Not an Outpost: The Erased Turkic Empire that Built Ukraine

Added: 2026-05-09

[00:00:04]So, what if I told you that um the history of Eastern Europe, like everything you might have learned in a standard university curriculum, was basically completely rewritten by bureaucrats around the year 1924.

[00:00:16]>> Just wiped out.

[00:00:18]>> Yeah. Specifically to erase the memory of an ancient sprawling empire.

[00:00:23]>> And you know what? The echoes of that erased empire are actually hiding in plain sight. Yeah.

[00:00:28]>> Like embedded in the names of modern nations and the words we use every single day.

[00:00:33]>> It's a I mean it's a profound premise.

[00:00:35]When we look at history, we tend to think of it as this solid foundation, right? Like a bedrock of indisputable facts, >> right? Something that's settled.

[00:00:42]>> Exactly. But the sources we're looking at today suggest that this bedrock is actually um an incredibly complex, highly contested construction site.

[00:00:51]>> Welcome to the deep dive. Today, we're opening up a stack of sources that is quite frankly unlike anything we usually examine.

[00:00:57]>> It really is.

[00:00:58]>> Yeah. This isn't some uh peer-reviewed dusty history textbook printed by Oxford or Cambridge. What we have here is a passionate, intensely detailed manifesto, >> right? It refers to itself as the new sphere mission.

[00:01:10]>> The new sphere mission. And its goal is nothing short of revolutionary. It wants to completely reimagine the origins of Kievan Roose, the Casaks and even uh the very etmology of the word Ukraine.

[00:01:23]>> So the core mission of this text is to decode an alternative historical lens.

[00:01:28]It argues that a specific Turk military elite, they're known as the black clubs or Tory Kloitzy in the Slavic Chronicles, >> right? that they were not just mercenaries or, you know, temporary border guards for Slavic princes, which is how traditional history often frames them, >> just hired help, basically.

[00:01:45]>> Yeah, exactly. Instead, the text positions this group as the foundational co-rulers of Eastern Europe, the true ancient owners of the land.

[00:01:54]>> Okay. And before we get into the weeds here, I need to make something crystal clear to you, the listener. The sources we are unpacking today touch on some deeply debated, incredibly sensitive regional histories.

[00:02:04]>> Highly sensitive.

[00:02:04]>> Yeah. geopolitical identities, ancestral claims of the Kakalpak people, the historical roots of Ukraine, and um very intense debates over Central Asian heritage. As always, we are taking absolutely no sides here.

[00:02:17]>> Not at all.

[00:02:18]>> We are not historians endorsing a new global theory, and we're definitely not weighing in on modern border disputes.

[00:02:25]>> No. Exactly right. Our role is strictly to act as your impartial guides. We're here to unpack the fascinating claims, the uh rigorous enthmological deep dives, and the sweeping linguistic arguments in this manifesto.

[00:02:39]>> We're just exploring the what if, >> right? Analyzing its internal logic and the external scholars it cites to build its case.

[00:02:46]>> Okay, let's unpack this. To understand why someone would allegedly want to cover this history up and how deep this alternate narrative goes, we have to start at the very beginning.

[00:02:56]>> The very beginning. And I mean the absolute deep antiquity beginning. When I first cracked this document open, I assumed, you know, we start in the Middle Ages. But the source takes us somewhere completely unexpected. Ancient Jerusalem.

[00:03:10]>> Yeah. The geographical and chronological starting point is jarring if you're expecting a standard European history.

[00:03:15]>> Very jarring. To understand the origins of the black cloucks, these fierce step warriors who would eventually end up in Eastern Europe, the text traces their ancestry all the way back to the era of the prophet Ibrahim or Abraham. Oh, >> it identifies the ancestors of the Kacs with the ancient Kuri Matani civilization, positing that they shared a single like civilizational layer with ancient Jewish populations in the Middle East, >> which I mean that sounds wild at first glance, right?

[00:03:48]>> Mhm.

[00:03:48]>> Step in, no ads in ancient Jerusalem.

[00:03:50]>> It does.

[00:03:51]>> But the text doesn't just make some vague spiritual connection. It lists highly specific structural cultural traits that have allegedly survived for millennia.

[00:04:00]>> Right? We're talking about the right of circumcision. Incredibly strict codified rules regarding hygiene and ritual purity.

[00:04:07]>> Very specific tribal seniority structures.

[00:04:09]>> Yeah. And even the literal shapes of their traditional headgear.

[00:04:12]>> What's fascinating here is the text's reliance on anthropological constants.

[00:04:16]It's arguing that um while language might drift and geography might change, certain foundational cultural codes act like a civilizational fingerprint.

[00:04:24]>> Like how a tribe structures its elder council.

[00:04:27]>> Exactly. Or fundamental rights of passage. But then the narrative introduces a critical juncture, what we might call the great split, >> right? Because obviously they didn't all stay in the Middle East.

[00:04:40]>> Precisely. According to the document, unlike later Turk confederations that formed much closer to our modern era on the Eurasian step, this particular group fractured in deep antiquity.

[00:04:51]>> So what happened?

[00:04:52]>> One branch remained in the Middle East.

[00:04:54]This branch focused heavily on preserving the theological, textual, and religious traditions.

[00:04:59]>> The scholarly route like the preservers of the law.

[00:05:02]>> Yes. But the other branch, the direct ancestors of the Kacol packs, the ones who had eventually become the black cloucks, they migrated east. They moved away from the Mediterranean and the Levant, pushing deep into Central Asia toward Corzm or Kism. Okay. So, if I'm picturing this, it's like two siblings who inherit the exact same massive ancient family estate, but they take completely different career paths to protect it.

[00:05:27]>> That's a good way to look at it.

[00:05:28]>> One sibling stays home, becomes a theologian or a scholar, locks themselves in the library, and focuses entirely on preserving the family's philosophical legacy, >> right?

