Before the creation of traditional chronology, there were about two hundred different versions of dates, with which the history was adjusted to fit the biblical concept. Moreover, the range of these options was impressive - more than 3500 years, that is, the period from the "Creation of the world" to the "Nativity of Christ" fit into the interval between 3483 and 6984 BC.
And so, in order to bring all these disparate options to a single plausible form, the Jesuit monk Petavius and the chronologist Scaliger were involved in the case.
The chronology of ancient and medieval history, which at the moment is considered the only true one and is studied in schools and universities, was created in the 16th-17th centuries of our era. Its authors are the Western European chronologist JOSEPH SCALIGER and the Catholic Jesuit monk DIONYSUS PETAVIUS.
They brought the chronological spread of dates, so to speak, to a common denominator. However, their dating methods, like those of their predecessors, were imperfect, erroneous and subjective. And, sometimes, these "mistakes" were of a deliberate (ordered) nature. As a result, the story lengthened by a thousand years, and this extra millennium was filled with phantom events and characters that had never really existed before.
Joseph Scaliger and Dionysius Petavius.
Promotional video:
Subsequently, some delusions gave rise to others and, growing like a snowball, dragged the chronology of events in world history into the abyss of virtual piles that had nothing to do with reality.
This pseudoscientific chronological doctrine of SCALIGER-PETAVIUS, at one time, was seriously criticized by outstanding figures of world science. Among them are the famous English mathematician and physicist Isaac Newton, the prominent French scientist Jean Harduin, the English historian Edwin Johnson, German educators - philologist Robert Baldauf and lawyer Wilhelm Kammaer, Russian scientists - Peter Nikiforovich Krekshin (personal secretary of Peter I) and Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov, American historian (of Belarusian origin) Emmanuel Velikovsky.
Isaac Newton, Petr Nikiforovich Krekshin, Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov, Emmanuel Velikovsky.
Further, already in our days, the baton of rejection of the Scaligerian chronology was picked up by their followers. Among them are Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, Professor, Laureate of the State Prize of Russia, Anatoly Timofeevich Fomenko (author of NEW CHRONOLOGY in collaboration with Candidate of Mathematical Sciences Gleb Vladimirovich Nosovsky), Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, Vladimir Vyacheslavovich Kalashnikov, Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Lenin Prize Laureate, Professor Mikhail Mikhailovich Postnikov and a scientist from Germany - historian and writer Yevgeny Yakovlevich Gabovich.
Anatoly Timofeevich Fomenko, Gleb Vladimirovich Nosovsky, Vladimir Vyacheslavovich Kalashnikov, Evgeny Yakovlevich Gabovich.
But, in spite of the selfless research work of these scientists, the world historical community still uses in its scientific arsenal, as a standard, the foundations of the vicious "Scaligerian" chronology. Until now, there is no complete, fundamental and objective research on the "Chronology of the Ancient World" that meets the modern requirements of historical science.
How dates were recorded in the Middle Ages
In the 15th, 16th and 12th centuries, after the introduction into circulation of the "JULIAN", and then, and the "GRIGORIAN" calendar, leading the chronology "FROM THE BIRTH OF CHRIST", the dates were written in Roman and Arabic numerals, but not like today, but TOGETHER WITH LETTERS.
But they have already managed to “forget” about it.
In medieval Italy, Byzantium and Greece, dates were written in Roman numerals.
“ROMAN NUMBERS, the numbers of the ancient Romans, - said in the encyclopedia, - The system of Roman numerals is based on the use of special signs for decimal places:
I = 1 (unus)
X = 10 (decem)
C = 100 (centum)
M = 1000 (mille)
and their halves:
V = 5 (quinque)
L = 50 (quinquaginta)
D = 500 (quingenti)
Natural numbers are written by repeating these numbers. Moreover, if a large number comes before a smaller one, then they add up
XII = 12
IX = 9
(the principle of addition), if the smaller one is in front of the larger one, then the smaller one is subtracted from the larger one (the principle of subtraction). The last rule applies only to avoid repeating the same number four times."
It is believed, further, that Roman numerals appeared a very long time ago, long before the new era, at the time of the "ancient Romans". At the same time, numbers up to fifty were recorded using three icons:
I = 1
V = 5
X = 10
Why exactly such and only such signs were used for small numbers? Probably, at first, people operated on small values. Only later did large numbers come into use. For example, more than fifty, hundreds, and so on. Then new, additional signs were required, like:
L = 50
C = 100
D = 500
M = 1000
Therefore, it is logical to assume that the signs for small numbers were the original, the earliest, the MOST ANCIENT. In addition, initially, the so-called system of "addition and subtraction" of signs was not used in writing Roman numerals. She appeared much later. For example, the numbers 4 and 9, in those days, were written like this:
4 = IIII
9 = VIIII
This can be clearly seen in the medieval Western European engraving by the German artist Georg Penz "TIME TRIUMPH" and on the old book miniature with a sundial.
