“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” George Santayana, American philosopher.
Has history been tampered with?
It was, it is and will be if not stopped by Science. To boast, to lie, to pretend is a part of the human homo sapiens sapiens nature. On one hand, the winners justified the claims they laid to the titles, and lands by alleged ancestry and its glorious deeds. On the other hand, the court historians knew only too well how to please their masters.
Did events and eras such as the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, Roman Empire, Dark Ages, and Renaissance, Ancient Egypt, Greece, Persia, India, and China, Buddha, Shiva, Alexander, Confucius and Ghengis Khan occur within a very different chronology from what we’ve been told?
US research of earth-moon mechanics by late NASA astrophysicist Robert Newton leads mathematicians of MSU Dr. Fomenko et al to the elaboration of New Chronology. Thereby the timeline of Civilization based on the Occam’s razor of irrefutably dated events and artifacts shrinks drastically to 1000 years.
The civilization of Homo sapiens sapiens population defined as a hierarchical system consisting of state, army, ideology, religion, exchange, writing, and communication is both drastically shorter and dramatically different than generally presumed and drilled.
The age of the planet Earth is approximately 4.5 billion years. Our homo sapiens sapiens species appeared on our planet barely 120 000 years ago and nearly got wiped out during the Ice Age that lasted 110 000 years ago. Once the Ice Age we started to multiply rapidly in the regions with fluvial agriculture.
The so-called universal classic world history is a pack of intricate lies for most events prior to the 16th century. World history as we learn it today was entirely fabricated in the 16th-18th centuries on the ‘firm’ foundation laid down by Italian ‘scholars’ idem white and black robe clergy, idem ‘humanists’ in 14th-16th centuries.
Petrarca and Dante, Bracciolinni and Machiavelli, Giotto, Bernini, Da Vinci and Michelangelo Corporations not only created immortal masterpieces exceedingly well paid by Roman Popes et al and Medici Princes of Florence, but also mass produced ‘ancient’ manuscripts, frescoes, statues very much in demand by the wealthy customers from England, France, Germany and Russia.
Oxbridge scholars earned their daily bread & butter by cooking very Ancient Greece & Roman Empire history mostly from Italian ingredients. The Glorious Revolution in England has already taken place, the British Empire was in the works, and badly needed glorious predecessors like the Roman Empire.
The French learned crowd made their encyclopedic cuisine of alleged ideal Roman Republic history, followed by Caesar, Augustus, and 12 Emperors, preparing the French minds for the Ideal Republic and French Caesar that turned it into Empire.
The French Kings out of pure spite of all things English (!) made a ‘successful’ live test of Ideal Republic 1776 in British American colonies by helping American freedom fighters to free their lands from paying taxes to the British crown and to found The United States of America.
British Empire paid back by helping French freedom fighters to make the dream of the French scholars come true, to found the French Republic in 1789, etc….Somehow very liberal King Louis XVI lost control, head, and crown.
Corsican Napoleon Bouenaparté, a student of artillery Academy of King Louis XVI found the regal crown the libertarian King lost in the gutter of the Revolution and rapidly became Leftenant, Captain, General Consul and Emperor (!) Napoleon I of the French Republic (!) blessed by the Roman Pope on the short leash.
Of course, neither generations after generations of historians, nor Hollywood scriptwriters can’t be totally in the wrong. After what was learned in school and university, no one will easily believe that the classical history of ancient Rome, Greece, Asia, Egypt, China, Japan, India, etc., is manifestly false.
Mainstream historians and history buffs will indignantly point the accusing finger to the gigantic pyramids in Egypt, to Coliseum in Rome to the Great Wall of China and ancient Chinese inventions, and claim, aren’t they really ancient, thousands of years ancient?
True that Renaissance artists, sculptors, architects, and engineers have not built Pyramids in Egypt or gigantic palaces in Persia, Great Wall in China, but a closer look at ‘evidence’ of the age of what is left of 7 Wonders of the Antiquity raises a suspicion that they were built only 5-8 hundred years ago.
The matter is that there is no valid irrefutable scientific proof that ALL ‘ancient’ artifacts are much older than 1000 years contrary to the self-fulfilling radiocarbon dating obligingly rubber-stamped by radiocarbon labs to the prescriptions of the mainstream historians.
How heartbreaking is that the oldest ORIGINAL written documents that can be irrefutably and unambiguously dated belong only to the 11th century!
All dirty and worn-out originals of “ancient” manuscripts have somewhat conveniently disappeared in the Very Dark Ages, as illiterate but tidy monks kept only brand new copies.
