Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: What is the earliest online source promoting the Tartaria conspiracy and when did it appear?
Executive Summary
The earliest item in the supplied dataset that explicitly promotes the modern Tartaria conspiracy as a suppressed global empire appears in an online commercial listing for Anatoly Fomenko’s book “The Issue with Russian Tartary,” dated September 18, 2017, which markets claims about a fabricated “Great Tartary” and frames those claims for an online audience [1]. Earlier documents in the dataset—historic map surveys and standard archaeological scholarship—use the term “Tartary” in its conventional historical sense and do not advance the conspiracy narrative; a 2016 academic PDF on the Tărtăria tablets treats the artifacts within mainstream archaeology and does not promote a hidden empire [2] [3]. Fact‑checking pieces in 2024 likewise debunk claims that archival references or declassified files vindicate a Tartarian Empire, noting that “Tartary” historically meant a vague region in Asia rather than a single erased civilization [4].
1. The earliest explicit online promotion: a book listing that packaged the myth for readers
The Amazon product page for “The Issue with Russian Tartary (History: Fiction or Science?)” dated September 18, 2017, is the clear early instance in the dataset where the Tartaria narrative is presented directly to an online consumer audience, with marketing language that frames a “Great Tartary” as evidence of hidden history and suppressed knowledge [1]. This listing repackages revisionist claims in a commercial format, converting fringe historiography into an easily discoverable online product, and thus functions as an active promoter rather than a neutral historical reference. The presence of this listing in 2017 predates the other explicitly conspiratorial items in the set and signals a shift from academic uses of “Tartary” to an online marketplace for alternative history narratives that can be amplified via later social media and self‑publishing.
2. What earlier scholarly and cartographic records actually show—and why they don’t equal a conspiracy
Historic scholarship and map analysis show that “Tartary” was a cartographic catch‑all used by Western mapmakers from the medieval period through the 19th century to denote large, poorly known parts of Eurasia, and its referent shifted over time [2]. The 2016 academic PDF on the Tărtăria tablets falls squarely within mainstream archaeology, treating artifacts through standard scholarly methods and making no claims about a global empire, mud‑floods, or suppressed technologies [3]. Those documents represent the conventional historical record and illustrate the semantic lineage of the term “Tartary,” which conspiracy proponents appropriate; they do not provide causal support for the modern conspiracy narrative that alleges deliberate erasure of a high civilization.
3. Fact‑checks and debunking: recent confirmations that archival snippets do not prove a lost empire
Recent fact‑checking work in 2024 examined claims that declassified intelligence documents vindicate the Tartaria story and concluded they do not; a 1957 CIA file cited by proponents refers to “Tartar history” in context and does not demonstrate the existence of a suppressed Tartarian Empire, according to detailed analysis [4]. This debunking ties into a broader pattern: archival mentions of “Tartar” or “Tartary” reflect historic ethnonyms and geographic notions rather than evidence of systematic historical erasure. The existence of such fact‑checks in 2024 demonstrates that researchers and journalists have been tracing the modern myth’s claims back to source documents and consistently finding the documentary trail lacking.
4. Later explicit promoters and the rise of the modern myth in self‑published works
Within the dataset, an e‑book titled “The Lost Empire of Tartaria: Myths, Mudfloods, and Hidden History,” dated August 31, 2025, explicitly stitches together mud‑flood theories, architectural anomalies, and narratives of suppression into the contemporary Tartaria conspiracy framework [5]. That work is a later example of self‑publishing buoyed by internet distribution, showing how the myth evolved from sporadic online references into full‑blown, commercially available narratives. The sequence in the dataset—academic materials and map histories first, an early commercial listing in 2017, followed by more overt conspiratorial e‑books by 2025—illustrates the pathway by which fringe interpretations became packaged and amplified for online audiences.
5. The big picture: how legitimate terms were repurposed and why chronology matters
The dataset demonstrates a clear distinction between legitimate historical usage of “Tartary” in maps and scholarship and the later online repurposing that manufactures a lost global empire narrative. The earliest items here that could be called promotional date to 2017 for mainstream commercial promotion and reach more conspiratorial articulation by 2025 [1] [5]. Fact‑checks from 2024 and scholarly PDFs from 2016 show the academic baseline against which the conspiracy diverges [4] [3]. Recognizing this chronology matters because it reveals the modern myth’s construction from reinterpreted historical terms and commercial self‑publishing rather than discovery in older primary sources.