[00:05:38]>> And the other sibling heads out into the absolute wilderness, realizes that surviving out there requires a totally different skill set, and becomes a gladiator.

[00:05:47]a warrior.

[00:05:48]>> Yes, exactly.

[00:05:49]>> They share the same DNA, the same underlying family rules, but their environments forged them into completely different archetypes.

[00:05:56]>> That is a brilliant way to conceptualize it. The text notes that this eastern branch retained the ancient esoteric knowledge of their shared origins, but the harsh reality of the central Asian environment forced them to adopt a fierce, unyielding warrior spirit.

[00:06:12]>> They had to adapt.

[00:06:13]>> They did. However, the text makes a profoundly interesting observation about what it calls cultural gravity.

[00:06:19]>> Cultural gravity. Is that the idea that despite taking completely different paths for centuries, these two branches somehow keep magnetizing back to each other?

[00:06:28]>> Yes, exactly. That the source specifically tracks this phenomenon through major historical urban centers.

[00:06:35]It points out that in cities like Bkara, Samarand, and eventually ancient Kev, you consistently find these two groups coexisting. That's so strange.

[00:06:44]>> The descendants of the theological branch and the descendants of the warrior branch, separated by millennia of distinct history, repeatedly end up living side by side in these major hubs of trade and power.

[00:06:55]>> This is an incredible image, almost like historical destiny. But um let's follow that gladiator sibling because that's where the core of this text argument lies, right?

[00:07:03]>> This eastern migration takes them to the banks of the Sudaria River in Central Asia near the Aerrol Sea. And this isn't just some random camping spot. They build something monumental here.

[00:07:13]>> They established Churik Rebot. The text describes Churbot not just as a settlement but as a legendary fortress city of the Az people. Okay. This geographical shift to the Sdaria is the crucible. Why? Because the step is unforgiving. It's a massive open highway for migrating tribes, competing empires, and incredibly lucrative caravan trade routes.

[00:07:33]>> So, it's high stakes >> extremely. To survive and control that space, you cannot just be a loose band of nomads. You have to develop a highly structured almost Spartan military society.

[00:07:45]>> You essentially have to become a machine.

[00:07:47]>> Exactly. And this environment is where their specific distinct military identity is forged. The warrior spirit isn't just a vague attitude anymore. It becomes a codified professional reality centered around this fortress city.

[00:08:02]>> And this brings us to our first major linguistic decoding from the source text which honestly completely blew my mind.

[00:08:09]The Churkus etmology.

[00:08:10]>> Yeah. If you are listening to this and you grew up learning anything about Eastern European history, you've probably heard the word Churkus. Today, we associate it heavily with a city in Ukraine and it's intrinsically linked to the Casacs, >> the famous saber wielding warriors at the Ukrainian steps, >> right? So, what does mainstream history say about that word?

[00:08:29]>> Well, mainstream historioggraphy has wrestled with the etmology of Cherkos for centuries. If you open a standard historical encyclopedia, the explanations are often surprisingly weak. They will frequently link it to distant Asian roots or they'll translate it using incredibly vague social terms like um free people, wanderers, or briggins.

[00:08:50]>> Because the traditional narrative, the one we all get in school, is that the Casacs were basically runaway surfs, peasants who couldn't take the oppression of feudal lords in Poland or Russia anymore. So, they fled to the wild, untamed borders to live free.

[00:09:03]right, the runaway peasant myth.

[00:09:05]>> And in that narrative, Turkus is just a catch-all label for these unbound, slightly lawless people.

[00:09:11]>> But the newsphere mission text throws their entire mainstream dictionary completely out the window. It views the runaway surf narrative as a later politically convenient myth.

[00:09:21]>> Okay?

[00:09:21]>> Instead, it argues for a totally different intensely Marshall ethmology based on ancient Turk roots. It breaks the word Turkus down into two highly specific semantic halves. Sure and K's.

[00:09:33]>> Okay, let's look at those roots. Break down the sure part for me.

[00:09:36]>> In ancient Turk, sh translates to lion.

[00:09:39]>> Lion.

[00:09:39]>> But we have to understand the semiotics here. In step culture, a lion isn't just an animal. It is the apex predator, the king of beasts. It is the ultimate symbol of supreme power, royalty, and the absolute highest echelon of marshall valor.

[00:09:55]>> Okay. So to take the root shure is to claim an elite almost royal status on the battlefield.

[00:10:01]>> Exactly.

[00:10:01]>> Okay. So sure gives us the lion the royal aspect. Yeah.

[00:10:05]>> But getting from a regal lion to a border guard implies some kind of physical action. Does the keys part explain the military function?

[00:10:14]>> Precisely. Keys is an active aggressive verb. It means to cut, to sever, to slice through, or to cross.

[00:10:20]>> The cut.

[00:10:20]>> Yeah. When you put it into a military context, the text explains that this meant to cut the enemy's path, to sever the vanguard, or to intercept.

[00:10:28]>> Wow. So, Shis doesn't mean a runaway peasant seeking a farm without a landlord. It translates literally to lions who cut the enemy's path or simply cutting lions.

[00:10:37]>> What's fascinating here is how this linguistic breakdown completely redefineses their social status from the ground up. It elevates them from refugees to apex predators. The text connects sh directly back to that ancient fortress city on the sdaria churikbat. The militia or the professional standing army that emerged from that city to protect the trade routes was called the churik.

[00:10:59]>> Churikas >> meaning the army or militia of the as people.

[00:11:03]>> So you have churik as functioning as a military unit. And the source argues that over time through phonetic drift and geographic movement churik as morphs into churus.

[00:11:14]>> Yes. The source argues that Chirkus is fundamentally a title of ultimate valor and military professionalism.

[00:11:21]It wasn't a social label for displaced peasants. It was the name of an ancient elite border spettnas.

