Fomenko's "New Chronology"

Re: Fomenko's \

I'm currently working on book 3 and the Egyptian calendars, but in the meantime I had never heard of Poggio Bracciolini until reading Fomenko's first book. I found a copy of a book by JW Ross called " Tacitus and Bracciolini, the annals forged in the XVth century." It was written in 1878 and Ross does a great job tearing apart the work of Tacitus and reviewing Bracciolini's life. There are many excerpts in Latin which he scrutinizes and since I don't know Latin, this part was a little slow for me. By the time I finished there was no doubt that Tacitus works are a forgery. The church and money men paid huge sums for "ancient" material and then the stories of where they were found is dubious, not to mention the many mistakes in the stories themselves. The bigger question is how many forgeries are there? I also read "The Prolegomena of Jean Hardouin" in which JH makes it clear that the monesteries were cranking out forgeries and fiction in mass quantity. He also mentions that many of the ancient coins were also fake. Great reading and certainly backs up what Fomenko is talking about. Jean Hardouin can be somewhat monotonous due to his rants on how many works are atheistic in nature especially Saint Augustine and his "Confessions."
 
Re: Fomenko's

I'm also working my way through his work, (up to about 400 in book 1) and I feel that he makes a fairly convincing argument that something definitely crazy was going on in the 10th - 15th centuries I'm still largely on the fence about his conclusions.

As a high school student and until now it has never really sat well with me that so much of the trappings of the Roman Empire were carried forward in time for so long. Latin being used for nearly a thousand years after the empire collapsed was something that always bugged me, despite it usually being explained that it was a lingua franca of the upper class. Why latin at that point? Supposedly the Roman Empire had been largely destroyed by 500AD (western) and still this small class of monks for nearly 500 years kept it alive as a speaking language? This, along with the other trappings of ancient rome continuing (The Holy Roman Empire, the old olympian gods and greek heroes being kept around forever) had never really made a whole lot of sense to me.

There's two options now to look at this phase :
1. The traditional chronology> Rome goes blank in the 500sAD, Latin is kept alive as a liturgical language, and with the Renaissance all of the old gods and heroes make a comeback after a long absence.
2. Fomenko chronology> the 'Roman Empire' is contiguous from its foundation c.IX or Xth century until the "Renaissance" and nothing really vastly changed besides an explosion of texts from the invention of the printing press. Latin is still spoken because its always been spoken and the gods and heroes have always been around.

Have you asked the C's about this material Laura?
 
Re: Fomenko's

I'm with you, BP: his arguments for the falsification are overwhelmingly compelling, but I'm not sure if the reasons he gives for them, or even the way he thinks it was done exactly, are correct interpretations.

Bottom line is: we have here some significant data; we need to take care in interpreting it.
 
Re: Fomenko's \

Received the 4 printed volumes two weeks ago and have been flat out reading ... MIND-BOGGLING!

I wish I knew more of the math involved, as I only halfway understand the method. It would certainly be interesting to follow up his methodology with other books - and why not on Homer's Iliad? It would certainly be fascinating to compare it to other works - maybe the Artus Legend or ...? I am unfortunately neither a mathematician, nor a historian. But if there are any maths gurus here that understand the maths behind Fomenko's work, it certainly would be interesting to examine his method more closely. And certainly a lot of us would pitch in to do the leg-work like counting lines or words or ...

For me the most fascinating part so far was the description of the Journey of the Israelites, led by Moses, from Egypt that Fomenko actually localizes in modern Italy! He hasn't explored the whole idea completely yet, as this will be done in a later Chronology, but if that is true, then the ramifications are truly phenomenal. Think about the situation the modern Israel would be in: They could not even claim a "historical" right to the current location of the State of Israel as they insist on today. Instead they would have to move to Italy!

I'll certainly plod on, hard yakka. Yet again a "bastion of knowledge" built on shifting sands, another monument destroyed, another layer of the onion peeled back. The falsification of history is way, way worse than I ever imagined. And everybody, including the academic world has swallowed it hook, line and sinker.

I wonder, where does it stop ...
 
Re: Fomenko's \

nicklebleu said:
I'll certainly plod on, hard yakka. Yet again a "bastion of knowledge" built on shifting sands, another monument destroyed, another layer of the onion peeled back. The falsification of history is way, way worse than I ever imagined. And everybody, including the academic world has swallowed it hook, line and sinker.

I wonder, where does it stop ...
Click to expand...

I know exactly how you feel. Just keep in mind that Fomenko does not adequately address the problem of the facts of cataclysmic disruption and the need to restore history after such events. Of course, the restoration after such an event is going to be politically motivated and contain corruptions, but I think that general memory of things past and their general time frame of occurrence is retained in seed form at least. Also, re-writers of history try to make things more "real" for their readers and will naturally tend to include window dressing that is familiar to them.

But yes, overall, the corruption is monstrous. Quite debilitating to think about.
 
Re: Fomenko's \

For those interested in the topic who don't read Fomenko at the moment I'd like to summarize what I have read so far - all of this is quite mind-boggling and has far reaching consequences, I think.
It also ties in with the other thread about the Odyssey ...