Better yet, most of the very old original documents and chronicles of the 11th-13th century tell very peculiar stories completely out of line with the consensual history.
New Chronology firmly asserts that Homo sapiens invented writing (Chinese hieroglyphics and cuneiform including) only about 1000 years ago. Writing skills were immediately and irreversibly put to the use of ruling powers and science.
Gentlemen, kindly don’t shout and wave about the fragile and dusty Dead Sea scrolls as irrefutable proof of pre-diluvian ancient primary sources. They contain valuable information to extract and analyze in spite of their medieval make.
For heaven’s sake, don’t quote the endless pearls of wisdom of Confucius allegedly from 551 B.C. These pearls are no more than the top line quality product of teamwork of learned Jesuit-infiltrators to China and Lettered Chinese (who played along) of the 16th-18th century.
The case of ‘Ancient’ China is even funnier as there is not a single piece of firm written evidence or artifact that can be independently and irrefutably dated older than the 15th century!
The clean-up of all things written ordered by the Manjou dynasty, which took (with a sword, etc…) over from the Ming dynasty in 1644 A.D. was very thorough. All majestic Chinese inventions like powder, silk, paper are actually of European and Middle Eastern origin.
Don’t throw at us the Sinai Codex Book from the British Museum either. British Museum coughed up £100 000 ( £5 000 000 in today’s pounds) to buy from smart illiterate Russian atheist Bolsheviks in 1932.
Too bad, this precious Codex is also early medieval at best. German Indiana Tischendorff dug it personally from the wastebasket of St Catherine’s monastery in Sinai (fact!), invented a ‘science’ of paleography (fact!), proved with his ‘science’ the biblical age of the Codex (presumption?).
Learned Dr. Tischendorff presented this stamped by his own ‘science’ treasure it to the Csar-Emperor Alexander II of the Russian Empire, reaped the Czar’s ransom of 50 000 gold roubles ($ 10 000 000 today) and was ennobled as Russian Count (sic!).
We learn about ancient history in school. Children love the magical lessons of history – they are sweet fairy tales. Teachers recite breathtaking stories; very soon we know by heart the names and deeds of brave warriors, wise philosophers, fabulous Pharaohs, cunning high priests and greedy scribes.
We find out about the gigantic Pyramids and sinister castles, kings and queens, dukes and barons, brave powerful knights and beautiful ladies, emaciated saints, and low-life traitors.
We are caught up in tales of cruel wars, merciless Roman legions conquering everything in sight, noble knights, crusades, and contests. We are thrilled by perilous sea voyages and discoveries, passions, and adventures. Wow, we love it! As we grow up, our love of history grows even stronger and turns us into history buffs.
We watch megalomaniac breathtaking Hollywood productions in 2D, 3D, read historical fiction, buy glossy and expensive books about mysteries of history, admire archaeological finds and digs, go to museums, travel to Egypt, Rome, Greece, India, and China to see it all with our own eyes.
Oh yes, we understand at last the true meaning of the universal world history, ah, we see the rise and, ouch, the fall of civilizations. Human civilization began so very-very long ago. It was antediluvian maybe? Aliens helped us along?
There is just too much fantasy to be found in history. The ‘ancient history’ of Antiquity and the Middle Ages is an enormous edifice of unspeakable perfection and beauty manufactured in Rennaissance but literally left hanging in the air.
This construct has no proven and reliably dated documentary foundation. The consensual version of World history generally accepted today is based on Kabbalist and Jesuit presumptions.
You might indignantly object that there are innumerable historical documents, manuscripts, ancient papyri, parchments, old and not so old books, buzzing with references to, from, and about the past. There appears to be more than enough historical material to easily reconstruct completely the glorious past!
Oh yes, there are ‘documents’ and ‘stories’ in abundance to generate multitudes of dazzling Hollywood blockbusters, such as “Gladiator”, “Troy”, “Alexander” with the convincing acting of Russell Crow or Brad Pitt.
There are enough sizzling ideas for further barn-burners like “Da Vinci Code”, etc… but it is wrong to presume that the reconstruction of the past is simple. Lucas & Co take an ancient chronicle, translate it into contemporary language, and that’s it. History is reconstructed to the last detail, right?
Alas and alack that is not so!
Ancient history is, first of all, a written subjective history based on the following sources used in a perfect circular manner: documents, manuscripts, printed books, paintings, monuments, and artifacts.
When the textbooks tell us that Genghis Khan in year X A.D. or Alexander the Great in the year Y B.C. has each conquered half of the world, it means only that it is so said in some copies of the written sources, alas their originals have somehow disappeared long ago.
