Ταυροθυσίες και Μιθραϊκά Μυστήρια στην Κορυφή του Ολύμπου

Russia, Ukraine and the World-II by Megalommatis

Σουννίτες και Σιίτες: στη ρίζα της διαφοράς, του Κοσμά Μεγαλομμάτη

Σουννίτες και Σιίτες: στη ρίζα της διαφοράς, του Κοσμά Μεγαλομμάτη – Εποπτεία 119, Ιανουάριος 1987, σελ. 29-37

Sunnis and Shiites: at the root of the dispute, by Cosmas Megalommatis: Epopteia (‘Overview’) 119, January 1987, p. 29-37

Сунниты и шииты: в основе спора, (автор:) Кузьма Мегаломматис: Эпоптея («Обзор») 119, январь 1987 г., с. 29-37

===============

Σχόλιο

(σχετικά με την ηλεκτρονική αναδημοσίευση του αρχικά προ 36 ετών δημοσιευμένου άρθρου μου) 21 Δεκεμβρίου 2023

Αναδημοσιεύοντας στο Ιντερνέτ αυτό το κείμενο, το οποίο έγραψα περαστικός από την Αθήνα τον Οκτώβριο ή τον Νοέμβριο του 1986, ασφαλώς και εντυπωσιάζομαι. Πριν από 36 χρόνια, είχα ήδη ολοκληρώσει πέντε-έξι χρόνια μεταπτυχιακών σπουδών (σε Παρίσι. Λονδίνο και Βρυξέλλες) ειδικευόμενος σε ασσυριολογία, αιγυπτιολογία, χιττιτολογία, ιρανολογία, μυστηριακές θρησκείες της Ύστερης Αρχαιότητας, Γνώση, Μανιχεϊσμό, θρησκευτικό συγκρητισμό, και καταγωγή των Χριστιανισμών. Είχα ήδη συμπληρώσει τρία χρόνια έρευνας σε Ανατολική Τουρκία, Συρία, Ισραήλ, Ιράκ, Ιορδανία, Κουβέιτ, και Ιράν, ετοιμάζοντας την διδακτορική διατριβή μου στην (Δυτική) Γερμανία. Και είχα μόλις αρχίζει να μελετώ το Ισλάμ, Ισλαμική Ιστορία, ισλαμικές επιστήμες, τέχνες, σοφία και μυστικισμό, ξεκινώντας με μαθήματα στη Σχολή (Μεντρέσα) Σουχάντα του Αγιατολλάχ Γιάχγυα Αλαμέχ Νουρί (σχετικά: https://www.bbc.com/persian/iran/story/2008/01/080119_mf_nouri; σε φαρσί).

Όταν λοιπόν έγραψα αυτό το άρθρο, είχα παύσει να είμαι χριστιανός ορθόδοξος και ήμουν άθρησκος πολίτης της Ελλάδας (επισήμως – αυτό αναφερόταν στην ταυτότητά μου). Είχα αρχίσει να εξοικειώνμαι με το Ισλάμ ως λαϊκή θρησκεία και καθημερινή ζωή, δοξασίες και λατρεία, είχα αρχίσει να αντιλαμβάνομαι το χάος που χωρίζει από την ιστορική αλήθεια και τους δυτικούς ισλαμολόγους και τους μουσουλμάνους θεολόγους, και είχα αρχίσει να καταλαβαίνω το πόσο πολυδιάστατο ιστορικό θέμα είναι το Ισλάμ. Αλλά σε καμμία περίπτωση τότε δεν θα πίστευα ότι μόλις έξι χρόνια μετά την συγγραφή του εν λόγω άρθρου εκ μέρους μου θα αποδεχόμουν το Ισλάμ και θα γινόμουν μουσουλμάνος. Μάλλον θα γελούσα, αν κάποιος μου έλεγε τότε κάτι τέτοιο, έτσι προφητεύοντας το μέλλον.

Εκείνη η περίοδος χαρακτηρίστηκε από την τάση μου να πάρω ίσες αποστάσεις από τα πάντα, ώστε να εξουδετερώσω ξένες επιδράσεις επάνω μου και να δω την ιστορική εξέλιξη αντικειμενικά και ψυχρά, ή μάλλον (για να είμαι ακριβής) ζεστά, δηλαδή αγαπώντας το αντικείμενο της έρευνας και της μελέτης μου. Έτσι, απόλυτα εκτιμωντας το βάρος της ιστορικής παράδοσης της Ανατολής (δηλαδή Μεσοποταμία, Αίγυπτος, Ανατολία, Χαναάν, και Ιράν), το οποίο πέρασε μέσα στο τότε κυοφορούμενο Ισλάμ, κατάφερα να διακρίνω και να επισημάνω την ουσία των καταστάσεων και περιστάσεων που προκλήθηκαν γύρω αποό τον προφήτη Μωάμεθ - κάτι το οποίο κανένας δυτικός ισλαμολόγος και κανένας μουσουλμάνος θεολόγος δεν μπόρεσε να εντοπίσει: όταν γύρω από τον ετοιμοθάνατο Μωάμεθ δύο ομάδες πιστών συγκρούονταν για το ποιον θα ακολουθούσαν, 4000 χρόνια σουμεριακής, ακκαδικής, ασσυροβαβυλωνιακής και ιρανικής ιστορίας, παράδοσης, κληρονομιάς, αυτοκρατορικού ουνιβερσαλισμού, και εσχατολογικών προσδοκιών βάρυναν πάνω στις καρδιές και τα μυαλά τους, χωρίς εκείνοι να το αντιλαμβάνονται. 

