20. Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere, Gumilev
Part nine, 2nd section, XXXVIII. Bipolarity of the ethnosphere
This is our last and 20th chapter of Lev Nikolayevich Gumilev's theoretical work, "Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere". Our first post was on Jan 25th, so we have been at it for 3 months. I thank those who have read along with the posts, but we also have many other works, and I don't suppose people are reading just where I am posting. We did have a regular number of email openings, so someone was probably following closely.
I have read the book again as I posted it. That is kind of my final edit, and I do find typos and anomalies, which I fix. This is an important book for me, even though I am well introduced into Gumilev's theory, through all his other works in this library. The theory is illustrated by vast tracts of history, which move fast, but whet the appetite for more knowledge of our ancient heritage.
I have the historical book "Ancient Rus and the Great Steppe", which I had prepared last summer. This will be the only source in English. I translated it from the Russian copy I have. It ties the history of Russia with the Eastern history of Asia and the Mongol period. At the end of August I started the upload of "From RUS to Russia", which is an (illustrated) comprehensive history of the beginnings of Russia in relation to the West. I chose to postpone the Great Steppe because a lot of this written history would duplicate From Rus to Russia.
Ancient Rus and the Great Steppe is by far the more comprehensive book. I don't know how it will break down, but it may come to 30 chapters, it is an 800 page book. (And that's on 8 1/2 x 11 single spaced.)
I don't feel to dive into a 30 chapter work just yet. Maybe both you an I need a rest. We have a good subscriber base, but I think many more people would be interested in a comprehensive history of Russia with the east.
I have collected a few articles which I will gradually post, and then we'll see what comes up.
THANKS AGAIN FOR FOLLOWING ALONG ON ETHNOGENESIS.
_________________
XXXVIII. “Bipolarity” means those constructive people, and those destructive people. Destructive is not only about institutions and things, but it is life-negative. Its choice is to kill people. The way he ends this book is with his caution on the ANTI-SYSTEM. I think it is very relevant to the 21st century. I have written some of this chapter already in the Anti-System thread. Here it is again in full detail:
FALSEHOOD AS A PRINCIPLE.
Words are polysemous. The meaning of a word depends entirely on the context, just as the meaning of a phrase depends on the text, the intonation, the situation for which the text is written, etc., and the meaning of a text depends on the environment, social and natural. Even such a simple word as "desk" has no meaning by itself; it can appear in combinations: "desk," "order table," "golden table Kiev," "this hostess has a good table," etc. But these semantic distinctions are simple, and any reader of the text understands what we are talking about. Much more difficult - with the concepts of equally polysemantic, but whose meaning is veiled. For example, "murder”. It is obvious to everyone that murder for the purpose of robbery is a crime; murder for the sake of sadism is a heinous crime; but murder in a duel is an act, though punishable, but not criminal, because he, who survived, put himself at equal risk of being killed and defended his honor; killing an enemy in war is not a crime, but a feat; executing a criminal by an executioner, that is also murder, is performance of duty, and executing an obviously innocent person is worse than a crime: this is sin.
And the philosophical resonance of Count L.N. Tolstoy, who interpreted the meaning of words out of context, and the meaning of the Gospel texts out of historical setting of the 1st century A.D., is meaningless. Apparently he was sincere in doing so, but all the worse, the fundamental error of analysis remains, and stupidity is as much a source of human misfortune as evil-willfulness. Even, perhaps, sometimes stupidity is worse, because it demands for itself the right to irresponsibility: "I thought so, so I am not to blame. And this is where the evil willfulness gets the space it needs. It cannot act directly, which always has its share of risk, but indirectly, through deceived fools who are sure of their right not to think about what they do, but to act according to the orders of others. The Gospel says on this subject, "change your mind" (metanoite), which is translated by the word "repent," which has already lost its original meaning.
Let's go back to the concept of "lie. Is it found in living nature? To some extent, yes! Animal mimicry is an attempt to deceive a predator or prey. But both predators and their prey have the right to save their lives either from starvation or from being eaten, so mimicry is justified by the laws of the biosphere, which are beyond good and evil.
People in war often misinform the enemy. Is this a lie? Technically, yes, but war is an exceptional state, and one should not believe any information. It is necessary to verify the information, for here deception is part of the rules of the game. Obviously, here, too, we are talking about a different concept, but with the same name – "lie. Neglecting the nuances of semantics makes the term meaningless.
The ancients were not confused about this problem. They introduced the concept of the "oath," i.e., a legally formalized renunciation of a useful and sometimes life-saving lie. The right to deception, to ambiguity, to evasion was retained, but only in everyday life. An oath, on the other hand, stood out as an extraordinary act, as a refusal to follow the laws of nature, i.e., the instinct of self-preservation. Therefore the gods or spirits of the elements were summoned as witnesses, or rather guardians, to punish the perpetrator of the oath. This was a shade of the supernatural significance of the oath.
In the Gospel, it is recommended for those on the path of self-improvement or holiness not to swear, but always to tell only the truth. But for all other, ordinary people in all Christian countries, the oath is called an oath and is still preserved as a semi-juridical-semi-religious act that still has meaning and meaning. For to deceive is simply an unseemly act, but to violate an oath, i.e., to deceive the one who trusts, is a crime, unnatural and contrary to the divine, is an insult to the world order - a betrayal.
But is it necessary for a geographical treatise to deal with the history of forgotten fantastic doctrines? Yes, it is, because their formulation of the problem of the attitude to life on Earth contains, implicitly, a solution to the problem posed at the beginning of the chapter: who, how and why destroys the biocenoses in which they themselves live.
In essence, we have found plus and minus, which, like in algebra, can be swapped. This change will change our subjective qualitative assessment, but not the objective opposition itself. If we take as positive the affirmation of the biosphere with its regularities, which include the killing of living beings, then the opposite position would be negative, even if it were associated with the preaching of non-resistance to evil.
Leo Tolstoy, in The Kreutzer Sonata, quite consistently pointed out that since the human race needs to kill in order to continue to exist, it would be better for it to stop. The 13th century French Manicheans (Cathars) believed that warm-blooded animals should not be killed. Therefore, during the Albigoy War, in order to distinguish a Cathar from a Catholic, the prisoner was offered to slaughter a chicken. The Cathars refused... ...and went to the stake.
But if the French had not slaughtered the chickens, they would not have raised them, but would have driven them out into the woods, where the chickens would have been overeaten by owls and foxes. The chickens, as you can see, would have gotten worse for it, but after all, a consistent life-negative system would have judged this to be an achievement: another species of animal spared the “horror” of being alive; of existence.
