Genghis Khan Was White: Primary Sources & Evidence
Genghis Khan, presumably born in Summer 6670 (860 years ago), died in 6735, was undoubtedly of the Aryan race and not an Oriental "Asian" as we have been told. The modern depiction of him was only invented in the latter half of the 19th century, because even until this point many artists were still depicting him as he was described for ages, bearded, long red hair, and blue eyed (but sometimes green).
(1) Coronation of Genghis Khan. Miniature from the "Flower of the stories of the lands of the East" (or "History of tartars") by Khayton (Hethum) (mid-1240s-1310s).
(2) This is how the representatives of the Borjigin clan are described - this is the Mughal clan to which Timur-Genghis Khan belonged. Borjigin is translated as "blue-eyed". Rashid ad Din in his "Collection of Chronicles" also writes that Genghis Khan belonged to the Borjigin family, and had bright eyes. Here is another source from 1896, which describes the Borjigin family: “The Borjigins have eyes “blue-green ...” or “dark blue, where the pupil is surrounded by a brown rim” “Histoire de Mogols el des Tatares par Aboul Ghazi Bahadour Khan, publiee, traduite el annotee par Baron Demaison, SPb., 1874, vol. 11, p. 72, Cahun L. Introduclion a l'histoire de l'Asie, Paris, 1896, p. 201 "".
(3) Genghis Khan on his deathbed. Engraving from "Universal Cosmography" by Sebastian Münster, Switzerland, 1588.
(4) Genghis Khan is drinking with a bayazid. Undated engraving.
(5)(6) More historical pre 19th century depictions of Genghis Khan, seems to be wearing medieval Russian-style clothing.
Also, the historian Gumilyov in his book “Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe” describes the Mughals as follows: “The ancient Mongols were, according to the testimonies of the chroniclers and the finds of frescoes in Manchuria, a tall, bearded, fair-haired and blue-eyed people ...”
(7)(8) It is not for nothing that on the maps of Europeans the place of modern Mongolia is still called: Great Mogolia of the Blondes, the territory where the Mughals originally lived is marked in red.
(9) Another pre 19th century Genghis Khan depicted in a French engraving by Pierre-Duflos (Pierre-Duflos-1742-1816).
(10) Duflo also painted not only Genghis Khan himself, but also his wife named (Hyu-Chen) Hee-Chen (or Purte Kuzhdin). Her appearance is yet again also Slavic/European.
And although modern historians do not want to notice her, this wife of Genghis Khan is described in volume 4 of the encyclopedia The Modern Part of an Universal History: From the Earliest Account of Time, published in London in 1759 year, which is a collection of historical information: “Western Asian historians attribute the four sons of Genghis Khan to Hi-Chen (or Purte Kuzhdin), while Chinese historians call her the mother of only two of them. (The western Astatic historians ascribe the first four sons of Jenghiz Khan to Purta Kujin (or Hyu-chen); whereas the Chinese history makes her the mother of two of them).
(11) Genghis Khan is also depicted in the book of Marco Polo, here is a miniature from this book "The Coronation of Genghis Khan".
(12) In the same book by Marco Polo there is another miniature "Death of Genghis Khan". It is contained in the large volume "Le Livre des Merveilles" (Fr. 2810), kept in the French National Library [1264], v.2, p.527.
(13) Dream of Genghis Khan. The white knight predicts his coronation, and here we see Genghis Khan is not at all a relative of the Chukchi! But a typical Slav, with a thick beard and all the signs of a white man.
Well okay, you get the idea. I can show you 100 more historical depictions and eyewitness accounts of his appearance, but I am running out of space on this post.
Genghis Khan, presumably born in Summer 6670 (860 years ago), died in 6735, was undoubtedly of the Aryan race and not an Oriental "Asian" as we have been told. The modern depiction of him was only invented in the latter half of the 19th century, because even until this point many artists were still depicting him as he was described for ages, bearded, long red hair, and blue eyed (but sometimes green).
(1) Coronation of Genghis Khan. Miniature from the "Flower of the stories of the lands of the East" (or "History of tartars") by Khayton (Hethum) (mid-1240s-1310s).