Dates in the Middle Ages according to the "JULIAN" and "GRIGORIAN" calendars, leading chronology from the "CHRIST'S BIRTHDAY", were written in letters and numbers.
X = "Christ"
The Greek letter "Xi", before the date written in Roman numerals, once meant the name "Christ", but then it was changed into the number 10, indicating ten centuries, that is, a millennium.
Thus, there was a chronological shift of the medieval dates by 1000 years, when later historians compared two different ways of recording.
How were the dates recorded in those days?
The first of these methods was, of course, the complete date recording.
She looked like this:
1st century A. D.
2nd century A. D.
III century A. D.
"1st century from the birth of Christ", "2nd century from the birth of Christ", "3rd century from the birth of Christ", etc.
The second way was the abbreviated notation.
Dates were written like this:
X. I = from Christ 1st century
X. II = from Christ II century
X. III = from Christ III century
etc. where “X” is not the Roman numeral 10, but the first letter in the Greek word for “Christ”.
Mosaic image of Jesus Christ on the dome of the "Hagia Sophia" in Istanbul.
The letter "X" is one of the most common medieval monograms, still found in ancient icons, mosaics, frescoes and book miniatures. She symbolizes the name of Christ. Therefore, they put it in front of the date written in Roman numerals in the calendar leading the chronology "from the CHRIST'S BIRTHDAY", and separated it with a dot from the numbers.
It is from these abbreviations that the designations of centuries adopted today arose. True, the letter "X" is already read by us not as a letter, but as the Roman numeral 10.
When the date was written in Arabic numerals, the letter "I" was put in front of them - the first letter of the name "Jesus" written in Greek and, too, was separated by a dot. But later, this letter was declared a "unit", supposedly meaning "one thousand".
I.400 = from Jesus 400th year
Therefore, the record of the date "I" point 400, for example, originally meant: "From Jesus the 400th year."
This way of writing is consistent with the previous one, since I. 400 is the 400th
From Jesus 400th year = 400th year from the beginning of X. I in n. e. = X. I century.
year "from the Nativity of Jesus" or "400th year from the beginning of the X. I century AD. e."
Here is a medieval English engraving, allegedly dated 1463. But if you look closely, you can see that the first digit, one (ie, one thousand) is not a digit at all, but the Latin letter "I". Exactly the same as the letter on the left in the word "DNI". By the way, the Latin inscription "Anno domini" means "from the Nativity of Christ" - abbreviated as ADI (from Jesus) and ADX (from Christ). Consequently, the date written on this engraving is not 1463, as modern chronologists and art historians claim, but 463 "from Jesus", that is, "from the Nativity of Christ."
This antique engraving by the German artist Johans Baldung Green bears his author's stamp with a date (allegedly 1515). But with a strong increase in this stigma, you can clearly see at the beginning of the date the Latin letter "I" (from Jesus) exactly the same as in the author's monogram "IGB" (Johannes Baldung Green), and the number "1" is written differently here.
This means that the date on this engraving is not 1515, as modern historians claim, but 515 from the "Nativity of Christ".
On the title page of Adam Olearius's book Description of
Muscovy”depicts an engraving with a date (allegedly 1566). At first glance, the Latin letter "I" at the beginning of the date can be taken as a unit, but if we look closely, we will clearly see that this is not a number at all, but a capital letter "I", exactly the same as in this fragment from
old handwritten German text.
Therefore, the real date of the engraving on the title page of the medieval book of Adam Olearius is not 1566, but 566 from the "Nativity of Christ".
The same capital Latin letter "I" appears at the beginning of the date on an old engraving depicting the Russian Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov. This engraving was made by a medieval Western European artist, as we already understand, not in 1664, but in 664 - from the "Nativity of Christ".
And in this portrait of the legendary Marina Mnishek (wife of False Dmitry I), the capital letter "I" at high magnification does not at all look like number one, no matter how we try to imagine it. And although historians attribute this portrait to 1609, common sense tells us that the true date of the engraving is 609 from the "Nativity of Christ".
