Historical Events Database - History

[Myeong In]

I also try to sort out the phantom history. Before looking into histographies, archeology may give some good insight about what happened. Thank for people mentioning Gunnar Heinsohn. He makes some good observation.

To summarize Gunnar Heinsohn's argument:

-Archaeological sites of 1st millennium in Europe and Mediterranean usually only consist around 300 years strata. That means there is only 300 years of building history in 1st millennium. Usually, sites are said to belong to either one periods, the Imperial Roman Period (1st- 3rd century), Late Antique (4th to 6th century) or early middle ages (7th to 9th century). No site consists of more than one period.

-All the sites are few meters deep down in the ground. From Mediterranean to Baltic, it is not uncommon to see that ancient ports are few meters away from the coast.

- Below the 300 years strata is the strata of Hellenistic strata or iron age. The medieval strata (10th century) usually can be found above the 300 years strata with a layer of black earth in between.

- By examining the artifact and architecture, Gunnar Heinsohn notices that style seems that is not changing for 700 years, or in his wording culture standstill for 700 years. The early middle ages buildings from 7th to 9th century usually are praised by scholars to have antique (1st/2nd century) appearance. The Arabs are reported culturally retarded, ie no coins or writing after 1st century and before the rise of Islam despite their frequent contact with Roman or Persian. Similar happened to Polish where 700 years of archeological strata in Poland is missing and their culture doesn't change much and follow the iron age style for 700 years in 8th/9th century.

- It seems to have not enough archeological evident to show the existing of Saxon in post roman Britain.

The impression of extreme poverty under which Anglo-Saxons must have suffered in post-Roman Britain does not only afflict commoners. Their rulers, too, are exposed to dire straits. Since their palaces cannot be found, their courts are conceptualized as transportable, itinerant settings that were erected in the wilderness to impress their homeless subjects, who braced themselves for royal decrees when their Saxon lords showed up:

“The history of the Anglo-Saxon court is largely lost and unknown” (Campbell 2003, 155). / “The Anglo-Saxons, from homelands [in Germany] where the necessary materials scarcely existed, probably had no tradition of building in stone”(English Heritage 2017). “Attempts to demonstrate conclusively significant continuity in specific urban or rural sites have runafoul of the near archaeological invisibility of post-Roman British society” (Jones, 1998, 23).​

One may assume that poor peasants lived in caves or straw huts, whereas the nobility survived in perishable tents that left no tracesarchaeologists could discover. Still, the Saxons would need to eat. Therefore, at least agriculture (90 percent of the economy withlots of hardware) should have left detectable remains. Yet, researchers are stunned by the same enigmatic absence of evidence:

“Whatever the discussion about the plough in Roman Britain, at least it is a discussion based on surviving models and partsof ploughs, whereas virtually no such evidence exists for the Period A.D. 500-900 in England. […] In contrast to the field system of the 500 years or so on either side of the beginning of our era, little evidence has survived in the ground for the next half millennium (Fowler 2002, 28).​

The surprises do not end there because nobody can understand why the Saxons conquering post-Roman Britain did not simply takeover the superbly located Roman settlements and fields: “The Saxons tended to avoid Roman sites possibly because they used different farming methods“ (Southern 2013, 361).

Such an assumption begs the question of why the alternative agricultural technologies left no traces either. Moreover, dozens of plants cultivated during the Roman period did not only become rarer but disappeared entirely:

“[We] learn from Prof. Fleming [2016] that Roman conquerors introduced many — perhaps as many as 50 — new and valuable food plants and animals (such as the donkey) to its province of Britannia, where these crops were successfully cultivated for some 300 years. Among the foodstuffs that Roman civilization brought to Britain are walnuts, carrots, broad beans, grapes, beets, cabbage, leeks, turnips, parsnips, cucumbers, cherries, plums, peaches, almonds, chestnuts, pears, lettuce, celery, white mustard, mint, einkorn, millet, and many more. These valuable plants took root in Britain and so did Roman horticulture. British gardens produced a bounty of tasty and nourishing foods. […] Following the collapse of Roman rule after400 AD, almost all of these food plants vanished from Britain, as did Roman horticulture itself. Post-Roman Britons […]suddenly went from gardening to foraging. Even Roman water mills vanished from British streams. But similar mills came back in large numbers in the 10th and 11th centuries, along with Roman food plants and farming techniques” [Whelton 2016].​

The events that led to the mysterious extinction of plants also caused the devastation of Roman cities like, e.g., Durovernum Cantiacorum (Canterbury of the Middle Ages). Researchers are at a loss to explain why Germanic invaders would rather live in the woods or in caves under constant threat from savage beasts rather than make themselves comfortable in existing Roman structures well shielded by massive walls.