Seemingly simple questions practically never have clear, unambiguous answers. When were these sources written? Where and by whom were they found? For each of these questions, the answers are very complex, require in-depth research and refute the assumptions.
It is further wrongly presumed that there are numerous carefully preserved ancient and medieval chronicles readily available, written by Genghis Khan’s or Alexander the Great contemporaries and eyewitnesses to their fantastic conquests.
Naturally, such precious primary sources are kept in the National Libraries of Mongolia, Greece, France, Germany, Italy etc; or in the Library of Congress, or in the private collection of Microsoft, right?
Zilch comma zilch sources come from contemporaries and eyewitnesses: Mongols were a nomad and illiterate bunch, sweet Alexander lived so long ago that most 100% reliable sources know for sure he was the son of Zeus, right?
Nobody has seen Alexander’s birth certificate, not even a copy, and Zeus doesn’t answer the phone to confirm his fatherhood. Sorry, only fairly recent sources of information are available, having been written hundreds or even thousands of years after the alleged events.
In most cases ‘sources’ have been written only in the XVI-XVIII centuries, or even later. As a rule, these ‘sources’ suffered after their discovery considerable multiple manipulations, falsifications, and distortions by editing to this or other order of this or another power in command of the day.
At the same time, innumerable originals of ancient documents under the pretext of heresy were DESTROYED in Europe. List of forbidden authors established by the Roman Curia contemporary and ancient heretic manuscripts burnt all over Europe.
Council of Trent of 1545-1563 transforms pro-imperial Orthodox Catholic Church into the Roman Catholic Church, starts a bitter confrontation with Protestants that dare to translate Bible into vernacular English, German.
Brand new Roman Church changes in 1582 Julian to Gregorian calendar in Europe. Multi-volume collections of ancient Greek and Roman authors appear even before original masterpieces of the “ancients” are ever found.
Of course, some real events were the source for most written documents, even those that were later falsified and manipulated. However, the same real events could have been described in Chronicles by authors writing in different languages and having contradictory points of view.
There are many cases where such descriptions are plainly unrecognizable as the same event. The names of persons and geographical sites often changed meaning and location during the course of the centuries.
The exact same name could take on an entirely different meaning in different historical epochs. Geographical locations were clearly defined on maps with definite coordinates, only with the advent of printing.
Printing made possible the circulation of identical copies of the same map for purposes in the fields of the military, navigation, education, and governance, etc.
Before the invention of printed maps, each original map was a unique work of art, both beautiful, non-exact and contradictory.
Mainstream from Oxford says: «stop… everybody knows that Julius Caesar lived in the first century B.C. Do you really doubt it?» Yes, we really do. For us, this statement is only a point of view that is dominant today. But it is only one of many possible points of view until the very fact of his life and deeds is proven.
In turn, we will also ask some simple questions: where did you get your information? from a textbook? That’s not good enough. When and Who was the first to say that Julius Caesar lived in the first century B.C.?
What book, document, and/or manuscript can you quote as a primary source? Who is the author of this source? When and by whom this primary source was written down and where discovered, if you please?
We do not accept the «textbook says so» type of answer as proof. As soon as you dig for proof slightly deeper than the school textbook, the adamant grounds for the totally and utterly dominant point of view suddenly evaporate.
The whole world community of professional historians will not be able to come with up irrefutable documentary proof that Julius Caesar ever existed, be it on paper, papyri, parchment, or stone. Idem for all great names of Antiquity.
Cambridge mainstream says: “here is the ancient chronicle that was written in the twelfth century A.D., which says, ‘Julius Caesar lived in the first century B.C.’.”
But what proves that this Chronicle was written in the twelfth century and not in the sixteenth century, that happens to be the age oldest copy the Chronicle they quote? Is your written source scientifically dated?
You know, the bronze (plastic or cardboard) panel made in the twenty-first century with the lettering: “Temple of Jupiter built in I century B.C. by the personal command of the Great Magnificent Caesar the Emperor of Rome” is hanging on the ancient-looking edifice is not irrefutable proof of when, why, or what it was built for, even if the building is located in Rome, Italy, European Community.
Indeed, the dating itself of the chronicle by the twelfth century has to be proven. That is where the buck stops. Actually, nobody is capable of proving the date of the writing of their «old» written sources irrefutably or produce independent datings of any of the ancient artifacts.
Better yet – most of the rare sources that survived to our day and can be reliably dated back to the XI-XIV centuries do not show the polished textbook picture of classical history. They show a picture utterly different from consensual.