[00:11:28]>> Special forces.

[00:11:29]>> Think of them as a highly specialized military cast whose sole generational function was defending strategic borders and controlling arterial trade routes.

[00:11:36]>> I have to admit that completely flips the script for me. Like if I learned that Kasacs were rebellious farmers.

[00:11:42]This source is saying no. They were highly organized ancient special forces with a pedigree and a codified military tradition that was older than the very states they were eventually defending.

[00:11:52]>> The text lays out this evolution in three very distinct layers to prevent modern confusion. First you have the black cloook. In Turk that translates to kacalpac or black cap. Okay?

[00:12:04]>> That was their ethnic and social root.

[00:12:06]It defined who they were biologically and culturally, the owners of the lineage.

[00:12:10]>> So the second layer is the title.

[00:12:12]>> Yes. The second layer is Chirus. This was their warrior title, their professional designation, the cutting lions. It described what they did on the battlefield.

[00:12:21]>> Yeah. The third >> the third layer is Casac, which the text argues was a much later social status term that merely denoted a free warrior in the evolving landscape of Eastern Europe.

[00:12:30]>> So Black Clo is who they were. Chirkus is the elite job they performed. Kasac is the social class they eventually occupied centuries later.

[00:12:39]>> That is the exact triad the text presents. And the authors are incredibly adamant that labeling modern Ukrainian costs without acknowledging this ancient cutting lion lineage which was forged at Churik Rabat is a massive historical injustice >> because it robs them of a heritage.

[00:12:55]>> It robs them of a heritage that predates almost all modern central Asian ethn.

[00:13:01]>> Okay, this is a beautiful setup. M >> but it leaves a glaring logistical question >> which is >> if this group these black cloooks these cutting lions were such an elite independent military force forged on the Sdaria River in Central Asia. How on earth did they end up thousands of miles away sitting on the banks of the Janapa River in ancient Keith?

[00:13:24]>> It's a long walk.

[00:13:25]>> Yeah. And more importantly, the source makes a huge foundational point that when they arrived in Eastern Europe, they didn't arrive as employees looking for guard work. They arrived as owners.

[00:13:35]>> To explain this transcontinental leap, the text brings in one of the most famous and often misunderstood names in world history. Attilla the Hun.

[00:13:43]>> Oh wow.

[00:13:43]>> The source details a massive epochdefining migration from the east to the Geneer region, specifically to an area known as Porsy, which is south of modern Kev. But it insists that we have to fundamentally change our perspective on this migration. When the black cloths arrived, they were not refugees begging a Slavic king for a patch of land, nor were they vassels pledging falty.

[00:14:07]>> They were claiming a literal inheritance.

[00:14:09]>> Yes, the text frames them as the direct legal and biological heirs to the Hunik Empire. It doesn't refer to Aillaa merely as a barbarian conqueror, which is the traditional Roman view, >> right? The scourge of God.

[00:14:23]>> Exactly. Instead, it uses a Turk title, Urishagan or Adula, framing him as a sort of god of war, the supreme sovereign who originally conquered and held the southern European steps.

[00:14:35]>> So, they were just coming back.

[00:14:36]>> The Black Clos as descendants of this imperial vertical were simply returning to their ancestral inherited territory.

[00:14:43]They were stepping back onto their own property.

[00:14:45]>> And there's this one detail in the text regarding this concept of ownership that I found absolutely captivating. It's about a battlecry.

[00:14:52]>> Ah, yes.

[00:14:52]>> Everyone in the world knows the battlecry harrah or ura. We associate it with modern militaries, sports teams, you name it. But the source text claims this isn't just a generic shout to pump up adrenaline.

[00:15:04]>> No, the text elevates ura, which translates roughly from ancient turic roots as strike or beat to the level of a legal document. It presents it as a hunik sound seal.

[00:15:15]>> A sound seal like an audio copyright.

[00:15:17]>> Exactly. We have to remember that in nomadic and step cultures, written contracts on parchment were not the primary mode of establishing law.

[00:15:25]>> Right? Not everyone had a scribe handy.

[00:15:27]>> Oral tradition, public declaration, and ritualistic sound carried absolute legal weight. The text argues that the Huns left this battlecry as a vocal deed of property rights over the Sully steps >> and the black cloucks preserved it.

[00:15:41]>> Yes. When they rode into battle and shouted, "Ura," they weren't just trying to intimidate the enemy vanguard. They were legally, ritually announcing their sovereign ownership of the battlefield.

[00:15:50]It was a declaration of we are the heirs of Aillaa and this land is ours.

[00:15:55]>> That is wild. The idea that a battlecry is actually a spoken property deed. But um if I'm playing devil's advocate here, does the text have any actual documentary evidence to back up this claim that they were co-owners of Keieven Roose?

[00:16:10]>> It does actually >> because shouting a battlecry is one thing, but establishing a state is another. Traditional history usually paints the Slavic princes as the absolute rulers and the stepnomads as either enemies or hired muscle.

[00:16:25]>> It's a vital question and the text doesn't just rely on oral tradition. It goes straight to the primary written chronicles of the era. Specifically, it points to the Epatav Chronicle >> which is a major document, >> one of the most important historical documents for the history of Kievan Roose. The text cites entries from the years 1146 and 1151. It quotes a very specific recurring ancient formula used in these legal and historical documents.

[00:16:48]>> What's the formula?

[00:16:49]>> It says all the Rustland A and D. All the black clo books.

[00:16:52]>> All the Rustland and D. All the black clo books. On the surface, I mean that sounds simple enough. Just a list of who is there.

[00:16:58]>> But the text demands we perform a granular legal analysis of the grammar used by the medieval scribes. It focuses intensely on the conjunction and dd the letter in old Slavic.