Είμαι λοιπόν σήμερα στα 67 μου πολύ χαρούμενος βλέποντας ότι στα 30 μου, με λίγο Ταμπαρί και λιγώτερο Τερμεζί, είχα καταφέρει να γράψω την επάνω αριστερά παράγραφο της σελίδας 31, η οποία αρχίζει με τις λέξεις: "το περίπλοκο της όλης υπόθεσης". Σήμερα, μουσουλμάνος και όχι άθρησκος, όχι μόνον δεν θα άλλαζα ούτε μία λέξη στην παράγραφο αυτή, αλλά επιπλέον θα έλεγα ότι η παρατήρηση αυτή αποτελεί την μόνη δυνατή βάση αντίληψης, κατανόησης και αποτιμησης του Ισλάμ και της εν γένει κυοφορίας και γέννησής του. Όλα τα άλλα όλων των μουσουλμάνων θεολόγων, αφελών μέσα στην αμορφωσιά και την επιπολαιότητά τους, και όλων των δυτικών ισλαμολόγων, δηλητηριασμένων μέσα στο αντι-χριστιανικό, αντι-ισλαμικό και αντι-θεϊκό μίσος τους, είναι απλώς παιδαριώδη και ασυνάρτητα. Μη βιαστείτε να νομίσετε ότι στην παράγραφο αυτή θα βρείτε όλη την Αλήθεια! Όμως σίγουρα θα βρείτε τους παράλληλους δρόμους τους οποίους πρέπει να βαδίσετε για να φθάσετε.

Υπάρχουν δύο μικρά τυπογραφικά λάθη (τότε τα κείμενα παραδίδονταν ως απλά χειρόγραφα και εύκολα ένα νεοελληνικό υ συγχέεται με ένα ν, σε επισεσυρμένη γραφή, όταν ο γράφων είναι μάλιστα βιαστικός. Όταν μάλιστα η επιμέλεια κειμένου γίνεται από άτομο που δεν κατέχει το θέμα, τότε ένα μικρό λάθος διπλασιάζεται. Οι δύο τελευταίες λέξεις στην πρώτη γραμμή της δεξιάς στήλης στην τελευταία σελίδα πρέπει να αναγνωσθούν ως: «των Χαουαρίτζ». Προφανώς, ο επιμελητής κειμένου, αφού διάβασε το όνομα ως «Χαοναρίτζ» (η σειρά «αουα» θα φάνηκε ως κάτι το πολύ ξενικό για ένα Νεοέλληνα), το εξέλαβε ως όνομα άνδρα, ενώ είναι όνομα ομάδας: οι Χαουαρίτζ (Khawarij ή Kharijites/ الخوارج).

Σήμερα, 36 χρόνια μετά, παρά τον αναγκαστικό συγχρωτισμό με μουσουλμάνους (εντός του πλαισίου της παγκοσμιοποίησης) και παρά τις ηυξημένες σχέσεις της Ελλάδας με αρκετά μουσουλμανικά κράτη, η μεροληπτική και τυφλή Ελλάδα των αμόρφωτων ψευτο-πανεπιστημιακών και των άξεστων δήθεν γεωπολιτικών αναλυτών που ξερνάνε απόβλητα και παραλογισμούς στις τηλεοράσεις, στα ραδιόφωνα και στο Ιντερνέτ, η κατάσταση δεν έχει σε τίποτα αλλάξει. Η λέξη «Χαουαρίτζ» φέρνει ελάχιστα αποτελέσματα σε μία online search, και φυσικά δεν υπάρχει καν λήμμα στην ελληνική Wikipedia παρά το γεγονός ότι τα αντίστοιχα λήμματα είναι μεγάλα (Hâricîler/Хариджиты/哈里吉派/خوارج) όπως άλλωστε πρέπει.

------------------------ 

Comment

(about the online republication of my article, which was originally published before 36 years) 21 December 2023

Republishing on the Internet this text, which I wrote when passing from Athens in October or November 1986, I am certainly impressed. 36 years ago, I had already completed five or six years of postgraduate studies (in Paris, London and Brussels) specializing in Assyriology, Egyptology, Hittitology, Iranology, Late Antiquity mystery religions, Gnosticism, Manichaeism, religious syncretism, and the origins of Christianity. I had already completed three years of research in Eastern Turkey, Syria, Israel, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, and Iran while preparing my PhD thesis in (West) Germany. I had just begun to study Islam, Islamic history, Islamic sciences, arts, wisdom & mysticism, starting at the Madrasah Shuhada of Ayatollah Yahya Alameh Nouri (https://www.bbc.com/persian/iran/story/2008/01/080119_mf_nouri; in Farsi).

So, when I wrote this article, I had ceased to be an Orthodox Christian and I was an 'irreligious' Greek citizen (officially; it was mentioned on my identity card). I had started to familiarize myself with Islam at the level of popular religion and daily life, belief and cult; I had begun to perceive the chaos that separates the historical truth from the Western Islamologists and from the Muslim theologians; in addition, I had commenced to fathom what a multidimensional historical subject Islam is. But in no way would I then have thought that just six years after writing the article in question I would accept Islam and become a Muslim. I would have probably laughed if someone had said something like that to me at the time, thus foreseeing the future.