On the engraving of the medieval coat of arms of the German city of Nuremberg, it is written in large: "Anno (ie, date) from Jesus 658". The capital letter "I" in front of the date digits is depicted so clearly that it cannot be confused with any "unit".
This engraving was made, no doubt, in 658 AD. By the way, the two-headed eagle, located in the center of the coat of arms, tells us that Nuremberg in those distant times was part of the Russian Empire.
Exactly the same, the same capital letters "I" can be seen in the dates on the old frescoes in the medieval "Chilienne Castle", located in the picturesque Swiss Riviera on the shores of Lake Geneva near Montreux.
The dates "from Jesus 699 and 636", historians and art historians, today, read as 1699 and 1636, explaining this discrepancy, the ignorance of illiterate medieval artists who made mistakes in writing numbers.
In other ancient frescoes, Shilienskongo Castle, dated already in the eighteenth century, that is, after the Scaligerian reform, the dates are written, from the point of view of modern historians, "correctly". The letter "I", which previously meant "from the birth of Jesus", has been replaced with the number "1", that is, a thousand.
In this ancient portrait of Pope PIUS II, we clearly see not one, but immediately, three dates. Date of birth, date of accession to the papal throne and date of death of PIUS II. And before each date there is a capital Latin letter "I" (from Jesus).
The artist in this portrait is clearly overdoing it. He put the letter "I" not only in front of the numbers of the year, but also in front of the numbers that mean the days of the month. So, probably, he showed his servile admiration for the Vatican "deputy of God on earth."
And here, absolutely unique from the point of view of medieval dating, engraving of the Russian Tsarina Maria Ilyinichna Miloslavskaya (wife of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich). Historians naturally date it back to 1662. However, it has a completely different date. "From Jesus" 662. The Latin letter "I" here is capitalized with a dot and certainly does not look like a unit. Slightly below, we see another date - the date of birth of the Queen: "from Jesus" 625, that is, 625 "from the birth of Christ."
We see the same letter "I" with a dot before the date in the portrait of Erasmus by the German artist Albrecht Durer of Rotterdam. In all art history reference books, this drawing is dated 1520. However, it is quite obvious that this date is being interpreted erroneously and corresponds to the year 520 "from the birth of Christ".
Another engraving by Albrecht Durer: "Jesus Christ in the Underworld" is dated, in the same way, - 510 year "from the birth of Christ."
This old plan of the German city of Cologne has the date that modern historians read as 1633. However, here the Latin letter "I" with a dot is completely different from a unit. This means that the correct dating of this engraving is 633 from the "Nativity of Christ".
By the way, here too, we see an image of a two-headed eagle, which once again testifies that Germany was once part of the Russian Empire.
Author's monograms of the medieval German artist Augustin Hirschvogel.
In these engravings by the German artist Augustin Hirschvogel, the date is included in the author's monogram. Here, too, the Latin letter "I" stands in front of the year numbers. And, of course, it is completely different from one.
The medieval German artist Georg Penz dated his engravings in the same way. The year 548 "from the birth of Christ" is written on this, his, author's monogram.
And on this medieval German coat of arms of West Saxony, the dates are written without the letter "I" at all. The artist did not have enough space for the letter on the narrow vignettes, he simply neglected to write it, leaving only the most important information for the viewer - the 519th and 527th years. And the fact that these dates are "from the Nativity of Christ" - in those days, was known to everyone.
On this Russian naval map, published during the reign of the Russian Empress Elizabeth Petrovna, that is, in the middle of the 18th century, it is quite clearly written: “KRONSTADT. Map Marine Accurate. Written and measured by the decree of Her Imperial Majesty in the 740th year of the fleet by Captain Nogayev … composed in the 750th year. Dates 740 and 750 are also recorded without the letter "I". But 750 is the 8th century, not the 18th.
Examples with dates can be given indefinitely, but it seems to me that this is no longer necessary. The evidence that has come down to our days convinces us that the Scaligerian chronologists, using simple manipulations, lengthened our history by 1000 years, forcing the public around the world to believe this outright lie.
Modern historians tend to shy away from an articulate explanation of this chronological shift. At best, they simply mark the fact itself, explaining it by considerations of "convenience."
They say: “In the XV-XVI centuries. when dating, often, thousands or even hundreds were omitted …"
As we now understand, medieval chroniclers honestly wrote:
150th year "from the birth of Christ"
200th year "from the birth of Christ"
150th year "from the birth of Christ" or 200th year "from the birth of Christ", meaning - in modern chronology - 1150th or 1200th
1150s or 1200s n. e.
years n. e. And only then, the Scaligerian chronologists will declare that it is imperative to add another thousand years to these “small dates”.
