Saturday, 17 March 2012

Jochi's dream

The Ulus of Jochi

The eldest son of Genghis Khan was held back from following his father as Great Khan, due to doubts with regard to who his father was. Allegedly his mother, BÖrte, had been kidnapped before his birth and his brothers duly felt he was not one of theirs. Historically this kidnap is portrayed to be by the chief of a minor tribe, but the story does not hold the icing on the cake. 

We feel the exact circumstances of the event is very well reflected in the story of Abram and Sarai. Before Pharao Abram pretends to be Sarai's brother and Sarai, a very beautiful woman in the eyes of Pharao actually becomes Pharaos wife. At the moment Sarai is with issue, Abram reveals the state of affairs to Pharao - apparently no longer fearing for his life, although he now has added fraud to the list of offences and Abram and Sarai are promptly dismissed. The deceit in the old Testament is cleverly concealed by making Sarai 90 years old and putting 13 years between the birth if Isaac en Abram's real son Ishmael. Later it becomes apparent that Isaac and Ishmael were born with one year of each other. The story does not hold the icing on the cake. Isaac was Abram's way into the inheritance of Pharao so to speak. 

Jochi Borjid
note the 'Roman' greeting
Jochi then was the Borjid's clan inheritance to the legacy and blood line of Byzantium and of course Jochi's appearance will have differed quite substantially from that of his brothers. But for Genghis Khan that was no reason to not regard Jochi as his own son. His brothers thought differently and Jochi for that reason became a minor Khan between the Ulus of the Great Khan in the East and Byzantium and Genghis's third son Ögedei received his legacy  

But that was no reason for Jochi to waste his other inheritance, apart from the fact that nobody knew about it. To reclaim that inheritance will take a lot of strategy and that became the legacy of the family. The task and duty of 'the blood' so to speak. 

Jochi (B)orjid then is the blueprint for the non-historical character  of Jacob and in his wrestle with Esau (the wolfs clan of the Borjids) Jochib becomes Israel. 

Jochi has 14 sons and one daughter, which resembles Jacob's 12 sons (and Ephraim and Manasse) and one daughter. The name Isaac in the bible story is  Yesügei , Jochi's grand father. 

Jochi will organise his sons into four armies of three chiefs who press the boundaries of the Golden Horde into four directions: North, East, South and West. For the time being two chiefs without land will stay behind - probably - in Kiev and for that reason Kiev will be modelled after Constantinople. 

Batu Khan takes the lead westwards. Allegedly, in our history books this mission did not result in any success due to the death of the great Khan in the East. But Batu Khan approached well beyond the boundaries of Hungary and to withdraw solely to go back, because the Great Mongol Khan had died does not look like sound strategy. Why would the son of Jochi succeed where his father was rejected, a scar which still soared? 

And how likely is it that European princes - kings paying tribute to the Emperor (Khan) - could deal with two exorbitant claims at the time. That of a victorious Batu Khan and that of Pope Innocent III? Namely to be 'the lord of the world'. Not only are the claims similar, but the reluctant submission of the European princes was also similar. 

Would it not likely be so that Batu Khan had arrived at his own version of the 'great Khanate'? The great Khanate in the East for the time being outside the reach of the Jochi Borjid family? 
Slavic Pope

Then it may very well be so that Innocent III, the real founder of the Papacy, was none other than Batu Khan. No valid formal papal documents exist before this Pope with his unusual claims. But more unusual is the begrudged acceptance of them by the European nobility.  

BatuKhan. Note the tulban
and his slavic appearance
It has to be said though that at this stage Batu Khan did not reside in Rome yet as this seat was actually established after the period of Avignon. As a token of reminder the Pope's residence was called 'the Vatican'. Probably Batu Khan's (or Innocent III) residence was first located at Sarajevo and was Batu Khan at this stage not a catholic, but at best an Arian and more likely an adherent to Islam (not to be confused with modern Islam). That is: the Pope's principle objectors in those days were the catholic princes, which indeed confirms to classical history rather well. The situation is only rather poorly understood. 

Innocenti PP no. III
It comes  not as a surprise then, that Innocent's (alleged) remains were not buried in Rome at all, but were brought to Rome by Pope Leo XIII in the 19th century!

Note his slavic/byzantine features in the fresco and the text in the fresco. Innocenti .PP. III! Does Batu Khan not count backwards to Genghis Khan? 

'The lord of the world?' no. III?

Which gives ample thought to all the II's and III's before Innocent. Does this mean that there were no popes before him? Not at all, but they were attached to the Byzantine tradition and lived in Alexandrie, for which reason the Coptic Patriarch still is called Pope to this very day. With Innocent a whole new brand of papacy started in the West, for which reason the eagle in the image above and Innocent himself look westward. This of course immediate invalidates a claim to 'catholicism', because Batu Khan's assignment was in the west. On behalf of the golden Horde of Jochi, for which reason Vatican's colour to date is yellow...

No comments:

Post a Comment