That period was characterized by my inclination to take equal distances from everything, in order to neutralize external influences on me and to see the historical development objectively and 'coldly' (or rather, to put it better, 'warmly'; namely expressing deep love for the object of my research and study). Consequently, comprehensively appreciating the weight of the historical tradition of the Orient (i.e., Mesopotamia, Egypt, Anatolia, Canaan, and Iran), which was introduced into the then-embryonic Islam, I was able to discern and comprehend the essence of all the situations and the circumstances, which arose around the prophet Muhammad - something that no Western Islamologist and no Muslim theologian managed to detect: when around the dying Muhammad two groups of believers clashed over who to follow, 4000 years of Sumerian, Akkadian, Assyrian-Babylonian and Iranian history, tradition, heritage, imperial universalism, and eschatological expectations weighed upon their hearts and minds, without them understanding it.

So, today at 67, I am very happy to see that, when I was 30, having little knowledge of Tabari and even less of al-Tirmidhi, I managed to write a text like that of the top left paragraph of page 31, which begins with the words: "the complexity of the whole affair". Today, being a Muslim and not an irreligious man, not only would I not change a single word in this paragraph, but I would also say that this observation is the only possible foundation for the accurate perception, comprehension and evaluation of Islam, and of the entire process of its inception and emergence. All the rest, said or written by either the Muslim theologians, who are gullible in their ignorance and frivolity, or the Western Islamologists, who are poisoned in their anti-Christian, anti-Islamic and anti-Godly hatred, is just childish and nonsensical. Do not come fast to the conclusion that in this paragraph you will find the entire Truth! All the same, you will definitely find the parallel roads that you have to walk in order to get there.

There are two small typographical errors (at the time, the texts were submitted as manuscripts, and a Modern Greek -u can be easily confused with a -n, in cursive writing, particularly when the author writes fast. When the editing of the text is done by a person, who does not know the subject, then a small error is doubled. The last two words on the first line of the right-hand column on the last page should be read as: "of the Khawarij". Apparently the copy editor, having absolutely misread the name as "Khaonarij" (the sequence "awa" being apparently too alien for a Modern Greek), considered it as the name of a man, whereas it is that of a group: the Khawarij (Khawarij or Kharijites/ الخوارج).

Today, 36 years later, despite the forced acculturation (within the globalization context) and in spite of Greece's increased relations with several Muslim states, the biased and blind Greek state infested with uneducated pseudo-academics and uncouth, fake geopolitical analysts, who spew rubbish and nonsense on TV channels, radio programs, and on the web, the situation has not changed at all. The word " Khawarij", written in Greek, brings up very few results in an online search, and of course, there is not even an entry in the Greek Wikipedia despite the fact that the respective entries are as long (Hâricîler/Хариджиты/哈里吉派/خوارج) as they should be.

----------------------------  

Комментарий

(об онлайн-переиздании моей статьи, первоначально опубликованной до 36 лет) 21 декабря 2023 г.

Перепечатывая в Интернете этот текст, который я написал, проезжая из Афин в октябре или ноябре 1986 года, я, конечно, впечатлен. 36 лет назад я уже закончил пять или шесть лет аспирантуры (в Париже, Лондоне и Брюсселе) по ассириологии, египтологии, хеттитологии, иранологии, мистическим религиям поздней античности, гностицизму, манихейству, религиозному синкретизму и истокам христианства. Я уже провел три года исследований в Восточной Турции, Сирии, Израиле, Ираке, Иордании, Кувейте и Иране, одновременно готовя докторскую диссертацию в (Западной) Германии. Я только начал изучать ислам, исламскую историю, исламские науки, искусство, мудрость и мистицизм, начиная с медресе Шухада аятоллы Яхья Аламе Нури (https://www.bbc.com/persian/iran/story/2008/01). /080119_mf_nouri; на фарси).

Итак, когда я писал эту статью, я перестал быть православным христианином и был «нерелигиозным» гражданином Греции (официально это было указано в моем удостоверении личности). Я начал знакомиться с исламом на уровне популярной религии и повседневной жизни, верований и культов; Я начал осознавать хаос, который отделяет историческую правду от западных исламологов и мусульманских богословов; кроме того, я начал понимать, каким многомерным историческим субъектом является ислам. Но ни в коем случае я бы тогда не мог подумать, что всего через шесть лет после написания рассматриваемой статьи я приму ислам и стану мусульманином. Я бы, наверное, рассмеялся, если бы кто-то сказал мне тогда что-то подобное, предвидя таким образом будущее.

Этот период характеризовался моей склонностью отходить от всего на равной дистанции, чтобы нейтрализовать внешние воздействия на меня и видеть историческое развитие объективно и «холодно» (или, лучше сказать, «тепло», а именно выражая глубокую любовь для объекта моего исследования и изучения). Таким образом, всесторонне оценивая вес исторической традиции Востока (т. е. Месопотамии, Египта, Анатолии, Ханаана и Ирана), которая была внедрена в тогда еще зарождающийся ислам, я смог различить и понять суть всех ситуации и обстоятельства, возникшие вокруг пророка Мухаммеда - то, что не удалось обнаружить ни одному западному исламологу и ни одному мусульманскому богослову: когда вокруг умирающего Мухаммеда две группы верующих спорили о том, кому следовать, 4000 лет шумерской, аккадской, ассирийско-вавилонской и иранской истории, традиций, наследия, имперского универсализма и эсхатологических ожиданий легли бременем на их сердца и умы, хотя они этого и не поняли.