-Campbell, J. (2003), „Anglo-Saxon Courts”, in Cubitt, C., Hg., Court Culture in the Early Middle Ages: The Proceedings of the First Alcuin Conference, Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 155-169
-English Heritage (2017), Story of England. Dark Ages: c 410-1066; English Heritage
-Fleming, R. (2016), “Vanishing Plants, Animals, and Places: Britain’s Transformation from Roman to Medieval”, lecture at Fordham’s Center forMedieval Studies and the New York Botanical Garden, Humanities Institute, Mertz Library, New York Botanical Garden, 30 September 2016
-Fowler, P.J. (2002), Farming in the First Millennium A.D.: British Agriculture Between Julius Caesar and William the Conqueror, Cambridge/UK: Cambridge University Press
-Jones, M.E. (1998), The End of Roman Britain, Ithaca/NY: Cornell University Press
-Southern, P. (2013), Roman Britain: A New History 55 BC-AD 450, The Hill, Stroud; Gloucestershire: Amberley Publishing
-Whelton, C. (2016), “A Canterbury Tale by Saucy Chaucer“; A Canterbury Tale by Saucy Chaucer

-The Justinian Digestae also shows strange phenomena.

Justinian expressly promised the Romans that he would always keep their laws and comments up to date. Therefore, it is difficult to understand why the last commentator died 340 years before Justinian: “There remains the fact that between the writing of the classical works, mostly before about AD 230, and the compilation of the Digestae in the AD 530s three centuries intervened” (Crook 1967, Law and Life in Rome, Ithaca/NY: Cornell University Press, page14). Justinian’s Digestae are dated to Late Antiquity (6th century). Yet, the most important legal commentators quoted in the Digestae belonged to the time of the Severan emperors of Imperial Antiquity (2nd/3rd century). Justinian himself wrote the Latin of the 2nd/3rd century of these commentators. His Greek subjects got a readable version – strangely still using Koine Greek of the 2nd/3rd c.– only in the Early Middle Ages (Basilika; 9th/10th century). All these oddities give the impression as if the three epochs [ie: Imperial Antiquity, Late Antiquity, Early Middle Age] existed side by side at the same time. Yet, such a statement would sound bizarre or worse.

Therefore Gunnar Heinsohn proposed that the 1st millennium only consists of roughly 300 years and follows a big catastrophe in 10th century that start the medieval period.

The 10th century collapse is not only confirmed by destructions of human habitats. Extreme natural phenomena are recorded, too. The earth’s history of ALLUVIATION is divided in two main periods of deposition. The first belongs to the shift from the late Pleistocene to the early Holocene. The second one is global, too. In territories that once belonged to the Roman Empire it directly buried artifacts of Roman culture:

“Throughout the Mediterranean Basin, the Levant, Iran, and southeast Arabia, many valleys display two alluvial fills of which the older dates from about 30,000-10,000 yr BP and the younger from about A.D. 400-1850. […] The younger fill is well sorted and stratified and, as in Mexico, displays silt-clay depletion as well as iron loss when compared with the older fill deposits from which it is often derived. […]. The YOUNGER FILL is seen in many widely separated areas to cover structures of Roman age as the period of deposition extended into Byzantine and even medieval times. […] The sections in W. Libya are typical in showing the younger fill deposits in channels eroded into the earlier fill. In most areas, the surface of the older fill was the usable land in Roman times. Greek, Roman, Byzantine, and medieval sherds are found in the younger fill, which also covers entire cities, notably, Olympia in Greece.”. ( L.B. Leopold, C. Vita-Finzi, “Valley Changes in the Mediterranean and America and Their Effects on Humans”, in Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 142, no- 1 (March), 1-17/11)​

IMO, cutting 700 years is too much. It doesn't have enough time for some events to develop. But the one big catastrophe conclusion before 10th century makes sense if we consider the information given by C that
1) Caesar born in 379 AD (the corrected version)
2) Justinian is the last Roman Emperor
3) The reason for lacking 1054 supernova record in Europe is loss of civilized structure due to overhead cometary explosion in 564 AD. (The year indicates that it is related to Justinian)
4) Refugees from Northwestern Europe following cataclysms excavated the underground cities at Derinkuyu and Kaymakli in Anatolia.

