscovy and Siberia, are those of Astracan, Circassia, and Dagistan, situated north-west of the Caspian-sea; the Calmuc Tartars, who lie between Siberia and the Caspian-sea; the Usbec Tartars and Moguls, who lie north of Persia and India; and lastly, those of Tibet, who lie north-west of China." - Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. III, Edinburgh, 1771, p. 887.

1754 I-e Carte de l’Asie-1.jpg

Now compare to the description given by Wikipedia, "Tartary (Latin: Tartaria) or Great Tartary (Latin: Tartaria Magna) was a name used from the Middle Ages until the twentieth century to designate the great tract of northern and central Asia stretching from the Caspian Sea and the Ural Mountains to the Pacific Ocean, settled mostly by Turko-Mongol peoples after the Mongol invasion and the subsequent Turkic migrations."

1701: A System of Geography
country_tartary.jpg

Empires, Kingdoms and States

Tartary was not a tract. It was a country.
And to add some credibility (or to take away some) to the story, below you can find an excerpt from the CIA document declassified in 1998, and created in 1957.

CIA_tartar.jpg

Link to the document on the CIA website: NATIONAL CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT UNDER COMMUNISM

Tartarian Cities
tartary-mongolia.jpg

1855 Source

Today, we have certain appearance related stereotypes. I think we are very much off there. It looks like Tartary was multi-religious, and multi-cultural. One of the reasons I think so is the tremendous disparity between what leaders like Genghis Khan, Batu Khan, Timur aka Tamerlane looked like to the contemporary artists vs. the appearance attributed to them today.

Today: Genghis Khan - Batu Khan - Timur
Genghis-Batu-Timur.jpg


Here is how 15-18th century books saw these three

Genghis Khan

(with wife here)
ching_khun-and-wife.jpg

ching_khun_3-1.jpg

genghis-kahn4-1.jpg


Timur - Tamerlane
Tamerlane-11.jpg

timur_tartary_1-2.jpg

timur_tartary_1-3.jpg

timur_tartary_8.jpg


Batu Khan
Well, I could not find any 17th/18th century Batu Khan images, but apparently in Turkey we have a few busts of the following Gentlemen. Batu Khan is one of them.

Batu-statue-Sogut-Turkey-1.jpg

A few of them I do not know, but the ones I do look nothing like what I was taught at school. Also dates are super bizarre on those plaques. Do Turks know something we don't?

The other reason why I think Tartary had to be multi-religious, and multi-cultural is its vastness during various moments in time. For example in 1652, Tartary appears to have control over the North America.

1652-nova-totius-terrarum.jpg

Source

The Coverup
The official history is hiding a major world power which existed as late as the 19th century. Tartary was a country with its own flag, its own government and its own place on the map. Its territory was huge, but somehow quietly incorporated into Russia, and some other countries. This country you can find on the maps predating the second half of the 19th century.

Ngram by Google Books shows how Tartary was quietly put away.
Tartary_Ngram.jpg

Yet, some time in the 18th century Tartary Muskovite was the biggest country in the world: 3,050,000 square miles.

Tartary_HUGE-13.jpg


tartaria_book_1.jpg tartaria_book_2.jpg tartaria_book_3.jpg tartaria_book_5.jpg tartaria_book_4.jpg Tartary_HUGE.jpg Tartary_HUGE_1.jpg

Some of the maps showing Tartary

1570 Typus Orbis Terrarum..jpg 1597-98_Published by Battista and Galignani in Venice.jpg 1707 guillaume de l'ile.jpg 1714 Mappe-Monde ou Carte Universelle.jpg 1753 Mappa Mundi generalis.jpg 1754 I-e Carte de l’Asie.jpg 1806-Herisson-37-grand-tartary.jpg 1820_tartary.jpg great_tartarie_1.jpg great_tartarie.jpg great_tartarie_2.jpg great_tartarie_4.jpg great_tartarie_5.jpg tartaria_map_x_1.jpg tartaria_map_x_4.jpg tartaria_map_x_5.jpg

Tartary had its own language, flag, crest, its own emperor, and of course its own people.