Итак, сегодня, когда мне 67 лет, я очень рад это видеть, когда мне было 30, имея мало знаний о Табари и еще меньше об ат-Тирмизи, мне удалось написать текст, подобный верхнему левому абзацу страницы 31, который начинается со слов: «сложность всего дела». Сегодня, будучи мусульманином, а не нерелигиозным человеком, я не только не изменил бы ни одного слова в этом абзаце, но и сказал бы, что это наблюдение является единственно возможным основанием для правильного восприятия, понимания и оценки Ислама, а также всего процесса его зарождения и возникновения. Все остальное, сказанное или написанное либо легковерными в своем невежестве и легкомыслии мусульманскими богословами, либо западными исламологами, отравленными своей антихристианской, антиисламской и антибожественной ненавистью, - это просто ребячество и бессмысленно. Не приходите сразу к выводу, что в этом абзаце вы найдете всю Истину! Тем не менее, вы обязательно найдете параллельные дороги, по которым придется пройти, чтобы туда попасть.

Есть две небольшие опечатки (в то время тексты были представлены в виде рукописей, а новогреческое -u можно легко спутать с -n при рукописном письме, особенно когда автор пишет быстро. Когда редактирование текста делается человеком, который не знает тему текста, тогда небольшая ошибка удваивается. Последние два слова в первой строке правой колонки на последней странице следует читать как: «Хариджитов». Судя по всему, редактор, совершенно неправильно прочитав имя как «Хаонаридж» (последовательность «а-у-а», по-видимому, слишком чужда новогреческому языку), посчитал его именем человека, тогда как это имя группы: хариджитов (хаваридж или хариджитов/الخوارج).

Сегодня, 36 лет спустя, несмотря на насильственную аккультурацию (в контексте глобализации) и несмотря на расширение отношений Греции с несколькими мусульманскими государствами, предвзятое и слепое греческое государство, кишащее необразованными псевдоакадемистами и неотесанными, фальшивыми геополитическими аналитиками, которые извергают чушь на телеканалах, радиопрограммах и в сети, ситуация ничуть не изменилась. Слово «Хаваридж», написанное на греческом языке, дает очень мало результатов при онлайн-поиске, и, конечно, его нет даже в греческой Википедии, несмотря на то, что соответствующие записи такие длинные (Hâricîler/Хариджиты/ 哈里吉派/خوارج), какими они должны быть.

====================

========================

Κατεβάστε το άρθρο σε PDF / Download the article in PDF / Скачать статью в формате PDF:

calameo.com

Σουννίτες και Σιίτες: στη ρίζα της διαφοράς, του Κοσμά Μεγαλομμάτη

Σουννίτες και Σιίτες: στη ρίζα της διαφοράς, του Κοσμά Μεγαλομμάτη - Εποπτεία 119, Ιανουάριος 1987, σελ. 29-37 Sunnis and Shiites: at the ro

4shared.com

4shared.com - free file sharing and storage - Document Preview - text

Download Σουννίτες και Σιίτες; στη ρίζα της διαφοράς-1987 & σημερινό σχόλιο at 4shared free online storage service

figshare

Σουννίτες και Σιίτες; στη ρίζα της διαφοράς-1987 & σημερινό σχόλιο

Σουννίτες και Σιίτες: στη ρίζα της διαφοράς, του Κοσμά Μεγαλομμάτη – Εποπτεία 119, Ιανουάριος 1987, σελ. 29-37Sunnis and Shiites: at the roo

slideshare.net

Σουννίτες και Σιίτες: στη ρίζα της διαφοράς (1987) & σημερινό σχόλιο

Σουννίτες και Σιίτες: στη ρίζα της διαφοράς (1987) & σημερινό σχόλιο - Download as a PDF or view online for free

Patreon

Σουννίτες και Σιίτες: στη ρίζα της διαφοράς, του Κοσμά Μεγαλομμάτη (1987) | Megalommatis

Get more from Megalommatis on Patreon

The Stele of Roma the Doorkeeper, Dedicated of the Goddess Astarte

The Egyptians almost never depicted illness. This instance is one of the exceptions. One of the man’s legs is withered and the foot only supports itself on the toes. It is the opinion of quite a number of doctors that these deformities are due to polio. This may be the world’s oldest representation of that disease.

New Kingdom, 18th Dynasty, ca. 1401-1363 BC. Now in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek. Copenhagen. ÆIN 134

January 26 1988 - Burnum Burnum plants the Aboriginal flag at the cliffs of Dover, claiming England for the Aboriginal peoples of Australia, exactly 200 years after Arthur Phillip claimed Australia for the British. [video] The full Burnum Burnum Declaration:

I, Burnum Burnum, being a nobleman of ancient Australia, do hereby take possession of England on behalf of the Aboriginal people. In claiming this colonial outpost, we wish no harm to you natives, but assure you that we are here to bring you good manners, refinement and an opportunity to make a Koompartoo - ‘a fresh start’. Henceforth, an Aboriginal face shall appear on your coins and stamps to signify our sovereignty over this domain. For the more advanced, we bring the complex language of the Pitjantjajara; we will teach you how to have a spiritual relationship with the Earth and show you how to get bush tucker.