And those who affirm life kill and die themselves so that their descendants may do the same on their corpses and so that life, transformed by death, may spread across the face of the planet just as it did in past geological epochs. And both worldviews are consistent, but the genesis of their passionarity is different, as are their goals and their traces in the landscapes of the Earth.
At the individual level, lying is not only an unsympathetic stereotype of behavior, but also a way of influencing the environment, ethnic and landscape. At the population level, it is already a massive disinformation in anti-systems, affecting the environment social and cultural. But at the biospheric level there are simplification processes that lead to replacement of higher animals with microorganisms (rotting of corpses): transformation of living matter into indirect matter; disintegration of indirect matter into molecules, molecules into atoms, real atomic particles into virtual ones, and transfer of photons into the "Abyss", i.e. light radiates out into the vacuum. But it seems to be a trivial thing to begin with.
But what is the truth against lies? It is not necessary to make a mystery and to mystify the reader, as well as oneself. Let's call as truth the judgment adequate to the given sum of the observed facts, where the error does not exceed the legal tolerance. When superimposed on the coordinate axis, true judgments will be positive values and false ones will be negative values, and on a global scale.
And the genesis of positive and negative values is different: the former are direct generation of the biosphere's living substance energy, the latter are reflections from the vacuum, i.e. hollow concepts and thoughts.
THE THIRD PARAMETER
Recall that, seeking to describe the ratio of passionarity and the sphere of consciousness in the processes of ethnogenesis, we introduced the category of attraction, putting it on the ordinate. In this way we have achieved the clarity necessary to describe those ethnogenesis processes that are initiated by a passionate impulse or genetic drift. But when there is a superposition of differently characterized ethnic systems and related "systems of consciousness", which are nowadays called "cultures", chimeras emerge that are fundamentally different from ethnoses, although superficially similar to them.
The difference between ethnos and chimera is subtle to the eye. But if an ethnos passes all ages, if it does not die a violent death, then the chimera either exists or disintegrates. This means that the relationship between ethnos and chimera is the same as that between an organism and a cancerous tumor. The latter can grow to the limits of the organism, but no further, and it lives only at the expense of the host organism. Like a tumor, a chimeric anti-system (chimeras can also be harmless, i.e. passive) sucks the means to maintain its existence from the ethnos or super-ethnos, using the principle of lies described above. This is not a type of attractionability, because the latter is always based on sincerity, but a phenomenon of a different order, for the description of which a third axis of coordinates, the applicata, is needed. The positive axis will include life-affirming impulses, including those that sacrifice an individual's life, often their own, to maintain the existence of the species, and the negative axis will include those that lead to saving the individual from the burdens of the world by rejecting grief and joy, rejecting caring for loved ones and those far away, rejecting loving the truth and denying lies. This list, far from complete, characterizes the anti-system.
It might seem that Buddhism is a model anti-system, but this is only partially true. There are many branches of Buddhism. Where the bodhisattva of compassion - Avalokita, the bodhisattva of wisdom Manjushri, where there is the teaching about Adi-buddha - the creator of the world, the worldview remains positive. But in the schools of contemplation and non-doing the negative impulse prevails, just as in the Gnostic movements of early Christianity and in the modern existentialism of C. Jaspers the life-negative worldview is openly expressed, although the front one is openly atheistic. But this is not what interests us.
The parameters noted are different in meaning and in character. Powerful impulses of passionate impulses, as a rule, deprive individuals of the possibility to choose their own line of behavior. If such a desire arises in someone, the imperative of the collective will not allow the person to unfold. The same happens in the inertial phase, where the persona is shaped by the tradition of the accumulated culture. And in the latter phases, sub-passionary individuals have no reason to reconsider their habitual worldview. So in the flow of normal ethnogenesis the anti-system cannot arise.
However, at the combination of the two super-ethnoses, when the contact zone becomes an ethnic chimera, anti-systems develop with terrible force. And after all, we cannot say that the deterioration of living conditions or economic hardships prompts to accept the negative view of the world. No, there are not more of them than there were before, and sometimes even less, for in the contact zones there is usually an intense exchange of things (trade), people (slave trade) and ideas (faith trade). Obviously, there is another reason.
A PERNICIOUS PHANTOM.
Let us put the question this way: what do Ismailism, Karmatianism, Marionite Pavlikianism, Manichaeism, Gnosticism, Bogomilism, Albigensianism and other similar systems and, in particular, with the existentialism of C. Jaspers have in common?
Nothing on the genesis of beliefs, dogmatics, eschatology and exegetics. But there is one feature that is common to these systems - life-negation, (they are all anti-systems), which is expressed in the fact that the truth and falsehood are not opposed, but equated to each other.
Out of this grows a program of manslaughter, because since there is no real life, which is seen either as illusion (Tantrism), or as a mirage in a mirror image (Ismailism), or as the creation of Satan (Manichaeism), there is no one to pity - because there is no object of pity; and there is no reason to pity - God is not recognized, so there is no one to be held accountable to, and there cannot be pity, because this would prolong the imagined, but painful suffering of a being who is in fact a spectre, a shadow spirit. And if so, in the absence of an object, the lie is equal to the truth, and one can use both to one's advantage.
We must give the medieval men credit: they were consistent, and so their speeches sounded very convincing. Reality was sometimes so terrible that people were ready to "throw themselves" into any illusion, especially one as logical, rigorous and elegant as this one. After all, by entering the world of phantasmagoria and spells, they became masters of that world, or, more accurately, they were sincerely convinced of it. And the fact that they had to spit on the cross, like the Templars, or smash a Kaaba meteorite into pieces, like the Karmatians, for the sake of freedom and power over others, did not embarrass them at all. True, when they took this path, they did not gain personal freedom. On the contrary, they lost even that which they had to that very limited extent, in one or another positive system. Before, law and custom guaranteed them some rights commensurate with their incumbent duties. Here they had no rights. Strict discipline subjected them to an invisible leader, an elder, a teacher, but it enabled them to do maximum harm to their neighbors. And it was so pleasant, so joyful to wreak havoc on your fellow man that it was possible to sacrifice one's life.
And it was not only distress and resentment that drove the neophytes to anti-systems. People often lived badly, but not everywhere and not always. Stormy periods were replaced by quiet ones, but the philistine mustiness of peaceful rural life acted dialectically and created consequences opposite to the prerequisites. When the passionate young man was fed to his heart's content, but forbidden to do anything or to think logically, he sought the use of his hidden powers. And he found them in the preaching of denial, disregarding the fact that the goal set before him was a fantasy. Fairy tales and myth were born every day.