Therefore such witnesses and sources are not admissible to the orderly court of history. Period. Learned mainstream historians know better, they say that such sources are primitive and full of errors, wrong names, and locations, chronologically impossible situations, etc …
Historians claim that these sources are unfortunate concoctions of half illiterate monks, completely illiterate hermits, and misguided travelers – therefore they cannot be accepted to the sacred temple of universal classical history.
Dating of primary sources
All existing methods of dating of old and ancient sources and artifacts are both non-exact, circular, subjective, and contradictory. This is, unfortunately, the case for archaeological, dendrochronological, paleographical, and carbon dating. Judge for yourself.
In an Egyptian dig of a pharaoh burial site attributed to the 16th-19th dynasty,(1500 years B.C. – this is allegedly known for a fact!) – an archaeologist finds a pot from allegedly Ancient Greece; let’s call it Article A, attributed to the Mycenae culture.
It is inferred that they are of the same age: (1500 years B.C ). Logical. In another dig in Greece, definitely attributed to the Mycenae culture, another archaeologist finds a “peculiar” button; let’s call it: Article B, next to a similar pot; and it is inferred that they are from the same age (1500 B.C ) as: (Age of Article A = age of Article B). OK so far.
In further digs in Germany, archaeologists find other objects next to similar “peculiar” buttons, so it is also inferred that all these objects: Articles C, D,…N, found in the German dig have the same age: (1500 years B.C). Logical? Seems so.
But the next day the archaeologists in Sweden find exactly the same “peculiar” buttons in a dig of the fairly recent dolmen burial of King Bjorn (born 953 A.D), presumably irrefutably dated by the 10th century AD.
Therefore, the “peculiar” button “proves” that King Bjorn lived 2500 years ago and burial dolmen irrefutably proves that he was buried 1500 years later? Not so logical anymore.
Archaeologists call such a case a “mystery” – and .. sweep it under the carpet. Forget about logic! Archaeological dating, therefore, is by definition completely and inevitably SUBJECTIVE.
Very sorry about c14 radiocarbon dating methods, the poor Nobel Libby must be turning in his grave after arbitrary ‘calibration’ of his method (pity that!).
By ‘calibration’ on a statistically non-significant number of wood samples from Egypt with the arbitrarily suggested alleged age of 3100 B.C. the Arizona University radiocarbon team simply smuggled the consensual chronology into the c14 method of dating, turning it into a sheer fallacy. This ‘calibration’ curve allows arbitrary dating of samples by radiocarbon laboratory.
Dr. Libby honestly earned his Nobel by developing a valid dating method (albeit a very pollution sensitive one), and on top of it, this method became very un-precise after the unknown tonnages of radiocarbon c14 isotope were dumped into the atmosphere in the course of US-USSR-France-UK nuclear tests in the friendly nuclear race of the fifties.
The c14 radiocarbon dating procedure runs as follows: archaeologist sends an artifact to a radiocarbon dating laboratory with his idea of the age of the object to get a ‘scientific’ rubber-stamp. Laboratory gladly complies and makes required radio dating, confirming the date suggested by the archaeologist.
Everybody’s happy: lab makes good money by making an expensive test, the archaeologist by reaping the laurels for his earth-shattering discovery.
The in-built low precision (because of high sensitivity) of this method allows cooking up scientifically looking results desired by the customer-archaeologist. The general public doesn’t realize that it was duped again.
Just try to submit to any c14 lab a sample of organic matter and ask them to date it. The lab will ask your idea of the age of the sample, then it fiddles with the lots of knobs (‘fine-tuning’) and gives you the result as you’ve ‘expected’.
With the c14 dating method being allegedly so mind-bogglingly precise C14 labs decline to make a ‘black box’ test of any kind absolutely.
Nah, they assert that because their method is SO very sensitive they must have maximum information about the sample.
This much-touted method often produces reliable dating of objects of organic origin with exactitude (mistakes that) of up to plus-minus 1500 years, therefore it is too crude for dating of historical events in the 3000 years timeframe!
This method is unusable for dating reliably events in Europe older than 800 years. Samples from North America are reliably datable up to 5000 years but are irrelevant for dating ancient events in Europe, Africa, or Asia.
All methods of dating used today are not independent of the classical Scaliger -Petavius chronology. Moreover, all these “fine” methods were developed and calibrated on the basis of classical chronology. Very Vicious circle!
The dendrochronology in Europe and Minor Asia was ‘ordered’ to expand its scale over 12 500 years, which is another fallacy as the number of ancient samples presented is simply statistically non-significant.
