Solution for the Ukraine
Supernova “Messier 1” , 1054 AD
The Ukraine conflict is currently described by media as a matter of U.S. / NATO vs Russia. In a sense this is true.
At its root however, it’s the war over the history of Vladimir the Great also known as St. Vladimir. The root, that also includes understanding the difference between seeing him as Vladimir the Great alone, versus additionally understanding him as St. Vladimir.
Now why I would present such a Solution to the Ukraine in the first place, is because the solution is actually dependent on my person (and a certain other).
This is not some statement of hubris, but due to source reasons explained in NEW ROMES, where is explained the 38th parallel of the Korean War. The epicenter conflict of all other conflicts — including of the Ukraine, but also Israel/Palestine.
The certain other person is understood by way of ST. GEORGE and WORLD CITIZENSHIP.
What brings it all together — now, in culminating crisis — is the difficulty of understanding this through the lens of the 20th century framework.
This includes war maneuvers begun in mid-19th century, and cumulative effects through 20th century to today, the 21st century. Overall I will refer to this as the 20th century, sometimes called by historians, the American Century.
The century when all other centuries seemed to recede in importance. If they were thought about at all, were assessed along 20th century lines, in its metrics, vernacular, and frameworks. The same 20th century by which was formed the Ukraine, and the state of Israel.
That the solution is dependent on myself (and the specific certain other) is described in the soon-published TWO SEATS. The two by whom is understood the difference between seeing Vladimir the Great alone, and seeing St. Vladimir, also.
Vladimir the Great, who later became known as St. Vladimir. How he became St. Vladimir, is the answer to all things.
I return to the 20th century when the understanding was lost — or more accurately, was sent into obscurity.
The Ukraine was established in 1991 upon the breakup of the Soviet Union. The history of the Ukraine before 1991 is described in TWO SEATS.
I note for a moment Israel, because it is relevant.
Israel, the nation established on the date 5/14/1948. Before that, was part of a region that for 2 millennia was lived in by peoples called today Palestinian (and also Christians and Jews). However what it was not, was Israel.
The nation-founding date of 5/14 was not randomly picked, understood by two things: the numbers within the date 5/14. Within the 5/14 date is contained the same numbers seen in year 1054 AD.
1054, year of the Great Schism of Christianity, severing the Western Church (generally Roman Catholic and Protestant & Anglican churches that came from it) from the Eastern Orthodox Church (Russian and other Eastern churches).
The key figure against whom the Western churches sought to consolidate against, was St. Vladimir.
Why St. Vladimir briefly explained here. And what this has to do with the 38th parallel, and Israel/Palestine. As I have already hinted, the war over Vladimir the Great and St. Vladimir, is connected to why Israel established on the date 5/14.
All of the solutions presented on this site, serve to resolve the problems culminated in the 20th century: problems borne many centuries before in ancient times.
Problems which include: misunderstandings about Genesis, misunderstandings about the Crusades and Mongol invasions, misunderstandings about the founding of the U.S. — misunderstandings that then indeed came to a head in the 20th century.
The timing of when problems came to a head (the contemporary times) — does not mean that contemporary frameworks are the most effective means to solve them.
However is it a human tendency to try solve problems through the framework of familiarity. And by the contemporary times in which one lives.
This is problematic if the problems have their source in ancient history. The “modern” view that may provide insight — that is, unless it becomes a victim of modern hubris.
Nonetheless we examine the contemporary times, considered begun around the Industrial Revolution. The advent of technologies that from the mid-19th century onwards that created a certain era of war, unseen before.
However do historians (and modern everyday persons) tend to lump all wars together under general category WAR — but also, one general war timeline. By such a framework, does era of war tends to read as having equal value and weight, to the next. I.e., war that is generally same from one era to the next.
This is a mistake, however is the mistaken assumption made, due to the framework of familiarity: of behind human.
It means, that while human beings did not radically change in that timeline (for the past 10,000 or so years), war has.
To wit, humans who tend to describe war with phrases such as “there is nothing new under the sun” or “it is human nature to go to war.” In doing so, we fail to appreciate how the nature of war changed.
The change has not been incremental — say, the way human have incrementally changed and adapted, per our biology. I.e., humans who change at the pace of evolution. War however, has changed at a pace, unseen in all human history before — that is, before the contemporary era.
The rate of tcchnologic that can outpace human biologic change, by an exponential factor. Thus while we humans created technology, what we have not yet done is fully grasped its effect.
An example of the exponential effect of technological change, is the amplification of war’s effects with the advent of mass-assembly production. I.e., the literal, actual mechanism by which exponential is achieved: through the multiplier-effect of mass production.
Thus did the 20th century bring not only Ford vehicles off the assembly line, but weapons. Thus did we see a devastating scale of death, never before seen. More who died in the 20th century than all the combined 10,000 years before (from approximate first recorded history).
The exponential scale of war, not only never before seen — but never before experienced. Have we truly grasped its impact? Not just to nations, but the human race.
The contemporary era, also marked by the end of a previous era of human history: the royal era. The Industrial Revolution brought forth the “American Century” understood as democracy.
With that, the decline/elimination of several royal families and histories. Royalty, in the global awareness, that was winnowed down to just a handful of families: in England, the Middle East, Japan. All other royals, crowded out from the picture by these few.
This brings us back to the Ukraine, and a key royal story crowded out from the picture.
Bringing the story out of the sidelines— and more so, unlocking its profound meaning, is the key to solving matters today. This requires understanding why the royal story was sent to the sidelines in the first place.
The royal story I speak of, is the one that made the history of Vladimir the Great and also who he became: St. Vladimir. More so, through whom he was able to become St. Vladimir. This is his Queen wife, known as Anna Porphyrogenita.
