Where does the Eastern Roman Empire, the continuation of Constantine, based in Constantinople, and surviving (and sometimes thriving), for 1000 years after the fall of the city of Rome stand into all this?

They may have declared independence, but they were still ruled by the same group of people. Perhaps there was a real schism, perhaps they were controlled opposition. In either case, it doesn't change the fact that it was the same Aristocratic group that ruled over it (hint, the Papacy were not the real rulers of The Church either). Just because cousins fight (literally cousins, they are all related), doesn't mean it isn't the same family.

There's another part of 'the church' that you completely ignore.

I didn't "ignore" anything. You can't really explain the whole world all at once.

They also fought the Khazarians

The "Khazarians" were just a Scythian tribe.

the Russians & the slavs

the "Russians" and the "Slavs" were also just Scythian tribes (at that time).

the Muslims

The Muslim religion was a creation of The Church, specifically to have a controlled opposition. The "Crusades" were a contrivance between two entities controlled by the same source, just like almost all wars.

the turks

The Turks were just a tribe of the Scythians.

You really can't understand how anything works until you understand the erasure of the Scythian Empire, the largest Empire in the world since the Younger Dryas.

A 1000+ year, VERY powerful state entity is completely ignored in your narration of events

Again, not "ignoring," just, there's a whole lot of stuff.

Don't get so huffy. Please ask questions, I'm happy to answer and send you to sources. I can back up everything I am saying with substantial evidence (except the Crusades, that one takes way to much context, so please don't ask about that one). Trying to do all of that all at once ain't easy.

They have been intentionally brushed aside by the 'western' version of history, but that is obviously by design.

This I agree with. I think in no small part because they were much closer to the Scythians.

Where does the Eastern Roman Empire, the continuation of Constantine, based in Constantinople, and surviving (and sometimes thriving), for 1000 years after the fall of the city of Rome stand into all this?

They may have declared independence, but they were still ruled by the same group of people. Perhaps there was a real schism, perhaps they were controlled opposition. In either case, it doesn't change the fact that it was the same Aristocratic group that ruled over it (hint, the Papacy were not the real rulers of The Church either). Just because cousins fight (literally cousins, they are all related), doesn't mean it isn't the same family.

There's another part of 'the church' that you completely ignore.

I didn't "ignore" anything. You can't really explain the whole world all at once.

They also fought the Khazarians

The "Khazarians" were just a Scythian tribe.

the Russians & the slavs

the "Russians" and the "Slavs" were also just Scythian tribes (at that time).

the Muslims

The Muslim religion was a creation of The Church, specifically to have a controlled opposition. The "Crusades" were a contrivance between two entities controlled by the same source, just like almost all wars.

the turks

The Turks were just a tribe of the Scythians.

You really can't understand how anything works until you understand the erasure of the Scythian Empire, the largest Empire in the world for the past 10,000 years or so.

A 1000+ year, VERY powerful state entity is completely ignored in your narration of events

Again, not "ignoring," just, there's a whole lot of stuff.

Don't get so huffy. Please ask questions, I'm happy to answer and send you to sources. I can back up everything I am saying with substantial evidence (except the Crusades, that one takes way to much context, so please don't ask about that one). Trying to do all of that all at once ain't easy.

They have been intentionally brushed aside by the 'western' version of history, but that is obviously by design.

This I agree with. I think in no small part because they were much closer to the Scythians.

Where does the Eastern Roman Empire, the continuation of Constantine, based in Constantinople, and surviving (and sometimes thriving), for 1000 years after the fall of the city of Rome stand into all this?

They may have declared independence, but they were still ruled by the same group of people. Perhaps there was a real schism, perhaps they were controlled opposition. In either case, that doesn't change the fact that it was the same Aristocratic group that ruled over it (hint, the Papacy were not the real rulers of The Church either). Just because cousins fight (literally cousins, they are all related), doesn't mean it isn't the same family.

There's another part of 'the church' that you completely ignore.

I didn't "ignore" anything. You can't really explain the whole world all at once.

They also fought the Khazarians

The "Khazarians" were just a Scythian tribe.

the Russians & the slavs

the "Russians" and the "Slavs" were also just Scythian tribes (at that time).

the Muslims

The Muslim religion was a creation of The Church, specifically to have a controlled opposition. The "Crusades" were a contrivance between two entities controlled by the same source, just like almost all wars.

the turks

The Turks were just a tribe of the Scythians.

You really can't understand how anything works until you understand the erasure of the Scythian Empire, the largest Empire in the world for the past 10,000 years or so.

A 1000+ year, VERY powerful state entity is completely ignored in your narration of events

Again, not "ignoring," just, there's a whole lot of stuff.

Don't get so huffy. Please ask questions, I'm happy to answer and send you to sources. I can back up everything I am saying with substantial evidence (except the Crusades, that one takes way to much context, so please don't ask about that one). Trying to do all of that all at once ain't easy.

They have been intentionally brushed aside by the 'western' version of history, but that is obviously by design.

This I agree with. I think in no small part because they were much closer to the Scythians.

Where does the Eastern Roman Empire, the continuation of Constantine, based in Constantinople, and surviving (and sometimes thriving), for 1000 years after the fall of the city of Rome stand into all this?

They may have declared independence, but they were still ruled by the same group of people. Perhaps there was a real schism, but that doesn't change the fact that it was the same Aristocratic group that ruled over it (hint, the Papacy were not the real rulers of The Church either). Just because cousins fight (literally cousins, they are all related), doesn't mean it isn't the same family.

There's another part of 'the church' that you completely ignore.

I didn't "ignore" anything. You can't really explain the whole world all at once.

They also fought the Khazarians

The "Khazarians" were just a Scythian tribe.

the Russians & the slavs

the "Russians" and the "Slavs" were also just Scythian tribes (at that time).

the Muslims

The Muslim religion was a creation of The Church, specifically to have a controlled opposition. The "Crusades" were a contrivance between two entities controlled by the same source, just like almost all wars.

the turks

The Turks were just a tribe of the Scythians.

You really can't understand how anything works until you understand the erasure of the Scythian Empire, the largest Empire in the world for the past 10,000 years or so.

A 1000+ year, VERY powerful state entity is completely ignored in your narration of events

Again, not "ignoring," just, there's a whole lot of stuff.

Don't get so huffy. Please ask questions, I'm happy to answer and send you to sources. I can back up everything I am saying with substantial evidence (except the Crusades, that one takes way to much context, so please don't ask about that one). Trying to do all of that all at once ain't easy.

They have been intentionally brushed aside by the 'western' version of history, but that is obviously by design.

This I agree with. I think in no small part because they were much closer to the Scythians.