The Language

tartarianlang.jpg

Source: The Washington Union, February 13, 1849 - Page 3

Tartarian_Language.jpg

1739 Source

The Kings of Tartary
Genealogy Of The Former Tartar Emperors
tartarus.jpg

Source

Genealogie Des Anciens Empereurs Tartares, Descendus De Genghiscan-1.jpg

Genealogie Des Anciens Empereurs Tartares, Descendus De Genghiscan-2.jpg

Family tree of the descendants of Ghengis Khan, with a map showing the Tartar Empire.
Source - Source - Source


The people of Tartary

tartary_people_2.jpg tartary_people_3.jpg tartary_people_4.jpg tartary_people_5.jpg genghis-kahn4-1.jpg tartary_people_7.jpg
The flag and crest of Tartary had an owl depicted on it. The emperor's flag contained a griffin on a yellow background.

tartary_flags-11.jpg

There were multiple publications listing the country of Tartary and its flag/crest. Some of those publications came out as late as 1865.

Tartary was not China
tartary_flag_6.jpg

1276px-Bowles's_naval_flags_of_the_world,_1783.jpg Flags_of_all_nations_1865.jpg tartary_flag_1.jpg tartary_flag_3.jpg
It is also worth mentioning that in the British Flag Table of 1783, there are three different flags listed as a flag of the Tsar of Moscow. There is also an Imperial Flag of Russia as well as multiple naval flags. And all of them are proceeded by a flag of the Viceroy of Russia.

Significance of the Viceroy is in the definition of the term. A viceroy is a regal official who runs a country, colony, city, province, or sub-national state, in the name of and as the representative of the monarch of the territory. Our official history will probably say that it was the Tsar of Russia who would appoint a viceroy of Moscow. I have reasons to doubt that.

Why is the flag of the Viceroy of Moscow positioned prior to any other Russian flag? Could it be that the Viceroy of Moscow was superior to its Czar, and was "supervising" how this Tartarian possession was being run?

viceroymoscovie.jpg

large_moscovian.jpg
large_russiamarine.jpg

large_russiamarine1.jpg
large_russianimperial_copy.jpg

There is a growing opinion in Russia that French invasion of Russia played out according to a different scenario. The one where Tsar Alexander I, and Napoleon were on the same side. Together they fought against Tartary. Essentially France and Saint Petersburg against Moscow (Tartary). And there is a strong circumstantial evidence to support such a theory.

Questions to Answer
1. Saint Petersburg was the capitol of Russia. Yet Napoleon chose to attack Moscow. Why?

2. It appears that in 1912 there was a totally different recollection of the events of 1812. How else could you explain commemorative 1912 medals honoring Napoleon?

medal_1.gif
medal_2.gif

medal_3.gif
medal_4.gif

And specifically the one with Alexander I, and Napoleon on the same medal. The below medal says something similar to, "Strength is in the unity: will of God, firmness of royalty, love for homeland and people"

Napoleon_Alexander_medal.jpg

I have hard time imagining the below two guys on the same medal in "Love and Unity"...

hitler_stalin.jpg

3. Similarity between Russian and French uniforms. There are more different uniforms involved, but the idea remains, they were ridiculously similar.

How did they fight each other in the dark?
Russia: Regular Army
1_rus.jpg


France: Regular Army
1_fra.jpg

There was one additional combat asset officially available to Russians in the war of 1812. And that was the Militia. It does appear that this so-called Militia, was in reality the army of Tartary fighting against Napoleon and Alexander I.

Russian Volunteer/Militia Units... Tartarians?
1_rus_tart.jpg

4. Russian nobility in Saint Petersburg spoke French well into the second half of the 19th century. The general explanation was, that it was the trend of time and fashion. Google contains multiple opinions on the matter.
  • Following the same logic, USA, Britain and Russia should've picked up German after the victory in WW2.
5. This one I just ran into: 19th-century fans were totally into a Napoleon/Alexander romance

Treaties_of_Tilsit_miniature_(France,_1810s)_side_A.jpg

NapoleonxAlexander2.jpg

napoleon-alexander.jpg


American Tartary
The jury is still out on this one, but there are some indicators that Tartary was present on the North American continent as well. There obviously are no official historical accounts, but some bits and pieces of info suggest just that.
north-america-1.jpg


Books and Publications
The One World Tartarians by James W. Lee


KD Summary: I think there is enough circumstantial evidence to justify a deeper look into who fought who, and why this Tartary country is so little known about.
  • And the main question out of this all should be what is the purpose of misleading generations of people? It appears there is something tremendously serious hidden in our recent history.
 

