Not the First
For centuries the chronology has been in question. Some of the People who have question it are:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
De Arcilla - 16th Isaac Newton - 1643-1727 Jean Hardoiun - 1646-1729 Peter Nikiforovich Krekshin - 1648-1763 Robert Baldauf - 19-20th Edwin Johnson - 1842-1901 Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov - 1854-1946 Wilhelp Kammeryer - 19th-1959 Immanuel Velikovsky - 1895-1979
Edwin Johnson (1842-1901) said: "We are a lot closer in time to the Greeks and Romans than what the chronological table tells us"
The chronology we use today, herein referred to as Scaligerian chronology, was created in the 16th and 17th century by Josephus Iustus Scaliger (1540-1609) and Dionysius Petavius.
Scaliger and Dionysius
Scaliger's principal works on chronology were: Opus Novum de Emendatione Temporum (1583) and Thesaurum Temporum (1606). Dionysius Petavius's best known books are De Doctrina Tempotum (1627) and Rationarium Temporum (1652).
E. Bickerman writes that "Scaliger... had attempted to reconstruct the entire tractate of Eusebius, the datings of which, that often got transcribed erroneously in manuscripts, are hardly of any use to us nowadays".
Another instance of Scaliger's keen senses were at play was when he published a book where he claims to have proved the "true quadrature". He was, of course, wrong in his proof that the area was equal to a 196 angle polygon circumscribing the circle. The best mathematicians of the day could not convince him he was wrong. Scaliger and his supporters ended up calling any geometrician that didn't believe it ignoramuses.
Less damning, but very interesting is that Dionisius Petavius was a Jesuit and author of several theological writings. He was inclined to make the Scaligerian history fit his beliefs.
These two "scholars", Scaliger and Petavius, are the bedrock everything is based on, but their sources are unverifiable in many instances. Quite often the originals that they supposedly worked with are no longer available, lost to time or "incompetence".
Beginnings of the Modern Work
Nikolai Aleksandrovich Morozov (1854-1946) took up the work of the aforementioned questioners of Scaligerian chronology in the early 1900s. Morozov struggled to get his work published and when it finally was, like the works of others before him, it was ridiculed. While he was not the first to make such claims to the veracity of ancient chronology, he took it farther and deeper than those before him. This was still not far enough. He suggested that everything up to 6th century was in need of revision, but the later chronology was basically correct. With A.T. Fomenko's work, we now see that everything up to the 16th, or so, century is in need of revision.
In the 1970's, Robert Newton calculated the lunar motion model, but it revealed a huge discontinuity when using the Scaligerian dates. To account for this he tried to invent new gravitational models (that were never observed) instead of questioning the veracity of the Scaligerian chronology. A few years later A.T. Fomenko rectifies the calculation to the predicted linear trajectory when he plugged N.A. Morozov's revised dates into the model.
A.T. Fomenko then took up the mantle of Morozov. Fomenko uses astronomical dating methods such as the lunar and solar eclipses as well as star/planet alignments that have been preserved in many works via the description of horoscopes. While we today might scoff at such a thing, horoscopes and using the alignment of the heavens was integral in tracking time long before any chronometers had been invented. Even after time keeping devices were invented they remained rarely available. In addition to astronomical methods, Fomenko uses what he calls empirico-statistical methods to look for similarities in events across time. Simple examples would be the length of a ruler's reign or major events such as plague, famine, or war.
The results of this work yielded the theory that there are four copies of history that seem to be layered on one another in such a way as to stitch a longer chronology than would be expected. These stitchings seem to occur about 333, 1053, and 1800 years ago in Scaligerian terms.
Fomenko's work was railroaded and given the runaround for a decade (1980-90) before being published. In the magazine "Communist" July 1977, 10th issue, pages 106-114 A. Manfred issues severe criticism of an unnamed, but clearly implied Fomenko: "If these 'young' scientists are given any degree of liberty at all, they will drown the book market in summaries of numeric data. The 'new' tendencies need to be overcome as a result of scrupulous critical analysis, since they are holding back the progress of global historical science..."
When You Don't Know When
A few examples of the large discrepancies seen in dating are given below. Sometimes these differences span only a few years, other times thousands!
