The astronomical calculations of the ancients are simply amazing. Sometimes they are more accurate than modern ones! But Christians had their own ideas about the universe. Ancient culture was simply destroyed by Christians. Greek and Roman beauties and beauties, embodied in stunning sculptures - almost all of them were destroyed by Christians, only a few copies have survived to us. The same thing happened in the intellectual sphere. Ancient science, in the overwhelming majority of its ideas absolutely true, gave way to a multitude of such a number of pseudosciences that entire encyclopedias are now devoted to their cursory review.
Russian schoolchildren know that we have been using the current calendar from the Nativity of Christ quite recently, since 1700. Peter the Great, who brought innumerable misfortunes and suffering to Russia, moved the New Year from September to January, and 1700 was the first year lived by the Russian world according to the Christian calendar. Prior to that, all of Europe and Muscovite Rus used the chronology from the Creation of the world (at that time, 7208 was the year from the “Creation of the World in the Star Temple”).
How was this time calculation created? The entire Christian world in the second half of the 16th century was agitated by the idea of having its own chronology, that is, keeping track of the years according to Christ. Christian theologians and scientists (at that time it was almost the same thing) racked their brains over the question: what to take as the starting point of reference - the birth of Christ, the day of his death, his resurrection or something else. And on the historical stage, among others, the famous philologist and critic Joseph-Just Scaliger (1540-1609) appears. Scaliger was distinguished by his versatile knowledge, spoke classical and oriental languages, fought against opponents of the Catholic Church, wrote church books and was generally an erudite person. Together with other scientists, he did a titanic job of developing what they thought was a scientific chronology. Let's pay tribute: Scaliger was an outstanding scientist,but it would be better if he had not taken up history. The world shuddered at their concept. Here is what a contemporary writes: "Scaliger and his supporters, who furiously defended their opinions, did not recognize anything, responded … with abuse and contemptuous epithets, in the end declaring everyone to be complete ignoramuses."
Scaliger together with Petavius first applied the astronomical method, but not for a critical check of the chronology of antiquity, but to confirm their concept. Thus, he turned, as it is believed today, his version into a "scientific" one. But the real misfortune happened a century later, when the Christian Church proclaimed Scaliger's chronology as deeply scientific, the only true one and announced the transition to the chronology from the Nativity of Christ. Even the creator of the “new” chronology in his entire life did not even think to introduce the years of the Christian chronology as official. His version of the new chronology really came from the Nativity of Christ on January 1, but the year remained the same from the creation of the world 5343, which would correspond to 1583 A. D. And in general, I must say, Scaliger was a deeply tolerant person. Isn't it an irony of fate? The scientific world exploded with indignation. The great physicist Sir Isaac Newton, who conquered all of humanity with his mind, as his contemporaries rightly wrote about him, filed a protest in parliament, devoting twenty years of his life to exposing Christian chronology. Voltaire, wishing to give a devastatingly low assessment, called the story, composed in the light of that new chronology, "an unworthy collection of declarations and miracles" and "a shame of the human mind." And we still use this shame."An unworthy collection of declarations and miracles" and "the shame of the human mind." And we still use this shame."An unworthy collection of declarations and miracles" and "the shame of the human mind." And we still use this shame.
Promotional video:
According to them, history developed logically and consistently. In the official new historical chronology there are failures of several centuries. It turns out that humanity has stopped in its development. For almost a thousand years you have not written a single book or made a single discovery? It can not be so. The events that the official history speaks of do take place, but much closer to us in time. Roughly speaking, the early Middle Ages must be brought closer to the late antiquity. And then everything will fall into place.
In 1700, Europe and Russia switched to the reckoning of the years from the birth of Christ, and today it is necessary to revise the dates on the books published in Europe in the 15th – 17th centuries. Two systems were used to record dates: Arabic numerals and Roman numerals. For example, the date on the book is 1552 in Arabic. Does it follow from this that this is necessarily 1552 in the modern sense? Not at all. The fact is that in medieval Christian books and documents the Latin capital letter "I" was written first and was even separated by a dot from the numbers: 1.552. The letter "I" or "J" was an abbreviation of the name Jesus - from Jesus 552, that is, the 552nd year from the birth of Jesus Christ.
Then it was forgotten, and the letter "I" or "J" began to be perceived as the number "one". AT ONE MOVE HISTORY OF HUMANITY HAS BEEN EXTENDED BY A THOUSAND YEARS! But since the 18th century, the letters "iot" are no longer written in the dates, after a hundred years they will be forgotten, and after three hundred they will claim that Christianity is two thousand years old. With the rise of archeology, antiquity will become fashionable and prestigious. And now any archaeologist, having dug up some skull, immediately announces that it is hundreds of thousands of years old. It is important to understand that today, when the primary sources are published, a strict censorship is carried out - consciously or unconsciously - for their compliance with the Scaligerian version. Only primary sources that fit into the familiar Scaligerian picture are recognized as "worthy of attention". As a result, only texts that have undergone targeted editing of the 17th-18th centuries are put into circulation.