I noticed that on some resources as "historical sources" a certain map is used, which is called "Europe in the era of Charlemagne 768-814" or "Map of the Carolingian empire of 768-814". It is also called the "Map of Europe 768-814". But at the same time, I would like to ask the “mitrofanushkas” who consider this map a “historical document”: do you have any brains that are no longer “cooked” or are you deliberately misleading other people?
Is it really not clear that this is a clear "remake" with the already modern coastline of the Black, Mediterranean, Baltic, Aegean, Adriatic and North Seas? I'm not even talking about the fact that the map has a modern coordinate grid and even a "new" Greenwich prime meridian. This is what kind of "extensive knowledge" in the history of Europe is necessary to consider that Greenwich and the Greenwich Observatory existed already in 768-814, and the maps were already compiled with an orientation to the modern poles and the Greenwich meridian?
So when was this "prime meridian" introduced in cartography and geodesy? And it turns out that the Greenwich meridian was proposed to be taken as a zero reference point for many years in order to standardize cartography and geodesy already in 1884 at the International Meridian Conference, which took place in Washington (USA). From here, comes a completely logical conclusion that this very map, well, could not have appeared earlier than 1884, therefore it is not any "historical source". And it is only a reflection of the views of historians of the second half of the XIX century on the history of Europe and the existing state formations in the era of Charlemagne or the Carolingian empire (768-814).
So this map depicts: Hibernia, the English kingdoms, the Frankish kingdom, Galicia, the Avar kingdom, Suroland, the Avar kingdom, the Bulgarian kingdom, Khazaria, Pontikum-Mare, Alania, Iberia, Corsica, Sardinia, the Byzantine Empire, as well as the cities: Merida, Larka, Monastir, Herba, Spoletius, Roma (Rome), Croton, Sabaria, Beirut, Alexandria, Jerusalem. But we don't really know what Europe of that era actually looked like, and this map is just a reflection of the opinion of historians of the late 19th - early 20th centuries on this score.
By the way, all this was fully confirmed by the search for the source of this map, which turned out to be the "Clarendon Press" edition, which published the "Historical Atlas of Modern Europe" under the auspices of Oxford University in 1896-1902. The author and editor of this atlas is Reginald Lane Poole (1857-1939). And a collection of such maps is part of this very British Historical Atlas of Modern Europe from the Decline of the Roman Empire, which also includes maps of parts of Asia, Africa and the New World associated with European history, published in London and New York.
And for those who have not "entered", I explain popularly: if I or someone else draws a map of the ancient world or medieval Europe today, then such a map will not be a real "historical source" of those eras. And it will be a modern "remake" reflecting my or someone else's views on the events of that historical era, ie. their modern interpretation. Therefore, dear ladies and gentlemen, when you are offered such "sources" as "historical facts" and "proofs", then turn on your brains so that you do not hang noodles on your ears. Indeed, many of the modern falsifiers "bashfully" keep silent about the true year of publication of such "sources." And this can be interpreted as deliberate misleading or even fraud, if such actions of falsifiers pursue specific geopolitical goals.
By the way, I will designate my personal position and my personal opinion, which does not claim to be true in the latest reality, on the issues of new-made maps and other historical sources. Personally, I do not think that all artifacts of the past and historical documents are fake and "remake", as "pseudo-disclosures" do. But still I have to admit that some of them (and possibly "a good half") really are such, since they were made in later eras than historians officially date them. And on the example of maps and atlases by G. Mercator and A. Ortelius, I have already shown: how you can distinguish the original maps of that era from the later "remake".
And I still believe that the goal of the history falsifiers is to conceal our true past and the existence in it of highly developed civilizations of the “golden age”, as well as their unique technologies, much more advanced and environmentally friendly than those that our civilization is forced to use. Also, another goal of the falsifiers is to conceal the true reasons for the death of these highly developed civilizations of the past. For this knowledge can open our eyes to the true cause of the current troubles of mankind and the events of a planetary scale taking place in the world.
Promotional video:
Well, the pseudo-revealers who mutter their mantra "there was no civilization", in fact, just help these parasitic forces in fooling mankind and in their essence are no different from the usual falsifiers of history, with whom they have common goals, and a single source of funding for its activities.
michael101063 ©