Before I describe the two, I return to the tendency to analyze a problem, through familiar frameworks. Thus while the story of a Vladimir and Anna is a royal story, the tendency is to analyze it along lines of, say, “democracy.”
More so, to not even think about the two in the first place — precisely because of the framework of familiarity, democracy, that thus subconsciously seems to reject all royal histories (unless it appears in the fashion pages of People magazine).
Thus I make direct point of the United States that proudly considers itself a democracy. However in that pride, has it failed to look outside of democracy, to understand matters more clearly.
An example would be this: an Italian restaurant is proud to serve its world famous pasta, known by many. Pasta also helps the wheat industry, as well as the tomato sauce and parmesan industries.
However, being proud of something, doesn’t mean it has the answer to other things — like how to cook different types of foods, say rice and soy, or corn and chiles, etc. Or simply to use wheat to make something other than spaghetti.
This is a silly example, but I make it to illustrate the point that pride and competence in one arena does not necessarily make for solutions in another.
Americans, proud to be democratic, but deficient in its solution-making abilities for problems that are essentially royal in nature.
Even more so for royal matters that venture into the arena of religion.
Yet there is such a royal instance, one that not only ventured in the arena of religion - but so much so that it caused the Great Schism in 1054 AD.
The event that split Christianity into Western and Eastern. This is the royal story of Vladimir and Anna.
The royal and religion story that sent shockwaves to the West, how it could be possible for such a moment to arrive — by way of the line it considered East.
The royal and religion story that reverberates to today — the story sent to obscurity by the West.
But like all matters sent underground, matters unable to be ignored - they surface, eventually.
The re-surfacing matter, and story, happening now and in the Ukraine. I describe it here.
The Ukraine capital is Kiev.
The city, considered the founding city of the history of the Ukraine (by those on that side of the conflict), but also, the founding city of the history of Russia (by those on that side).
Now, which one it is, is the question — the question however, when asked in the U.S. / Western Europe, rarely mentions Vladimir the Great or St. Vladimir.
Why not? This would be the equivalent to arguing about the founding of the United States, but never mentioning the Founding Fathers.
It might be more akin to arguing that the state of Texas is the true history of America, simply because Texans want to break away and become a true Lone Star State, and then claimed all of U.S. history with it. However would they be hard-pressed to make such a claim, given that none of the Founding Fathers prioritized the area.
In the Ukraine, we have a trickier matter, because Vladimir did pass through Kiev — and in fact, Kiev where Vladimir was Grand Prince, and effectively the King.
Thus why does no one in the West, mention Vladimir? This is akin to talking about Washington DC — but acting as if there was never such a person, George Washington.
This is because mentioning Vladimir the Great automatically opens the discussion of St. Vladimir. And that automatically leads to the matter of the Great Schism.
That automatically leads to the question — why does no one in the U.S. know what is the Great Schism? You mean there’s another Christianity other than the ones of the Roman Catholic Church and Protestant & Anglican churches?
Let’s time-travel for a moment, to the 11th century, but in England first, the place more familiar to American audiences, and then also a place familiar to Americans because of WW2.
The time is the Norman invasion of England. Prior to that, was the childless King of England Edward the Confessor. Thus was the English throne up for grabs.
Edward who had a distant relative named William, though was an unlikely contender given that he lived across the channel waters in the area called Normandy.
Normandy, the north coastal area of now-France that had been invaded by Norse peoples called today Viking. The ones who settled in France became the Normandy peoples, and intermingled with some Anglo-Saxons.
William was from Normandy, but born a bastard, to the point he was nicknamed William the Bastard.
Thus did William need a further legitimacy to claim an English throne. Thus would a conquest not be enough.
Thus did he marry the daughter of a noble family. Matilda who became the wife of the person known today as William the Conqueror.
William’s conquest is overlooked in its details. Especially how on the England side of the conflict, was occurring maneuvers before his invasion began, in the city of York.
York, the famous English location where the first Christian Roman Emperor cemented power in the 4th century, then went on to found Constantinople. The city named after himself, known in history as Constantine the Great.
Do we think William did not know who was Constantine?
His fellow contenders to English throne knew who was Constantine, and now warred amongst themselves trying to be his symbolic heir.
Thus in the fall of 1066 did they fight at the Battle of Fulford, on the southern border of York.
William invaded England two days later, defeating the one who thought he had won the symbol of Constantine.
William throned himself King of England later that year, on Christmas Day year 1066.
William who not only knew the symbolism of Constantine, but the Great Schism just a dozen years before — and was considered split along symbolism of Constantinople.
The event that rocked the Christian Church as has not occurred … since 4th century Constantine.
So what precisely was the symbolism William (and his opponents) seeking? And what was so upsetting to the Western church, to cause such a schism?
It is not just about Constantine — but Constantine’s relationship to the female.
The key male-female relationship in Constantine’s life was with his mother.
Helen, the rumored discoverer of the True Cross of Jesus Christ. This is described further in ST. GEORGE and upcoming TWO SEATS.
The discovery which enabled Constanstine to become the first Christian Roman Emperor. The moment, as if Helen had “birthed” her son into such a heightened existence. Thus by extension did she take on symbolism of the Virgin Mary.
William the Bastard, who didn’t feel as bad about his bastard status as one would think — and likely even conjured up the nickname, himself. Why?
Because Constantine was a bastard too. Thus we can imagine some of the psychological motivation for Helen to create for herself an aura of Virgin Mary, when in fact her son was born because she was a mistress of Constantine’s father.
The bastard issue aside, William who knew that Constantine and Helen failed to resolve a key matter about male and female:
How on earth does one create a male role model akin to Jesus Christ .. if the leading female had to be akin to the Virgin Mary? And his mother! Awkward doesn’t begin to describe such a relationship.