[00:17:10]>> Okay. The a and d is important >> crucial in the context of ancient Russ's law and diplomacy. That specific conjunction is not used casually. It is used to connect two equal sovereign subjects.

[00:17:23]>> Ah, so it doesn't say the Russland and its subordinate black cloook servants.

[00:17:27]>> Precisely. If the black cloooks were merely mercenaries, the grammar of the chronicle would reflect vaselage or possession. By sating all the Russland and all the black clo books, the phrasing legally elevates the Turk component to an absolute equal standing with the Slavic component.

[00:17:44]>> They are recognized by the scribes of the time as co-soververeigns.

[00:17:48]>> Yes.

[00:17:48]>> So we're looking at a true dualism of power, a symbiotic state.

[00:17:52]>> That is the exact model. The text describes a perfect functional symbiosis. The Slavic component, the Russins, managed the agriculture, the farming, the internal economy, and the localized governance of the cities.

[00:18:03]>> They were the plow. They were the plow.

[00:18:05]The Turk component, the black cloucks, handled the sword. They managed external security, the defense of the borders, the geopolitics of the step, and military strategy.

[00:18:15]>> And the text argues they were necessary for survival.

[00:18:19]>> It argues forcefully that without the sword of the black cloucks, the agricultural centers of Kiev would have fallen to other step nomads centuries earlier.

[00:18:28]>> And it wasn't just that they patrol the borders and lived in temporary camps, right? Because a key part of sovereignty is infrastructure, >> right? They weren't just living in yurts outside the Slavic city walls waiting for orders. The text highlights that the black claw books had their own permanent fortified cities >> like where >> places like Torches, KV, and Corsum.

[00:18:48]They had their own complex administrative structures, their own internal economy, and their own regiments. They were a state within a state, or rather half of a dual state.

[00:18:57]But the most shocking claim about their power, the one that really underscores this idea of them being co-owners, is what the text calls the veto power.

[00:19:05]>> Yes, this is where the narrative completely breaks with the idea of Slavic absolute monarchy. According to the newsphere mission text, no Kievon prince or Kagan, as the text often refers to them, deliberately using the step title to emphasize the Turk influence.

[00:19:21]>> Right? No Kagan was considered truly legitimate until he was officially recognized, vetted, and approved by the Council of Black Clobook elders.

[00:19:30]>> Okay, let me try to wrap my head around the mechanics of that. Traditional history gives us the image of a king passing power to his son by divine right. But this sounds less like a medieval monarchy hiring a regiment of bodyguards and much more like a modern corporate structure.

[00:19:45]>> A corporate structure.

[00:19:46]>> Yeah. In this analogy, the black cloookbooks are the board of directors.

[00:19:49]The Kavon prince is the CEO. The CEO might run the day-to-day operations of the agricultural and urban centers, but if the board of directors doesn't hold a vote and approve his appointment, he doesn't get the corner office. He has no authority.

[00:20:02]>> That analogy perfectly captures the dynamic the text is trying to convey.

[00:20:06]The text refers to this system as military democracy in action.

[00:20:09]>> Military democracy. The voice of a seasoned black cloak warrior representing the military might that kept the state alive carried vastly more real political weight in determining the leadership of Kievon Roose than the will of foreign Byzantine advisers or internal court politics.

[00:20:26]>> Wow.

[00:20:26]>> They weren't guards. They were the kingmakers. They were the electors of the realm. So if we follow this logic, if this Turk element, these black cloucks were so deeply foundational to the region, if they were the literal co-owners of the state, the sword to the Slavic plow, the board of directors choosing the rulers, >> it brings up a massive modern contradiction, >> the name, >> yes, why is the very name of the country today, Ukraine >> almost universally attributed strictly to Slavic origins? Because if you open any standard encyclopedia or dictionary today, it tells a very different story about that word.

[00:21:01]>> It does. The mainstream universally accepted view in academia is that Ukraine comes from the old East Slavic words cry or Ukraina. These words translate roughly to borderland, edge, march, or periphery. Under this linguistic model, the name implies a territory sitting on the outer edge of a larger, more central empire or state, >> which frankly I've always thought sounded a bit historically passive. A massive culturally rich country naming itself the outskirts.

[00:21:30]>> It's an unusual choice for a self-designation.

[00:21:33]>> Yeah, it feels like a name given to you by someone else looking at a map, not a name you choose for your own sovereign center. But our source text offers a radical counter claim, a complete linguistic paradigm shift regarding this word.

[00:21:46]>> It really does.

[00:21:46]>> It argues that the root UKR has absolutely nothing to do with the Slavic word for borderland. The newsphere text asserts that UKR is actually a phonetic corruption of an ancient highly prestigious Turk ethnmogre.

[00:22:00]>> On ogre. Okay, we need to define that.

[00:22:02]What does that mean and where does it come from?

[00:22:04]>> To understand the gravity of the term on ogre, we have to look far to the east to the Orcan styles.

[00:22:09]>> What are those?

[00:22:10]>> These are massive 8th century stone monuments erected in modern-day Mongolia. They contain the oldest known examples of written Turk language and they document the history of the early Turk cognates.

[00:22:23]>> Okay.

[00:22:24]>> These steels prominently mention the ano budun which translates to the people of 10 arrows.

[00:22:29]>> The people of 10 arrows. Yeah. That sounds like a massive military alliance.

[00:22:33]>> It was. It was a powerful highly structured confederation of Turk tribes.

[00:22:39]The arrows represented tribal divisions or military wings.

[00:22:42]>> Got it. When this massive confederation began moving westward across the Eurasian step under great leaders like Eststeagan, a specific part of these tribes, the on ogres eventually settled in the Duniper region, exactly where we find Kon Roose.

[00:22:56]>> Okay. Conceptually, I understand a step tribe moving west.

[00:23:00]>> But linguistically, how do we get from an ogre to UKR? Cuz those don't sound immediately identical.