Against them the strict conclusions of science in practical predictions of reality were powerless. In the 1st millennium they fascinated people of all countries except Russia and Siberia, where the anti-systems have never formed.
The latter can be easily explained. Two parameters are necessary for the emergence of a stable anti-system: decline, for example, the moment of transition from the phase to the phase of local ethnogenesis, and the introduction of an alien ethnos. Even if both systems are positive and creative before the beginning of the process, both in terms of ecology and in terms of culture. By combining, they give rise to an anti-system, a side phenomenon arising apart from the will of the participants.
Since Siberia and Ancient Russia were shielded from extraneous, undesirable influences until the 13th century, ideas alien to the worldview of their inhabitants, if they got into the northern forests of Eurasia, it could not take root there.
We proposed the concept of ethnicity as a field of biophysical oscillations with a certain frequency or rhythm. It now finds confirmation. When two different rhythms overlap, a kind of cacophony emerges, which people perceive as something unnatural, which is generally correct. But then people begin to dislike the geographical environment that accommodates them, looking for a way out with strict logic and justifying their hatred of a world arranged so inconveniently.
This is precisely the situation that arose in the Hellenistic states of antiquity in the second and first centuries B.C. Before the campaigns of Alexander the Great, the Hellenes did not know the Jews, and the Jews paid no attention to the "Javan"-Jews[9]. But in Seleucid Syria and Ptolemaic Egypt they were neighbors. The Jews studied Plato and Aristotle, the Hellenes the Bible translated into Greek. Both ethnic groups were talented and passionate, but out of the contact of their worldviews arose Gnosticism, a grand and fascinating anti-system[10]. The clash of Hellenism with Iranianism gave rise in the third century to Manichaeism, a powerful anti-system that was persecuted not only in Rome, Byzantium and Iran, but even in tolerant China[11] and somewhat later in France[12].
In India, invaded by the Kushans and the Sakvas, the great philosopher Nagarjuna in the second century AD created the world-negating doctrine of emptiness (shunyata), and went so far in its negation that he declared even his own existence an illusion[13].
The most terrible thing, however, happened in China, when the Huns and Xianbi, driven out of their native steppe by the centuries-long drought, moved there in the 3rd century. Systems and philosophies did not arise there, because for three centuries there was a terrible massacre. In this constant war, 27 ethnic groups, including the ancient Chinese (Han), perished. Only the passionate push, which brought the medieval Chinese (Tabgach) ethnos to life, saved the dying country.
Equally passionate push of the turn of our era gave birth to the original positive system - Christianity, which overlapped the Gnostic phantasmagoria, and a new push of the 6th-7th centuries, which created Islam as a worldview, stopped the existence of Iranian anti-systems – the zindiks.
However, the Caliphate quickly turned into a chimerical integrity, as exogamy, carried out through harems, introduced Persians, Georgians, Armenians, Syrians, Greeks, Turks, Berbers, etc. into the new Arab-Muslim ethnos. The Mongols were the bearers of passionarity, but when confronted with the anti-systems, they lost their passionary charge and in the XIV century were extinguished.
In Byzantium, the anti-system developed in the 9th century in Asia Minor, on the border with the "Muslim world". From there it spread to the Balkans, where the Bulgarians and Slavs, who accepted the Greek education, created their own chimera - the Bulgarian kingdom. Here the anti-system was called Bohumilism and disappeared after the passionate push of the 13th century, displaced by the Ottomans.
But the fate of the Manicheans of Provence was much more complicated. They died in the XIII century, but infected Western Europe with their worldview, where a disgusting social institution - the Inquisition - appeared. It is worth telling more about this.
ANCIENT DUALISM
Manichaeism and Christianity equally recognize in the world the combination of two elements: Light and Darkness. But the Manicheans consider "darkness" as matter and especially the flesh, while Christians see in the material world, the creation of God and bless the pure joys of the flesh, marriage, fun, love for the motherland... The incompatibility of the two worldviews is obvious, and the struggle between them is not over to this day.
Western Manichaeism had been in competition with Christianity since the late third century and was persecuted in the same way as Christianity under Diocletian.
Christian emperors continued these persecutions. Theodosius defined the death penalty for belonging to Manichaeism. Honorius classified the confession of Manichaeism as a state crime. The Vandal king Gunnerich exterminated the Manichaeans in North Africa; only those who managed to run to Italy escaped. In the sixth century Ravenna became the center of Manicheanism, for the inhabitants of Lombardy, the Arians, forced to fight against Rome, gave them shelter. In the 10th century Manichaeism spread to Languedoc and merged with similar teachings in Bulgaria. Manichean preachers in southern France and even in Italy so electrified the masses that at times even the pope was afraid to leave the fortified castle in order to avoid being insulted in the city streets by the excited crowd, among whom there were also knights, especially since the feudal lords affected by the propaganda refused to subdue them.
In the second half of the eleventh century the Manichean doctrine spread to Lombardy, where the vices of the higher clergy caused the legitimate indignation among the laity. In 1062 the priest Ariald spoke out in Milan against the marriage of priests, but met with the resistance of Archbishop Guido and was killed.
The struggle continued, with the Archbishop and his successor supported by Emperor Henry IV, the secret Satanist, and the reformers by Popes Alexander II and Gregory VII. Apparently, both popes and emperors were not interested in the essence of the problem, but were simply looking for supporters. The people of Milan paid the price for the rivalry of the chieftains, who burned during a street fight in 1075.
In the twelfth century the Manicheans, called Patarenes in Italy, spread throughout all the cities as far as Rome, with the peasants being the least inclined to the heresy and the nobles and priests, i.e. the most passionate part of the population of the time, being the most active heretics.
In Languedoc, which was under the shadowy patronage of the kings of Germany, the city of Albi became the center of Manicheanism, and because of this the French Manicheans became known as Albigensians, along with their Greek name of Cathars, which means "pure". Their community was divided into "perfect," "faithful," and laity. The "perfect" lived in celibacy and fasting, teaching the "faithful" and guiding the dying, who on their deathbed accepted initiation into the "perfect" in order to be saved from the bonds of the material world. The laity, sympathetic to the Cathars, translated the books of the Old Testament into popular languages as heroic tales, thus gradually changing the ideals of chivalry and thus the stereotype of their readers. The rest was completed by the antipathy of the Provençal people to the French as an alien and aggressive ethnic group. By 1176 most of the nobility and clergy of Languedoc had become Cathars, while a smaller portion and the peasants preferred to remain silent and not protest.