At least, not unless the King wanted to rule as a celibate monk. This was obviously not a great way to secure one’s power, not to mention, not the kind of life most wanted to live.
Thus did William seek to set a new kind of male-female role model for his reign — the one able to create a dynastic chain of power, and thus a continuous empire.
Now we look to the Schism itself, and its causes. There are many theories of why it happened, and many scholars who have tried their hand.
One of the theories, and very close to the correct one, is that the Eastern churches supported the idea of married priests. The other correct theory is that the Schism was motivated by competing claims to European thrones of power.
How do we know these are very close to correct?
With the benefit of hindsight - but also simple human nature — do we know that Christianity might struggle to endure over the long run, if constantly confronted with the notion of a celibate male monk as the top male role model of society.
The overly strict standard that would inevitably create distorted responses in society, including among the most loyal followers of Christianity, in priests and ministers.
This is seen today in priest crimes and scandals of the Roman Catholic Church. And scandals of ministers of southern baptist churches who have covered up decades of sex abuse against females. We can imagine in both, power narratives based on the psychological need to be a “savior” — and who they would convince must submit to them, in order to be saved.
A distorted response, but based on a misunderstanding unsolved since Constantine.
Since then, males able to uphold or live up to the unattainable standard set forth by a Constantine-like leader of primary relationship to his Virgin Mary-like mother. Or the impossible standard of Jesus Christ himself — as he is commonly understood to have lived. As he is misunderstood to have lived.
Who knew about the misunderstanding about Jesus Christ, was William the Conqueror.
However did he only know it, because of a now lesser known conqueror. Because his conquests were less?
Or because they were more.
Then why do we not know about it, today?
Because of the Schism.
The Schism from which the Western church acted as if history did not exist east of the Schism. This became true of the Western dynasties and later nations risen from it. I.e., the Western world as we know it today.
The West, that defined itself as a whole world-idea. Yet in fact, was only doing so by pretending important things did not happen out of Constantinople, that is, unless it went by way of York.
Unknown since then, the one who conquered Constantine, but did so centuries later.
The conqueror, for summoning what Constantine could not.
By personifying the male in a male-female relationship, in a way Christians could relate to. In other words, as a male would behave in a male-female relationship, and in a way that ensures continuity.
The means by which to make a Christian empire, and Christian era. Not to mention, ensure an even greater continuity: of the very human race.
The way that Christianity was meant to continue. As would have said so himself, Jesus Christ.
Jesus who could not say so in his lifetime — at least, not without being crucified.
As he was. Constantine who knew this, Helen his mother who knew too.
Thus did they convene a table, and with the purported True Cross they found, spoke on Jesus Christ’s “behalf.”
The table, the gathering in history called the Council of Nicaea, convened by Constantine (and Helen) in approximate year 325 AD.
The Council where it was also determined the female was not important, unless she were the Virgin Mary. The all-male Council nonetheless that implicitly recognized Constantine’s mother.
Helen, the discoverer of the purported True Cross. The gathering that would not have happened otherwise — nor by such luminaries of the Christian world, those invited to be the luminaries.
To clarify thus, the Council of men who implicitly suggested the female was not important — yet implicitly recognized one female. The one they were required to recognize as more important than any of them, Constantine’s mother.
The female seat she did not physically fill at the table, but filled nonetheless. And by the female symbol, compared to which, no other female could possibly be important: the Virgin Mary.
The Council of Nicaea where it was decided, what is the true essence of Jesus Christ. 300 years after his death, the Council who jointly spoke on his behalf - the table implicitly understood to only be possible because of Helen.
Helen who would make them all Jesus Christ? Or a trinity of men, some who were older than her son, Constantine.
The Father, Holy Ghost — and the Son. The Son whom we might guess would be fulfilled another more recent son. The one birthed by herself.
Thus by extension, Helen the mother, who filled the symbol of Jesus’ mother, the Virgin Mary.
Yet a seat remained unfilled. For centuries since Helen deemed the Virgin Mary, the female seat to fill.
The seat of the other Mary of the Bible.
The lesser known Mary, but not an unknown Mary.
Since the Council of Nicaea in 325, the Mary who implicitly became known as unimportant.
The Mary who then became famously known as unimportant — but infamously important too. The Catholic Church who deemed Mary Magdalene a sinner (prostitute) in 591 AD.
In the 11th century, William the Conqueror figured out what the Catholic Church had figured out in 591 AD, about what Constantine and Helen had figured out too.
The path to power was achieved by making the female “unknown” — but infamously known at the same time. All other females except the Virgin Mary. The impossible-to-fill role filled by no one except persons like “the Virgin Queen” Queen Elizabeth I, and the “prim” Queen Victoria of the Victorian Age.
Returning to William the Conqueror — and the real one who conquered Constantine.
The one came the closest to filling a seat unfilled since 300 years before: Vladimir.
William the Bastard who tried to style himself not only after Constantine the Bastard, but Vladimir the Bastard. Vladimir, son of the mistress of the Kiev leader at the time, Sviatoslav I.
Was Vladimir styling himself after Constantine too?
Possibly. Vladimir however who proved himself in a way that Constantine did not — nor did William.
The very thing Jesus Christ would have said, is the way a male must prove himself. That is, while simultaneously still ensuring the continuity of society, and human race.
The proving that, contrary to Christian convention for centuries, did not come about by becoming a monk.
The proving, which was the control of sexual impulse that led to bastards being born. The very same impulse blamed on the female at the Council of Nicaea. In times before, blamed on mistresses such as Helen.
Helen, the mistress of Constantine’s father, who knew the fate of mistresses all the way to persecuting times of Judaism.