[00:23:05]>> They don't.

[00:23:06]>> Does the text explain the mechanics of how that word evolved?

[00:23:09]>> It does. and it relies on the concept of phonetic drift and linguistic illusion over centuries of migration and interaction with other languages. The text traces the evolution through a specific chain of tribal names that are well documented in regional histories.

[00:23:23]>> Okay, walk me through the chain.

[00:23:24]>> The chain begins with the cooer confederation.

[00:23:32]>> A common linguistic phenomenon in the steo cucher evolves phonetically into kunger. So krier to kunger you lose the t and the i.

[00:23:40]>> Exactly. Hunger then becomes congrat and finally the core root distills down to simply ukrer to kung to congrat to ukr.

[00:23:48]So what you're saying is the tng sounds soften or drop out entirely as the word is passed down through generations and dialects leaving that hard K&R core.

[00:23:57]>> Exactly. And the central revolutionary argument here is that Uker was not a geographic descriptor invented by mapmakers. It was the proud self-d designation of a highly elite group of Turk ogre warriors.

[00:24:08]>> The people of 10 arrows.

[00:24:10]>> Yes, these were the very people who created the militarized protostate structure in the Porsy region we were just discussing. Therefore, the name Ukraine does not mean edge of the map.

[00:24:22]>> It's anonym.

[00:24:23]>> It is a living memory of a time when the Ukers, the on ogres, were the absolute core of the region's defense, sovereignty, and resistance against external empires. Here's where it gets really interesting to me. It's the idea that language isn't just communication.

[00:24:39]You know, it holds the ghosts of history.

[00:24:42]>> Beautifully put.

[00:24:43]>> If we connect this to the bigger picture, the text is saying that to claim Ukraine is purely a Slavic name, meaning borderland, is to actively strip the country of its original foundational power.

[00:24:54]>> That is precisely the grievance the text is airing. The authors argue that removing the Turk step route from the etmology of Ukraine deprivives the region of its imperial step passion and will to freedom. The black cloucks as the carriers of the anogre legacy were the source of that power. Because if Uker is actually an ancient Turk elite title, then identifying as Ukrainian isn't just noting where you live on a map.

[00:25:15]>> It carries the genetic, historical, and marshall memory of the black cloucks.

[00:25:20]It's almost an invocation of the cutting lions, the sherkies, every single time the word is spoken.

[00:25:26]>> It fundamentally changes the national code. It moves the identity from a passive geographic periphery to an active imperial core. It says we are not the borderlands of someone else's empire. We are the descendants of the center.

[00:25:40]>> But this brings up a massive unavoidable problem.

[00:25:43]>> How it was lost.

[00:25:44]>> Yeah. If this linguistic connection is so deeply foundational, if the evidence is literally hiding in plain sight in the word Ukraine itself, how did it get lost? How does mainstream academia completely miss a connection that massive?

[00:25:57]>> It's a great question.

[00:25:58]>> According to our sources, it wasn't just a matter of people naturally forgetting over time or misplacing a dictionary.

[00:26:04]The text claims this history was actively suppressed, intentionally mistransated, and politically erased.

[00:26:09]>> Right. To explore the mechanics of this suppression, the text fast forwards from the middle ages to the 20th century. It brings up a highly controversial explosive book published in the Soviet era by a writer and linguist named Olzas Sullemanov.

[00:26:22]>> And what was the book called?

[00:26:23]>> The book is titled as Aya.

[00:26:25]>> As Aaya, what exactly was the premise of this book? And why was a book about linguistics considered dangerous enough to be suppressed? Sulamonghov's book dared to analyze one of the most sacred, untouchable, foundational texts of Slavic literature and identity, the tale of Igor's campaign.

[00:26:44]>> For those who might not know, how important is that text?

[00:26:47]>> It is paramount. It is an epic poem from the late 12th century detailing a military campaign. It is essentially the equivalent of Beaowolf for the English or the Song of Roland for the French.

[00:26:58]>> It's the bedrock.

[00:26:59]>> Exactly. It's the bedrock of Eastern European literary history. For centuries, mainstream academic scholars, specifically Slavists in Moscow and St. Petersburg, had analyzed this text strictly through a monolingual Slavic linguistic lens.

[00:27:14]>> Right? They looked at it and assumed it was a purely Slavic document written by a Slavic author for a purely Slavic audience. But Silamonghov who was a trained Turkologist and understood the languages of the step looked at the original manuscript and realized something that shattered the academic consensus >> which was >> he realized the mainstream academics were entirely fundamentally misinterpreting the text because they were only using half the necessary dictionary. He argued that the tale of Igor's campaign was not a monolingual Slavic text at all but a deeply bilingual monument. bilingual meaning it was written in two languages simultaneously.

[00:27:50]>> Specifically, he provided linguistic proof that the elite of Kievon Russ, the princes, the nobility and their black cloook co-rulers spoke a shared mixed language, >> asseric, >> asseric as the text calls it, which heavily blended old Slavic with Palovsian, a prominent Turk language of the time. This mixed language was the lingua franca of politics, the language of the military command, and the language of high poetry.

[00:28:16]>> Okay, this is where the text gets incredibly specific with its examples.

[00:28:19]And I love this part because it shows exactly how historians can get things hilariously wrong. Talk to me about the Ludarakan chickens.

[00:28:26]>> This is perhaps the most famous and slightly embarrassing example of the mistransation the text points out.

[00:28:32]>> Let's hear it. In the tale of Igor's campaign, there is a tense passage describing a military scenario near the city of Mutarakan. The original text uses the word kur.

[00:28:43]>> Generations of traditional Slavic scholars locked into their monolingual framework and using only Slavic dictionaries translated the word kr as chickens or roosters.

[00:28:53]>> Wait, really? So you have this epic soaring poem about war, conquest, and the fate of nations. And suddenly right in the middle of a strategic description, the author is talking about the poultry of Tuveturkin.

