The Phantom Timeline. Are we really living in the 1700s?

Firstly I thought


Then I sighed and thought


But in the spirit of ATS (the weird an wonderful side not the religious/political side)...have a squizz at this.

Is history made up?

The theory goes that the Dark Ages were actually made up. Yep 300 hundred years supposedly never existed. The years between 614 and 911 never happened, so technically we are being asked to believe we are technically living in 1715.

due to some suspicious mathematical manipulation, they have been included in the Western calendar. To cover up the time shift, three centuries of fictional events and nonexistent figures like Charlemagne have been squeezed into the historical record.

www.motherjones.com...

Heribert Illig is a German Historian and publisher who proposed that a medieval Roman Emperor, Otto II, Pope Sylvester II and quite possibly Byzantium Emperor Constantine VII were all involved in an early conspiracy theory to advance the European calender 300 years overnight.

www.historicmysteries.com...

According to Illig, both Otto and Sylvester were keen to participate in the landmark year of AD 1000 but were several hundred years too early to do so. To overcome this anomaly, they rewrote future history and invented heroic figures such as Charlemagne. While attending an archaeological conference held in Munich, Germany in 1986, Illig was just one member of an audience listening to the President of the Monumenta Germaine Histoica, Horst Fuhrmann, as he detailed claims that the Roman Catholic Church forged documents during the Middle Ages and actually insisted that these were hundreds of years old and embraced by medieval citizens.

www.obscuragator.com...

According to Illig the mistake also came from calculations after the adoption of the Gregorian calendar supplanting the Julian Calendar and somehow missing 11 minutes, when calculated actually Gregory thought 1627 years had passed when actually only 1257 years had occurred.
Whaaat>????

He includes the building of Contasntnople dod not take 350 years in his theory.
Additionally, that the Roman Catholic Church forged documents during the Middle Ages designed to lead medieval citizens to believe the events took place.


There is one problem recorded history outside of Christian Europe and known astronomical events contradict Illig’s findings and the archaeological record doesn't seem to match his theory. Not to mention the archaeological record in Europe says wither wise .

So on top of this craziness, we have the New Chronology (Fomenko)to take us to a even greater level of kooky theories.

The New Chronology is a fringe theory regarded by the academic community as pseudohistory, which argues that the conventional chronology of Middle Eastern and European history is fundamentally flawed, and that events attributed to the civilizations of the Roman Empire, Ancient Greece and Ancient Egypt actually occurred during the Middle Ages, more than a thousand years later. The central concepts of the New Chronology are derived from the ideas of Russian scholar Nikolai Morozov (1854-1946),[1] although work by French scholar Jean Hardouin (1646-1729) can be viewed as an earlier predecessor.[2] However, the New Chronology is most commonly associated with Russian mathematician Anatoly Fomenko (b. 1945), although published works on the subject are actually a collaboration between Fomenko and several other mathematicians. The concept is most fully explained in History: Fiction or Science?, originally published in Russian.

en.wikipedia.org...(Fomenko)

It is worth reading the full Wiki description on New Chronology, it is too in depth (nonsense) for me to write about.

. almost all important civilized peoples have early woven myths around and glorified in poetry their heroes, mythical kings and princes, founders of religions, of dynasties, empires and cities—in short, their national heroes. Especially the history of their birth and of their early years is furnished with phantastic [sic] traits; the amazing similarity, nay literal identity, of those tales, even if they refer to different, completely independent peoples, sometimes geographically far removed from one another, is well known and has struck many an investigator.

Rank, Otto. Der Mythos von der Geburt des Helden (in German).
Otto Rank made note of duplications in literary history of a variety of culture

Archaeological and astronomical records aside, (that disprove them) it begs the question, how much of history is made up? Victors tell their own tales, losers their own. Could the premise be stretched to the making up of centuries?

I think not, but there are no doubt moments in time that we recorded as a porky pie.

a reply to: zazzafrazz

911 never happened

Oh, not this again!

a reply to: combatmaster
lmao!

Remember this from a few years back - was it not because the then pope or something wanted to be 'in power' for the new millenium - 1000AD.

Stephen Fry mentioned it as one of his dubious theories a few series ago on QI also.

a reply to: johnb
There are a couple of theories in the OP. I mentioned IIligs and The New Chronology.
The churchs' reasoning for faking centuries is quoted. ^

I

So if this were the case then that explains why Nibiru never passed thru in 2012. I knew it! Damn it, just realized I won't be alive when it will pass thru the real 2012.

Interesting read though OP.

a reply to: HawkeyeNation

Thank God I won't be round to relieve that nonsense again, and the Mayan calendar

a reply to: zazzafrazz

Hilarious! I love how Mother Jones has it under "politics".

Yes, there are many other cultures on earth with which to compare chronology.

One wonders, "what the deuce?"

a reply to: zazzafrazz
It's an interesting thought exercise, but that doesn't explain why Chinese astronomical observations made during those 300 years jive with what is known (astronomically) with observations made in the west. While there are not many western made records, there are some.

In order for this theory to be true China would have to have been compliant with this cover up.

a reply to: zazzafrazz

So, what you are really saying Zazz is that the 21st December 2012 is still on but we will all be worm-food by the time it occurs.

I feel weird - I'm relieved, disappointed and envious all at once towards the ATS of the the year 2315 who will actually witness the doom porn we keep taking the piss out of.

Where's John Titor when you need him - I want in on the end of the world.

Another reality moment is that it takes an Aussie chick living in the US to bring home the reality of..............

a reply to: Sublimecraft

I hear you brother. I hear you.

