When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

Once I started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century saying "The Tartarians are the Scythians," which suprised the fuck out of me, since not a single one of the "research efforts" on Tartary said anything about the Scythians. But every single historian prior to the "Rockefeller reeducation system" was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire with the same form of government, with just a name change.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and getting what I believe is a reasonable understanding of their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, somewhere in the first couple chapters, but see Petes, 1722 talking about how Genghiscan gained power). With that obligation, these Royals can use their strength, if they choose, to challenge yet another tribe for Tribute, up to the limits of their ambition (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the greater Asia/Eastern European regions going back through time. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region (according to the official narrative), and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "There is no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region. This is totally a different culture. Trust us."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years has been effectively erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century saying "The Tartarians are the Scythians," which suprised the fuck out of me, since not a single one of the "research efforts" on Tartary said anything about the Scythians. But every single historian prior to the "Rockefeller reeducation system" was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire with the same form of government, with just a name change.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and getting what I believe is a reasonable understanding of their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, somewhere in the first couple chapters, but see Petes, 1722 talking about how Genghiscan gained power). With that obligation, these Royals can use their strength, if they choose, to challenge yet another tribe for Tribute, up to the limits of their ambition (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the greater Asia/Eastern European regions going back through time. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region (according to the official narrative), and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "There is no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region. This is totally a different culture. Trust us."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years has been effectively erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century saying "The Tartarians are the Scythians," which suprised the fuck out of me, since not a single one of the "research efforts" on Tartary said anything about the Scythians. But every single historian prior to the "Rockefeller reeducation system" was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire with the same form of government, with just a name change.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and getting what I believe is a reasonable understanding of their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, somewhere in the first couple chapters, but see Petes, 1722 talking about how Genghiscan gained power). With that obligation, these Royals can use their strength, if they choose, to challenge yet another tribe for Tribute, up to the limits of their ambition (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the greater Asia/Eastern European regions going back through time. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "There is no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region. This is totally a different culture. Trust us."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years has been effectively erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century saying "The Tartarians are the Scythians," which suprised the fuck out of me, since not a single one of the "research efforts" on Tartary said anything about the Scythians. But every single historian prior to the "Rockefeller reeducation system" was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire with the same form of government, with just a name change.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and getting what I believe is a reasonable understanding of their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, these Royals can use their strength, if they choose, to challenge yet another tribe for Tribute, up to the limits of their ambition (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the greater Asia/Eastern European regions going back through time. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "There is no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region. This is totally a different culture. Trust us."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years has been effectively erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire with the same form of government, with just a name change.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and getting what I believe is a reasonable understanding of their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, these Royals can use their strength, if they choose, to challenge yet another tribe for Tribute, up to the limits of their ambition (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the greater Asia/Eastern European regions going back through time. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "There is no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region. This is totally a different culture. Trust us."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years has been effectively erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire with the same form of government, with just a name change.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and getting what I believe is a reasonable understanding of their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, these Royals can use their strength, if they choose, to challenge yet another tribe for Tribute, up to the limits of their ambition (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the greater Asia/Eastern European regions going back through time. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "There is no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region. This is totally a different culture. Trust us."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years have been erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire with the same form of government, with just a name change.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and getting what I believe is a reasonable understanding of their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, these Royals can use their strength, if they choose, to challenge yet another tribe for Tribute, up to the limits of their ambition (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the greater Asia/Eastern European regions going back through time. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years have been erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire with the same form of government, with just a name change.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and getting what I believe is a reasonable understanding of their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, these Royals can use their strength, if they choose, to challenge yet another tribe for Tribute, up to the limits of their ambition (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the greater Asia/Eastern European regions going back through time. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back through time.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years have been erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire with the same form of government, with just a name change.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and getting what I believe is a reasonable understanding of their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, these Royals can use their strength, if they choose, to challenge yet another tribe for Tribute, up to the limits of their ambition (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the regions. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back through time.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years have been erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire with the same form of government, with just a name change.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and getting what I believe is a reasonable understanding of their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, these Royals can use their strength, if they choose, to challenge yet another tribe for Tribute, ad infinitum (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the regions. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back through time.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years have been erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire with the same form of government, with just a name change.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and getting what I believe is a reasonable understanding of their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, these Royals can use their strength, if they choose, to challenge another tribe for Tribute (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the regions. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back through time.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years have been erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire with the same form of government, with just a name change.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and getting what I believe is a reasonable understanding of their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, they can use their strength, if they choose to challenge another tribe for Tribute (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the regions. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back through time.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years have been erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire with the same form of government, with just a name change.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and understanding their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, they can use their strength, if they choose to challenge another tribe for Tribute (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the regions. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back through time.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years have been erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees that some time after Genghis Khan they are the same Empire.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and understanding their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, they can use their strength, if they choose to challenge another tribe for Tribute (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the regions. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back through time.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years have been erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was the only one I found that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. Others call the "Tartarians" a subgroup of the Scythians (a tribe). Who knows what really happened, though everyone agrees they are the same Nation.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and understanding their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, they can use their strength, if they choose to challenge another tribe for Tribute (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the regions. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back through time.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years have been erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was one that states explicitly who renamed Scythia into Tartaria. I'm not sure that's what happened, but it's possible. Why, I'm not sure, though I have some ideas that I won't get in to.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and understanding their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, they can use their strength, if they choose to challenge another tribe for Tribute (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the regions. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back through time.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years have been erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was one that states explicitly who renamed them. I'm not sure that's what happened, but it's possible. Why, I'm not sure, though I have some ideas that I won't get in to.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and understanding their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, they can use their strength, if they choose to challenge another tribe for Tribute (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the regions. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back through time.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years have been erased from history.