So they artificially made medieval history old.
In ancient documents (especially the XIV-XVII centuries), when writing dates in letters and numbers, the first letters denoting, as it is believed today, “large numbers”, were separated by dots from subsequent “small numbers” within ten or hundreds.
Here is an example of a similar recording of a date (allegedly 1524) on an engraving by Albrecht Durer. We see that the first letter is depicted as a frank Latin letter "I" with a dot. In addition, it is separated by dots on both sides so that it is not accidentally confused with the numbers. Therefore, Dürer's engraving is dated not 1524, but 524 from the "Nativity of Christ".
Exactly the same date is recorded on an engraved portrait of the Italian composer Carlo Brosci, dated 1795. The Latin capital letter "I" with a dot is also separated by dots from the numbers. Therefore, this date should be read as the year 795 "from the birth of Christ."
And on the old engraving of the German artist Albrecht Altdorfer "The Temptation of Hermits" we see a similar date entry. It is believed to have been made in 1706.
By the way, the number 5 here is very similar to the number 7. Maybe here the date is written not 509 "from the birth of Christ", but 709? How accurately are the engravings attributed to Albrecht Altdorfer, who allegedly lived in the 16th century, dated today? Maybe he lived 200 years later?
And this engraving depicts the medieval publishing stamp of Ludovic Elsevier. The date (supposedly 1597) is recorded with dots and using left and right crescents to record the Latin letters "I" in front of Roman numerals. This example is interesting because right there, on the left tape, there is also a record of the same date in Arabic numerals. It is depicted in the form of the letter "I", separated by a dot from the numbers "597" and is read in no other way than the year 597 "from the birth of Christ."
Using the right and left crescents separating the Latin letter "I" from the Roman numerals, the dates are recorded on the title pages of these books. The name of one of them: "Russia or Muscovy, called TARTARIA".
And on this old engraving of the "Ancient coat of arms of the city of Vilna", the date is depicted in Roman numerals, but without the letter "X". It is clearly written here: “ANNO. VII. " Moreover, the date "VII century" is marked with dots.
But no matter how the dates were recorded in the Middle Ages, never, in those days, X = 10
the Roman numeral "ten" did not mean "tenth century" or "1000". For this, M = 1000.
much later, the so-called “big” figure “M” = one thousand appeared.
This is how, for example, the dates written in Roman numerals looked like after the Scaligerian reform, when an extra thousand years were added to the medieval dates. In the first couples they were still written "according to the rules", that is, separating "large numbers" from "small" ones with dots.
Then, they stopped doing this. Simply, the entire date was highlighted with dots.
And in this self-portrait of the medieval artist and cartographer Augustine Hirschvogel, the date, in all likelihood, was inscribed in the engraving much later. The artist himself left on his works the author's monogram, which looked like this:
But, I repeat once again that in all medieval documents that have survived to this day, including forgeries dated in Roman numerals, the number "X" never meant "one thousand."
X = 10
M = 1000
For this, the "large" Roman numeral "M" was used.
Over time, the information that the Latin letters "X" and "I" at the beginning of the indicated dates meant the first letters of the words "Christ" and "Jesus" was lost. Numerical values were assigned to these letters, and the dots separating them from the numbers were cunningly abolished in subsequent printed editions or, simply, erased. As a result, abbreviated dates, like:
Х. Ш = XIII century
or
I.300 = 1300 year
"From Christ the 3rd century" or "From Jesus the 300th year" began to be perceived as "the thirteenth century" or "one thousand three hundredth year."
This interpretation automatically added a thousand years to the original date. Thus, the result was a falsified date, a millennium older than the real one.
The hypothesis of "negation of a thousand years", proposed by the authors of "NEW CHRONOLOGY" Anatoly Fomenko and Gleb Nosovsky, is in good agreement with the well-known fact that medieval Italians designated centuries not by thousands, but by hundreds:
XIII century. = DUCHENTO = Two hundredth years
This is how the 200th years were designated, that is, "DUCHENTO"
XIV century. = TRECENTO = Three hundredth years
And so - the three hundredth, that is, "TRECHENTO"
XV century = QUATROCENTO = Four hundredth years
Four hundredth, that is, "QUATROCHENTO".