[00:29:06]>> Exactly. It made absolutely no logical sense in the context of the poem, but because they refused to acknowledge any Turk influence, they forced the translation to fit their limited vocabulary.

[00:29:16]>> And what did Sulleinov say?

[00:29:17]>> Sulimonov came along, read the passage, and pointed out that in the Turk languages spoken by the step elilites of that era, Kurr simply means wall or fortress. wall, which makes infinitely more sense in a military epic than a flock of chickens.

[00:29:32]>> It completely changes the meaning of the passage from nonsense to tactical reality. The text gives another brilliant example of this blindness. In another section, traditional scholars translated a confusing word as debris or impenetrable thicket.

[00:29:48]>> Okay, >> Sulum showed that the word wasn't Slavic at all. It was the Turk word de Burkasan which translates to iron shackles.

[00:29:57]>> Wow. So historians were essentially trying to translate a complex bilingual French English legal document, but they stubbornly refused to use anything except an English dictionary.

[00:30:08]>> That's a great comparison.

[00:30:09]>> So whenever they hit a French word they didn't know, they just found an English word that sounded vaguely similar and ended up writing total nonsense about chickens instead of fortress walls.

[00:30:18]>> That is the exact analogy. And the newsphere text uses these examples not just to point out funny errors, but to make a devastating critique of the academic establishment.

[00:30:27]>> They didn't know the culture.

[00:30:28]>> It argues that the historians writing the official history simply did not know the languages or the culture of the people they were writing about. They tried to explain the massive interconnected turic world through the narrow lens of Slavic dictionaries, erasing the reality of the black books in the process. But you know, making a translation error, >> even a stubborn one, is one thing.

[00:30:49]Academics argue over translations all the time. But the text says Slemanov's book as Aaya was actively banned and physically destroyed by the state.

[00:30:59]>> It was >> why the extreme sensorious reaction to what is essentially a linguistic debate.

[00:31:05]Because as the manifesto clearly states, the implications of Sulimon's linguistic work threatened to collapse the entire ideological foundation of the Soviet state at that time.

[00:31:14]>> How so?

[00:31:15]>> The official state sponsored mythology was rigidly built on the concept of the three brotherly Slavic nations, Russia, Ukraine, and Bellarus, existing in pure untainted Slavic isolation. Sulimanov's undeniable linguistic proof of a bilingual society revealed a fourth non-Slavic brother. the Turk black cloook. And worse, for the state narrative, it revealed that this fourth brother was often the leading dominant military force in the alliance.

[00:31:45]>> Because recognizing that the foundation of the culture was actually a mixed step, Turk imperial root would completely shatter the pure Slavic narrative that the state relied upon to justify his borders and its power structure.

[00:31:57]>> Precisely. Acknowledging Sulleangh meant acknowledging that the official state sanctioned history of Piovon Russ, a history that deliberately minimized the central co-ruling role of the ancestors of the Caracall Paxs was a fabrication.

[00:32:11]>> It was too dangerous an idea.

[00:32:12]>> Exactly. Therefore, the book Aza was pulled from libraries, its publication was halted, and the ideas were suppressed. This suppression of a single book though the source claims it was really just a symptom a latestage symptom of a much larger systemic centuriesl long project of rewriting history.

[00:32:28]>> Yes, the text goes much deeper.

[00:32:30]>> And while the prompt for our dive noted that this falsification was a massive multi-entury process involving Russian emperors like Peter and Katherine I stretching all the way to Stalin in 1944. The specific text we are analyzing points its finger at one incredibly pivotal year as the master stroke of this eraser 1924.

[00:32:51]>> Yes. While the imperial eraser began much earlier with the Zar's rewriting chronicles to legitimize the Romanov dynasty. 1924 is highlighted in the sourc's narrative as the moment the modern trap was sprung.

[00:33:04]>> What happened in 1924?

[00:33:05]>> This was the era of the Soviet national territorial delimitation in central Asia. The text argues that during this specific bureaucratic process, history was actively surgically weaponized by the state apparatus.

[00:33:17]>> The ultimate bureaucratic divide and conquer strategy. But how does that actually work mechanically? How do you just change history across an entire continent?

[00:33:24]>> You don't just change a single textbook.

[00:33:25]You redraw the borders. You create entirely new compartmentalized national identities. You standardize new isolated dictionaries. And you purge the academics who remember the old connections. The stated goal of the 1924 delimitation, according to the text, was to create manageable, separate nations while intentionally severing the connective tissue of older, broader imperial memories.

[00:33:48]>> Because united, they're too strong.

[00:33:50]>> Exactly. If people remembered they were once part of a unified continent spanning elite like the Black Clos, they would be unified, powerful, and much harder to govern from a central capital.

[00:34:01]So how did they manipulate the history of the Kacol packs specifically during this 1924 process?

[00:34:07]>> The text claims the Kacol packs were artificially rejuvenated in the official newlymandated textbooks.

[00:34:13]>> Rejuvenated.

[00:34:14]>> The central bureaucrats essentially wrote them into history as a young newly formed people who only emerged as an ethnic group in the 17th century.

[00:34:22]>> Oh, I see.

[00:34:22]>> By doing this, they created a chronological firewall. They surgically severed the modern caracall pack's historical link to their ancient past in Kievon Roose and their deep origins in carzum and sherbot.

[00:34:34]>> It's like creating a new shell company to hide a corporate paper trail.

[00:34:37]>> That's exactly what it's like.

[00:34:38]>> If you look at the new company's charter, it says it was founded yesterday. That effectively erases all the massive assets, debts, and history of the parent company.

[00:34:47]>> Yes. If your statemandated history book says your people didn't even exist until the 1600s, you can't possibly claim to be the descendants of the black cloookbooks who were electing princes in Kiev in the 1100s.