These are only the famous examples of dating Genesis. There are about 200 variations of the "Genesis date". This sampling fluctuates over 2100 years.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
5969 - Antiochian 5508 - Byzantine 5493 - Alexandrian the Annian era 4004 - Usher 5872 - "seventy interpreters" 4700 - Samarian 3761 - Judiac 3491 - Hieronymus 5199 - Eusebius of Caesarea 5500 - Hippolytus and Sextus Julius Africanus 5515 - Theophilus 5507 - Theophilus 5551 - Augustine
Similar discrepancies appear in the dating reign of Menes, the first Egyptian Pharaoh. There is a 2079 years difference at the extreme in the German view and a 3600 year difference in the French view.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
GERMANS Boeckh 5720 BC Unger 5613 Lauth 4157 Lepsius 3892 Bunsen 3623 FRENCH Champollion 5867 BC Lesueur 5770 Mariette 5004 Chabas 4000 Meyer 3180 Andrzejewski 2850 Wilkinson 2320 Palmer 2224
On page 65 we see a stunning revelation: "In the 19th century two prominent historians, Hochart and Ross, had published the results of their research proving that the famous "ancient" Roman 'History' by Cornelius Tacitus was really written by the well-known Italian humanist Poggio Bracciolini. The publications occurred in the years 1882-1885 and 1878;" Fomenko believes it was a reconstruction of an original, not a total forgery.
Another preposterous disclosure,regarding Cicero's works, is that in about 1420 a Milanese professor named Gasparino Barzizza took it on his behalf to "filling in the gaps in the incomplete collection with his own writings for the sake of consequentiality." Before he could finish this work though, a manuscript with the complete text of all the rhetorical works of Cicero was discovered. With this newfound copy Barzizza and his students translated the works to produce a complete collection. No one else was interested in the originals so they were sent back to Lodi, where they were found and disappeared in 1428.
Quoting N.A. Morozov in regard to 'De Architectura' by Vitruvius, which was discovered as late as 1497, "the astronomical part of the book quotes the periods of heliocentric planetary circulations with the utmost precision! Vitruvius, an architect, who is supposed to have lived in the 1st and 2nd century AD, knew these periods better than Copernicus the astronomer! Furthermore, his error in what concerns the circulation of Saturn differs from the modern value of the period by a ratio of 0.00007. The error ratio for Mars is 0.006, and a mere 0.003 for Jupiter..." Vitruvius's work can be seen paralleled in 15th century Alberti's - an architect that had written 'The Ten Books on Architecture' that is an analog of Vitrucius's work. Sometimes the works coincide word for word.
As a last example of historical insanity we can see that the works of Euclid, Diophantus, and Archimedes work all can be traced back no farther than the 1400s. The 'lost' manuscript of Archimedes was found in 1907! The first manuscripts of Archimedes are said to have reached Europe in 1204. The first complete text in 1884! The first printed edition in 1053 and "the works of Archimedes entered scientific circulation after 1544."
Also interesting is the fact that Churches portray Biblical epoch characters along Mediaeval ones. This is chalked up to them being confused. Maybe we are confused via Scaligerian chronology and the people of that era were reflecting reality in their works. Even still, it is true that the Bible had driven many early archaeological undertakings. "The following example is a rather representative one. In the early 20th century a tablet archive was found in the city of Umma, in Mesopotamia. But since Umma isn't mentioned in the Bible, and no enthusiastic entrepreneur could identify it with some Biblical town, the excavations in Umma were stopped, and the archives scattered without even being studied. The tablets were sold to Paris collectors for one franc per piece. "
Beyond the fact that many 'ancient' manuscripts can only be traced back to mediaeval origins, and some of these works have been edited in modern times, we see interesting parallels between historical characters. For example Plato, Plotin (205-270AD) and Gemisto Pleton (15th century) are all Platonists. Pleton founds Pleton's Academy and writes on Utopia, Laws, and communal aristocracy. The same path as the "original" Plato. Dionysius (-265AD), Dionysius Exiguus (D. the little)(6th century), and D. Petavius (17th) all seem to be clones as well. The first two both followed a Victor, both calculated the birth of Christ/Easter. Also, all three Dionysiuses were chronologists. The first died in 265AD, the second D. Exiguus lived in 6th century AD, third D. Petavius (1583-1652).
Chemistry and Trees
Other oddities are more tangible. In Scaligerian chronology the Bronze Age occurred before the discovery of tin. This has confounded chemists for years.
Without going into detail it is shown that carbon dating is questionable at best, and likely wholly unreliable on things less than several millennium old. A book, "C-14 Crash" by Hasn-Ulrich Niemitz and Christian Bloss is given a citation. I have not read that work, but have been aware of some dispute concerning the accuracy of carbon dating for some years.
According to Humphrey Davy, "the Pompeian painters and the Italian painters of the Renaissance epoch used identical paints" [389, pg 70].
Dendrochonology (measuring time via the rings of trees) is also suspect since trees grow at different rates in different regions and in different climates. There is also no way to set a verifiable scale since we can't measure trees that are known thousands of years old (the best place we find ancient dead trees in Arizona, but that is no help dating European history).