The persecutions that included, horrifyingly, the execution of pregnant females. The female deemed guilty because of her “thigh” (see LIFE AND THE CHILD).
The proving against, that became the Christian tradition of monkhood. From “Father, Son, Holy Ghost” determined at the Council of Nicaea, came the spiritual reasoning for monasteries, celibate monks, celibate priests.
William who knew this was not an unsustainable formula. Thus did he marry a nobleman’s daughter named Matilda — as William knew, because Vladimir had married a woman named Malfrida.
William knowing that “Mal”, in Frankish languages, meant bad. Thus came the supposed “good” — and Matilda instead of Malfrida.
Vladimir however, had not only a Malfrida wife, but many others before Malfrida. Additionally, Vladimir was reported to have had 800 concubines, i.e., mistresses.
No one has time for 800 mistresses. However was dynastic power at the time associated with having many wives and mistresses. Vladimir is thus described as growing up in the culture of “Slavic paganism.”
Before Malfrida, Vladimir had married 4 other women, all whom he remained married to, simultaneously.
However along the way, did Vladimir meet the daughter of the Byzantine King.
Anna Porphyrogenita, the name emanating from “porphyry” which means purple.
In Roman times, also became the name of a stone called Imperial Porphyry, the “marble of Rome.”
Unlike Greek marble, came in a beautiful color. A magenta-purple called simply, purple. Roman Emperors used it for the interiors, columns of their palaces, so much so that, the stone’s color came to be associated with royalty.
By the inclusion of this item in the Metropolitan Museum — more so, the museum’s description of it as the most significant porphyry piece in the United States, do we know the claims still happening on its symbolism to this day.
Thus might we correctly speculate that the conflict in the Ukraine is of more complicated origin than described by U.S. media, that is, U.S. media which puts all blame on Russia.
America’s most famous museum has found a porphyry piece all the way from histories nearly 2000 years old, from the 2nd century. But is unaware of more recent history, in the 10th century?
The 10th century times of Anna Porphyrogenita — and as “genita” indicates by etymology, having to do with birth. Indeed, Porphyrogenita that translates into “born in the purple.”
Literally, as the Macedonians had built an Imperial Porphyry-lined room in their palace, reserved for royal births. Thus “born in the purple” that indicated an actual room.
From this, did the expression come to overall mean, born of royalty - and to this day purple is associated with royalty. It began with the magnenta-purple of Imperial Porphyry.
Thus if I can describe in a few paragraphs the history behind the name “Anna Porphyrogenita” — do we think American museums do not know the same? The Metropolitan Museum is funded by benefactors whose names we often hear in the press — likely since they own U.S. press, too.
Thus the Solution to the Ukraine, by simple logical analysis, necessitates the pointing out of one of the reasons it is unsolved heretofore.
Unsolved, given how Americans have come to view the conflict to begin with — the American viewpoint, and impression, shaped by U.S. media.
To wit, no one in America ever talked about the Ukraine until it was “invaded” by Russia. Now it is America’s favorite pet cause.
We know it is a fad — the one driven by U.S. media and not a genuine care and concern — given that America otherwise has ignored Kiev since 1986, when Kiev was hit with the worst nuclear disaster in history, Chernobyl.
This topic shall not be addressed here at length except to illuminate American ignorance. To this day, no U.S. media mentions that Chernobyl’s proximity to Kiev. Chernobyl is to Kiev, what Bergen or Essex County NJ, Fairfield County CT, Westchester or Nassau County NY are to NYC.
The supposed American great rallying for the Ukraine, meanwhile, doing nothing to help the massive clean up still required to make Chernobyl livable.
Instead, the cheap and easy rally for the Ukraine, while expending zero real effort to help. Chernobyl, how you understand everything else.
Returning to the 11th century — and what U.S. media will never describe.
And mostly, whom it will never describe: Anna Porphyrogenita.
The failure for to mention her, enabling the avoidance of Vladimir. Specifically how Vladimir the Great became Vladimir the Saint.
So how did Vladimir become a Christian Saint, despite having multiple wives and hundreds of concubines? Meanwhile, William the Conqueror only had one wife, and lived a reported virtuous Christian life.
The answer is thus, not how many wives Vladimir had. The answer is, how many did he have, when he became who became. The King who was a pagan — and became a Saint. The answer is then he had one — the one for whom he gave up, all the others. The one, that was Anna Porphyrogenita.
Thus while many say, it is Vladimir’s conversion to Christianity that made him a saint. Vladimir was baptized in Chersonesos Crimea in the late 10th century.
However was a religious ceremony, not enough. William the Conqueror, and all European kings were baptized too. Baptism alone that does not confer sainthood.
Sainthood that must be proven by actions. For Vladimir, it was the action of giving up a distinct lifestyle, the one baked into his birth culture, the one associated with the power of a male King. The act of giving this up, that made the difference.
Not to mention, then and only then did Anna Porphyrogenita agree to marry him.
Marriage. While this might seem like an unimportant subject over which to become a Saint, it is in fact the most important thing.
Sainthood we associate with martyrdom in war, having visions, spontaneous healings etc. None who looked at the “mundane” matter of marriage — and thus overlooked the very thing Jesus Christ would have said, yes, look here.
The truth of this is understood by reading the Epistles of Paul the Apostle, for which the running theme throughout is the male-female relationship. This is discussed further in TWO SEATS.
Marriage however, the subject avoided at the Council of Nicaea. The table at which Constantine and Helen decreed all of Christianity to be understood through Father, Son, Holy Ghost.
If we think about it, why did the Christian world take what was said by Constantine and Helen at face value?
Why, is the simple answer of power struggle, and the rise and fall of Christian dynasties that makes the Western history from 4th century to now.
How, is actually the more illuminating question.