(2) This is how the representatives of the Borjigin clan are described - this is the Mughal clan to which Timur-Genghis Khan belonged. Borjigin is translated as "blue-eyed". Rashid ad Din in his "Collection of Chronicles" also writes that Genghis Khan belonged to the Borjigin family, and had bright eyes. Here is another source from 1896, which describes the Borjigin family: “The Borjigins have eyes “blue-green ...” or “dark blue, where the pupil is surrounded by a brown rim” “Histoire de Mogols el des Tatares par Aboul Ghazi Bahadour Khan, publiee, traduite el annotee par Baron Demaison, SPb., 1874, vol. 11, p. 72, Cahun L. Introduclion a l'histoire de l'Asie, Paris, 1896, p. 201 "".
(3) Genghis Khan on his deathbed. Engraving from "Universal Cosmography" by Sebastian Münster, Switzerland, 1588.
(4) Genghis Khan is drinking with a bayazid. Undated engraving.
(5)(6) More historical pre 19th century depictions of Genghis Khan, seems to be wearing medieval Russian-style clothing.
Also, the historian Gumilyov in his book “Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe” describes the Mughals as follows: “The ancient Mongols were, according to the testimonies of the chroniclers and the finds of frescoes in Manchuria, a tall, bearded, fair-haired and blue-eyed people ...”
(7)(8) It is not for nothing that on the maps of Europeans the place of modern Mongolia is still called: Great Mogolia of the Blondes, the territory where the Mughals originally lived is marked in red.
(9) Another pre 19th century Genghis Khan depicted in a French engraving by Pierre-Duflos (Pierre-Duflos-1742-1816).
(10) Duflo also painted not only Genghis Khan himself, but also his wife named (Hyu-Chen) Hee-Chen (or Purte Kuzhdin). Her appearance is yet again also Slavic/European.
And although modern historians do not want to notice her, this wife of Genghis Khan is described in volume 4 of the encyclopedia The Modern Part of an Universal History: From the Earliest Account of Time, published in London in 1759 year, which is a collection of historical information: “Western Asian historians attribute the four sons of Genghis Khan to Hi-Chen (or Purte Kuzhdin), while Chinese historians call her the mother of only two of them. (The western Astatic historians ascribe the first four sons of Jenghiz Khan to Purta Kujin (or Hyu-chen); whereas the Chinese history makes her the mother of two of them).
(11) Genghis Khan is also depicted in the book of Marco Polo, here is a miniature from this book "The Coronation of Genghis Khan".
(12) In the same book by Marco Polo there is another miniature "Death of Genghis Khan". It is contained in the large volume "Le Livre des Merveilles" (Fr. 2810), kept in the French National Library [1264], v.2, p.527.
(13) Dream of Genghis Khan. The white knight predicts his coronation, and here we see Genghis Khan is not at all a relative of the Chukchi! But a typical Slav, with a thick beard and all the signs of a white man.
Well okay, you get the idea. I can show you 100 more historical depictions and eyewitness accounts of his appearance, but I am running out of space on this post.
👍26🔥12👏3😁2👎1
All lessons on Russian history start with Prince Vladimir, the first Christian king of Rus, under the pretext that the prior Pagan Slavs (Aryans) were a bunch of barbarian savages.
But what if that's not the case;
Prince Vladimir "Red Sun" was not Russian at all, but a Jew!
His mother was a Jewess Malka, the daughter of a rabbi, also named Malk, from the city of Lyubich, which was a vassal of the Khazar Kaganate.
Vladimir was merely the bastard child of Prince Svyatoslav, the last Pagan king of Rus'. Malka was his Khazar housekeeper slave who was drunkingly impregnated by him.
The heir to of Rus' was Yaropolk, the son of Svyatoslav and his legal wife who was Slavic. But Vladimir murdered his half brother and usurped power.
So the Jew became king and baptized Russia into a special form of Judaism for goyim, Christianity. Following forced baptism and genocide, the population of Rus' was reduced by a third.
We abandoned the old Gods, and the Vedic truth, scientific and spiritual knowledge was destroyed.
But what if that's not the case;
Prince Vladimir "Red Sun" was not Russian at all, but a Jew!