Before moving into the astrological dating, Fomenko sums up the first part of the work with: "Our idea is as follows: the chronologies of the Scaliger-Petavius school first created the erroneous chronology of ancient and mediaeval history, having arbitrarily extended the real history of the 9-17th centuries AD into the past. After that, in the 16-17th centuries a great body of work was started in order to make this scheme "look scientific" as a result of astronomical calculations. If we're to call a spade a spade, it really was a deliberate falsification of history. Fomenko minces no words: "Simply speaking, 'ancient' Rome and medieval Rome are probably the 'same thing.'"
When Fomenko looks into the Book of Revelation he notices the passage: "the first living creature was like a lion, the second was like an ox, the third had a face like a man, the fourth was like a flying eagle" (Revelation 4:7) These creatures seem to be Leo, Taurus, Sagittarius, and Pegasus. By using these constellations to date the book Fomenko calculates the time of writing to be October 1486. This year falls in the epoch of the Ottoman/Ataman conquest. Considering mediaeval Christians would have expected Judgement Day 7000 years after Adam, 1492 A,D., the year 1486 outlining the end of times makes prefect sense.
When considering looking at the similarities of dynasties and periods of history on can assume that periods with "poor" availability of data should correlate between authors because they have such sparse information to go on the authors would copy what little data was available meticulously. On the other hand, periods with "rich" availability may not correlate because the authors can be more selective in their choice of covered topics. Based on this assumption, the amplitude of "poor" availability regions should also correlate since both authors will carefully copy all of the limited data from the given region. The amplitude is calculated by Fomenko and represents essentially how much information is available in a given time period.
Fomenko postulates that "the 'Scaligerian textbook' on ancient and mediaeval history is the result of joining four virtually identical shorter chronicles, shifted by approximately 333, 1059, and 1800 years versus their mediaeval original.", and that this shift "was probably the result of the activity of a well-known mediaeval chronologist Dionysius Petavius (1583-1652). He is 'reflected in the past', in particular, as Dionysius the Little, in the alleged 6th century A.D. It is interesting that our empirico-statistical methods had not revealed any statistical duplicates for the events which occurred after Dionysius Pentavius."
An examination of what we today call Roman numerals reveals a potential for misinterpretation. What we see today as numbers may have actually been abbreviations. For example: X could be an abbreviated from of XPICTOC (Christ in Greek). X.III would have then meant 'the 3rd century of/after Christ' and not 'the 13th century' as we read it today. Additionally "the Latin letter 'I' -- the first one in Iesus, the Greek spelling of the nae Jesus -- originally could be an abbreviated version thereof." This would mean that I.300/I300 would mean year 300 since Jesus. It is shown that, in many original documents, the first "large number" is separated by dots in just this manner.
Some speculation regarding D,M,C.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
D = Domini = Lord, Divine = Dom = House, Dynasty M = Magnus, great C = Caesar, kaiser, king A.D. = Anno Domini = Years after the Lord A.D.M. = Year of the Ruling House, Great Lord M.D. = Great House M.C. = Great King C.M. = King Great
Bacchic Monks and Nuns
One of the most interesting aspects of this book was the connection between the Christian Bacchic celebrations, that may have occurred in the middle ages, to the ancient Dionysian festivals and mystery school rites of "ancient" times. Numerous literary and architectural evidence is given to support that Christianity, at least at one point, was rife with promiscuity amongst even the monks and nuns.
Rebuilding Athens in the Dark
F. Gregorovius talks about the "impenetrable darkness" surrounding Athens in the Middle Ages and that the city was so totally grown over by weeds and trees and burnt by barbarians that "hardly anything can serve as a more surprising proof of the city's complete disappearance from the historical horizon than the very fact that one has to 'prove the actual existence' of what used to be one of the greatest cities in a country that is historical for the most part."
"The Christian religion had made the holiest place of the ancient goddess on the Acropolis [Parthenon] serve its ends almost without causing any hard to it... the entire history of transformation of ancient beliefs and holy places into Christian ones knows no other example of such easy and complete transformation as Athena Pallas had to undergo in order to become the Christian Blessed Virgin Mary... the Athenian populace didn't even have to change the nicknames for its divine virgin protectrix, since the Blessed Virgin Mary retained the ancient name Parthenos."
Was Athena the Virgin Mary?
There are many examples of Ottoman buildings around the Parthenon. These building, that can be seen in a few photographs today were destroyed and carted off. They seem to be built of the same stones and masonry.
The Greek engineer Nikolaos Balanos "restored" the Parthenon in the late 19th to the 20th century. His assistant, Anastasios Orlandos broke off relations with him in 1922 when Balanos was supposedly building, not reconstructing, what he saw fit. Balanos would cut stones to make them fit his master plan and paid no attention to where they lay.
Books of interest:
- C-14 Crash Hasn-Ulrich Niemitz and Christian Bloss