Why is this so?
The ‘sources’ are part of the classical chronology. Most Greek, Roman, medieval chronicles, annals, and memoirs were massively produced in the XVI-XVIII centuries.
In fact, for the last 400 years, the whole class of historians created, researched, perfected, and polished a world of phantom universal history and classical civilization artfully constructed by their predecessors in the course of XVI-XVIII centuries at the command of powers of that time.
Therefore the ancient history taught in school is not the truth in the final instance; it is only the currently dominant and indoctrinated version of history. Until the contrary is proved, it is only one of the possible versions with an inbuilt bug of popery chronology.
The consensual version of chronology is based on a «chronological hypothesis», formulated for the first time by the chronologists and historians Joseph Scaliger (1540-1609, leading Kabbalist of his time) and Dionysus Petavius (1583-1652, high ranking Jesuit of his time).
Their chronology is about as irrefutable as Scaliger’s solution of the quadrature of the circle problem with π=3.16 of which Kabbalist Joseph Scaliger was anecdotic, but the ferocious protagonist. Contemporary mathematicians giggled.
Genuflect and admire the Almagest, which lies as the solid foundation to the entire edifice of contemporary chronology! Almagest is supposed to have been written in the II century AD by Ptolemy, the founding grandfather of astronomy.
The fact is that Almagest according to Robert R. Newton and Dr. A.T. Fomenko et al was written in XVI-XVII cy by astronomers Tycho Brahe and Kepler based on astronomical data of X-XVI cy:
This presumably antediluvian tractate catalogs 1028 observable stars with a fairly high precision of 10′-15′ (arc minutes) of longitude. Now, the rotation of the Earth makes the night sky make a turn of 1 arc degree every four minutes. One arc degree consists of 60 arc minutes, which means that the sky rotation speed equals 15′ (arc minutes) per one minute of time.
Ptolemy’s very precise measurements were simply too precise to have been performed with the existing time measurement instruments existing in the alleged II century A.D. Ptolemy of the II century A.D. had at his disposal a sundial, a clepsydra (water jug with a hole), or a sand hourglass.
None of these contraptions has the precision to a minute. Could he have used his Grandfather’s Swiss chronometer that had a minute hand? This seems improbable considering that minute hands are a novelty introduced to clocks only as recently as 1550 AD.
Another solid pillar of universal history is the Bronze Age, that has supposedly taken place 3-5 thousand years ago. The many numerous armies of alleged Antiquity, i.e. Egypt, Persia, Greece, Rome were all armed with hundreds of thousands of bronze swords, knives, etc…
Scores of thousands of tons of bronze had to be manufactured every year for each valiant army that according to ‘sources’ counted hundreds of thousands of brave warriors. Now, to make bronze you need 90% copper and 10% tin, meaning that you need thousands of tons of copper and tin per year.
Even more, if you count tonnages needed for house utensils for the wives of the warriors. Right? Yes, but the technology for crude industrial tin extraction dates back as late as the 14-th century A.D.
The learned chronologists like Kabbalist Scaliger & Co did not bother to consult a chemist or alchemist. They have been driven by altogether different considerations, neither caring much for tin nor indeed for science itself!
As a result, ‘ancient’ Greek heroes (like Brad Pitt in «Troy») happily hack at each other with bronze swords that need tin metal for their manufacture, but which has not been discovered as yet!
Do explore, google, wiki the points (non-exhaustive) we made and, step by step, you will find on Your own sufficient proof to reach the inevitable conclusion that the classical Scaliger-Petavius chronology built on Kabbalistic numbers is false and therefore, that the history of the ancient and medieval world built on this chronology and universally accepted today, is also false.
After reading these books you will certainly have a fresh and very suspicious outlook on everything said or printed about “ancient” and “enigmatic” Roman, Greek, Egyptian, Persian, and Chinese medieval as well as all other “lost and found” civilizations.
Henry Ford once said: “History is more or less bunk! “.
Mathematician Dr. Anatoly Fomenko proved it.
P.S. Back in USSR back in 1973 one young and talented mathematician, Dr. Fomenko worked in the Russian Lunar landing program developing high precision mathematical models of the Earth-Moon system.
He got his initial impulse to look closer into the ancient history from the book Crime of Claudius Ptolemy by American astrophysicist Robert Newton (sic!).
For his brilliant research in applied mathematics Fomenko was nominated the Full Member of the Academy of USSR, quite a sensation then, as he was only 30 years old and actually the youngest Full Member ever elected to the Academy.