How, the Christian world failed to question Constantine and Helen. How, the question that reveals the tricky matter of religion itself, which is a matter of faith.
The unquestioning of Father, Son, Holy Ghost that was taken to be an act of faith — rather than the common sense question simply asking — is that really what Jesus meant? What an aspiring Emperor said 300 years after his death?
To state the obvious, Jesus was not present at the Council of Nicaea. However, did everyone implicitly know to nod their heads when Constantine spoke on Jesus’ behalf — otherwise, would they have been uninvited from the table, and perhaps no longer with their heads.
Jesus, whom Constantine knew, sat a table at the Last Supper (seder).
Yet as the last one, we know its importance — but not quite, its secrets.
What they are, centuries of persons have speculated. Later, the secrets that were presumed to be convened around in Round Tables of Kings and Knights in Medieval to Renaissance times.
All that symbolically alluded to a missing female at the table, not present for being embroiled out there somewhere, in the intrigue of war and empire These include fictional and real and fictional women from Queen Guineve to Joan of Arc and more. One in particular, in a moment.
All who were written about, idealized or slandered as a version of Mary Magdalene.
Mary Magdalene, indeed, who was not at the Last Supper.
However she was the last person seen with Jesus, before he was betrayed.
Thus do we know Mary Magdalene was important to Jesus — to the point where he was betrayed, then crucified over it.
Over what exactly?
The secret known by Constantine and Helen — of the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. The secret not “revealed” by way of Renaissance paintings (Da Vinci’s Last Supper) or modern day fictions (the Da Vinci Code).
Instead, the secret understood by Western history, in its rise and fall of empire. The dynasties and empires, though battling each other, commonly suppressed public knowledge of the most threatening male and female role model: the two married to each other.
In Roman times, the male and female who were Jesus and Mary Magdalene.
In the 10th century, it was Vladimir and Anna.
Anna born in the purple room who became Queen of Byzantium and Kiev, died in year 1011 AD. Vladimir the Great who became Saint, died in 1015 AD.
The two around whom the Great Schism occurred. The Great Schism understood to be influenced by the Eastern Orthodox Church’s wish, to allow priests to marry. The West that refused.
Why? Because this would have implicitly recognized Vladimir and Anna. The King who converted into order not just to be Christian, but to be married — to just one.
The conversion + radical change of lifestyle. Thus we contrast with the life of a monk, which on the surface seems as if it would more qualify a man for sainthood.
However again, would we return to the problem of continuity, of not just society, but the human race.
On the flip side, a lifestyle such as Vladimir previously had, of many wives and mistresses. This could lead to many wars, overpopulation, chaos, more wars, and then extinction. Thus defeating the so-called purpose of having so many wives, mistresses (and children).
The balance that is explained in ONE MAN ONE WOMAN.
The balance, and fundamental baseline, set forth in Christianity, by Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Along with the message of forgiveness, Jesus who thus posed an existential threat to the Roman Empire — and to Judaism from which he converted.
Converted to… Christianity? Yes, as Jesus Christ himself. The choice he made for himself — including with his wife, Mary Magdalene.
However still would this have not suffied to pose a threat to the Roman Empire. The Romans who considered truly threatening, only those who had children.
This is understood in the war of the region immediately preceding the birth of Jesus.
The war between and amongst Julius Caesar, Antony, Cleopatra, Augustus. The underlying motive of the wars, whose line would continue.
Ultimately, Cleopatra the “mistress” of Julius Caesar who lost. The one who noted this keenly — including how Cleopatra struggled to keep her children alive, was Helen.
Helen, who was born not a Roman but a Greek — as was Cleopatra. The leader we associate with being Egyptian, was actually Greek.
Thus did Helen worry, of meeting the fate of a Cleopatra, who had in fact been assassinated by the Roman, Augustus.
Thus did she instead become Empress Helen of Constantinople — and not without ensuring that the city her son chose to name his new empire, evoked the most famous city in the region until the Roman Empire.
The city of Troy — and the city where was the legend of another Helen, indeed of Troy. Though legendary, nonetheless still characterized the region (today, the city of Cannakale on the southwest coast of Turkiye).
Later in the 10th century, a rising family of the region called itself the new Macedonian, The new dynasty that knew not only of the famous Alexander the Great of Macedonia.. but of another Macedonian.
The Macedonian whom later centuries would calle Egyptian, when in fact she was Greek — specifically, Macedonian Greek. Indeed, Cleopatra.
And thus, did the new Macedonians line their palace birth room in the new marble. Not the marble of Ancient Greece, but of the imperial Romans. And yet in symbolic allusion to how Rome came to be: by defeating the Macedonian in Egypt — by way of Porphyry stone, only found in Egypt.
Anna Porphyrogenita, thus, who would not marry a mere conqueror, no matter how great his deeds in battle. How would this be any different from times of Caesar, Augustus, Constantine? Did not the rise of fall of empire, prove this not to be the true and lasting formula? For continuity, and for Christianity.
Anna Porphyrogenita married Vladimir the Great. More so, Vladimir the Great married Anna Porphyrogenita of Macedonian Dynasty. Anna, who gave Vladimir reason to become Christian.
However, not for reasons of conquest and dynasty. Instead, because of a mistake made at the table set for the men of Constantine’s new empire. The table led by Constantine and Helen, who spoke on behalf of Jesus and Mary.
Not the Virgin Mary as we thought, but Mary Magdalene. The Mary replaced with Jesus’ mother, to cement a new kind of Rome at Constantinople.
Anna who knew why the new Macedonian dynasty was made — not just because of Alexander, but to correct a wrong done to Cleopatra, killed by Roman leader, Augustus.