Sonofabor

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2021
Messages
102
Reaction score
175
Good grief... I thought Lenin was a Jew. Now he is a Tartar? Wait! Aren't black Americans also Tartars, I mean, Moors.... All Turks and Uzbeks are bald? Why not compare genitals?

Could it be that your source is just plain Soviet?

I wager that the Soviets wanted such a collection of races/ethnicities to maintain their divide and rule program over the refugees of the the past.

I resent that you imply I'm politically correct for criticizing your argument. That said, maybe there is something to the ethnic/race differences that goes way back and is related to families and marriage patterns, For instance, all the Napoleon-like gods appear Phonetician. Long straight snout, etc.. But why does it matter to this discussion? We don't even know who really did what to whom and when. Based on our current circumstances, mind control and weapons are far more important than fixing differences. Differences melt away when we realize that the enemy might not be human-- in any usual sense.
 
Last edited:
  • A Avatar
    Info

  • Silveryou

    Member
    Joined
    Jan 9, 2021
    Messages
    53
    Reaction score
    163
    Good grief... I thought Lenin was a Jew. Now he is a Tartar? Wait! Aren't black Americans also Tartars, I mean, Moors.... All Turks and Uzbeks are bald? Why not compare genitals?
    The skills of the illustrator seem to go beyond hair styles and mustaches. imo means in my opinion. I don't want to go searching for a Lenin photograph and in any case the image has Tatars written on it, not Tartars. As for the genitalia, it seems to me they don't belong to human faces, but I know some exceptions...
    I resent that you imply I'm politically correct for criticizing your argument.
    I don't care about your opinion, apologies. That in the past races were distinguished based on appearance is a fact, not an opinion. All the tribes living in isolated areas have people who look alike, and this is another fact. In the past these isolated people resembling each other in their body features would have been considered a race. Hair styles and unwanted hair on genitalia have nothing to do with race.
    But why does it matter to this discussion? We don't even know who really did what to whom and when.
    It matters because there are people still not brainwashed to the point of not being interested about the race (ancient meaning of the term here) the Tartars (with two r) belonged to. And this is important to know because it is part of historical research, whether you like it or not.
     

    Silveryou

    Member
    Joined
    Jan 9, 2021
    Messages
    53
    Reaction score
    163

    Under the not-so hidden hand of SPQR, Monte Python asks the key question...
    It seems you are obsessed with male genitalia, especially those from specific places. You occupy a great amount of space with your silly posts. By the way @KorbenDallas sorry, I am not going further in replying to this dude.

    Returning to the subject, here below a photo of Lenin. I have a suspect that the illustrator could have in fact taken Lenin's appearance as a reference point, since it seems that Lenin is a spitting image of a Tatar, imo (I am referring to somatic features, not mustaches and hair styles, if someone doesn't understand).
    Cattura14.jpg
    Lenin.jpg
    I couldn't find any kind of info directly relating Lenin to the Tatars, and even less to the Tartars obviously, whether the modern Tatars were in some way what remains of the original population. He is said to have been of "Russian, Chuvash, Mordvin, or Kalmyk ancestry" (Vladimir Lenin - Wikipedia), and certain Mordvins are said to speak a Tatar (not Tartar) language (Mordvins - Wikipedia). Could the suppression/oppression of the Tatars and many other ethnicities (as reported in the CIA document) by the politically correct URSS be the cause for our loss of knowledge? Lenin's racial background included? Here below some Mordvins today.
    Etno_Kudo_Toramasj_terdi_DSC_0941.jpg

    But in any case we can see that Lenin was born in Ulyanovsk (Ulyanovsk - Wikipedia) or, to be more precise, in Simbirsk, the city's name before it was changed in 1924 after Lenin first name (Ulyanov, not Vladimir).