After the Europe is burnt and it gives rise to the black earth deposit which buries the roman world and that become the new ground of medieval people.

In the case of Rome according to Gunnar Heinsohn

A no less fatal fall at such an incredibly late date is confirmed for ROME, too. Though one would expect traces of the fall-out of the Crisis of the Third Century or of the fall of Eastern Rome in the 6th century, there is hard evidence only for a devastating cataclysm the 10th century:

"The eleventh century marked another turning-point in Rome's urban history. Excavations have revealed that this period [of the beginning of the High Middle Ages; GH] is characterized, in all strata, by a significant rise in paving levels, and the consequent obliteration of many structures and ancient ruins. [...]It is mostly the building types that change radically. For the first time [i.e., not already in the 3rd or 6th c.] we find a typical medieval urban fabric: houses of brick or masonry, and often with two stories, built side-by-side along the thoroughfares. Even more radical is the change in the type of building occupied by the wealthier classes: the increasing conflict within the nobility led to the militarization of the urban landscape, most evident in the spread of fortified complexes dominated by towers, in which the nobles resided. [...]An English pilgrim, Magister Gregorius, who visited Rome at the end of the twelfth or at the beginning of the thirteenth century, when first setting eyes on the city from the surrounding hills, compared the towers to ears of wheat, 'so many that none can count them'." (R. Santangeli Valenzani, “Box 4.2 Rome"; in James Graham-Campbell, M. Valor, The Archaeology of Medieval Europe. Vol. 1: The Eighth to Twelfth Centuries AD, Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 2013; 130-133/133; )​

In the case of London according to Gunnar Heinsohn

“Many [British] building sequences appear to terminate in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. […] The latest Roman levels are sealed by deposits of dark coloured loam, commonly called the ‘dark earth’ (formerly ‘black earth’). In the London area the ‘dark earth’ generally appears as a dark grey, rather silty loam with various inclusions, especially building material. The deposit is usually without stratification and homogeneous in appearance, It can be one meter or more in thickness. […] The evidence suggests that truncation of late Roman stratification is linked to the process of ‘dark earth’ formation“ (Yule, B. (1990), „The ‘dark earth’ and Late Roman London”, in Antiquity: A Review of World Archaeology, Bd. 64, Nr. 244, September, 620-628).

“Parts [of Londinium] were already covered by a horizon of dark silts (often described as `dark earth'). Land was converted to arable and pastoral use or abandoned entirely. The dark earth may have started forming in the 3rd century” (Schofield, J. (1999), “Saxon London in a tale of two cities”, British Archaeology, No. 44 [May]).

The problem is that how can we make sense of all the histographies about 6th to 10th century. I think some did cover the period but because of the dating system and the confusion of language or mistakes, when after the catastrophe people recollected stories and records and turn them into a coherent narrative, it becomes a mess where archeological evident sometimes doesn't fit.

 

[Jtucker]

I also try to sort out the phantom history. Before looking into histographies, archeology may give some good insight about what happened. Thank for people mentioning Gunnar Heinsohn. He makes some good observation.

To summarize Gunnar Heinsohn's argument:

-Archaeological sites of 1st millennium in Europe and Mediterranean usually only consist around 300 years strata. That means there is only 300 years of building history in 1st millennium. Usually, sites are said to belong to either one periods, the Imperial Roman Period (1st- 3rd century), Late Antique (4th to 6th century) or early middle ages (7th to 9th century). No site consists of more than one period.

-All the sites are few meters deep down in the ground. From Mediterranean to Baltic, it is not uncommon to see that ancient ports are few meters away from the coast.

- Below the 300 years strata is the strata of Hellenistic strata or iron age. The medieval strata (10th century) usually can be found above the 300 years strata with a layer of black earth in between.
View attachment 94944

- By examining the artifact and architecture, Gunnar Heinsohn notices that style seems that is not changing for 700 years, or in his wording culture standstill for 700 years. The early middle ages buildings from 7th to 9th century usually are praised by scholars to have antique (1st/2nd century) appearance. The Arabs are reported culturally retarded, ie no coins or writing after 1st century and before the rise of Islam despite their frequent contact with Roman or Persian. Similar happened to Polish where 700 years of archeological strata in Poland is missing and their culture doesn't change much and follow the iron age style for 700 years in 8th/9th century.

