1. The Greek and the Biblical chronology

7.2. The “ancient” Romulus and Remus are the grandchildren of Aeneas the Trojan and the founders of Rome in Latinia. This event apparently reflects the foundation of Rome in Italy at the end of the XIV century A.D.

We shall now acquaint ourselves with the mediaeval events of the XIV century a.d. that played an important part in the creation of the “ancient” legend of the rape of the Sabines, and also the history of Italy’s foundation by Romulus and Remus, or the foundation of Livy’s Regal Rome. Let us remind the reader that one of the “ancient” versions considers Romulus and Remus to have been grandchildren of Aeneas, who had escaped after the fall of Troy. After long wanderings, Aeneas (the Biblical Noah?) arrives in Latinia with a group of Trojans; this event is followed by the foundation of Rome (a new kingdom) and can be credited to either Aeneas himself or the descendants of the latter ([579], pages 23-24).

Nowadays it is presumed that Latinia from the epoch of Aeneas is located on the territory of modern Italy. However, the layered structure of the “Scaligerian history textbook” implies that the country in question is most likely to be identified as Russia-Horde from the end of the XIII century (see Chron1, Chapter 6; also Chron5 and Chron6). The “ancient” Roman kingdom founded here is the Great = “Mongolian” Empire of the XIV-XVI century, qv in the dynastic identification table found in Chron1, Chapter 6. One of the traces of this Empire can be found in Scaligerian history (“Third Rome” being another name of Moscovia).

Another group of refugees from the destroyed Troy = Czar-Grad headed westwards, and founded the city that subsequently became known as Rome on the territory of modern Italy. It became important in the epoch of the great = “Mongolian” conquest of the XIV century, when one of the local centres of “Mongolian” regency appeared here. All of these events were then mixed up in the single legend about Romulus and Remus, the descendants of King Aeneas, founding the city of Rome and the Roman Kingdom. Later chroniclers would confuse the “three Romes” between each other: Czar-Grad (referred to as the New Rome), the Horde Russia of the XV-XVI century, which became known as the “Third Rome”, and Rome in Italy.

All of this knowledge brings us to the following conclusion: apparently, the foundation of Rome in Italy took place as recently as the XIV century of the new era, which makes this city a lot younger than New Rome, or Constantinople - “new” as compared to the “old” capital – “Ancient Rome” or “Old Rome”, also known as the Egyptian Alexandria.

7.3. A partial transplantation of the Romean history to the documents of Italian Rome from Constantinople in the XIV century A.D.

When the “Roman nationhood” migrated to the Italian Rome from Constantinople in the XIV century a.d., a large part of the Romean and Byzantine history was also placed there as a result of a “paperwork transfer”, and ascribed to Rome in Italy for a number of obvious reasons. The Holy See was founded in the Italian Rome – a bastion of Catholicism that didn't exist until the XIV century. This is what we actually learn from the Scaligerian version, which reports the “return of the Holy See” to Rome in the XIV century (after the Avignon captivity, which, as we shall soon see, became partially reflected in the Biblical tale of “Babylonian captivity” (see chron2, Chapter 4). However, the creators of the “New History” decided that the citadel of Papacy had to be “very ancient”. The socio-historical demand was complied with, and the Italian city of Rome instantly received a very lengthy paper history.

7.4. The original mediaeval tale of the foundation of Rome in XIV century Italy by Romulus and Remus

This is what F. Gregorovius tells us in re the XIV century events after an examination of the mediaeval chronicles in [195]. According to our hypothesis, what we read is de facto an account of the “ancient” Romulus and Remus founding the Roman kingdom on the territory of Russia-Horde at the end of the XIII – beginning of the XIV century. Another group of their brothers-in-arms and descendants founded Italian Rome at the end of the XIV century, qv in Chron1, Chapter 6, and Chron6. We mustn’t be confused by the fact that certain sources associate this story with the “Greek capital”. Firstly, Troy (or Czar-Grad fled by Aeneas) had been the capital of Byzantium, or the Great Greece, whose territory included that of the modern Greece. Apart from that, some of the mediaeval sources used the word “Greek” as a synonym of “Christian”, and both Byzantium and its heir, Russia-Horde of the XIV-XVI century had really been Christian kingdoms. Furthermore, bear in mind that the south of Italy was called “Greater Greece” in the Middle Ages ([39], pages 282-283). Therefore, later chroniclers may have been confused by the geography of the Byzantine, or “Mongolian” events, transferring them to Greece as well as the territory of modern Italy.

“Soon the entire Duchy of Athens was conquered by the 'fortunate Frankish troops in Romania'. After having wandered for many years [cf. the wanderings of Aeneas after the Trojan War – A. F.] accompanied by valiant struggle and horrendous privations, the band of mercenaries could finally forget about the hardships of life on the march and enjoy the ownership of a great land where they could settle down. The sudden fortune took these soldiers completely by surprise, and they were in confusion. They proved capable of conquering the bounteous land, but couldn't restore any kind of government in order to rule over it by a mere replacement of the destroyed legislative system with the primitive customs of a military encampment” ([195], page 211).

Apparently, what we see here is an account of the ordeals suffered by the “surviving” ancient Trojan heroes, who had fled the ruins of their motherland and finally began to settle upon the new land that they had conquered. Further we read, “The Spaniards started to settle on the conquered land. They spread all across its territory like a motley military party which was, quite obviously, predominantly Catalan ethnically. It had been a real military invasion… even if we are to consider the insignificant losses suffered by the mercenaries at Cephissus, there were 6.000 of them at the very least. This crowd accompanied by wives, children, and all sorts of kin, had occupied the Duchy of Athens, which had already possessed two large ethnic groups – the indigenous Greeks and the French, who had ruled over them. The latter were deprived of their ranks, estates and feuds” ([195], page 212).

This is followed by the tale of the rape of the Sabines that we have already related. Let us remind the reader that the “ancient” Romans from the epoch of the Regal Rome (as described by Livy) are usually characterized as soldiers, and this military style pertains to “ancient” Rome throughout its entire history.