    Here begins my pure speculation. It is said on the wiki (Ulyanovsk - Wikipedia) that Simbirsk was founded in 1648 and only twenty years after it "withstood a month-long siege by a 20,000-strong army led by rebel Cossack commander Stenka Razin". An entire month for a 'city' twenty years old and besieged by whom? By one of the main protagonists of the Tartaria/Russia conflict happening in the 17th century according to Fomenko's reconstruction! Is it possible that Simbirsk was merely occupied in 1648 by the Russian army? And this date has been since then considered the foundation of the city?
    Who was the other protagonist mentioned by Fomenko? The wiki says: "Also in Simbirsk another country rebel, Yemelyan Pugachev, was imprisoned before execution".
    It also appears that "At the time Simbirsk possessed a wooden kremlin, which was destroyed by a fire during the 18th century". It also had a kremlin: a little bit too much for a new city. I bet it was demolished the same day in which Pugachev was executed. By the way, the kremlin was the ancient city.

    But the most interesting part is yet to come.
    Fomenko says, after Britannica 1771, that Tobolsk, in today's Siberia, was the capital of Muscovite Tartary at the end of the 18th century. Historians say that near Tobolsk there stood in ancient times the capital of the Khanate of Sibir (also historically called the Khanate of Turan - Khanate of Sibir - Wikipedia), Qashliq (Qashliq - Wikipedia), which, life is strange, was also called Sibir (its real name, apparently)!!! Now this city is said to be lost in time. It was apparently destroyed and then its ruins absorbed in the newly founded Tobolsk. Who destoyed this city? Cossack ataman Yermak Timofeyevich!!!

    So, long story short, my proposal is that the real Sibir was the city of Simbirsk on the Volga river.

    Uliyanovskaya_Obl.jpg
    Siberian_Khanate_map_English_revised.svg.jpg

    Coincidentally the Khanate of Sibir was also called Khanate of Turan. Being Italian, this immediately reminds me of Puccini's famous opera Turandot. It is believed that "Turan was a region of Central Asia, formerly part of the Persian Empire" (Turandot - Wikipedia). I've always believed the Russian churches with their peculiar domes to have a somewhat Persian vibe, like something coming out of the One Thousand and One Nights stories. It is one of my doubts whether we should talk of Persian or Russian empire though...

     
    Last edited:
    Joined
    Oct 29, 2020
    Messages
    1,103
    Reaction score
    3,312
    @Sonofabor and @Silveryou, gentlemen, lets keep anything similar to what I'm seeing above, whether you are the instigator or on the receiving end, off this blog. I do not have neither time nor desire to handle stuff like that. We are all adults here.
    • This comment of mine requires no response.


    On a separate note, the "Tatar" gentleman sure does resemble Lenin. I agree that it's a very suspicious coincidence, considering where he was born.
    sim.jpg
     

    Cemen

    New member
    Joined
    Jan 19, 2021
    Messages
    19
    Reaction score
    65
    On a separate note, the "Tatar" gentleman sure does resemble Lenin. I agree that it's a very suspicious coincidence, considering where he was born.
    Nothing suspicious, Ulyanovsk is located on the border with modern Tatarstan and Lenin could well have had an admixture of Tatar blood.

    Although, if you move away from the lucid image of Lenin, everything becomes not so obvious.

     
  • A Avatar
    Info

  • Joined
    Oct 29, 2020
    Messages
    1,103
    Reaction score
    3,312
    Methinks, this is the territory where Nikolay Lenin and Vladimir Ulyanov become two separate people.

    It's kind of bizarre. Some dude (or two) from the area between Samara and Kazan (would that be former Tartaria?) greatly contributed to the destruction of the tsarist system of government in Russia, eventually destroying Russia in the process.
     

    Sonofabor

    Member
    Joined
    Jan 11, 2021
    Messages
    102
    Reaction score
    175
    That's what I'm thinking, too.

    It is too strange that the Soviets posited Lenin-dude X as the archetype Tartar. Maybe they needed a Tartarian dude, like an early Lenin, as a front-- think Bill Clinton, etc... Then they drew, literally, his visage into a perfect Tartarian after "he" "died". The people could mourn one of their own-- a convenient national father-figure, like Sun Yat-sen in China (A southern Chinese; thus a perfect Ming). Then the PTB hands over the reigns to mobsters of the favorite flavor. Chiang (literal Shanghai mobster) and Mao (reportedly a choice of the banksters) in China and Joseph Jughashvili and Trotsky in the USSR. (The corporation, USA, Inc., est. 1871, played a real role in all of these transitions).