The wrong known by Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene. Mostly, the two who knew the true path forward, for the continuity of peoples, and society. And forgiveness to sinners — including the ones who accused people of being sinners, knowing they were not.
The two who thus became a threat to both the Jews, and the Romans — because they who represented continuity, through another. Through a child.
The wrong done to Cleopatra understood, not for reasons of sin, but reasons of child. The Romans who were not threatened otherwise.
Thus Jesus who died — and Mary who fled. Mary and their child, their fates we do not know.
The tragedy and the wandering, unresolved since. The tragedy felt by Anna — and Vladimir who did too.
At that moment began, Kiev.
A place of lost souls, a place of hope, for a new time to begin.
For one man one woman, to find home. And make a new home, with children. A new Christian picture, begun in Kiev.
Kiev founded by not just one person, but two —- and children. The understanding of this, the difference between Vladimir the Great alone, and the Saint he became.
Sainthood, by way of the most natural thing of all — as Jesus Christ would say so himself.
Vladimir who did not say so — but his life that seemed to speak the story anyways.
Redemption, from a long ago time. For another person — the one who died on the cross.
Jesus Christ, punished for a sin not even done by himself. Nor by Mary Magdalene.
Jesus who died on the cross — and Mary forced to flee and survive, with their child. Mary who was abandoned, though by no fault of Jesus Christ.
Jesus who felt responsible, anyways. For things not even his fault — yet he felt them anyways, as a father. And a husband.
Vladimir, faced with multiple contradictions, because of his life. Vladimir, husband and father to many. All whom he took care of to ensure their future — and only then could he feel he could marry Anna.
Anna who would not marry him otherwise.
And together, brought together the complexity — the complexities across many centuries and dynasties.
The two who could have said, this is too much. Instead, joined in marriage.
Kiev, that is not the mere story of persons who made their way through, in travel, trade, settlement, political or royal title.
Kiev instead, that is the story of a hope — and two seats.
The two seats that could never be filled by the familiar path, and by familiar frameworks. Otherwise would they have been filled, a long time ago.
Instead, they are filled by the rare and untold and unknown heretofore. Unknown, has been the story of Vladimir the Great and Saint, the husband to Queen Anna of Byzantine and Macedonia.
The two, unmatched since the original pair torn apart in Jerusalem 1000 years before. them.
Kiev, the history not made by “baptism” alone. Not by conversion alone, either.
Instead, the conversion that always had to be a Redemption — for Jesus Christ himself.
The sin of Jesus Christ, to be made right by another, in the future.
The future time that has always called for Vladimir.
Vladimir the Saint, who set the first stage. The stage, however, severed in 1054 AD.
Vladimir thereafter, overshadowed in the West, first by William the Conqueror. Thereafter, by all the Kings of England.
And thereafter by its settlements in the West, including the one that says it broke free, ie., United States.
Bringing us to today — and how to really break free.
The future time that has always called for Vladimir — including the Vladimir to make set right, the lost history of Vladimir the Great and Saint.
Vladimir who conquered what William did not, as Constantine had not either.
The seat at the table always and only filled by the one who could conquer as Vladimir did — as he did for Anna.
The future time that has always also called for another. The female unknown this whole time.
Two seats at the table, understood through Kiev.
Kiev, a city of hope.
A citadel, unseen since the cities on the hills of the Roman Empire — and not even in Roman times. That is, except the hill that Rome tried to conquer in Jerusalem. However, did the Romans not make their way as far north as Kiev.
Kiev, a city of hope — the place where now is embroiled the United States. Embroiled not by Russia, but by the times of England handed down since William the Conqueror.
William who claimed himself King, by the defeat of those in York. York, the perpetual English symbol of Constantine.
The United States, never free for as long as it remains locked in the same. “Constantine by way of York” - the strategy it adopted understood in its state-naming “New York.”
Yet the “heir to Constantine” comes not by the routes through England — but in recognizing that its not actually about Constantine anymore.
However have we not known that, since that would also make it not really about York and what York really represents: London and the British Empire.
Thus the true symbolism has not so much been “York, the perpetual English symbol of Constantine” but Constantine the symbol of England. Americans who thus not only never questioned Constantine, but pursued the symbol, themselves.
No one who questioned that Jesus Christ had been routed through Constantine.
The routing, that always pointed north, to Kiev.
And from Kiev, to the great expanse north and east across continental Eurasia.
In the intervening time from Vladimir to now, occurred the Mongol conquest last two centuries. Who finally drove them out, was not the peoples that became “the Ukraine.”
They are the peoples that became Russia. Without Russia, Kiev today would be a non-descript province of a continued Mongol empire, or part of the nation to its west, Poland. (See TWO SEATS).
Instead, it is Kiev. A citadel, and city of hope.
Hope, that sets its destiny forward, to know what it is today.
The future that always called for a Vladimir. To solve problems not just those of “geopolitics” but the ones impacting the entire human race.
Issues as fundamental as Male-Female, the matters of St. George and guns, reproduction and the very basic meaning of Child.
A long time ago, the Romans were threatened by one man .. and one woman. And a child that signaled a new time would begin.
Continuity.
The fundamental matter driving the conflict of the Ukraine.
The answer that does not lie in direction, “Constantine-by-York”.
The answer lies in direction north and east, in the country capturing the greatest number of longitudes east by west.
East-West: the direction signaling continuity itself, by way of rotation and revolution.
These are the profound matters that drive the Ukraine.
Anna Porphyrogenita, who if alive today, would say the same. The Great Schism, not just a split of churches, but an actual line.
A longitude that does not run through Constantinople where she was born in the purple room of the Palace of Constantine.
After all, Anna married Vladimir of Kiev — not someone from Normandy or York. Why? Her family that lived in the Palace of Constantine was not unaware of Constantine’s victory in York.