Disappointed in the possibilities of scholasticism, which in the tenth century suffered another decline, medieval theologians tried to find a solution outside the schools and received answers from Manicheans who came from the East (from the Balkan Peninsula), whose teachings boiled down to the following:
Evil is eternal. This is matter, animated by the spirit, but enveloping it with itself. The evil of the world is the torment of the spirit in the tenets of matter; therefore, all material things are a source of evil. And if so, then evil is all things, including temples and icons, crosses and bodies of people. And all this is subject to destruction.
The easiest way out for the Manicheans would be suicide, but they introduced into their doctrine the doctrine of the transmigration of souls. This means that death plunges the suicidal person into a new birth, with all the trouble that comes with it. Therefore, for the salvation of souls another was suggested: the exhaustion of the flesh either by ascesis or by frenzied debauchery, collective debauchery, after which the weakened matter should release the soul from its clutches. Only this goal was recognized as worthy by the Manicheans, and as far as earthly affairs were concerned, morality was naturally abolished. For if matter is evil, then any extermination at any cost is good, be it murder, lying, betrayal... all made no difference. With respect to the objects of the material world, everything was permitted.
Such a concept frightened and infuriated the medieval French. In 1022 ten Cathars, betrayed by their disciples, were burned in Orleans; among them were King Robert I's clergyman Etienne, the scholastic Lisieux and the chaplain Heribert. As human beings they were very pitiable. They were honest, sincere, inquisitive. At a terrible time of Catholicism's crisis, when insolent prelates were given pulpits like feudal lords and semi-literate priests could not explain basic Christian ethics to their parishioners, these men sought a consistent, logical solution to the painful problems that reality posed to them. Their conclusions were logically sound but unnatural. This is why the healthy intuition of the medieval French rebelled against their logic. The system collided with the anti-system during the transition from the ascendant phase to the acmatic.phase and left the ashes of the executed on Earth.
A similar attitude to Manichaeism is always and everywhere. That is why the Manichean communities of the 1st millennium were secret, as a consequence of which lies became a stereotype of their behavior. Once in Italy and France, the Manichean emissaries called themselves "weavers" in order to be able to move freely from city to city to propagate their doctrine. In reality, they were as much "weavers" as the Freemasons were "masons”.
Meanwhile, the false self-name misled and continues to mislead the ignorant, eager to see the class struggle everywhere. This is how the poet A. A. Blok perceived the Albigensians in his play "The Rose and the Cross". And one can hardly blame him for this.
In fact, the Albigoyan war was by no means akin to the Jacqueria, (a popular revolt in 1358 France), nor was it a feudal skirmish between Toulouse and Paris, nor was it a national war between the Provençalians and the French. And here's why. Unlike many patriarchal and plebeian anti-church movements, the Cathars were socially diverse, which contributed to the successful spread of the doctrine, not constrained by social and ethnic boundaries.
The class struggle of peasants and townspeople against the dominant feudal lords never ceased. However, it followed two unrelated lines. The serfs resented the arbitrariness of the barons. But their program was clearly formulated: "Our good liege lords protect us from wicked enemies and evildoers. Reasonable, but after all, it had nothing to do with the doctrine that everything material is a manifestation of world evil and as such must be destroyed. On the contrary, the class nature of the peasantry pushed them to cultivate land, build houses, raise children, and accumulate small fortunes, rather than abandon it all for illusions, even if quite logical.
The second line is the struggle of urban communities (communes) in alliance with royalty against the dukes and earls. Again, the nascent bourgeoisie sought wealth, luxury, power, not asceticism and poverty. In the West, cities supported the pope and the emperor; in the East, the Sunni caliph; in Byzantium, they were a bulwark of Orthodoxy, for the well-being of city dwellers depended on strengthening order in the world, not on destroying the world for the sake of otherworldly ideals that were foreign and inarticulate.
And it is unlikely that the preaching of salvific poverty can be considered a social program. After all, Christian monks and Muslim marabouts and Sufis advocated the poverty of the clergy. The bishops' opulence, nepotism and simony were stigmatized from the pulpits by popes and councils, but they did not attract suspicion of heresy. Occasionally, too restless denouncers have been killed around corners or executed on fictitious charges, but in those cruel times it was easy to end up on the scaffold, especially when the enthusiastic person did not notice that he was standing in the way of the crown prince. Executions were carried out without ideological censure. Indeed, how could a mystical doctrine reflect class interests? After all, in order to do so it would have to become generally accessible, but then the guiding principle of secret initiation and blind obedience would be lost.
Well, what was the behavior of the heretics themselves? The last thing they wanted was peace. They killed the feudal lords, of course, but they were just as ruthless in dealing with the peasants and townspeople, taking their possessions and selling their wives and children into slavery. The social composition of the Manichaean and Ishmaelite communities was extremely variegated. They included racial priests, poor artisans and rich merchants, peasants and vagabonds who were adventurers, and finally professional warriors, i.e., feudal lords, without whom a long and successful war was impossible in those days. The army had to have people who could build soldiers into a fighting order, strengthen the castle, and organize a siege. And in X-XIII, only feudal lords were able to do this.
There may be a misconception that Catholics were better, kinder, more honest, nobler than Cathars (Albigensians). This view is just as wrong as the other way around. People remain themselves, no matter what ethical doctrines are preached to them. And why is the concept that one can buy absolution with money donated for a crusade better than the call to fight against the material world? And if one doctrine is better than the other, for whom is it better? So, to pose the question of qualitative evaluation is meaningless and as antiscientific as the question of which is better: acid or alkali? Both burn the skin!
But if so, then why exactly this feud is given so much attention, when at the same time social conflicts between the feudal class and the enslaved peasants were exacerbated, the rivalry of growing kingdoms for territories and trading cities for markets developed? How did the semi-concealed war, which we have taken as our starting point, differ from them?
In contrast to the struggle for political domination within one large ethno-social system and even clashes between different cultural-systemic units, this was a war of extermination. The French Manicheans were too similar to the French Catholics to coexist in the same arena, for both favored the development of the system in opposite directions. As they clashed, they caused the annihilation of the very matter they considered not God's creation, but the world's evil. And just so, they behaved everywhere: in Byzantium, Iran, Central Asia, and even in faith-tolerant China. Their persecution was therefore ubiquitous, and their resistance, often very active, gave the early Middle Ages the coloring that shines through the visible history of the clash of states and the formation of ethnic groups. The presence of two incompatible behavioral and psychological structures was a global phenomenon at that time. This is why so few monuments of art remain from that era.