Just a dozen years later he was badly mauled by the Soviet and communist mainstream historians for ANTI SOVIET and ANTIRUSSIAN activity for his application of mathematics to classical world history.
Today the same indignant crowd of Russian (formerly Soviet & staunch communist) turncoat mainstream historians attacks him on his alleged Russian nationalism. DIRT CHEAP.
True, Dr. Fomenko’s is Russian, also true that his theory finds short-lived instant sympathy with the Russian nationalistic crowd, but this sympathy immediately evaporates and turns into hate as soon as the same Russian nationalists discover to their dismay that in Dr. Fomenko’s books ancient Russians are not blue-eyed blonde Slavic-Nordic Arians, but Turks, Tartars, Arabs, and some Slavs.
Better yet, Dr. Fomenko dares to assert that the glorious 1100 years of noble Russia is a pack of lies invented by German historians imported by Czar Peter the Great.
Actually, there wasn’t a single scientifically valid refutation of his theory. The lobby of Russian mainstream historians has hired a couple of Russian scientists from astronomy and physics, who cooked up ‘ scientific’ refutations allowing historians to slap a ‘pseudo-science’ sticker to Dr. Fomenko’s theories.
What the mainstream historians don’t say is that our good Doctor has did not take long to refute the said ‘refutations’ in a very academic fashion.
We have here a true paradigm shift going through its works:
- complacency and/or marginalization,
Looks it will take a while before reaching step 4.
Anecdotic evidence of the ‘ancient’ history made up today:
Following the disintegration of the USSR Evil Empire, the mainstream of ex-soviet turncoat historians has disintegrated into Russian, Ukrainian, Kazakhstan main-mid-min-streams, each one contradicting completely other’s ‘ancient’ history.
Are History and Astronomy incompatible?
History: Fiction or Science? is a most unusual book series, one that undermines the very foundations of History. According to the author and his team of researchers, History as it has been taught in Europe ever since the Renaissance is fundamentally false, verified history beginning around 1250 A.D. the earliest.
Jesus Christ was born in 1152 and crucified in 1185, the First Crusade being an immediate reaction to his Crucifixion. Homer identifies an anonymous poet of the second half of XIII century A.D., and the event led to the creation of the Iliad had been the fall of the Latin Empire of Constantinople in 1261 A.D. The list goes on and on.
Historians generally oppose the author’s views without making much commentary. The author is not a historian, period. He is only a leading differential geometrician (mathematician), successful and respected. A. T. Fomenko is also a corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences; his main argumentation is of a statistical and astronomical nature.
I happen to be a physicist myself and not a historian. However, astronomy and differential geometry are known to me well from the area of general relativity, and I cannot recommend this book enough, since its author approaches History, usually a highly emotional discipline ascribed to the field of humanities, armed with impartial mathematics.
History is a collective memory; yet even our own memory errs at times, and no real memory extends beyond three generations. There are written sources, but each one of those might easily prove a forgery. There are material remnants of archaeological nature, but they may be misinterpreted.
Astronomy is precise by definition, and a history dating that can be calculated from information about eclipses should satisfy any researcher. Yet the XIX century astronomers did not use the lunar tidal friction term in the equations of lunar motion, which would make ancient lunar eclipses appear several hours off the mark and relocate several total eclipses of the sun geographically (assuming tidal friction has remained the same all the time but there is no reason to believe it hasn’t). How could XIX century calculations have conformed to consensual history?
I must say that a methodical recalculation of ancient eclipse datings shall invariably bring surprises; in the unlikely case these datings are correct, we shall prove the existence of erratic changes in the telluric rotation over the last 4,000 years instead. Both possibilities are highly alarming.
Fomenko demonstrates the incompatibility between consensual history and modern astronomy. This incompatibility is a sad fact. (He exposes a number of other contentious issues as well, but those do not fall into my professional scope.) Which is more reliable – history or hard-boiled scientific facts? Science cannot afford subjectivity; most of us would feel the same way about history as well.
Chronological problems are very serious indeed; Fomenko offers a viable solution to most of them, and a radical one at that – a “Copernican revolution” of history, no less. I am not using the term to predict the final and total victory of his version; that is a matter for a multitude of scientific and scholarly discussions to come. But the contradiction between history and astronomy that becomes graver with the day cannot and must not be tolerated, in the best interests of both history and the theory of telluric rotation.
True Egyptian vs Fake Babilon Eclipses
The vocabulary of astronomical symbols found in numerous Zodiacs from Egyptian Temples allows their deciphering. They contain abundant astrological, i.e. astronomical information that is sufficient for the irrefutable and non-circular unique dating. See Contents of Part 2, vol.III
The horoscopes found in Sumerian/Babylonian tablets do not contain sufficient astronomical data; consequently, they have solutions every 30–50 years on the time axis and are therefore useless for purposes of dating.