    If the thesis that Tartaria expanded to the the American continents is valid (and I tend to think it is, based on the Civil War and Fou Sang and Alaskan Greek Churches, etc...), the "look" of a typical Tartar can't be pinned down. Also, see the work of Michelle Gibson to further complicate the matter of Tataria-qua-race.

    As for ethnic-differences, I'm all for them. Over the course of 20 years in Asia, I watched Global Culture/technology (especially phones) wreck havoc on those qualities of people and their pagan gods that make life rich and interesting. One major way the state destroys local differences is by ironically fixing them into images, see above. In the case of China, there are dozens of minorities recognized. Of course, this act of the state elides from common-sense the fact that every region in China is marked by enormous differences, if only recognized in the so-called dialects, which, are as different from each other as so-called "romance" languages in Europe. In other words, the construction of a national state requires putting everyone into their place-- defining them precisely and leaving everyone else in a state of confusion.
     
    Last edited:

    Cemen

    New member
    Joined
    Jan 19, 2021
    Messages
    19
    Reaction score
    65
    Methinks, this is the territory where Nikolay Lenin and Vladimir Ulyanov become two separate people.

    It's kind of bizarre. Some dude (or two) from the area between Samara and Kazan (would that be former Tartaria?) greatly contributed to the destruction of the tsarist system of government in Russia, eventually destroying Russia in the process.
    The modern city of Ulyanovsk, judging by old maps, is located on the former territory of Tartary. Although I assume that the boundaries have changed over time in one direction or another.
    As for the post, some of our researchers also consider the war of 1812 to be the finishing off of Tartary, united by the army of Europe and Russia.
    And the uprisings of Pugachev and Razin, too, most likely were not uprisings and not a people's war, but wars between states using regular armies (judging by the scale of the events).

    Now to the Tatars. Tatars are very different both in phenotype and in place of residence. And the Mongoloid eye shape is not at all a sign of a Tatar, it is rather a sign of crossbreeding with people from Mongoloid groups.

    In general, we still have a saying "scratch a Russian, you will find a Tatar."
    For example, the Tatars.)

    marat-safin.jpg liliya-gildeeva.jpg

    Here you can read about the Tatars and look at them, if anyone is interested.

    It is difficult to say if Lenin is one or two, he had more than 100 conspiratorial psephdonyms.

    And he did not destroy the royal power, the monarchy finally degraded and collapsed by itself. And the Bolshevik Party, led by Lenin, was the only one who had a program to preserve the country and the will to take power, which was literally "lying on the ground."
     
    Joined
    Oct 29, 2020
    Messages
    1,103
    Reaction score
    3,312
    And he did not destroy the royal power, the monarchy finally degraded and collapsed by itself. And the Bolshevik Party, led by Lenin, was the only one who had a program to preserve the country and the will to take power, which was literally "lying on the ground."
    Well, that's the narrative. How do we know that events were properly described to us?
     

    Sonofabor

    Member
    Joined
    Jan 11, 2021
    Messages
    102
    Reaction score
    175
    In general, we still have a saying "scratch a Russian, you will find a Tatar."
    For example, the Tatars.)

    Who is we? How is this sensibility attached to Russian nationalism?

    1627420562112.jpg


    Sven Magnus Øen Carlsen

    Oriental eyes? Tartar?
    Maybe Tansberg, Norway was, once upon a time, Grand Central Tartaria?
     
    Last edited:
  • A Avatar
    Info

  • Joined
    Oct 29, 2020
    Messages
    1,103
    Reaction score
    3,312

    Silveryou

    Member
    Joined
    Jan 9, 2021
    Messages
    53
    Reaction score
    163
    Now to the Tatars. Tatars are very different both in phenotype and in place of residence. And the Mongoloid eye shape is not at all a sign of a Tatar, it is rather a sign of crossbreeding with people from Mongoloid groups.

    In general, we still have a saying "scratch a Russian, you will find a Tatar."
    For example, the Tatars.)