The fact that the Manicheans disappeared from the face of the Earth by the end of the fourteenth century is not surprising, for they, in fact, aspired to it. Hating the material world and its joys, they had to hate life itself; consequently, they did not even have to affirm death, for death is only a moment of change of states, but anti-life and anti-world. This is where they moved, clearing the earth for the Renaissance. Their failure was only that they could not destroy all men by leading them through martyrdom, not always voluntary. How hard they tried! And it is not their fault that the life-affirming principle of the human psyche withstood their onslaught, so that the history of nations did not cease to flow.
Against this background arose the first Inquisition, founded by the Spanish monk Dominic and directed against the heretics Cathars, or Albigensians. Of course, no one would want to endorse, much less defend, the principle of the Inquisition: condemnation without charge, based on personal confession.
Confessions are forced by torture, denunciations are false, judges are biased and uncontrolled, but the motive for the introduction of such proceedings is clear. The Inquisitors were guarding their agents against the vengeance of the Cathars, who in the thirteenth century had infiltrated all strata of French and Italian society. The war was not fought only in Languedoc. It was waged in all courts, in all workshops, in ecclesiastical communities and even in bazaars. It was a merciless massacre without a front line, and its victims were all the defenseless, innocent people slandered by the Cathars and the agents of the Inquisition.
The Cathars made extensive use of the right to lie, as allowed by their confession, which recommended treachery to the fight against matter. "The former Cathars who converted to Catholicism, Robert Le Bugre, Peter of Verona and Rainier Sacconi, were the most formidable inquisitors in the thirteenth century”. Robert Le Bugre, who had been a Cathar in Milan for 20 years and was well acquainted with the manners and customs of the sect, was appointed in 1233 by Pope Gregory IX as an inquisitor, after which he applied his extensive knowledge. For example, in 1239 he burned 182 cathars in Mont-Éme, near Chalons on the Marne. And later it was the same: Jacques Molay, grandmaster of the Templar order, and other knights were burned in Paris in 1214 after a trial conducted by Chancellor Guillaume Nogare, grandson of the burnt Cathars. The secret court was a double-edged weapon.
Dying dualism found a way to reincarnate into another, this time monistic concept. After all, for the anti-system such trifles as fidelity to principles are irrelevant, what matters is the goal - getting rid of matter and the flesh. The doctrine of Blessed Augustine was adopted, a talented thinker of the fifth century, who began his way as a member of a secret Manichean community, and ended his days as bishop of Hippo (in Africa) and after his death was recognized as the father of the church. He was the author of one of the three strands of scholasticism, the doctrine of the eternal predestination of men to either heaven or hell. There were reservations, of course, but that was the point.
Blessed Augustine's reasoning was that Adam sinned and passed on sin to all his descendants genetically as "original sin”. Therefore, all men are scoundrels and belong only in hell. God has eternally and unconditionally decreed that some shall be saved and the rest shall perish. And any merits and deeds of sinners are irrelevant, as well as the wickedness of the elect. There is no place for the devil in such a system, for God does everything for him.
We must do justice to the theologians of the time: they did not accept Augustine's teachings. The supporters of Augustine's concept were condemned: the monk Gottschalk was even imprisoned for life for preaching the idea of predestination, i.e. the responsibility of God for the sins of men. But the Middle Ages passed, the Reformation came, and Jean Calvin resurrected the ideas of Augustine. The theory of the Second Inquisition was built on these ideas. Vog's reconciliation with Satan suited all the evildoers of Europe.
CONCORDAT WITH SATAN
The Second Inquisition, which operated in the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries, was worse than the first. To justify as well as regulate the crimes committed, the inquisitors created a theory based on the ideas of Blessed Augustine. According to this theory, "God is so compassionate that he would not allow evil in his creatures if he were not so all-powerful and good as to turn evil into good" (Hammer of Witches, p. 147). From this it followed that "by the persecution of tyrants the patience of martyrs was strengthened, and by the enchantments of witches the perfection of the faith of the righteous. Therefore God need not prevent evil" (ibid.). One could argue that God is unjustly unfair to tyrants and sorcerers, forcing them to torment the righteous and thereby condemning them to the torments of hell, but there is an answer to that as well. The sinner is worse than the devil, for "Satan was estranged from God, who allowed him to sin and did not guard him with love... Satan abides in wickedness because God has rejected him and does not give him his mercy" (ibid., p. 159).
More than that, God wishes the devil good, and the poor "devil is in great agony, seeing how the evil done through witches is transformed into good" (ibid., p. 161). In general, the devil is not to blame, as he "cannot do anything without God's allowance," and "God cannot want evil, but can allow evil" (ibid.).
The theory proposed by the inquisitors is an apologia not only for themselves, but also for the devil, with whom they supposedly fought. In their view, only God is to be blamed for all the atrocities of history, and worse, atrocities must be welcomed, for out of evil comes good. This devilish dialectics is essentially philistine subservience, elevated to the level of metaphysics, And to think how much blood has been shed because of this schizophrenic delirium!
And how could it be otherwise? The doctrine of predestination took from its adherents only one freedom, the freedom to choose between Good and Evil, but in return it gave them the right to be irresponsible with respect to their own conscience. Once the final outcome was predetermined, one could do as one wished. And then the inverse came into force.
Complete irresponsibility of the individual is contraindicated in a society which enforces a law based not on conscience, but on an order from superiors. It is more profitable to reckon with such a law, but it is by no means immoral to circumvent it. He succeeded and he won! So it was quite logical and not even unconscionable to exterminate the Indians in North America, the slave trade, the robbery of India, the sale of opium to China ... After all, the prohibition of these enterprises was not, and could not have been, for God turns evil into good, and the devil serves before his throne.
But if so, why not make contact with the devil, especially since he is even willing to pay for his service with very real benefits. He demands little - the sale of an immortal soul, in the existence of which one must still believe, and participation in the "black masses”. These Masses were necessarily served by an apostate priest, and consisted in the glorification of Satan, the good master, who does not forbid anything (cf. the thesis of Ivan Karamazov: "Everything is permitted"). The holy gifts were illuminated on the belly of a naked woman and then defiled. Sometimes it seemed to the participants of these mysteries that Satan himself appeared and allowed himself to be kissed on the ass. It happened that infants stolen from their mothers were sacrificed to him. The mysteries took place at midnight, secretly, but very many people knew about them.