The vocabulary of Babylonian astronomical symbols once applied to clay tablets don’t allow for the extraction of unique dates of eclipses. Astronomical data therein contained is not sufficient for unique dating.
Either there not enough symbols allowing for astronomical interpretation of the symbols change from one clay tablet to another. The clay tablets contain data about eclipses visible in Babylon that could have taken place every 30-40 years, therefore don’t allow their exact pinpointing on the time axis.
An eclipse can easily be found for each allegedly ancient event mentioned in a clay cylinder or tablet of unknown age. Consequently, the dates of eclipses are attached in a circular manner.
Dr. Stephenson argues: ancient dates of Babilon eclipses coincide with dates of Babilon eclipses described in Ptolemy’s Almagest who was a late medieval phantom cover for Tycho Brahe and Kepler for Inquisition but forgets to mention that Almagest composed in XVI cy describes events of X-XVI centuries. Circulus Vicious.
Why tamper with history?
By the middle of XVI th century the prime political agenda of Europe that already has reached superiority in Sciences and Technologies, but was still inferior militarily, was to free itself from the control of the Empire of Eurasia.
The concerted effort of European aristocracy, black and white Catholic clergy despite the severe fight with Protestants, humanists and scientists in XV – XVII th centuries – the creation and dissemination of ideas of the fictional Ancient world and Dark Ages served this agenda perfectly.
The fictional Ancient World that was created by black and white Catholic clergy, Protestants, humanists and scientists served their particular agendas too by representing events of XI-XVI centuries as ones that happened thousands of years before according to the ancient authorities they invented and the sources they wrote under aliases.
The European aristocracy, i.e. partly fugitives from Byzantine and partly inheritors of the former Eurasian warlords, justified thus their claims of self-rule for their lands, the Roman Curia declared its priority over orthodoxy of the Evil Empire, Protestants, humanists and scientists prepared the Enlightenment under the cover of Antiquity.
The Breakthrough New Chronology books published in USA open new perspectives to check the veracity of History by application of mathematics, statistics, and astronomy in the same manner as they were applied to genetics.
Indeed, the time has come to check chronology scientifically as it is the true foundation of history. Moreover, world history must not serve Judeo-Christian, Eurocentric or any other agenda, it must become the rocket science reporting irrefutably the past of home sapience species.
Jesuits breed Atheism
According to the consensual chronology of world history manufactured by the Jesuits in the XVI-XVII centuries, a number of philosophers concluded by XVIII century that Jesus Christ is only a myth, constructed from elements of earlier ancient beliefs, Sun worship, and human sacrifices.
Armed with the arbitrary chronology of kabbalist J.J.Scaliger and Jesuit D.Petavius, encyclopedists led by Monsieur Voltaire prove that most dogmas and postulates of Christianity were known long before Jesus Christ. Consequently, Christianity consists of elements preceding ancient religions.
According to the superstar of Enlightenment Monsieur Voltaire, the very idea of the eternal soul appears initially in India 3000 years before Jesus, and the idea of Hell comes to Christianity from extremely ancient Persia. Archangel Gabriel’s visit to The Virgin Mary is copied on Mercury’s visit to nymph Alcmene on the order of Jupiter. Gospels are fairy tales, etc.
The kabbalistic chronology of the Scaliger and Jesuit Petavius has led thinkers of the past astray. Many a scientist followed in the steps of Voltaire and has discovered numerous parallels between Jesus Christ and ‘ancient’ figures – Buddha, Krishna, Mithras, Osiris, and Horus, etc. As a result of such ‘discoveries’, the authority of Christianity was put in doubt, and atheism started to spread.
Atheism has easily found supporters in the scientific community for the simple reason that Scaliger’s chronology is presumed to be correct and irrefutable. The Church hierarchy of that time makes a grave mistake by not pairing the attacks of atheists with scientific arguments and revision of the erroneous Scaliger Chronology.
Atheists argue that if the consensual chronology is correct, then the atheist anti-Christian criticism based on it also is true. If most of the “facts about Jesus” existed before Jesus, then these ‘facts’ are copies of more ancient events. Therefore, Jesus Christ is fiction, and Christianity is questioned.
The number of people disappointed in Christianity started to grow first amongst scientific communities. The skepticism spreads with literacy from scientists to the general public. It is impossible to refute the atheists because of the ‘irrefutable’ ancient dates of consensual chronology. The authority of Christianity is undermined.