What difference would this really make? Since dates are arbitrary anyway. .. whatever calendar we are on, we invented.. so if it's actually the 4th of June in say 1756 just now, what's the difference ? Because to call that calendar correct would be erroneous also as it was made up at some point as well as an arbitrary way of telling the time, is the chinese calendar wrong? Is not the Jewish calendar older? All of them are wrong overall but do the job for each culture for a time. Don't think it's impossible for the calendar to change again either to account for seasonal shift and changing events in the solar system, as that's what it's really supposed to be based on anyway. .. and If we go back to that older calendar for its 'correct year' do we also go back the the 13 months It had instead of 12? As It was a lunar month calendar ...

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
Firstly I thought

Then I sighed and thought

But in the spirit of ATS (the weird an wonderful side not the religious/political side)...have a squizz at this.

Is history made up?

The theory goes that the Dark Ages were actually made up. Yep 300 hundred years supposedly never existed. The years between 614 and 911 never happened, so technically we are being asked to believe we are technically living in 1715.

due to some suspicious mathematical manipulation, they have been included in the Western calendar. To cover up the time shift, three centuries of fictional events and nonexistent figures like Charlemagne have been squeezed into the historical record.

www.motherjones.com...

Heribert Illig is a German Historian and publisher who proposed that a medieval Roman Emperor, Otto II, Pope Sylvester II and quite possibly Byzantium Emperor Constantine VII were all involved in an early conspiracy theory to advance the European calender 300 years overnight.

www.historicmysteries.com...

According to Illig, both Otto and Sylvester were keen to participate in the landmark year of AD 1000 but were several hundred years too early to do so. To overcome this anomaly, they rewrote future history and invented heroic figures such as Charlemagne. While attending an archaeological conference held in Munich, Germany in 1986, Illig was just one member of an audience listening to the President of the Monumenta Germaine Histoica, Horst Fuhrmann, as he detailed claims that the Roman Catholic Church forged documents during the Middle Ages and actually insisted that these were hundreds of years old and embraced by medieval citizens.

www.obscuragator.com...

According to Illig the mistake also came from calculations after the adoption of the Gregorian calendar supplanting the Julian Calendar and somehow missing 11 minutes, when calculated actually Gregory thought 1627 years had passed when actually only 1257 years had occurred.
Whaaat>????

He includes the building of Contasntnople dod not take 350 years in his theory.
Additionally, that the Roman Catholic Church forged documents during the Middle Ages designed to lead medieval citizens to believe the events took place.


There is one problem recorded history outside of Christian Europe and known astronomical events contradict Illig’s findings and the archaeological record doesn't seem to match his theory. Not to mention the archaeological record in Europe says wither wise .

So on top of this craziness, we have the New Chronology (Fomenko)to take us to a even greater level of kooky theories.

The New Chronology is a fringe theory regarded by the academic community as pseudohistory, which argues that the conventional chronology of Middle Eastern and European history is fundamentally flawed, and that events attributed to the civilizations of the Roman Empire, Ancient Greece and Ancient Egypt actually occurred during the Middle Ages, more than a thousand years later. The central concepts of the New Chronology are derived from the ideas of Russian scholar Nikolai Morozov (1854-1946),[1] although work by French scholar Jean Hardouin (1646-1729) can be viewed as an earlier predecessor.[2] However, the New Chronology is most commonly associated with Russian mathematician Anatoly Fomenko (b. 1945), although published works on the subject are actually a collaboration between Fomenko and several other mathematicians. The concept is most fully explained in History: Fiction or Science?, originally published in Russian.

en.wikipedia.org...(Fomenko)

It is worth reading the full Wiki description on New Chronology, it is too in depth (nonsense) for me to write about.

. almost all important civilized peoples have early woven myths around and glorified in poetry their heroes, mythical kings and princes, founders of religions, of dynasties, empires and cities—in short, their national heroes. Especially the history of their birth and of their early years is furnished with phantastic [sic] traits; the amazing similarity, nay literal identity, of those tales, even if they refer to different, completely independent peoples, sometimes geographically far removed from one another, is well known and has struck many an investigator.

Rank, Otto. Der Mythos von der Geburt des Helden (in German).
Otto Rank made note of duplications in literary history of a variety of culture

Archaeological and astronomical records aside, (that disprove them) it begs the question, how much of history is made up? Victors tell their own tales, losers their own. Could the premise be stretched to the making up of centuries?

I think not, but there are no doubt moments in time that we recorded as a porky pie.

Interesting idea.

You know, I have actually thought about this. What if much of history was basically made up or severely altered somehow, whether by ignorance or design?

Like, what if our modern perception of many famous epochs in history was completely wrong?

And, I say this as a total history nerd.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

I think history isn't totally made up. There is certainly a "spin" put on some of recorded history. But we have the stars, other contemporary writings from different cultural zones and archaeology to help us clear away some of the dust ( so to speak )

ka reply to: Elijah23

Yes it is made up in a sense, but so is "time" in the way it is based on a observers application. That said the Julian calendar was about 10 days out, but the Gregorian calendar does coincide with earths rotation of the sun so its a measure more than a record keeper.

What if we really are in the year 2015 and there is someone in our time who wants to live back in the 1700's so he is trying to erase 300 years of history by calling it fictional.

a reply to: thomadom

Intense.

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

I think history isn't totally made up. There is certainly a "spin" put on some of recorded history. But we have the stars, other contemporary writings from different cultural zones and archaeology to help us clear away some of the dust ( so to speak )

Right, I agree with you. There is evidence for many things that happened. I just mean that it is a good thing to entertain, that some history may be different than we perceive.

Would it not have to be a global conspiracy for the addition of 300 years?
Seems far fetched to me....

Isn't the Anti-Christ supposed to change the time or date or something like that ? :>)