Here is a vivid example. In 1089 the Russian princess Eupraxia Vsevolodovna married Henry IV, Holy Roman Emperor of the German Empire. This crown prince attracted her to participate in the "black masses." The poor woman became so disgusted that she fled from her husband to his enemies at Canossa, where she was received by Countess Matilda. In 1094 and 1095 the empress appeared at church councils to denounce her husband. Pope Urban II absolved her of her involuntary sin of participating in the "Black Mass" and sent her home with an escort, where she ended her days in a monastery in 1109.
And Henry IV...? He remained on the throne until 1105 and was deprived of power not for his Satanism but for the treacherous murders of his vassals. But even then, the citizens of Liege, Cologne, Bonn and the Jewish community continued to support him. It turned out that Satanism shocked very few people.
"Black Masses" were celebrated in Paris as early as the 19th century. Only invitees were allowed to take part in them, except members of the sect, but it was easy to get an invitation. Details can be read in Huysmans' book The Abyss, where the author vacillates between acknowledging the seriousness of the orgy he observed and wanting to be deceived. For the skeptical positivist, the personification of any principle is unacceptable; it simply disgusts him.
If we abandon personification, which had already become superfluous in the thirteenth century, we are left with the theory of the Absolute, the moral law within itself. It is impossible to pray to such a law, just as it is impossible to pray to Boyle-Marriott's law. This becomes evident in the nineteenth century, and with the successive development of the concept emerges existentialism, the philosophical religion of C. Jaspers. The latter was right about one thing: such systems had arisen even before our era, but he overlooked the fact that they always perished, taking with them the lives of thousands of people who trusted the philosophers.
Finally, the last important consequence of the theory of strict monism is that the attitude toward the biosphere as a whole, as well as toward individual beings and their creations, becomes negative. In order to protect defenseless nature from unscrupulous people, we need to explain the benefits of biocenology to them, and this is super complicated. The teaching of useful and harmful animals and plants is much closer to the mind of the philistine than the concept of the harmony of life on planet Earth. The philistine prefers to think of himself as the king of nature, not as part of it. That's why strict monism in practice merges with Manichaean dualism, the only difference being that everything unpleasant, disturbing a given person, is considered evil, but not the objective element of "Darkness". This means that the guiding principle for the distinction between good and evil, light and darkness, progress and regress becomes arbitrariness. The distinction, although insignificant, is not logically in favor of monism.
But why could not monistic and dualistic doctrines supplant Christianity, especially in the Middle Ages, when popes were at war with emperors, and scholastics were wasting their energy in fruitless disputes with each other? Perhaps because monism and Manichaeism were opposed by an unconscious worldview, the essence of which can be formulated as follows: God created the earth, but the devil is the prince of this world; on earth the devil is stronger than God, but that is why the noble knight and the monk-monk must stand up for the weak and fight the strong enemy to the last drop of blood. For God is not in strength, but in truth; and his creation, the Earth, is beautiful; and Evil comes from without, from the gates of Hell, and the simplest and most dignified thing is to drive it back. And that God did not create the devil is clear without proof; to suggest such a thing is blasphemy.
The concept was uncontroversial, easy to grasp, and consistent, if not with the mores of the time, with its ideals. And since the ideal is a distant prediction, perceived intuitively, it was justified. The biosphere continues to exist.
THE WAY OUT OF HOPELESSNESS
We the people of the twentieth century know that there is no such thing as a trait. And yet, when you look back at the history of anti-systems, it gets very creepy. There are vampire concepts with the qualities of werewolves and a purposefulness truly diabolical. Neither the mighty intellect, nor the iron will, nor the pure conscience of men can resist these phantoms. Where an ethnic chimera is formed - an overlap of ethnic fields of different rhythms, anti-systems appear. And since during the existence of man on Earth all the ethnic groups long time ago came into contact with each other, it would seem that the anti-systems had to displace the ethnic groups, replace them with themselves, destroy all life in their areas and turn their real impulses into virtual ones, so they can mutually annihilate. But nothing of the kind has happened for some reason.
It means that there is some powerful impulse in the world, counteracting the spread of anti-systems, and perhaps cleansing the face of the Earth from them. However, as we have seen, anti-systems appear again and again, so this impulse must act if not constantly, then often enough. And it must not be in the realm of human consciousness, because this realm is open to deception or incomplete understanding of the subject, i.e., to delusion. And it is not commanded to us from above, because anti-systems can be theistic, and the ideals of ethnic cultures are atheistic. And it does not add up in the process of evolution, for in the time required for addition it would have died. Do we know an impulse with such properties? Yes we do! It is the passionary impulse.
No, not the heroism of individual passionate individuals, personalities, sacrificing themselves, but the impulse, the mutation that generates the sign of passionarity and informing the newly emerging ethnic groups of the original rhythm of the biofield - that's what destroys chimeras and anti-systems nesting in them. Passionary impulse gives a kind of high heat, in which chimeras "melt" (may you forgive the author’s metaphor) and turn into ethnoses, harmoniously combined with landscapes, as a link of geobiocenoses. Anti-systems cannot exist at such a high intensity. But further goes the already described process of ethnogenesis, in which sometimes, due to the created conditions, impulses with negative values appear.
Thus, passionarial impulses are not only a hindrance in human evolution, but also a purification force without which evolution couldn't proceed at all. With this force nature maintains the balance of the biosphere, including the bodies of those very people who believe that their thoughts, no matter how fantastic, are of the greatest value to planet Earth. We now know that all philosophical teachings and prophetic speeches are only biospheric impulses, reflected by some facet of the great vacuum that awaits Life at every turn. And for the sake of this there are black holes punched from the Abyss into the World, each of which is called a "personal consciousness. It would be a good idea to put a damper on them, called "conscience".
And the very passionary push, which has been described as an empirical generalization explaining the oscillations of the ethnosphere, is clearly of unearthly origin. Already the fact that the axes of the shock zones are located on the planet's surface as lines whose ends are limited by the planet's curvature and the perpendiculars to them pass through the Earth's center points to the dependence of the shock axis on the planet's magnetic field. The assumption that these energy shocks to the Earth do not come from the Sun, but from the dispersed energy of the Galaxy has found clarification.
American astronomer John Eddy discovered that the Sun's activity varies so much that even the 11-year cycle of sunspot activity cannot be traced. Based on these findings, John Eddy made a graph of solar activity over 5 thousand years [15]. And it turned out that all dated passionate shocks chronologically coincide with the minimums of solar activity or with periods of its decline. This is already a pattern, which allows us to interpret the phenomenon. At a decrease of solar activity protective properties of ionosphere are reduced and separate quanta or beams of radiation can reach Earth's surface. And hard radiation is known to cause mutations.