    Here you can read about the Tatars and look at them, if anyone is interested.
    Thank you for the reading advice. By the way, I think that if Tatars and Tartars are the same, then they are in the same sort of condition of the so-called Mediterraneans. Typical populations living in "the middle" with their peculiar racial features but whose origin is difficult to grasp. Are they the final risult of the meeting of two or more peoples or were they a distinct group from the start?

    EDIT: Sami people (Sámi people - Wikipedia). They live in Norway too and some people could call them Norwegians, even if it's not strictly correct.

    800px-Anja_Pärson_Semmering_2008.jpg
     
    Last edited:

    Sonofabor

    Member
    Joined
    Jan 11, 2021
    Messages
    102
    Reaction score
    175
    She is a pretty lady. I thought these people were Aryans or some such.

    In any case, she looks like my mom's side. Blue-eyed. Blond. Why in the heck they ever moved to Northern Montana still mystifies me.

    If she is a Tartar, therefore, so am I. So?
     

    Sonofabor

    Member
    Joined
    Jan 11, 2021
    Messages
    102
    Reaction score
    175
    The phrase, which is attributed to different writers, in fact came to Russia in the 19th century from France
    No offense. This is pretty typical. Many common phrases in China can be traced to Europeans-- often Germans, from the 19th century.
    What are you trying to accomplish with that?
    My point is that race is interesting (and no-doubt real) but not explanatory.
     
  • A Avatar
    Info

  • Joined
    Oct 29, 2020
    Messages
    1,103
    Reaction score
    3,312
    No offense. This is pretty typical. Many common phrases in China can be traced to Europeans-- often Germans, from the 19th century.
    I’ve just read that it allegedly originated with Napoleon. Regardless of who said it, the phrase has a pretty deep meaning, especially considering the misrepresented Mongol-Tartar invasion. If everyone is a Tartar and we don’t know about it, that could explain a lot, and would make sense in the historical perspective.
     

    Sonofabor

    Member
    Joined
    Jan 11, 2021
    Messages
    102
    Reaction score
    175
    Of course, these things all have meaning.

    Try showing average people in China that contemporary Mandarin Chinese was a state-produced product in the 1920s, you will not make friends. My point is that race is one of those hot-button issues (see above). History should complicate notions of race, just like your reading of Napoleon complicates all national identity issues in Europe. My point is also that the state uses race (as we see everyday right now in Seattle) to divide and conquer. To say that race doesn't exist is nonsense. But how is it significant? Where does one race start and another end? In fact, race is the equivalent of carbon-14 dating: one can make it say whatever one wants.

    Furthermore, consider the term historically. In light of the Civil War research, it appears this term proliferated precisely at the moment the old world was taken out.

    Screen Shot 2021-07-27 at 2.47.35 PM.jpg
     
    Last edited:

    Silveryou

    Member
    Joined
    Jan 9, 2021
    Messages
    53
    Reaction score
    163
    So if race is not explanatory saying, for example, that the American Denzel Washington (Denzel Washington - Wikipedia) probably descends from some African race and the American Justin Bieber (Justin Bieber - Wikipedia) from some kind of European race is just useless.
    This doesn't make sense to me. People are naturally interested in their own origins, aka race. For example there are strong indicators that dark skinned races are probably from Africa or equatorial regions, while light skinned races are probably from regions near the pole(s). Races were defined by skin colour but also other bodily features. In our dumb age they want to tell us that race is only about skin colour and we see the result. People nowadays have forgotten their own origins with this new unite & conquer doctrine. Really bad.

    EDIT: Google Ngram Viewer offered by the giant multinational Google. English is not the only language used on planet Earth.
     
    Last edited:
    Joined
    Oct 29, 2020
    Messages
    1,103
    Reaction score
    3,312
    I’m borderline on calling these races. I think there are like 4 or something like that. Races are important from the creation stand point. Enoch had only three in his book, as far as I understand.
    • Enoch sees a white bull and a heifer to whom two bulls were born, one black and the other red.
    All the ethnicity division is artificial and brought in by the controllers to control. If we are playing their game, we are distracted from real historical issues.

    Below is a historical document, and should be treated as such. There is nothing else to this, or to whoever ends up sharing it.
    typical-face-soviet-union.jpg
     

    Similar articles

    Top