Anna, who if alive today, would say — it is not “York” that holds the clue. However is it about place.
Anna who’d say, look to longitudes. And therefore latitudes too.
Therein the invisible measures of earth, the invisibly woven stories of history — and how they might resurface. But when?
That is, by how many rotations, revolutions, always the question. The question, When?
When all the rotations, revolutions of earth would converge to a single moment.
And by way of two persons, their fates and destinies spun by the ages, starting a long time ago. Their long paths that brought them here, inseparable from the places where they came from.
The common ground and great expanse by East and West. The largest remnant of the great one continent Pangaea, the Eurasian Plate.
Within the plate, the largest nation that came to be Russia. On its far eastern shore, the Korean peninsula and geologic seam where begins the earth’s next plate, the planet’s largest oceanic plate, the Pacific.
Not coincidentally, the two regions that in history, became dynasties — and yet, both that their lost their royal histories at the turn of the century, when rose the American Century.
The American Century, the brief span in time, that must now give way to the grander and larger. The timelines not of one nation, but of the planet, the Universe. The timeline of the human race.
The human race accelerating towards a horizon, one way or the other. Its destruction — or its ability to continue.
Continuity, possible by way of the following delineations.
Anna Porphyrogenita who would say, look to longitudes, and latitudes too.
And rivers, and confluence.
Anna Queen of Macedonians and Byzantium and Kiev, knew the importance of the Dniepr River, the north-south river running from the great north tundra to the Black Sea, also known by the Latin empires as the Euxine Sea.
The Sea where it was known by the ancients, where occurred the Great Flood. The centuries-long deluge creating the channels that broke nature’s dams, to give passage to even more seas beyond.
Including where sat her birthplace home, the Palace of Constantine, on the banks of the Bosphorus Strait, today the Palace replaced with the Blue Mosque.
Beyond through the Sea of Marmara through the Dardanelles Strait. On its banks where was fought the legendary battle between Aeneas and Achilles in Troy. And Helen and Paris, caught in the middle.
Onwards to the Aegean, the ancient lands of Macedonia, where her ancestors came from.
Then southwards past Athens to the ancient channel built by the Romans through the city of Corinth. There where Paul the Apostle had met the married couple, tentmakers Priscilla and Aquila. There, where Paul made a temporary home, as where he told them the story of Jesus but also, Mary his wife.
The Mary who was later wiped clean from the story by Helen of Constantinople - the story enabling her and her son to make the same Palace where Anna was born. The “tent” of the great palace, where subsequent dynasties, figured out differently.
Thus Anna who would say if alive today, look to rivers.
And straits and channels and confluence. There one might find a new “tent”. The place searched for, for a very long time.
Home. A true home, and stage, to set the stage One Man, One Woman.
Thus did Anna look far and wide — to new longitudes where she had never been. Kiev, the city of hope and vision.
Beyond it, lay lands further east. East, where was rumored lived great but also fearsome peoples. East, where travelers said existed a land of gold, riches and treasure. There, where also ran a great river, and converged at a delta.
There in the land of gold and rivers and confluence — there where Anna knew, many would plunder and plot and storm its palaces too. There, where an unknown female might sit at the center of it all. Unknown, yet like herself, at the center of it all.
Anna, who would delineate differently today.
The Ukraine Solution, per its delineations, seeks to answer the following:
#1 — What secures the region in the long run?
#2 — What is practical, and avoids endless war or stalemate?
#3 — What enables the Ukrainian people to choose the culture / language of their preference?
#4 — What best tells the story of Vladimir? In a timeless manner to ensure it will survive the test of time — and thus too would the region.
Answers:
#1 — What secures the region in the long run?
This is a matter of “underwriting” which would come by way of 4th Rome. Why the “underwriting” is the need for an external grounding force, otherwise is the region perpetually subject to claims by competing regional actors.
This is different than superpowers coming in as intervening protectorates, as was done with North and South Korea. Thus does “underwriting” come by way of the region familiar with such a geopolitical dynamic and strategy. There are no pawns created here, to be used for future war games.
Why 4th Rome, for that same reason. 4th Rome being the more critical location, in its security, can impart security to others. Thus while 4th Rome is the core location from which all other locations (realms, empirus, cite etc) are possible, there are a select number of locations where the point is more pointedly made. Thus does 4th Rome sit in the background, to ensure the stability of the Ukraine matter. This shall specifically be so, at the 3rd region, described next.
In a general sense, this can serve to encourage investment and trade from South Korea and trade with North Korea. Thus to encourage someone else other than the typical U.S., China leading the way. Russia assumed, but if on its own, then you inevitably get U.S. involved, in ways Russia does not like.
There is empathy for Kiev from Korea. This is due to shared 13th century history per the Mongol invasions, and times of Crusades. Thus does the “underwriting” also come by way of the bond of history.
#2 — What is practical, and avoids endless war or perpetual stalemate?
A 3-part regional solution allows all actors to get something but not everything. A Western Ukraine, an Eastern Ukraine and a Citadel region of Kiev.
Korea where is 4th Rome, provides a “city on the hill” grounding like no other — hence its designation as 4th Rome. Citadel Kiev, elevated in similar manner, now speaking to grandeur and not mere “post-Soviet history.”
Citadel Kiev, the 3rd region prevents the two-actor dynamics seen in the Korean War, that results in an endless tug-of-war stalemate. Better to learn the 7-decade lesson than experience the futility themselves. Citadel Kiev provides a new option, while still drawing upon culture and both languages. And again, with underwriting from 4th Rome, in both economic possibility, but also, to position and root Kiev in a far greater history and legacy than would be possible on its own.
Kiev and the Ukraine otherwise, will fall into stalemate and obscurity as the U.S., E.U. and NATO inevitably find themselves unable to continue to help. The 3 regions shall be delineated below.