We are not alone in the world! The near Cosmos takes part in the protection of nature, and our job is not to spoil it. It is not only our home, it is ourselves.
For the sake of this thesis a treatise was written, which is now finished. I dedicate it to the great cause of protecting the natural environment from anti-systems.
Afterword
THE EXPERIENCE OF SCHEMA BUILDING
The study of the biosphere as a systemic unity faces great difficulties. In addition to the above-mentioned problems, it should be noted that in the early 1990s the total biosphere production in this region amounted to over 1.3 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. It was easy to notice, for example, that a prolonged secular drought occurred as a result of cyclone tracks drifting in such an area, which changed the character of vegetation and, hence, fauna, but it is impossible to establish the dates of the beginning and end of this phenomenon without an absolute chronology. The latter is a matter of history, but, alas, historians evade their task.
The latter is not accidental. History, in the sense of the science of events in their connection and sequence, finished its cumulative period by the end of the 18th century, and the need for its interpretation, which found its completion in historical materialism, appeared at the same time.
However revealing social law - progressive development of productive forces and production relations - highlighted only one side of multifaceted phenomenon, and the relation of mankind with biosphere remained in the competence of dialectical materialism. Historians were not prepared for such a division and indulged in refining the details in the reports of the sources. However, this inevitably lost the contours of the main object of ethnic history - a discrete centuries-long process of ethnogenesis, its beginnings and ends.
And now let's try to answer the question that the author has heard very often: "If the laws of ethnogenesis lie in nature and we can't change them, is such a science necessary? Is it worth spending time and effort on it?" Yes, indeed, the processes of ethnogenesis are so grandiose compared to the capabilities of man, even armed with mighty technology, that it makes no sense to try to correct them directly. But this does not mean that the consideration of their influence has no practical value and the study of ethnology is an unpromising occupation. After all, no one considers meteorology - the science of weather or atmospheric physics useless on the grounds that humans are powerless to directly influence such atmospheric phenomena as cyclones or anticyclones! On the contrary, these sciences are considered extremely useful because the impact of global atmospheric processes on people and their activities is extremely great. Much more important in this case is the fact that the influence of weather is obvious for everyone: it is taken into account not only in choosing the right time for picnics, but also in making economic forecasts.
Everything mentioned above about meteorology and atmospheric physics can be reasonably applied to seismography, geomorphology and a number of other Earth sciences, the subject of which is extra-human, and their practical importance is not questioned by anybody.
The usefulness of ethnology, its applied significance is not so obvious. And here is why. Although ethnogenesis is also a statistical natural process, and its consequences are no less than a hurricane or the emission of ash from the volcano, it goes slowly: from the moment of passionarial impulse to the complete extinction of its inertia passes more than thousand years. The contemporaries, busy with business, are deceived by the aberration of proximity, and it seems to them that during their lifetime nothing significant has happened to the ethnic system. But that is half the trouble. Worse, scholars on this basis take ethnicity as a constant, whose influence can be neglected without consequence.
The persistence of such a view is easy to explain: that the historical sciences, unfortunately, have the persistence of such a view is easy to explain: the historical sciences have stopped at sequencing events and, at best, at classifying them according to geographical regions, an approach which allows building synchronistic tables.
This has led to the replacement of true historical analysis by numerous descriptions of the "Brownian motion" in history as its real development. But even a drop from a cloud does not fall straight down. Any prolonged movement is not so simple. It includes a number of small deviations, which are mutually compensated.
But let us imagine an observer, who studies not the whole course of a drop of water up to the Earth surface, but any two centimeters in the middle of the way. He will inevitably come to the conclusion that Newton's law is false: for the drop, according to his observation, moves not only downward, but sideways and often upward. The conclusion is false, but logical, for the error is hidden in the formulation of the problem: the right of the researcher to narrow the topic, without coordination with the surrounding problems, is allowed.
And let it not be said that this does not happen! A similar methodology, leading to deliberate fallacies, was complained about even by Thor Heyerdahl's Aku-aku.
The treatise we are presenting here is not so much about understanding history as such, but rather about understanding history as an aid to solving the problems of natural science, in particular the study of the biosphere. The direct study of the dynamics of ethnic systems as part of them is possible only if historical material is processed using the methods of natural science. By examining the history of a single super-ethnos in this way, we will establish the cause-and-effect relations that determine the course of the process. If we add to this the history of ethnic contacts between different super-ethnoses over a long period of time, we will obtain the dynamics of development of super-ethnoses
Establishing the interdependence of these dynamics with landscape changes is the task that etiology addresses. When solving it, it becomes obvious that the actions of people both at the personal and population levels in the social and ethnic environment have diametrically opposite consequences. In the social environment it matters what and how a person did: a stone knife, an electric light bulb, or an atomic bomb. More often than not, he cannot foresee the consequences of his inventions, because the development of the sociosphere is spontaneous, the cause of which lies within itself. This self-development is studied by sociology.
In an ethnic environment, a person or an ethnos as a system may not do anything harmful to nature, of which they themselves are a part. So it is necessary to anticipate the consequences of one's actions in relation to nature, for any mistake can be fatal. It is not necessary to repeat ourselves and tell us about the multitude of reasons to fight against civilization in defense of nature, although this topic is within the competence of ethnology.
A second possibility for the practical application of ethnology is the study of ethnic contacts and the choice of the line of behavior necessary to establish symbiosis. The necessity of this particular form of coexistence between peoples needs no proof. Hardly anyone today would take the liberty of preaching genocide.
Finally, although human well-being in the flow of ethnogenesis is determined by statistical regularity, this does not mean that on the personal level the freedom to choose between several decisions disappears when the opportunity to do so is provided. And it is provided all the time; it is only important not to miss the chance.
One person cannot change the phase of ethnogenesis or the number of subsystems in an ethnic system, but at lower taxonomic levels - subethnic and especially organismal - individual efforts are possible, capable of generating events that are only later and far from immediately compensated by the general statistical regularity. In other words, an individual with great passionarity can sometimes create a zigzag on the development curve, even one that will be recorded in history.
Of course, it is very tempting to blame all the troubles either on Allah, or on the mathematical laws of nature of Laplace, or on the space-time continuum of Einstein. But the act of will is also a natural phenomenon, for it is directly related to human physiology, nervous and hormonal. Since no human being can live outside an ethnic system capable of both amplifying his tensions and reducing them to zero, it is to humans that the mechanism of ethnogenesis can be virtually indifferent.