Fomenko basically found, that all of the Scaligerian history, that is the history that we conventionally use today is a superimposition of four smaller chronicles:

This basic result of ours can possibly be explained by stating that the "Scaligerian textbook" of ancient and medieval history of Europe and Asia is a laminated chronicle obtained by the collation of four virtually identical copies of the short chronicle S1. The remaining three chronicles S2, S3, S4 are derived from chronicle S1 by shifting it downward in time as a rigid whole by 333, 1053 and 1778 years accordingly. The indicated values of shifts are of course approximate.

In other words, the "Scaligerian textbook", - and therefore contemporary textbooks of history as well, - can be completely restored from their smaller part S0, all of which lies to the right of year 960 A.D. In other words, each "Scaligerian historical epoch" located further to the left, i.e. below 960 A.D., is only a phantom reflection of a certain later historical epoch, all of which lies to the right of year 960 A.D.
Click to expand...

Or again in other words, we basically know nothing about what happened before 960 A.D.

He then goes on to give some examples of periods and people that have been duplicated, e.g.:

- Odysseus (=Ulysses) = Lartius + Martius Coriolianus = Lucius Sulla and Cicero = Lucius Aurelianus
- Agamemnon = Tarquin the Proud = Pompey the Great = Diocletian the Great = Justinian and Theodora = Theophilactus and Theodora = Hugo and Theodora II = Otto II = Innocent IV
- Achilles = Valerius = Julius Caesar = Constantius Chlorus = Velizarius = Alberic I = Alberic II = Charles of Anjou
- Patroclus = Valerius = Junius, son of Marcus Brutus = John II = John X = John XI
Click to expand...

In terms of Ancient Greece, he says:

Identification of the "ancient" Greek history and the medieval Greek history with a 1810 year shift. [...] This brightly eventful parallelism identifies the fragment of history of medieval Greece of 1250 - 1460 A.D. with the fragment of history of the "ancient" Greece of allegedly 510 - 300 B.C.
Click to expand...

In terms of the Bible, he states the following:

It is evident, that the so-called historical part of the Bible , the Old Testament, is identified with a part of the Scaligerian "European textbook" E in the range from 850 B.C. to 1400 A.D. However, since the Bible appeared to contain many phantom duplicates, then the Old Testament, likewise "Scaliger's textbook" E, can be completely restored from its smaller part - namely the part to the right of 900 A.D. on the time axis. [...]
Moreover the New Testament probably describes events occurring in the XI century A.D. in the New Rome, Constantinople.
[...]
The Biblical Story - that is all the events of both the Old and the New Testament - fits into the intveral between the X century A.D. and XVI century A.D.
[...]
A serious mistake the medieval chronologists made was the erroneous dating of the Nativity or the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ. They made, give or take a little, a mistake of one thousand years, shifting the fife of Jesus Christ from the XI century A.D. into the I century A.D.
Click to expand...

From what I have read and understood so far is that all of this analysis is done in a purely statistical way using volumes of verses or lines, or frequency of names mentioned etc, and doesn't require one to analyze the text in a semiotic way, which may be ambiguous and open to interpretation. Furthermore he used different approaches which all gave similar results and cross-checked them with known (later than XXVI century material).

That's a brief overview of the findings of Fomenko. I will come back and post further bits and pieces I deem interesting.
 
Re: Fomenko's \

Today I came across an advertisement for a Christie's auction of books, atlases and manuscripts that reminded me of Fomenko.

The advertisement featured an illuminated manuscript titled "Liber insularum Arcipalagi" [Book of the Islands of the Archipelago], by Christoforo Buondelmonti, thought to date from c. 1450 AD and produced in Italy, perhaps Florence. A "luxurious atlas of the Aegean islands, including more than 70 maps and descriptibe texts".

If you go to Christie's website, and click on the "Advanced Search" and then search through the "Past Sales" for the keyword "Buondelmonti", you can see Christie's fairly detailed description of this item and a picture of it.

It sold for $1.7 million on April 10, 2012, at New York. Sale 2622, Lot 155.

What reminded me of Fomenko was a sentence in the advertisement in the print magazine which read: "This was the first isolario, or island book, with particular attention devoted to "classical" monuments and ruins." [Italics added].

The illustrations in the manuscript include Chios, showing Homer's tomb; Crete; Mount Athos and other places.
 
Re: Fomenko's \

For anyone interested in watching a Russian (English subtitled) documentary about Fomenko, i found this a while back on Vimeo. It took a while to find for some reason, so should anyone have missed it.

It seems to be in 4 parts. Episode 3 is an overview of his methodology and the process from which his work came to be. Interviews with Fomenko and his colleagues, background to the discovery and i particularly liked seeing the wall charts he created to visualize the data.

I would highly recommend it to anyone who hasn't finished the books (like me), it provides a fascinating overview. I had to prioritise CATHOM and i am glad i read that first ... ;D


"History: Fiction or Science? Part 3: Methods (English Subtitles) - 1hour

_http://vimeo.com/28085647

(also hosted here on youtube: _https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbQMplPvA7k)

---

I wanted to be double sure this wouldn't have been posted here so i thought to check youtube aswell, and came across what appears to be a different documentary series, with individual episodes - 'the Moscow Cremlin is Season 1 Episode 11! - presenting his discoveries focusing on notable events. I can't remember if i watched this but from a quick glance, it looks worthwhile.

History: science or fiction?
from IGMAR

(English version)
Season 1 episode 11 - The Moscow Cremlin

_http://vimeo.com/49907342
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom