The New Chronology van Fomenko

links
Wikipedia - New Chronology (Fomenko)
Allthatisinteresting - Anatoly Fomenko's new Chronology

Een beetje een universum van een onderwerp hier en 'where to begin'..

wipkipedia dan maar:

Fomenko's Claims
Central to Fomenko's New Chronology is his claim of the existence of a vast Slav-Turk empire, which he called the "Russian Horde", which he says played the dominant role in Eurasian history before the 17th century. The various peoples identified in ancient and medieval history, from the Scythians, Huns, Goths and Bulgars, through the Polyane, Duleby, Drevliane, Pechenegs, to in more recent times, the Cossacks, Ukrainians, and Belarusians, are nothing but elements of the single Russian Horde. For the New Chronologists, peoples such as the Ukrainians, Belarusians, Mongols, and others who assert their national independence from Russia, are suffering from a historical delusion.[18]

Fomenko claims that the most probable prototype of the historical Jesus was Andronikos I Komnenos (allegedly AD 1152 to 1185), the emperor of Byzantium, known for his failed reforms, his traits and deeds reflected in 'biographies' of many real and imaginary persons.[19] The historical Jesus is a composite figure and reflection of the Old-Testament prophet Elisha (850–800 BC?), Pope Gregory VII (1020?–1085), Saint Basil of Caesarea (330–379), and even Li Yuanhao (also known as Emperor Jingzong or "Son of Heaven" – emperor of Western Xia, who reigned in 1032–1048), Euclides, Bacchus and Dionysius. Fomenko explains the seemingly vast differences in the biographies of these figures as resulting from difference in languages, points of view and time-frame of the authors of said accounts and biographies. He claims that the historical Jesus may have been born in 1152 and was crucified around AD 1185 on the Joshua's Hill, overlooking the Bosphorus.[20]

Fomenko also merges the cities and histories of Jerusalem, Rome and Troy into "New Rome" = Gospel Jerusalem (in the 12th and 13th centuries) = Troy = Yoros Castle.[21] To the south of Yoros Castle is Joshua's Hill which Fomenko alleges is the hill Calvary depicted in the Bible.

Fomenko claims the Hagia Sophia is actually the biblical Temple of Solomon. He identifies Solomon as sultan Suleiman the Magnificent (1494–1566).

On the other hand, according to Fomenko the word "Rome" is a placeholder and can signify any one of several different cities and kingdoms. He claims the "First Rome" or "Ancient Rome" or "Mizraim" is an ancient Egyptian kingdom in the delta of the Nile with its capital in Alexandria. The second and most famous "New Rome" is Constantinople. The third "Rome" is constituted by three different cities: Constantinople (again), Rome in Italy, and Moscow. According to his claims, Rome in Italy was founded around AD 1380 by Aeneas and Moscow as the third Rome was the capital of the great "Russian Horde".[22]

Specific Claims
In volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4 of History: Fiction or Science?, Fomenko and his colleagues make numerous claims:

Historians and translators often "assign" different dates and locations to different accounts of the same historical events, creating multiple "phantom copies" of these events. These "phantom copies" are often misdated by centuries or even millennia and end up incorporated into conventional chronology.
This chronology was largely manufactured by Joseph Justus Scaliger in Opus Novum de emendatione temporum (1583) and Thesaurum temporum (1606), and represents a vast array of dates produced without any justification whatsoever, containing the repeating sequences of dates with shifts equal to multiples of the major cabbalistic numbers 333 and 360. The Jesuit Dionysius Petavius completed this chronology in De Doctrina Temporum, 1627 (v.1) and 1632 (v.2).

One might wonder why we should want to revise the chronology of ancient history today and base our revision on new empirical-statistical methods. It would be worthwhile to remind the reader that in the XVI–XVII century chronology was considered to be a subdivision of mathematics.[23]

37 complete Egyptian horoscopes found in Denderah, Esna, and other temples have unique valid astronomical solutions with dates ranging from AD 1000 and up to as late as AD 1700.

The vocabulary of Egyptian astronomical symbols once applied to horoscopes from temples allows for extraction of unique dates of eclipses. Astronomical data therein contained is sufficient for unique dating. There are symbols allowing for astronomical interpretation and the symbols do not change from one temple horoscope to another. The horoscopes from temples contain data about eclipses visible in Egypt allowing their exact pinpointing on the time axis.[24]

The Book of Revelation, as we know it, contains a horoscope, dated to 25 September – 10 October 1486, compiled by cabbalist Johannes Reuchlin.

As we have already noted, the inability of the latter day commentators to comprehend the astronomical symbolism of the Apocalypse is directly resulting from the loss of knowledge about the correct chronology and the distortions introduced by historians of the XVI–XVIII century. Another possibility is that there was an unspoken general taboo on what concerned a subject quite as dangerous, which resulted in the misdating of the Apocalypse. One way or another, the understanding of the astronomical descriptions that the Apocalypse contains got lost at some point. The Apocalypse had lost its distinctive astronomical hue in the eyes of the readers. However, its "astronomical component" is not simply exceptionally important – it alone suffices for the dating of the book itself.[25]

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 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 or 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 there exact pinpointing on the time axis.[24]

The Chinese tables of eclipses are useless for dating, as they contain too many eclipses that did not take place astronomically. Chinese tables of comets, even if true, cannot be used for dating.

Chinese eclipse observations can neither confirm nor refute any chronology of China at all, be it veracious or erroneous.[26]

Een van de aanhangers is Gary Kasparov


Ik vind het wel interessant, ik zou niet in het gedeelte 'alles is vals' willen zitten als het om rapportage van gebeurtenissen gaat door de geschiedenis heen maar hij gooit een aantal interessante balletjes op.

quote:

Op woensdag 2 januari 2019 16:32 schreef illusions het volgende:
Zeker interessant, en zegt hij ook waarom die gebeurtenissen niet zo waren maar zijn samengetrokken? Dat haal ik helaas niet uit je OP. Het lijkt me allemaal vrij sterk, maar de beweegredenen zijn toch interessant.

Het waarom achter z'n theorie is dat hij vindt dat documentatie van voor de 11e eeuw op z'n best armoedig is te noemen en dat Kerkelijke leiders graag herhaaldelijk de bijbel wilden pluggen met moderne gebeurtenissen.

Je zou het een samenzwering kunnen noemen maar dan zou je uit moeten gaan van een groot vooropgezet plan en het lijkt bij deze theorie meer op geklooi van diverse personen in de geschiedenisboekjes die allemaal met of zonder de bijbel hun eigen persoonlijke belangen in een bepaalde tijd gehad zouden hebben of gewoonweg niet ervaren genoeg of competent genoeg waren. Ik voeg de tekst uit de 2e link van de OP nog wel even toe.

Since the 1970s, Fomenko (born in 1945) has been building, refining, and publishing his ideas claiming that the history we all know to be true has been largely fabricated, that centuries upon centuries’ worth of history was either faked by devious scribes or wildly misinterpreted by scholars (a theory not unlike the infamous Phantom Time Hypothesis).

While the finer points of the Fomenko theory are as convoluted and confusing as you might expect, the guiding principle is that recorded history before the 11th-14th centuries is generally unreliable for various reasons. Virtually all extant documents from the period before that time, Fomenko writes, are untrustworthy, due to a number of factors: poor timekeeping devices, inconsistent record-keeping, limited availability of surviving documents, lack of movable type, and so on.

Moreover, Fomenko argues, pre-Renaissance history was largely fabricated by a number of writers, most of whom did so at the behest of the Catholic Church and other Christian leaders of the time so that they could present historical “evidence” to back up claims made in the Bible.
Joseph Scaliger

Wikimedia CommonsJoseph Scaliger

Along these lines, Fomenko specifically focuses on the writings of 16th-century French Christian scholar Joseph Scaliger. According to Fomenko, Scaliger ranks among the leading historians of the time who helped forge and propagate the “false” record of pre-Rennaisance history that persists to this day.

And if historians weren’t being outright devious like Scaliger, then they were being devious in a more lazy way, Fomenko claims. That is, Renaissance scholars would simply invent ancient history based on contemporary people and events in order to create a “phantom” history, as he calls it.

For example, Fomenko believes that most Eurasian history between the third and 11th centuries A.D. was concocted by historians of the 13th-17th centuries A.D. who created a false record of those prior centuries by filling that record with variations of events that were happening during the 13th-17th centuries.

A similar thing happened with the Bible, Fomenko claims. He writes that the Bible we know today is largely built on 11th-14th-century fabrications and revisions to older texts and that these fabrications and revisions actually reflect events that were happening in the 11th-14th centuries.

So, Fomenko theorizes that the Babylonian captivity described in the Bible (in which in the Jews of the Kingdom of Judah were invaded by Babylon and held captive there for 70 years in the sixth century B.C.) is actually a false history inspired by the nearly 70-year Avignon Papacy period in which seven popes resided in Avignon, France as opposed to Rome due to pressure from the French monarchy.

Why exactly Fomenko argues all of this and how he attempts to prove these claims is another matter entirely.

Apart from his creation of the New Chronology, Fomenko is a notable mathematician who has earned his doctorate, taught at Moscow State Lomonosov University, become a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, won a State Prize of the Russian Federation for mathematics, and published some 250 works.

It’s this background in mathematics that helps explain how Fomenko began building the New Chronology. In 1973, he began reading other writers’ work about inconsistencies in historical data related to lunar cycles. When he began digging into such data himself, he concluded that many lunar eclipses and other celestial events could not have occurred when historians said they did and thus major historical lynchpins could be off by hundreds of years.

His calculations, which have since been criticized by other writers, showed that certain celestial events that were said to have occurred in the time of Jesus had to have actually occurred some 1,000 years later.

From there, Fomenko had help in building his New Chronology thanks to several centuries’ worth of other writers (including Jean Hardouin of 17th-century France, Nikolai Morozov of 19th-century Russia, and even Isaac Newton) who’d long been claiming that Christian scholars in the Middle Ages had misrecorded history either mistakenly or deviously.

Fomenko picked up these ideas, added in a host of dubious mathematical calculations related to the astronomical record, and so the New Chronology was born. In the decades since, Fomenko has published many volumes on the subject, although his only visibility outside of Russia is largely confined to the corners of the internet that feed on fringe theories.

In fact, Fomenko’s ideas haven’t even received enough attention to warrant much rebuttal from the scientific community. Perhaps it’s not worth refuting a theory that so obviously flies in the face of mountains of archaeological evidence, written records, carbon-dated artifacts, and on and on.

Nevertheless, as misguided as Fomenko’s claims are, there’s a kernel of truth at the center. History — and this becomes truer and truer the further back you go — is always a reconstruction to some extent.

As Fomenko wrote, “When we say that Brutus killed Caesar with a sword, the only thing it means is that some written source that managed to reach our time says so, and nothing but! The issue of just how faithfully documented history reflects real events is very complex and requires a special study.”

He’s right, it’s just probably not his kind of special study that we needed.


Een punt bij Kasparov is trouwens fout omschreven (kleine valse noot), London hoort niet bij het rijtje van steden, het ging met name om steden in wat wij als het oosten beschouwen. Constantinople, Troy, Jeruzalem etc.

quote:

Op woensdag 2 januari 2019 22:44 schreef illusions het volgende:
Ik vind het een interessant onderwerp, denk dat hij zeker een punt heeft door te zeggen dat geschiedschrijving onbetrouwbaar is, maar waarom zouden we zijn schrijven dan wél voor waar aannemen? Ook Jeruzalem samentrekken met Istanbul gaat me een beetje ver - die hebben duidelijk een héél andere geschiedenis. Ik ga het eens verder onderzoeken want het zijn wel interessante stellingen.

Ik ben geen aanhanger van z'n theorie maar ik verwerp 'm ook niet volledig op alle punten want er zitten argumenten tussen die valide kunnen zijn en die zitten vooral in z'n beschouwende kritiek die niet zou misstaan in boeken over journalistiek.

Over die steden, wat hij min of meer omschrijft is dat er bv nogal vele ontwikkelingen in Constantinopel plaatsvonden en men dat b.v. in de geschiedenis van Jeruzalem zou hebben geschreven. Dat er soortgelijke bouwwerken uit (b.v.) Constantinopel geprojecteerd werden in de geschiedenis van Jeruzalem en andere steden. Zelfde geldt voor personen. Jezus zou een mythische composietbeschrijving zijn als in een soort superheld van 3 a 4 memorabele mensen uit de tijd dat mensen beter documenteerden.

Het idee van Constantinopel als bakermat is ook niet zo heel ver gezocht want het is ooit de stad geweest die het toneel van het ontstaan was van de pre-Islam, dus dat is historisch gezien wel te omcirkelen in de reguliere beschouwing van de wereldgeschiedenis.

Nu is de bijbel al een beetje brak zand als het om historie en verifieerbaarheid gaat dus ik weet het niet. Als gedachtenexperiment vind ik de theorie wel aardig vormgegeven, maar het is vermoedelijk ontzettend moeilijk om de aansluiting met de gedateerde geschiedenis erin te vinden.

Bovendien zou z'n hele theorie ook gezien kunnen worden als een grote propagandacampagne (reclame) voor het Russische Rijk. Het is een van de vele theorieeen en in zijn theorie waren en zijn die volkeren die ergens invloed hadden eigenlijk "maar gewoon" Russen. Dus dat vormt ook weer een mooi pressiemiddel.