We do not intend to souvenir, pickle and preserve the heads of 2000 of your people, nor to publicly display the skeletal remains of your Royal Highness, as was done to our Queen Truganinni for 80 years. Neither do we intend to poison your water holes, lace your flour with strychnine or introduce you to highly toxic drugs. Based on our 50,000 year heritage, we acknowledge the need to preserve the Caucasian race as of interest to antiquity, although we may be inclined to conduct experiments by measuring the size of your skulls for levels of intelligence. We pledge not to sterilize your women, nor to separate your children from their families. We give an absolute undertaking that you shall not be placed onto the mentality of government handouts for the next five generations but you will enjoy the full benefits of Aboriginal equality. At the end of two hundred years, we will make a treaty to validate occupation by peaceful means and not by conquest.

Finally, we solemnly promise not to make a quarry of England and export your valuable minerals back to the old country Australia, and we vow never to destroy three-quarters of your trees, but to encourage Earth Repair Action to unite people, communities, religions and nations in a common, productive, peaceful purpose.

Burnum Burnum

From Jean Baptiste Duroselle (and his Book) to the Making (and Unmaking) of Europe to (the Rise of) the Final Empire in Russia

Several friends from different countries read with great interest and greater amusement my recent article about the Duroselle Affair back in 1990-1991:

Plea for Jean Baptiste Duroselle's Brilliant Book, Europe: A History of its Peoples

academia.edu

Plea for Jean Baptiste Duroselle's Brilliant Book, Europe: A History of its Peoples

The famous French academician Jean Baptiste Duroselle was commissioned by the Commission of the European Union (European Communities at the

Most of them did not know either the late French academician or his book, let alone the ridiculous and ignominious reaction of the average Greeks and of the barbarian Modern Greek elite to the truths revealed in the book of the French academician.

Then, these friends of mine made their own research for some time; subsequently, they came back with plenty of questions as regards my wholehearted support for Jean Baptiste Duroselle and his book. Some of them asked me why I supported so fervently a book that does not reflect my approach and evaluation of the History of Europe. Others asked me at what point this affair stands in my progressive adhesion to Islam, because in reality 25-26 months after the moment I wrote the Plea, I took my final decision to become Muslim.

Their questions offer me therefore the opportunity of a retrospective view on my spiritual path, academic career, intellectual progress, and cultural development; they are therefore quite challenging for me as they force me to stand in front of the mirror of my life. 

I - My view of Europe in the 1980s and now

Since my childhood, I have never been Euro-centric; I went to a French school during the primary and the secondary education, but this was not a reason for me to see France as the sole point of reference. I went to France for postgraduate studies, but this was only one of the countries where I pursued this level of studies. I spent my life's first 27 years in six European countries, also traveling to many other European states, but I was not Eurocentric at all. Until the end of 1983, my few travels to non-European lands were not the reason of my universalism. Certainly, this tendency must be attributed to aspects of inherent spirituality, to home culture and education, to my personal readings, and above all, to the fact that my parents and grandparents were -all- born in Anatolia, a major Asiatic land of civilization and eschatology.

Due to my strong European linguistic background (seven modern and two ancient European languages), I was well versed in European History; but I never viewed it as an autonomous historical knowledge, markedly delineated and clearly distinct from that about other lands or continents. In other words, I never felt and I never experienced, let alone accepted, the existence of borders; to me all borders are meaningless, useless and even profane. Therefore, I never considered Europe as a possibly standalone entity or land. My strong family connections with Turkey and Russia, my knowledge of these major European and Asiatic languages, and my intensive studies in Orientalist disciplines made me 'balance' and 'temper' what was absolute for many of the institutions that I frequented: the European culture and civilization.

This was my feeling at the time (and still is today): if you take off from Lisbon and land in Chelyabinsk, you will find an enormous cultural and behavioral difference; then you conclude that somewhere in-between there must be 'borders'. But in real terms, this is absolutely fictional. How can you understand that? If you travel by land, you will see the many similarities and the few dissimilarities that you will encounter every now and then from Lisbon to Valladolid, to Montauban and thence to Strasbourg, Dresden, Warsaw, Minsk, Moscow, Kazan, Ufa and Chelyabinsk. In reality, cultural continuity prevails over state borders.

My long years in the Middle East (where, while exploring the past, I extensively became acquainted with the local culture and the daily life of numerous nations and ethnic-religious groups) helped me shape my approach, corroborate my conclusions, and consolidate my conviction about the disappointing limits of the conventional modern scholarship (including my Greek, French, English, Belgian and German professors). Still, there was no systematic criticism of the European project of 'unification' from my side at the time; it simply did not interest me. Last, I did not express a straightforward rejection of the European colonial powers, of their deeds, and of the ensuing calamitous results back in the middle-late 1980s.

All the same; at the time, I did not approach the topic (History of Europe) in the same manner (as Jean Baptiste Duroselle did) either. To me, his approach was only one out of many possible approaches. I remember very well that at those days I was saying (as I do right now) that the History of Europe begins in Egypt and in Mesopotamia. This means automatically that I already did not accept either borders or continents.