His mother was a Jewess Malka, the daughter of a rabbi, also named Malk, from the city of Lyubich, which was a vassal of the Khazar Kaganate.
Vladimir was merely the bastard child of Prince Svyatoslav, the last Pagan king of Rus'. Malka was his Khazar housekeeper slave who was drunkingly impregnated by him.
The heir to of Rus' was Yaropolk, the son of Svyatoslav and his legal wife who was Slavic. But Vladimir murdered his half brother and usurped power.
So the Jew became king and baptized Russia into a special form of Judaism for goyim, Christianity. Following forced baptism and genocide, the population of Rus' was reduced by a third.
We abandoned the old Gods, and the Vedic truth, scientific and spiritual knowledge was destroyed.
👍37🤯6🤮4🤔3😱2🔥1
Who was the Real Christ?
He did not live 2000+ years ago.
He was neither Jewish nor King of the Jews.
He spoke neither Aramaic nor Hebrew.
He was not executed in Jerusalem.
He was not "Jesus" or "Yeshuah".
He was not the "son of God", Yahweh.
His name was Radomir.
Everything you know about him was twisted and deformed by Jesuit historians in the last few centuries.
He lived 900 years ago.
He was a Rus'Aryan, on Slavic Sanskrit his name, Radost' Mira, means "Joy/Sunshine of the World".
He spoke Slavic.
He was a mortal human like the rest of us, fighting the New World Order.
Born in Crimea, he was executed in Constantinople on Jewish holiday of Pesach, in 1086 (on the modern Jewish calendar), Summer 6594.
Christ has NOTHING to do with Christianity, which was created by the controllers to enslave the masses.
He was a Vedic Aryan missionary, his mission was to enlighten the Jews that their God Yahweh was the ENEMY. Only Judas Iscariot acknowledged his message, for that he was defamed by the Church.
He did not live 2000+ years ago.
He was neither Jewish nor King of the Jews.
He spoke neither Aramaic nor Hebrew.
He was not executed in Jerusalem.
He was not "Jesus" or "Yeshuah".
He was not the "son of God", Yahweh.
His name was Radomir.
Everything you know about him was twisted and deformed by Jesuit historians in the last few centuries.
He lived 900 years ago.
He was a Rus'Aryan, on Slavic Sanskrit his name, Radost' Mira, means "Joy/Sunshine of the World".
He spoke Slavic.
He was a mortal human like the rest of us, fighting the New World Order.
Born in Crimea, he was executed in Constantinople on Jewish holiday of Pesach, in 1086 (on the modern Jewish calendar), Summer 6594.
Christ has NOTHING to do with Christianity, which was created by the controllers to enslave the masses.
He was a Vedic Aryan missionary, his mission was to enlighten the Jews that their God Yahweh was the ENEMY. Only Judas Iscariot acknowledged his message, for that he was defamed by the Church.
👍41🤮36🤔17🤣13🔥5❤4👎4🥴2😁1
The Bible Was Created by 6 Corporations in the 1600s (Part 1)
In the year 1851, famous English writer Charles Dickens published a book noscriptd "A Child's History of England" which summarizes all of English history. Like all other books written in the midst of the reset, there are several contradictory claims to modern history, but one stands out in particular...
According to the book, in England it was customary to pardon prisoners during the coronation of a Monarch. Five prisoners were pardoned in the Coronation of Queen Elizabeth I in 1559. These were the evangelists Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and also the Apostle Saint Paul, not 2000 years ago but less than 500!
Don't believe me? Go read it for yourself on Chapter 31.
If the Bible is to be attributed to those four men, how could it be remotely as old as we are told? What if it's not?
How can history be generationally accumulated knowledge if it's so inconsistent? What if it's not? What if it's being written for the past 400 years?
In the year 1851, famous English writer Charles Dickens published a book noscriptd "A Child's History of England" which summarizes all of English history. Like all other books written in the midst of the reset, there are several contradictory claims to modern history, but one stands out in particular...
According to the book, in England it was customary to pardon prisoners during the coronation of a Monarch. Five prisoners were pardoned in the Coronation of Queen Elizabeth I in 1559. These were the evangelists Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and also the Apostle Saint Paul, not 2000 years ago but less than 500!