[00:34:59]>> That is exactly the mechanism of eraser the text is exposing. And simultaneously on the European side of the map, the history of the black cloookbooks was also being sanitized. How so?

[00:35:08]>> In Slavic textbooks, they were rebranded not as co-rulers or the cutting lions, but as faceless nomads or temporary insignificant mercenaries who eventually just vanished.

[00:35:19]>> A two-pronged approach.

[00:35:20]>> Yes. This ensured that modern Ukrainians wouldn't remember their Turk on ogre roots and modern Kacal packs wouldn't be able to claim their heritage in Europe as the heirs of Aillaa. Which brings us to the modern-day conflict that really seems to be the emotional driving force behind this entire new sphere mission manifesto. The text isn't just a dry historical critique. It is incredibly angry about how this 1924 falsification has led to modern appropriation.

[00:35:49]>> It is very passionate about this >> because when you erase a massive history, you leave a vacuum.

[00:35:54]>> And the text specifically targets modern internet culture calling out what it refers to as Kazak video. Yes, the text aggressively pushes back against modern content creators, amateur historians, and certain nationalistic ideologies that attempt to claim the legacy of the Black Clobooks as ancient Khaz'aks, >> which they view as theft.

[00:36:13]>> The authors view this as the direct toxic result of the 1924 historical manipulation. Because the true descendants were rejuvenated and their history erased, modern political brands are now swooping in to claim that ancient, glorious military heritage for themselves. And again addressing you the listener. We are not here to take sides in Central Asian identity politics or to validate one modern nation over another.

[00:36:36]Our job is to report what the source material is arguing. And the sourc's frustration is palpable and furious.

[00:36:43]They feel their ancestral copyright, their literal biological history is being stolen in real time by modern social media algorithms.

[00:36:51]>> This raises an important question regarding historical anacronisms which the text tackles head on. The newsphere text points out a glaring fatal chronological flaw in these modern internet claims >> which is >> it states definitively that the ethn Kazak as a defined state political identity simply did not exist in the 11th and 12th centuries when the black cloucks were at the absolute height of their power in Kievon Roose >> right you can't claim an ancient group belonged to a nation that hadn't been invented yet that's like claiming the ancient Romans were actually Italians it's a geographical truth maybe but a total political and historical falsehood.

[00:37:27]>> Exactly. The text emphasizes that the medieval chronicles from that era do record the specific tribes that made up the black globe of confederation. They explicitly mention tribes like the miton, the congrat, the kedes and the main >> and those tribes are >> the text notes with heavy emphasis that these specific ancient tribes form the absolute core of the modern caracelpac people today. To look back and call the black cloucks kazaks, the text argues, is to take a much later modern political label and illegally paste it over ancient distinct tribal history. The manifesto calls this act scientific looting.

[00:38:04]>> Scientific looting. That's a tremendously strong phrase. But does the text rely solely on its own angry assertions to fight this? Or does it bring in outside unbiased verification?

[00:38:15]It actively enlists external world-renowned scholars to validate its grievances. The authors know they are fighting a massive state narrative, so they bring in heavy artillery. They cite Peter B. Golden.

[00:38:26]>> Who is he?

[00:38:27]>> He is widely considered one of the world's foremost experts on Turk peoples. They note that Golden's extensive work proves the Black Global Confederation was a highly autonomous, deeply unique political entity rooted in a specific Ogus Peshane linguistic and cultural layer, not a modern invention.

[00:38:42]>> Okay, that's strong backup. The text also cites the legendary Russian historian Vio Klashevki, a giant of 19th century historioggraphy, who openly acknowledged that the Turkas were the indigenous Turk origin population of southern Ross that formed the foundational core of the Casacs.

[00:39:00]>> So they're essentially saying, don't just take our manifesto's word for it.

[00:39:04]Look at the scholars who actually read the original texts and aren't bound by the political manuals of 1924.

[00:39:10]>> Exactly. But this leads to a terrifying philosophical question. If paper history is written by the victors and then it's rewritten by Zars and then it's sanitized by Soviet bureaucrats in 1924 and then it's misidentified by internet videos today. How does a culture actually protect the truth of its origins? If you literally cannot trust the encyclopedia on your shelf, what do you trust?

[00:39:31]>> This leads us to the ultimate defense mechanism presented in the text. The one thing that cannot be burned in a library or rewritten by a committee. It is called Shesher.

[00:39:39]>> Sheshure. The text refers to it as the biological archive. What exactly is it?

[00:39:43]>> The text argues that while paper endures everything, meaning a bureaucrat can write whatever lies they want on a piece of paper, especially in 1924, the Shezier is immune to this kind of hacking.

[00:39:55]>> Okay.

[00:39:56]>> Shezier is the traditional incredibly rigorous genealogical record of the step. It is the genetic and historical memory passed down through generations.

[00:40:05]>> So, it's an oral and biological lineage.

[00:40:07]But how detailed can an oral history really be?

[00:40:10]>> In step culture, it is exhaustively detailed. It doesn't just list a few grandparents' names. A proper shezier tracks the continuous migration paths of the tribes over millennia.

[00:40:21]>> Really?

[00:40:21]>> Yes. It records their participation in specific battles for the ancient kaganates. It tracks the deep intricate kinship ties stretching all the way back to the era of the prophet Ibrahim.

[00:40:32]>> It's a massive database. The text claims that while official state sponsored science looks at them and calls them a young ethnos born in the 17th century, their shzier remembers the stones of Jerusalem, the fortress walls of Churik Rabat, and the halls of power in ancient Kev.

[00:40:47]>> I love the mechanics of this. So, Sheshire acts almost exactly like a cultural blockchain.

[00:40:52]>> A cultural blockchain. I like that.