When I first came across the "Tartaria conspiracy theory" I was like, Giants? Free Energy? Mud Flood? Ancient American architecture? Uh...

When I first started my investigation, none of the evidence I found surrounding Tartaria had anything to do with any of those things. Not to say there is no evidence for them (though the "Free Energy" thing doesn't have much... "momentum" in the evidence), but the interesting tidbits or otherwise unexplainable evidence regarding "Mud Flood" or hidden American architecture had absolutely nothing to do with Tartary. The giants evidence, of which there is a.... (ahem) Giant amount of evidence, again, had nothing to do (or perhaps very little to do) with Tartary. At least it had no more to do with Tartary than it did with any other area or group. It occurred to me that perhaps this information was purposeful misinformation, misleading associations, designed specifically to hide something, to make those that would look into the evidence of Tartary look like "crazy conspiracy theorists."

So I dug in. Looking into the primary and solid secondary evidence I came straight away to everyone prior to the 20th century say "The Tartarians are the Scythians." Like, everyone was saying it. As just one example, from Denis Petau, The History of the World, or, An Account of Time, 1659 (page 720) the author states explicitly:

The first of the great Chams or Emperours of Tartarie was Cingis or Zingis in 1162, who subduing Uncham the last King of Tenduch and Cathaia, changed the name of Scythia into Tartaria: the 5th from whom was Tamerlane or Tamir Cham, in whose time this Monarchy was at the height: the 9th was Tamor, since whom it is not known amongst us who have reigned, or what memorable things have been acted among them: for (they say) that neither the Tartar, Muscovite, or King of China, will suffer any besides Merchants or Embassadors to enter their Dominions, nor their own subjects to travel forth of them. But it is known that this Government is Tyrannical: life and death consisting in the Emerour’s word; whom some of the simple sort call,

Here, "Cingis" we call "Genghis Khan." Same guy. This wasn't the first reference I found (I found somewhere short of ten or so), but this was one that states explicitly who renamed them. I'm not sure that's what happened, but it's possible. Why, I'm not sure, though I have some ideas that I won't get in to.

Anyways, after seeing this over and over again, and having satisfied myself on the Tartarians being a real and sizable Empire, and understanding their form of government and culture, I moved away from my "Tartary" investigation, and started digging into the Scythians. The official narrative is all sorts of confused on the "end of the Scythian Empire." Some saying they were destroyed by the Romans (even though the Roman Empire never extended into their region), some saying they were destroyed by the Goths (even though the Goths were just another tribe of the Scythians), some saying they were destroyed by the Huns (even though official history says that Attila the Hun was a Scythian)...

It is all sorts of confused.

But all the older works stated that the government of Scythia was a "You Keep What You Kill" type of government (from Necromunda). In other words, the Aristocracy (Royal Scythians) can lay claim to any tribe and demand tribute. If they succeed in their claim, they get tribute, and that tribe is beholden to them (I'm not sure what page, but see Petes, 1722 talking about the governmental structure of Genghiscan). With that obligation, they can use their strength, if they choose to challenge another tribe for Tribute (where "another tribe" was almost certainly led by a cousin, since the Aristocracy, like all Aristocracies, was incestuous).

I looked at all the groups of the regions. They were all named as part of the Scythians, or stated explicitly in the official narrative as not part of the Scythians, even though they had the exact same culture, language, form of government, burial rituals (archeology), are noted as doing the exact same thing in the exact same way, all the way back through time.

I looked at so many groups that were "not Scythians" in that region, and they read pretty much identical. Going all the way back to the Corded Ware civilization (3300 BC), and they were all exactly the same. No small number stating explicitly "no continuity of government and culture from the previous people who looked exactly the same in this region."

It was a crazy investigation. You can't see it until you start looking at everyone, but they are all identical, with explicit statements that are directly contrary to all the evidence presented.

Anyways, I still haven't figure out why they want to hide the Scythian Empire. Is it because they hate them? Is it because they are them and they don't want anyone to see the parallels? I don't know, but I think there is a reason why the greatest Empire of the past 10,000 years have been erased from history.