One more thing. Speaking of the possible sources of passionate shocks, we have not discarded only one hypothesis - cosmic radiation. True, with the current level of knowledge about the near space this hypothesis now and in the future will not meet the facts contradicting it, ethnology will allow to receive data on states of the near space and its contacts with the surface of the Earth in epochs, strictly fixed by absolute chronology. A tolerance of plus or minus 50 years, the magnitude of the error for determining the length of the incubation period, is small, and the practical value of data on energy variations in the near space over 4-5 millennia is undoubted.
The influence of near space on terrestrial phenomena is not a paradox, but rather a truism. The moon causes tides in the oceans; solar activity causes cyclone tracks to shift through its effect on the tropic baric maximum; it also causes virus mutations and associated epidemics. All this is not mysticism, but geography. So what reasons are there for rejecting the effects of the planet's environment on its surface?
Well, what if the hypothesis of the effects of any rays on the anthroposphere is not confirmed? If biologists find another cause of mutations and especially micro-mutations, changing not anatomy, but only physiology of organisms of higher vertebrate genera? Does this mean that the cosmos is not the cause of outbreaks of ethnogenesis? No! For the bands of tremors on which ethnogenesis-peers are born is an empirically documented fact.
And what if there is a talented psychologist who will discover the physiological mechanism of passionarity and connect it not with the autonomic nervous system of the body, but with hormones or the influence of microorganisms living in symbiosis with their host? Or if he will explain the increased activity of passionarians not as a release of excess biochemical energy of living matter, but as the ability to issue this energy purposefully? Or would a geneticist clarify the way passionarity is transmitted as a trait? What will change in the description of the phenomenon of ethnogenesis? Nothing! Because ethnogenesis is a phenomenon observed not at the molecular and not even at the organismal level, but at the population level, which has its own traits that are unique to this level.
Table 5 is summarizing the content of the entire concept of ethnogenesis in its substantive part.
Table 5. Phases of ethnogenesis
Phases Ruling, imperatives Phase transitions Initial Combination of Ethnoses and Landscapes of the Region Passionary rise: "We must fix the world: incubation (hidden) it’s bad!" the starting point of ethnogenesis system period Passionary upsurge: explicit "We want to be great!" Transition to the acmatic phase period Acmatic phase "Be yourself!" "We're tired of being great!" Transition to the fracture phase. Fracture "We know, we know, everything Transition to the inertia phase will be different!" "Let us live, you bastards!" Inertia "Be like me!" Transition to the obscuration phase of "We've had enough!" Obscuration "Be like us!" Transition to the memorial phase: "Day, yes it's mine!" possible regeneration Memorial phase "Remember how it was Transition to homeostasis: relic fine!" "Be your own happy troll!"
Cosmic and planetary variations stand several orders of magnitude above ethnogenesis, affecting the entire biosphere, which includes not only the totality of living organisms, but also soils, i.e. plant corpses and free air oxygen. And although ethnoses are a drop in the ocean of the biosphere, they cannot but respond to its fluctuations.
In short, we have described a natural pattern that contains no philosophies. The description is built on facts, and only new undeniable facts can shake the concept.
HIERARCHY
Above, the reader was offered a hierarchy of approximations, which allows us to observe the principle of scale and use all the necessary historical material.
Using successive approximations, we can find the place of ethnogenesis experiencing the impact not only of the biosphere, but also of spontaneous social development. This impact is mediated by the so-called "logic of events", i.e. the section of history from which it began to be studied: wars, diplomacy, internal coups, seizures of power, etc. This material is abundant, but its application requires a strict adherence to scale, so that minor events are not placed on the same level as major ones. Therefore, the fates of individuals are placed two orders of magnitude lower than the fates of social systems.
WHAT THE BOOK DOES NOT CONTAIN
As if in the book "Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere of the Earth" the problem of the relationship of mankind with the natural environment is described fully enough, up to the fact that an attempt is made to explain the causes of the irreversible destruction of nature and culture. Yes, now we know that such disturbances in the conversion of biocenoses occur only during ethnic contacts at the super-ethnic level, but even there they do not always manifest themselves. The consequences of such contact are a chimera – it’s a "weak" point in the ethnosphere. Something unnatural, something anti-natural breaks through here, but the chimera is only a reason for its appearance, while in itself it is just an unstable system, a structure that breaks at the slightest push, and sometimes even from its own gravity.
When two behaviorally alien and incompatible super-ethnoses combine, there comes a period of tumultuous collisions. An immeasurably more tragic situation is when not only an alien ethnos, but an already established anti-systemic community enters a country experiencing a change of behavioral stereotype (phases of ethnogenesis). If in the first case a new ethnic unity can be formed out of the contact, it is also due to another disintegration, as was the case in Latin America in the early 19th century. Simón Bolívar's struggle killed as many people in sparsely populated America as Napoleon Bonaparte's wars killed in densely populated Europe - 1 million people.
And yet this is not the limit of disaster. When not two systems are combined, but a system with an anti-system, the doyenne (usually said to be the oldest female member), becomes even more brutal and unjustifiable. As terrible as brutal violence and the licentiousness of human passions are, the lies of betrayal are worse, because they are unnatural. So, along with ethnoses, naturally passing through phases of ethnogenesis, chimerical wholes, devoid of development and without age, arise and disappear; despite the shortness of their existence, they played a prominent role in ethnic history and therefore deserve description and analysis, to which the next book will be devoted - about brave heroes, greedy knights and hashish-influenced murderers.
NOTES
[9] Tyumenev A. Jews in antiquity and in the Middle Ages. Pg. 1922. С. 135 and following.
[10] Nikolaev Yu. In search after deity. Essays on the history of Gnosticism. SPb, 1913.
[11] See: Gumilev L.N. Ancient Turks. С. 427-428. 432.
[12] Osokin N. First Inquisition and the conquest of Languedoc by the French. Kazan,1872.
[13] Chatterjee S., Dotta D. Introduction to Indian philosophy. М., 1955. С.130-134.
[14] Lozinsky S. The Fatal Book of Middle Ages //Monks J. Sprenger and G. Insgitoris. Hammer of witches / Translated from Latin P. Tsvetkova. М., 1932. С. 31.
[15] Eddy J. The Story of Disappeared Sunspots // Advances in Physical Sciences. 1978. Т. 125. Vol. 2. С. 315-329.
.