[00:40:53]>> Yeah. You can't just hack the central ledger in a government office in Moscow in 1924 and change the past because the true history isn't centralized on paper.

[00:41:02]It is decentralized. It is stored in the DNA, the ritualized oral memory, and the complex family trees of every single family in the culture.

[00:41:10]>> Exactly.

[00:41:11]>> If one state textbook says you appeared in the 17th century, but 10,000 grandfathers across step have memorized lineages, placing them in the 12th century, the decentralized blockchain of the people simply rejects the textbook as a forgery.

[00:41:26]>> That is a phenomenal way to describe the function of the Cheshire. According to this manifesto, it is an incorruptible ledger. And the Texan points out that this memory isn't just invisible. It is anchored by powerful physical symbols that the people still wear.

[00:41:39]>> Symbols like what?

[00:41:39]>> The most prominent one being the shyma.

[00:41:41]>> The shogerma, the black cap, which is the literal translation of Gacel Pac.

[00:41:47]>> Yes. The text insists that we must stop looking at the shyma as merely an article of traditional clothing or a quirky hat worn for festivals.

[00:41:56]>> What is it then? It is a totem sign. The text describes it as the crown of step chivalry. The source explicitly states that for these ancient warriors, wearing the sherma carried the exact same sacred, sovereign, and terrifying weight as flying a wolfhead banner into battle.

[00:42:14]>> Wow.

[00:42:15]>> When the medieval Slavic chronicers wrote about the black cloucks, they weren't making a fashion observation.

[00:42:20]They were meticulously recording their elite sovereign social marker. It's like seeing a military officer walking towards you wearing a five-star general's insignia and instead of recognizing the massive rank and authority the uniform represents, you just write down in your diary, "I saw a man with some shiny stars on his collar."

[00:42:37]>> Right. It completely misses the point of the symbol.

[00:42:39]>> Precisely. And this intense defense of their symbols in their memory brings the newsphere mission text to its final resounding manifesto. It offers a synthesis of their entire argument against historical oblivion.

[00:42:51]>> The four pillars.

[00:42:52]>> Let's lay those pillars out clearly.

[00:42:53]First, the root. The root is UKR, descending from the ancient on ogre, the people of Teneros. Second, the spirit.

[00:43:01]The spirit is Shercase, the cutting lion, the elite, highly professional special forces identity forged in Central Asia.

[00:43:09]>> Third, >> third, the code. The code is theure, the unbreakable decentralized genetic and historical memory that survived 1924.

[00:43:18]And finally, the status. Their historical status is not that of roaming mercenaries, but of sovereign owners and electors of the Kagans of Russ.

[00:43:27]>> The text declares with almost militant finality that it will no longer allow the past to be privatized by political neighbors, appropriated by internet videos, or diminished by rewritten centralized textbooks.

[00:43:38]>> They view themselves not as a semi-finish product of recent imperial history, but as the primary ancient foundation of the region's power. And that is the ultimate verdict of the new sphere analysis. That the right to the land, the legacy of Itillaa, and the true history of Eastern Europe isn't determined by a modern political manual printed in 1924, but by the unbroken continuity of the cultural code preserved in the >> So what does this all mean? We have gone on an absolutely incredible continent spanning journey today.

[00:44:06]>> We really have. We started in the era of ancient Jerusalem, tracking a warrior branch of a civilization eastward to the harsh environment of the Saria River where they built the fortress city of Churik Rabat.

[00:44:19]>> We watched those warriors forge an elite professional military identity as the cutting lions, the Sheres. We followed them as they migrated to the Neper River, not as refugees begging for land, but as the legal heirs to Itillaa the Hun, armed with a vocal sound seal of property in their terrifying battlecry, URA.

[00:44:39]>> We examined a historical reality where they weren't hired guards, but the literal board of directors of Kiev and Russ wielding absolute veto power over Slavic princes. We looked at a radical linguistic theory that roots the very name Ukraine not in a passive word for borderland but in their Turk elite title the on ogre.

[00:44:57]>> We discussed how a bilingual epic poem revealed a shared language of power leading to a linguistic book so dangerous it had to be banned. And finally, we explore the chilling allegation that an entire empire's history was deliberately bureaucratically erased in 1924, leaving the descendants to rely entirely on their biological archive, the chessier, to protect their heritage from modern scientific looting.

[00:45:22]>> It is a sweeping, deeply controversial, and incredibly complex alternative view of history. It challenges the listener to completely rethink the foundational narratives of Eastern Europe and Central Asia.

[00:45:35]>> More importantly, it asks us to consider how easily the map of the past can be redrawn, erased, and manipulated by those holding the pen of state power in the present.

[00:45:43]>> And that leaves us with a final thought for you, the listener, to mle over long after this deep dive ends. We've just spent an hour looking at how massive paper histories, grand encyclopedias, and official government textbooks can potentially be manipulated, rewritten, or completely mistransated to serve the political borders of the day.

[00:46:00]>> It really makes you wonder about your own family tree.

[00:46:02]>> It does. If the official archives of massive empires can be so easily altered by a few bureaucrats in 1924, what hidden truths, what ancient shzier of your own are sitting quietly in the stories your grandparents told at the dinner table? What legends? What strange phonetic pronunciations or what weird family traditions have you inherited that the official state sanctioned record completely missed or erased?

[00:46:26]Because if this deep dive has taught us anything, it's that history isn't just locked away in dusty books in a university library. Sometimes the truest history is walking around right now, hidden in our language, in our symbols, and in our DNA. Thank you for joining us.

[00:46:59]Heat. Heat.

[00:47:29]Roana crush I'm the man.

[00:47:49]She love me. Shouldn't me again.

[00:48:25]Should get you down.

[00:48:58]Could it rain?

[00:49:01]What I myself could Get better.

[00:50:14]But I better sh Cut away.

[00:50:47]I better could it.

[00:51:15]Could it man?