#3 — What enables the Ukrainian people to choose the culture / language of their preference?
Each of the 2 regions leans one way or the other, thus can people choose where they wish to live. If they are in the “wrong” region, incentives and credits shall be provided enabling people to move and minimize the stress of doing so. This is also still preferable to their home region becoming a possible battle zone.
#4 — What best tells the story of Vladimir? That is, in a timeless manner to ensure it will survive the test of time — and thus too the region.
The answer that goes back to #1, which is the underwriting, which includes history.
The story of Vladimir, is the story that not only occurred in the past, but the possibility that writes the future.
As I described before, the 2000-year ago times when the future called for Vladimir. While this sounds like an extraordinary claim, we only need to see the devastating human history of war, to know what happened otherwise.
In sum, the world driven by the quest to try fill the seat of Jesus Christ, especially by the Western half of the Schism. I.e., by way of York (and its “Constantine”), London, any of the European nations, and in the past two centuries, by way of Washington (and America overall).
The Schism that is resolved today, by way of Axis of Mars, Axis of Venus, together the Great Circle Cardo Maximus.
The Schism solution, underwritten at the geologic crux between the two largest tectonic plates, at today’s 38th parallel Han River. And by the person who cares to make that so — the one calls the great longitude, Cardo Maximus.
The heart line that wraps around the world, and sets a balanced stage for protagonists, One Man One Woman.
Vladimir, the male half of that story — and I, who am the female.
Together, to fill two seats at the table.
The table, a long-time coming, to set the stable course of the world.
Citadel Kiev:
Citadel Kiev includes Kiev city area, heading eastwards to Hlukhiv general area / border area with Russia (Empirus Rusya). Approximately 200 miles x 100 miles in size.
Border, beginning at the confluence of the Medvedok and Stanyvesh streams: then heading southwest includes the Medvedok Stream to its confluence with Radcha River. Then heading south includes the Radcha River, through and including Nova Radcha, then as the crow flies on the western and/or southern borders of cities Davidky (the one due south of Nova Radcha), Piskivka, Nizhylovychi, Boyarka, Boryspil, Nova Basan, Icnhnya, Putyvl to Malushyne such as to include those cities. Thus encompasses Chernobyl.
In Citadel Kiev shall be a ceremonial residence (in Fleet & Command) for the persons symbolic of King Vladimir the Great and Saint, and Queen Anna Porphyrogenita of Byzantium and Macedonians and Kiev, situated near where is now the Vladimir statue on the high hill, overlooking the Dnieper River.
Otherwise, the highest royal title in the EMPIRIO geo-economic system, would be held by the current leadership of the Ukraine, with Fleet & Command residence in the Mariinkyi Palace.
Regional and non-regional stakeholders shall have residence in full or part, in royal buildings such as the House of Chimaeras / Gorodetsky House.
Western Ukraine (new name TBD):
Shall be a special region within a larger region, the Central-East Empirus of Western Europe (name TBD). This inclusion is in line with the current wish to be a part of NATO and the EU.
The superior solution is to be regionally linked to the aforementioned Empirus (which itself, is a linking of adjacent nations in geo-economic manner). Thus the economic benefit of inclusion, without the vagueness of “EU”, which if it hasn’t earned that membership yet, will not do so anytime soon. If it does, would risk the resentment of its fellow EU nations which over time will feel it is subsidizing the reconstruction of the Ukraine at the expense of its own people. This is even if such a reconstruction would actually happen, given the otherwise stalemate situation in which it would find itself, if not in permanent state of conflict. Very few nations or investors wish to invest in an unstable situation.
Western Ukraine are the areas west and south of Citadel Kiev, and west of the cities/towns sitting along the Dnieper River from Kiev to Kamianske. From Kamianske southwards and westwards, the border is such that Western Ukraine includes the immediate towns H11 and P55 up until and including Voznesensk.
The border continuing southwest is such that Western Ukraine includes Mostove, Demydove, Markevycheve, Znamianka, Poniativka, Petro-Yevdokiivka, Scherbanka, Kaharlyk, Bilyaivka, Lower Dniester National Park, Nadlymans'ke and cities south from here along T1625 but not past 2.5 miles east of the Dniester River.
At Ovidiopol where T1625 becomes P70, not more than 1.5 miles east of the Dniester River. Where P70 meets T1647, includes the seashore easterly for 2 miles, southeast of T1647.
Additionally would include an ocean zone, west of the Azores. The size of it would add to the Western Ukraine such it would become the approximate size of the Ukraine per Western maps on the day before 2/24/22.
As the current leader of the Ukraine leans more to the West, would a Fleet & Command residence be established in Western Ukraine in the royal fortress located in Kamianets-Podilskyi.
Like all royal and historic buildings, can create interest in history and culture and the beauty of the region. The effect is an increase in tourism and investment to the region.
Regional and non-regional stakeholders shall have residence in full or part, in royal buildings such as the House Palanok Castle, Dubno Castle, Pirhirtsi Castle, Lubart's Castle,and more. Western Ukraine has a high concentration of royal building and fortresses, which are currently untapped in potential.
Eastern Ukraine (new name TBD):No
Shall become part of Empirus Rusya. Includes Odessa, Crimea, and all areas not indicated in Western Ukraine above. Thus generally, the areas along and east of the Dnieper River, to the Russian political border.
Regional and non-regional stakeholders shall have residence in full or part, in royal buildings of the region, as shall be listed at a future event.
An additional region in the Pacific Ocean shall be established, for which regional “natives” can participate. The size of the region shall make the Eastern Ukraine the size of the Ukraine as it appeared on Western maps on the day before 2/24/22.