II - Europe begins in Egypt and in Mesopotamia

There cannot be History of Europe without

- the Phoenician colonization of the Aegean Sea, South Balkans, and North Africa,

- the Carthaginian presence in Sicily, Sardinia and the Iberian Peninsula,

- the Scythians, the Cimmerians, the Celts and the Teutons, who are of Asiatic origin,   

- the Egyptian priests of Isis, Horus, Anubis and Sarapis, who propagated their cults,

- the Mithraic pirates who imposed Mithraism in South Balkans and South Italy,

- the Mithraic priests, who revealed Mithras' mysteries throughout Europe,

- the Aramaean origin Emperor Elagabalus, for whom Syria was holier than Europe, 

- the Edict of Caracalla that turned Syrians, Egyptians & Berbers to Roman citizens,

- the Chaldean Oracles & the Babylonian spiritual heritage that they brought in,

- the Manicheans, whose faith was preached by an Iranian mystic in Mesopotamia,

- the Huns and all the other Turanian or not invaders who settled in Europe,

- the Muslims of Andalusia, who turned their land into Europe's scientific center,

- the Volga Bulgars who were Islamized before the Kievan Rus were Christianized,

- the Tatars & the Mongols (Golden Horde), who are Russia's vertebral column, and

- the Ottomans, whose European lands were larger than any other European empire's except for Napoleon's momentary state, Russia, and the Roman Empire. 

Still, all this was missing in Jean Baptiste Duroselle's book.

Certainly, an academic criticism of Duroselle's book could be founded, but any perspicacious scholar would instantly understand the purpose of that book: it was not a strictly educational material. It was written to become (as it really did) the cornerstone of the European unification. Today many people forget that, when Duroselle was writing his book, the USSR and the Warsaw Pact were still there. As educational material, it was meant to be that of at least one generation.  

Then, why should one write an academic criticism of a book that has an exclusively political purpose and scope (except the scope is nefarious and destructive)?

I never believed that Duroselle's book was written with bad intentions. As member of the same elite, which sought to establish the European Union on sound and solid bases, Jean Baptiste Duroselle advanced, at the academic/educational level, in the same manner statesmen and legislators did at the political level: step by step. Or if you prefer, one step at a time! The European Coal and Steel Community had only six (6) member states in 1952; but the European Communities had twelve (12) member states when, 37 years later, in 1989, Duroselle was writing his book.

Then, I realized that in the elaboration of the (demanded by the Commission of the European Communities) book, Duroselle proceeded in the same manner. Most probably, if everything went well, another historian 25-30 years later would compose another «Europe: A History of its Peoples» to incorporate material, facts, cultures and nations that I suggested (as per above) and which Duroselle fully omitted. Then, a fully successful European Union would incorporate Turkey and Russia, thus transforming its nature and changing its name (once more) into Eurasiatic Union. This would be a most propitious development – not only for Europe but for the entire world.

As I saw the entire project as an open-ended effort, I did not feel the need to criticize Duroselle's book at the time, hoping that things would progress beneficially to all, with the elimination of narrow-minded approaches, discriminatory theories, and racist schemes which help raise fictional barriers and fake borders, turning peoples and nations to conflicting parts in a destructive game.

III - Many different plans for a Unified Europe

One should not associate Jean Baptiste Duroselle and his book with today's calamitous and anti-European leadership of the European Union and of many of its countries. Duroselle belonged to a totally different elite, which simply failed to keep the evil forces out.

It is also erroneous to think that the problem is due to a divide between forces that intend to establish and consolidate a Unified Europe and those who intend to plunge the countries of the European Union into endless strives, fraternal conflicts, and catastrophic wars. I don't mean that there are not forces acting to damage the European Union; they certainly exist and they deploy every possible effort to harm the European project.

However, the greatest trouble has been the existence of several parallel agendas providing for different versions of the European project. There were plans which equated the European unification, not only with the fall of the Soviet system but also, with the split and destruction of Russia. Duroselle was a close associate of Jean Monnet and a French Freemason. But their plans about Europe included also the split and destruction of Russia (then known as USSR). This became fully evident with Charles de Gaulle, who did not say the words «Union soviétique» (or U.R.S.S.) even once. He used to call it «Russie». So, de Gaulle spoke about a Europe «de Lisbonne aux Ourals», which means a de facto split of Russia. 

I beg you not to misunderstand me! I do not equate Charles de Gaulle with all those who wanted to destroy Russia. His idea reflected the targets and the agenda of only one group. That group wanted (and still wants) to include European Russia into the European project. But there are other groups with other targets and very different agendas, as per which Russia must not be cut to just two parts, but to ten or fifteen pieces.

With the aforementioned, I don't mean recent but old groups, secret societies, and long enduring, evil plans providing for Russia's pulverization. To add further perplexity to the already confusing story, I must add that there is no unity of purpose even among those who intend to fully pulverize Russia. There are some who are very cheerful for the European unification project and have malicious intentions toward Russia; and there are others who want to see both, Europe and Russia, plunged in division, turned to endless battlefields, and mercilessly destroyed.