XVI century = CHINKVECHENTO = Five hundredth years
And the five hundredth, that is, "CHINKVECHENTO". But such designations of centuries
XIII century. = DUCHENTO = Two hundredth years
XIV century. = TRECENTO = Three hundredth years
XV century = QUATROCENTO = Four hundredth years
XVI century = CHINKQUENTO = Five hundredth years
directly indicate the beginning of the countdown precisely from the XI century of the new era, since they deny the addition of "thousand years" accepted today.
It turns out that the medieval Italians, it turns out, did not know any "thousand years" for the simple reason that this "extra millennium" was not even mentioned in those days.
Exploring the old church book "PALEIA", which was used in Russia up to the 17th century instead of the "Bible" and "New Testament", which indicated the exact dates of "Nativity", "Baptism" and "Crucifixion of Jesus Christ", recorded cross two calendars: "From the Creation of the World" and an older, indicative one, Fomenko and Nosovsky came to the conclusion that these dates do not coincide with each other.
With the help of modern mathematical computer programs, they managed to calculate the true values of these dates, recorded in the ancient Russian "Paley":
Nativity of Christ - December 1152
Baptism - January 1182
Crucifixion - March 1185
An ancient church book "Paleya".
Durer.
"Epiphany". Mosaic in Ravenna, 1500
"Crucifixion". Luca Signorelli, 1500
These dates are also confirmed by other ancient documents, astronomical zodiacs and legendary biblical events that have come down to us. Recall, for example, the results of the radiocarbon analysis of the "Shroud of Turin" and the flash of the "Star of Bethlehem" (known in astronomy as the "Crab Nebula"), which informed the Magi of the birth of Jesus Christ. Both events, it turns out, belong to the 12th century AD!
Shroud of Turin.
The Crab Nebula (Star of Bethlehem).
Historians are racking their brains over the still unsolvable question - why so few medieval monuments of material culture and so many antiquities have survived to this day? It would be more logical, it would be the other way around.
Hunting Scene. A fresco from an Egyptian pyramid.
"Three Graces". Fresco from Pompeii.
They explain this by the fact that after a centuries-old period of rapid development, ancient civilizations suddenly degraded and fell into decay, having forgotten all the scientific and cultural achievements of antiquity. And only in the 15-16th centuries, in the era of “Renaissance”, people suddenly remembered all the discoveries and achievements of their civilized “ancient” ancestors and, from that moment, began to develop dynamically and purposefully.
Not very convincing!
However, if we take the true date of birth of Jesus Christ as a starting point, everything immediately falls into place. There was, it turns out, in history.
"The Beggars" by Adrian de Venne, 1630-1650
"Hunchback". Engraving, 16th century.
of humanity of millennial backwardness and ignorance, there was no break in historical eras, there were no sudden ups and downs, which were not justified by anything. Our civilization developed evenly and consistently.
History - Science or Fiction?
Based on the foregoing, we can make a logical conclusion that the ancient world history, laid out in the Procrustean bed of a non-existent "mythical" millennium, is just an idle fiction, a figment of the imagination, formalized into a complete collection of works of fiction in the genre of historical legend.
Of course, today it is quite difficult for a common man to believe in this, especially in adulthood. The load of knowledge gained throughout life does not give him the opportunity to break free from the shackles of habitual, externally imposed, stereotyped beliefs.
Historians, whose doctoral dissertations and other fundamental scientific works were based on virtual Scaligerian history, categorically reject the idea of "NEW CHRONOLOGY" today, calling it "pseudoscience".
And instead of defending their point of view in the course of a polemical scientific discussion, as is customary in the civilized world, they, defending the honor of their "official uniform", are waging a fierce struggle with the supporters of "NEW CHRONOLOGY", as in the days of medieval obscurantism, guided by her with just one common argument:
"This cannot be, because this can never be!"
And in this "struggle" for them, as a rule, all means are good, up to a petition to the higher authorities on the introduction of an article on criminal punishment into the "Criminal Code", up to imprisonment for the alleged "falsification of history."
But the truth will triumph in the end. Time will put everything in its place, although this path will be thorny and long.
This has already happened. And more than once. Recall, for example, genetics and cybernetics declared "pseudoscience" or the fate of the medieval Italian scientist Giordano Bruno, who was burned at the stake for his revolutionary scientific and humanitarian ideas for that time.
Giordano Bruno is an Italian Dominican monk, philosopher, astronomer and poet.
"BUT EVERYTHING, SHE TURNS!" - he said when they led him to the fire …
Now, every schoolchild already knows that the Earth "revolves" around the Sun, and not the Sun around the Earth.
Based on materials from the director's script by Yuri Elkhov for the film "Non-existent Millennium"