[ Bericht 1% gewijzigd door Beathoven op 03-01-2019 10:46:08 ]

Nog enkele delen van delen.


...

A campaign of re-writing and tendentious editing of the old chronicles is launched in England, as well as the Western Europe and the Romanovian Russia. Moreover, after the violent mutiny of the Reformation, many real events of the XIV-XVI were erased from historical memory forever, over the course of several generations. The English Scaligerites of the XVI-XVII century declare the old chronicles of Byzantium, the Horde and the Ottoman Empire, which they edited in accordance with their own agenda. These chronicles serve as basis for the "ancient" his- tory of the actual British Isles. Large parts of Byzantine and "Mongolian" history that had originally pertained to the vast territories of Europe and Asia become transferred (albeit on paper only, obviously enough) to the relatively small territory of the British Isles and their environs. This leads to the inevitable "shrinkage" of many major events. The great and powerful Czars, or Khans, of the Empire, transform into local rulers under the quill of the Scaligerite editors. This leads to a great distortion of historical proportions. The Great = "Mongolian" Empire vanishes from the pages of the "carefully edited" chronicles for centuries to come. Whatever in- formation defies oblivion despite these efforts gets arbitrarily moved backwards in time with the aid of the erroneous chronology, transforming into "ancient myths". This results in the creation of such English chronicles as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Historia Brittonum by Nennius and so on. A while later this recent version of the "ancient" British history rigidifies. Historical research of the 19 and 20 century brings nothing but minor amendments, the addition of new data and new layers of varnish. Nowadays, having dis- covered strange and amazing duplicates inside the "English history textbook" with the aid of statistical methods, we are beginning to realise that the real English history had been a great deal shorter. Our objective can therefore be formulated as the location of Byzantine and "Mongolian" originals inside the Scaligerian version, and the restoration of their true chronological and geographical identity.

http://chronologia.org/en/en_history/04.html

----


_{Sample Fomenko parallelism}

Astronomical evidence
Fomenko examines astronomical events described in ancient texts and claims that the chronology is actually medieval. For example:

He says the mysterious drop in the value of the lunar acceleration parameter D" ("a linear combination of the [angular] accelerations of the Earth and Moon"[31]) between the years AD 700–1300, which the American astronomer Robert Newton had explained in terms of "non-gravitational" (i.e., tidal) forces.[31] By eliminating those anomalous early eclipses the New Chronology produces a constant value of D" beginning around AD 1000.[32]

He associates initially the Star of Bethlehem with the AD 1140 (±20) supernova (now Crab Nebula) and the Crucifixion Eclipse with the total solar eclipse of AD 1170 (±20). He also believes that Crab Nebula supernova could not have been seen in AD 1054, but probably in AD 1153. He connects it with total eclipse of AD 1186. Moreover he holds in strong doubt the veracity of ancient Chinese astronomical data.

He argues that the star catalog in the Almagest, ascribed to the Hellenistic astronomer Claudius Ptolemy, was compiled in the 15th to 16th centuries AD. With this objective in sight he develops new methods of dating old stellar catalogues and claims that the Almagest is based on data collected between AD 600 and 1300, whereby the telluric obliquity[clarification needed] is well taken into account.

He refines and completes Morozov's analysis of some ancient horoscopes, most notably, the so-called Dendera Zodiacs—two horoscopes drawn on the ceiling of the temple of Hathor—and comes to the conclusion that they correspond to either the 11th or the 13th century AD. Moreover, in his History: Fiction or Science series finale, he makes computer-aided dating of all 37 Egyptian horoscopes that contain sufficient astronomical data, and claims they all fit into 11th to 19th century timeframe.[clarification needed] Traditional history usually either interprets these horoscopes as belonging to the 1st century BC or suggests that they weren't meant to match any date at all.

In his final analysis of an eclipse triad described by the ancient Greek Thucydides in History of the Peloponnesian War, Fomenko dates the eclipses to AD 1039, 1046 and 1057. Because of the layered structure of the manuscript, he claims that Thucydides actually lived in medieval times and in describing the Peloponnesian War between the Spartans and Athenians he was actually describing the conflict between the medieval Navarrans and Catalans in Spain from AD 1374 to 1387.

Fomenko claims that the abundance of dated astronomical records in cuneiform texts from Mesopotamia is of little use for dating of events, as the astronomical phenomena they describe recur cyclically every 30–40 years.

bron: wikipedia