IV - Serious mistakes committed by past European leadership

And the forces that were in charge committed many mistakes. Things did not go out of control with the beginning of the Russian special operation in Ukraine in 2022; the real problems started at the time of Mitterrand (1916-1996), Kohl (1930-2017) and Gorbachev (1931-2022). The earliest form of these problems appeared in the minds of people like Jean Monnet (1888-1979), Pierre Renouvin (1893-1974), and Jean Baptiste Duroselle (1917-1994), who kept in their heads a pre-WW II image of the world. This fact prevented them from fully realizing that their project was in striking contrast with three different agendas:

- the Jesuit agenda providing for European unification and for Russia's division and subordination,

- the US-Zionist agenda implying US predominance in Europe, and Russia's final pulverization, and

- the UK-Fake Freemasonic agenda intending to cause conflict everywhere between the Atlantic and the Pacific.

Of course, the existence of an agenda does not mean that it will be materialized, but for this to be done, mistakes must not be made. Unfortunately, the aforementioned three leaders made colossal mistakes. Their intention to advance in small steps only guaranteed that catastrophic errors would be produced in the process; they should have advanced in a very bold and most impulsive manner, which would change everything in the horizon so quickly that others would never be in a position to react. Many times, what does not change in a second, fails to evolve and, due to other changes occurred elsewhere, becomes obsolete.  

Mitterrand, Kohl and Gorbachev should make an agreement as per which the termination of the Soviet/Russian presence in East Germany would imply the immediate termination of French/English/ American presence in West Germany.

UK and US should be kept out of every discussion pertaining to Germany and France. Gorbachev's agreement with Helmut Kohl dates back to July 1990 (during their meeting on 14th July); but the Warsaw Pact was dissolved one year later (July 1991). East Germany's exit from the Warsaw Pact should occur at the same moment as West Germany's exit from NATO. The momentous advent of a neutral, united Germany should be the sole and undisputed target of Mitterrand, Kohl and Gorbachev. With the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, the leading states of the European Communities, namely France, Italy, Spain and Portugal, should withdraw from NATO to become militarily neutral countries – just like Germany and all the former Warsaw Pact member states.

European Communities should then immediately start discussions with Russia and other Eastern European states for the establishment of a new European organization of security and military cooperation.

All the other European Communities member states that had not withdrawn from NATO should be asked to either follow the example of the major states or cease to be part of the European project.

Specific legislation in the European Parliament should be voted to permanently block academic exchanges with US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand (and with  UK if the insular state did not withdraw from NATO), making it impossible for European students to ever study in US, Canadian, etc. universities. The relations between the European Communities and the US should be limited at the level of simple trade.  

As a matter of fact, the mistakes of Mitterrand, Kohl and Gorbachev were those of their mentors, and the reason for them was the fact that they kept having a pre-WW II world view in a post-WW II world. This was preposterous. They failed to accurately assess the deep seated hatred that post-WW II American elites had of Europe, and which was superbly encapsulated in John Kennedy's silly words about France ('a country the size of Texas' having the pretension of 'grandeur' and 'universal relevance').

Example of typically American trash that is absolutely impermissible on European soil: https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/france-united-states-iraq/

Post WW II America evolved from a supportive friend of Europe to an encumbering ally only to dare finally assert her claim to world supremacy. It goes without saying that the rise of an empire is achieved either in parity with another or with the collapse of another. In fact, after the end of what is conventionally called WW II, any truthful vision of a United Europe is that of an Empire, and it cannot be achieved within the concept of a Res Publica. Consequently and by definition, the US and the UK are the 'enemies' and all the states of Asia and Africa are the potential allies.

V – The rise of a self-destructive establishment in Europe

Failing to understand that America is the enemy and not the ally or partner of Europe was not the only mistake of the last representatives of the old guard of European statesmen and politicians. They failed to identify a series of challenges, to come up with their own responses to them, to spot groups using a perverse language to corrupt European ideals and principles, to outmaneuver them, to eliminate subversive theories like today's biased and fake multiculturalism, to find various alternatives to the supposed 'need' of cheap labor force (which in turn translates to unnecessary millions of 'refugees'), to examine worldwide threats, notably the case of Islamic extremism, to avert the existing dangers, to address all major issues (Food and Water, Energy, Labor, Worldwide Competitiveness, Security, Health, Education, Internet-Mobile Telephony-Disruptive Technology, and the inevitable termination of the Welfare State), and to envision common national and supranational survival in an exceptionally different future.

The old guard of European statesmen and politicians proved to be too small, too mean, and too conventional to possibly stand the exam. Their traditional practice to please all the important groups of power by means of endless compromises, their unconditional relativism, their tactics to promise everything to everyone, and their absurd aversion to fix strict limits to their concepts, principles and values made them look absolutely useless. This situation was exemplified by Jacques Chirac, who was foolish enough not to realize that, when you don't stand for your values, you get supplanted. Elasticity is not a virtue for emperors.

And this is what really happened in Europe; the old guard of European statesmen and politicians, provenly useless, got effectively supplanted by valueless aliens and enemies of the European culture, who can easily promote by means of lawless laws any sort of bestial and villainous absurdity to a supposed 'value', only thanks to the long lasting relativism that corrupted the European societies. 

The rise of a self-destructive establishment in Europe did not and will not end up with its subordination to the US; this is so because the American society collapsed too due to the rise of similar chaotic and inhuman elements and groups. And this is exactly what the old guard of European statesmen and politicians (Reagan, Thatcher, Kohl and Chirac) failed to understand: it they put strict limits, stated their purposes clearly, and clashed with the disparate, corrupt and chaotic elements of the Evil Left, there would be a thunderous clash and they would eliminate the evilness, preventing the corruption from spreading across their societies. Their conformism, compromises and conventionalism (superbly described and decried by the perspicacious Pope Benedict XVI as 'relativism') did actually ensure calmness and placidity in their time only to bring about corruption, disintegration, and dissolution 20-30 years later. 