Don't believe me? Go read it for yourself on Chapter 31.
If the Bible is to be attributed to those four men, how could it be remotely as old as we are told? What if it's not?
How can history be generationally accumulated knowledge if it's so inconsistent? What if it's not? What if it's being written for the past 400 years?
👍22🤯8🔥4❤2👎1😁1🤔1💩1
The Bible Was Created by 6 Corporations in the 1600s (Part 2)
Reading this channel, you know that 1000+ years were added to our calendar. With that consideration in mind, and Paul and the evangelists living 500 years ago, how could any Bible such as the Codex Sinaiticus be as old as claimed? According to "A Child's History of England", the prisoners spoke an unknown language, presumably Greek. Maybe it's not a coincidence the King James Bible was written shortly after their pardon, after all they provided oral and or written documents which were translated into English for the first time ever.
That is seemingly the case because in 1604, King James ordered the translation (or rather creation) of the English Bible by six companies;
First Westminster Company: Genesis - Kings
First Cambridge Company: Chronicles - Song of Solomon
First Oxford Company: Isaiah - Malachi
Second Oxford Company: Gospels - Acts of the Apostles & Revelation
Second Westminster Company: Epistles
Second Cambridge Company: Apocrypha
Reading this channel, you know that 1000+ years were added to our calendar. With that consideration in mind, and Paul and the evangelists living 500 years ago, how could any Bible such as the Codex Sinaiticus be as old as claimed? According to "A Child's History of England", the prisoners spoke an unknown language, presumably Greek. Maybe it's not a coincidence the King James Bible was written shortly after their pardon, after all they provided oral and or written documents which were translated into English for the first time ever.
That is seemingly the case because in 1604, King James ordered the translation (or rather creation) of the English Bible by six companies;
First Westminster Company: Genesis - Kings
First Cambridge Company: Chronicles - Song of Solomon
First Oxford Company: Isaiah - Malachi
Second Oxford Company: Gospels - Acts of the Apostles & Revelation
Second Westminster Company: Epistles
Second Cambridge Company: Apocrypha
👍22👏2❤1🔥1💩1🥴1
Mudflood Research, Tartaria, True Aryan History
Who was the Real Christ? He did not live 2000+ years ago. He was neither Jewish nor King of the Jews. He spoke neither Aramaic nor Hebrew. He was not executed in Jerusalem. He was not "Jesus" or "Yeshuah". He was not the "son of God", Yahweh. His name was…
Christ was Executed 900 Years Ago/Romans in Russian Clothing
When analyzing historical paintings we will discover many extreme inconsistencies. If history was not falsified recently, how do these people who lived closer to the past than we do today, not have a greater understanding of it? Full plate armour was a recent invention to the painters who lived in this time, why are they depicting it in an event 1500 years ago? That clothing style looks awfully European. Where's the arid landscape of Jerusalem?
What I find most amusing are these depictions of a bearded Pontius Pilate dressed in medieval Russian clothing, particularly the Murmolka (fur hat), as well as the background people. I don't know about you, but if I were in the middle east I would not be wearing thick furs and steppe clothing.
Perhaps these artists were not told the same version of history that we are today, during their lives it was probably taught that he was executed a mere 200-400 years ago, rather than 1500, and not in Jerusalem.
When analyzing historical paintings we will discover many extreme inconsistencies. If history was not falsified recently, how do these people who lived closer to the past than we do today, not have a greater understanding of it? Full plate armour was a recent invention to the painters who lived in this time, why are they depicting it in an event 1500 years ago? That clothing style looks awfully European. Where's the arid landscape of Jerusalem?
What I find most amusing are these depictions of a bearded Pontius Pilate dressed in medieval Russian clothing, particularly the Murmolka (fur hat), as well as the background people. I don't know about you, but if I were in the middle east I would not be wearing thick furs and steppe clothing.
Perhaps these artists were not told the same version of history that we are today, during their lives it was probably taught that he was executed a mere 200-400 years ago, rather than 1500, and not in Jerusalem.
👍37🤯6❤2😁2🔥1💩1