'The Issue with Czar's Helmet' from the e-series History: Fiction or Science? asks why the armour of russian warlords of XIV-XVI centuries was all covered with arabic inscriptions from Quran they could not possibly read. Or could they? Russian Czars Alexander Nevskiy and Ivan the Terrible wore helmets with Arabic inscriptions.
Were the thousands of helmets, swords, sabres, shields, armours with Arabic inscriptions kept in Armoury of Kremlin the rich spoils of war with Arabs, Turks or presents of their embassadors to Russian Czars?

No, they are neither the spoils of war of victorious Russian Horde troops, nor the presents from from subjugated kigdoms and princes. They all are were made in Russia by Russian craftsmen of XIV-XVII centuries.

According to Anatoly Fomenko et al Russia was a bilingual state with Russian and Turkic as two official languages. Letters considered Arabic nowadays were used for transcribing Russian words.

Russia, Turkey and Persia had been part of the same Great = “Mongolian” Empire until the very end of the XVI century when it desintegrated during the Great Strife.

After reading History: Fiction or Science? you will develop a
more critical attitude to the dominating historical discourse
or even become its antagonist.You will be confronted with natural
disbelief when you share what you’ve learned with others.
Now you are very well armed in face of inevitable scepticism.
This book contains enough solid evidence to silence any
historian by the sheer power of facts and argumentation.
History: Fiction or Science? is the most explosive tractate on
history ever written – however, every theory it contains, no
matter how unorthodox, is backed by solid scientific data.
The dominating historical discourse in its current state was essentially
crafted in the XVI century from a rather contradictory
jumble of sources such as innumerable copies of ancient
Latin and Greek manuscripts whose originals had vanished in
the Dark Ages and the allegedly irrefutable proof offered by late
mediaeval astronomers, resting upon the power of ecclesial
authorities.Nearly all of its components are blatantly untrue!
For some of us, it shall possibly be quite disturbing to see the
magnificent edifice of classical history to turn into an ominous
simulacrum brooding over the snake pit of mediaeval
politics. Twice so, in fact: the first seeing the legendary millenarian
dust on the ancient marble turn into a mere layer of
dirt – one that meticulous unprejudiced research can eventually
remove.The second, and greater, attack of unease comes
with the awareness of just how many areas of human knowledge
still trust the elephants, turtles and whales of the consensual
chronology to support them. Nothing can remedy
that except for an individual chronological revolution happening
in the minds of a large enough number of people.