Now, alas, it will take extreme brutality, foremost violence, and overwhelming totalitarianism to save the European Union; but what will be saved will have nothing to do with 'democracy', 'human rights', 'civil rights', and 'republican' states. It will come with dozens of millions of dead on European soil and -above all- with fierce countenance. Many expect it to be based in Eastern Europe; they believe that the land of Russia, east of Moscow, the confines of Volga Bulgaria, the periphery of the Tatars, and Sibir (Siberia), as far as Chelyabinsk, are the world's most blessed Earth as past covenant and future pledge. It may appear to be like the Jack of all trades; what Christianity and Islam failed to achieve with their interminable wars, Tengrism and Shamanism may eventually achieve. And who knows? Those who wanted for more than 100 years to consecrate Russia may see their urban state desecrated forever! I guess one would even call it orbital deformity!

What was then Duroselle's error? I would not call it like that; as a matter of fact, it was an oversight. Although he fortunately avoided referring to nonsensical lines of division of which others were fascinated, he did not explicitly state that in Eastern Europe the only possibly peaceful borders are those between Austria-Hungary, Imperial Germany, and Czarist Russia.

---------------------

Download the article in Word doc.:

megalommatiscomments

From Jean Baptiste Duroselle (and his Book) to the Making (and Unmaking) of Europe to (the Rise of) the Final Empire in Russia

От Жана Батиста Дюрозеля (и его книги) к созданию (и разрушению) Европы и к (возвышению) последней империи в России Several friends from dif

academia.edu

From Jean Baptiste Duroselle (and his Book) to the Making (and Unmaking) of Europe to (the Rise of) the Final Empire in Russia

От Жана Батиста Дюрозеля (и его книги) к созданию (и разрушению) Европы и к (возвышению) последней империи в России Several friends from dif

Nefertum, god of the lotus and son of Ptah and Sekhmet.

François Bocion - Venice at sunset (1874)

Wall of the Temple of Horus in Edfu, built by the Ptolemids between 237 and 57 BCE.

Cosmas Megalommatis, Nabu: World Mythology, Greek Pedagogical Encyclopedia, 1989

Κοσμάς Μεγαλομμάτης, Ναμπού: Παγκόσμια Μυθολογία, Ελληνική Εκπαιδευτική Εγκυκλοπαίδεια, 1989

Кузьма Мегаломматис, Набу: мировая мифология, Греческая педагогическая энциклопедия, 1989

Kosmas Megalommatis, Nabu: Weltmythologie, Griechische Pädagogische Enzyklopädie, 1989

Kosmas Gözübüyükoğlu, Nabu: Dünya Mitolojisi, Yunan Pedagoji Ansiklopedisi, 1989

قزمان ميغالوماتيس، نبو : اساطیر جهانی، دایره المعارف آموزشی یونانی، 1989

Côme Megalommatis, Nabû: Mythologie mondiale, Encyclopédie pédagogique grecque, 1989

1989 قزمان ميغالوماتيس، نابو : الأساطير العالمية، الموسوعة التربوية اليونانية،

Cosimo Megalommatis, Nabu: mitologia mondiale, Enciclopedia pedagogica greca, 1989

Cosimo Megalommatis, Nabu: mitología mundial, Enciclopedia pedagógica griega, 1989

Cosmas Megalommatis, Nabu: World Mythology, Greek Pedagogical Encyclopedia, 1989

===============

Скачать PDF-файл: / PDF-Datei herunterladen: / Télécharger le fichier PDF : / PDF dosyasını indirin: / :PDF قم بتنزيل ملف / Download PDF file: / : یک فایل دانلود کنید / Κατεβάστε το PDF:

calameo.com

Κοσμάς Μεγαλομμάτης, Ναμπού: Παγκόσμια Μυθολογία 1989

Κοσμάς Μεγαλομμάτης, Ναμπού: Παγκόσμια Μυθολογία, Ελληνική Εκπαιδευτική Εγκυκλοπαίδεια, 1989 Кузьма Мегаломматис, Набу: мировая мифология, Г

docdroid.net

Κοσμάς Μεγαλομμάτης, Ναμπού Παγκόσμια Μυθολογία 1989.pdf

tl!p|Yo npqqeq KorTrq ox6o€rq roue, o(6Fo rrq rirdrnr€q KorT|q opllo6!6rrlteq, nou ol nrqroi rouq ono6i6ouv o' ouroiq. te opoueveq rcprrn6o€

figshare

Κοσμάς Μεγαλομμάτης, Ναμπού: Παγκόσμια Μυθολογία, 1989

Κοσμάς Μεγαλομμάτης, Ναμπού: Παγκόσμια Μυθολογία, Ελληνική Εκπαιδευτική Εγκυκλοπαίδεια, 1989Кузьма Мегаломматис, Набу: мировая мифология, Гр

slideshare.net

Κοσμάς Μεγαλομμάτης, Ναμπού: Παγκόσμια Μυθολογία-1989

Κοσμάς Μεγαλομμάτης, Ναμπού: Παγκόσμια Μυθολογία-1989 - Download as a PDF or view online for free

The Historian, Elizabeth Kostova