The fundamental error committed by Church hierarchs of the XVIII century was the unwillingness and fear to check and refute erroneous dates attributed to Christianity. They have ignored the appeal of Jesuit Jean Hardouin, chief librarian of Louis XIV and Curator of Louvre, and Isaac Newton to identify and correct the mistakes of Scaliger-Petavius chronology.
The Roman Curia confined itself to the vague “inviolability of faith”. It failed to restore the correct dates and to prove that Jesus Christ is not a “literary compilation”. All numerous allegedly “ancient” prototypes of Jesus are eventually phantom reflections (on paper) of the emperor Andronicus alias Jesus Christ alias Saint Andrew from the XIIth century.
Such reflections of Jesus Christ are very ‘ancient’ figures, labeled by the atheists as “the prototypes of Jesus”. The contrary is true because historical Jesus preceded ‘ancient deities’, therefore the importance of Jesus Christ-Andronicus-Saint Andrew increases dramatically.
According to New Chronology all ancient deities which have appeared after Christianity: Mithra, Horus, Buddha, Shiva, etc.. are reflections of Jesus Christ. They have appeared as a result of subsequent splits, mutations into competing faiths: Orthodoxy, Catholicism; but also Western, Eastern, and Oriental Christianity, Mithraism, Judaism, Buddism, and Islam.
The charges against New Chronology being harmful to Christianity are unfounded. On the contrary, New Chronology makes many atheistic arguments null & void. The New Chronology protects Christianity from the atheistic attacks by placing events of civilization on their more probable place on the time axis.
Also by Anatoly T. Fomenko
(List is non-exhaustive)
- Differential Geometry and Topology
- Plenum Publishing Corporation. 1987. USA, Consultants Bureau, New York and London.
- Variational Principles in Topology. Multidimensional Minimal Surface Theory
- Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, 1990.
- Topological variational problems. – Gordon and Breach, 1991.
- Integrability and Nonintegrability in Geometry and Mechanics
- Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, 1988.
- The Plateau Problem. vols.1, 2
- Gordon and Breach, 1990. (Studies in the Development of Modern Mathematics.)
- Symplectic Geometry.Methods and Applications.
- Gordon and Breach, 1988. Second edition 1995.
- Minimal surfaces and Plateau problem. Together with Dao Chong Thi
- USA, American Mathematical Society, 1991.
- Integrable Systems on Lie Algebras and Symmetric Spaces. Together with V. V. Trofimov. Gordon and Breach, 1987.
- Geometry of Minimal Surfaces in Three-Dimensional Space. Together with A. A.Tuzhilin
- USA, American Mathematical Society. In: Translation of Mathematical Monographs. vol.93, 1991.
- Topological Classification of Integrable Systems. Advances in Soviet Mathematics, vol. 6
- USA, American Mathematical Society, 1991.
- Tensor and Vector Analysis: Geometry, Mechanics and Physics. – Taylor and Francis, 1988.
- Algorithmic and Computer Methods for Three-Manifolds. Together with S.V.Matveev
- Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, 1997.
- Topological Modeling for Visualization. Together with T. L. Kunii. – Springer-Verlag, 1997.
- Modern Geometry. Methods and Applications. Together with B. A. Dubrovin, S. P. Novikov
- Springer-Verlag, GTM 93, Part 1, 1984; GTM 104, Part 2, 1985. Part 3, 1990, GTM 124.
- The basic elements of differential geometry and topology. Together with S. P. Novikov
- Kluwer Acad. Publishers, The Netherlands, 1990.
- Integrable Hamiltonian Systems: Geometry, Topology, Classification. Together with A. V. Bolsinov
- Taylor and Francis, 2003.
- Empirical-Statistical Analysis of Narrative Material and its Applications to Historical Dating.
- Vol.1: The Development of the Statistical Tools. Vol.2: The Analysis of Ancient and Medieval
- Records. – Kluwer Academic Publishers. The Netherlands, 1994.
- Geometrical and Statistical Methods of Analysis of Star Configurations. Dating Ptolemy’s
- Almagest. Together with V. V Kalashnikov., G. V. Nosovsky. – CRC-Press, USA, 1993.
- New Methods of Statistical Analysis of Historical Texts. Applications to Chronology. Antiquity in the Middle Ages. Greek and Bible History. Vols.1, 2, 3. – The Edwin Mellen Press. USA. Lewiston.
- Queenston. Lampeter, 1999.
- Mathematical Impressions. – American Mathematical Society, USA, 1990.