- It seems to have not enough archeological evident to show the existing of Saxon in post roman Britain.


-The Justinian Digestae also shows strange phenomena.


Therefore Gunnar Heinsohn proposed that the 1st millennium only consists of roughly 300 years and follows a big catastrophe in 10th century that start the medieval period.


IMO, cutting 700 years is too much. It doesn't have enough time for some events to develop. But the one big catastrophe conclusion before 10th century makes sense if we consider the information given by C that
1) Caesar born in 379 AD (the corrected version)
2) Justinian is the last Roman Emperor
3) The reason for lacking 1054 supernova record in Europe is loss of civilized structure due to overhead cometary explosion in 564 AD. (The year indicates that it is related to Justinian)
4) Refugees from Northwestern Europe following cataclysms excavated the underground cities at Derinkuyu and Kaymakli in Anatolia.

After the Europe is burnt and it gives rise to the black earth deposit which buries the roman world and that become the new ground of medieval people.

In the case of Rome according to Gunnar Heinsohn

In the case of London according to Gunnar Heinsohn


The problem is that how can we make sense of all the histographies about 6th to 10th century. I think some did cover the period but because of the dating system and the confusion of language or mistakes, when after the catastrophe people recollected stories and records and turn them into a coherent narrative, it becomes a mess where archeological evident sometimes doesn't fit.

@Myeong In thanks for the summary on some of Heinsohn's most compelling arguments.

IMO, cutting 700 years is too much. It doesn't have enough time for some events to develop. But the one big catastrophe conclusion before 10th century makes sense if we consider the information given by C that
1) Caesar born in 379 AD (the corrected version)
2) Justinian is the last Roman Emperor
3) The reason for lacking 1054 supernova record in Europe is loss of civilized structure due to overhead cometary explosion in 564 AD. (The year indicates that it is related to Justinian)
4) Refugees from Northwestern Europe following cataclysms excavated the underground cities at Derinkuyu and Kaymakli in Anatolia.

After the Europe is burnt and it gives rise to the black earth deposit which buries the roman world and that become the new ground of medieval people.

I think your above summation is possibly very close. As you mentioned. Heinsohn is thinking along the lines of Supernova and didn't suspect an overhead cometary explosion or explosions that sets off earthquakes, volcanoes and plagues. Also as it's hard to really grasp just how catastrophic the destruction was and how it may have affected a long-term psychological and technological trauma on the survivors. Avoiding Roman ruins or past settlements would make sense - I would imagine they would be perceived if as cursed and possibly the cause of the catastrophe (which may have been more accurate than not).

4) Refugees from Northwestern Europe following cataclysms excavated the underground cities at Derinkuyu and Kaymakli in Anatolia.

I would agree that these underground cities would have been used as refuge from the cataclysm, but more likely for survivors from the eastern part of the empire due to proximity. As for Brittania and much of western Europe, Heinsohn answers the most likely below:

"One may assume that poor peasants lived in caves or straw huts, whereas the nobility survived in perishable tents that left no traces archaeologists could discover. Still, the Saxons would need to eat. Therefore, at least agriculture (90 percent of the economy with lots of hardware) should have left detectable remains. Yet, researchers are stunned by the same enigmatic absence of evidence"

Most evidence points to the Saxons migrating to an abandoned eastern Britain. And the technological level and quality of life for the Dark Age survivors being very low. It's possible that the after effects of the catastrophe lingered for many decades and these small bands of "barbarians" had flee regularly due to some new threat. The whole period seems environmentally unstable.

Below is an excerpt from a 8th or 9th century Old English poem, entitled "The Ruin". Clearly the Saxon writer has little or no knowledge directly handed down from the ancient world, which by his description is long gone. The Roman ruin in Britain doesn't even have a remembered name.

This masonry is wondrous; fates broke it
courtyard pavements were smashed; the work of giants is decaying.
Roofs are fallen, ruinous towers,
the frosty gate with frost on cement is ravaged,
chipped roofs are torn, fallen,
undermined by old age. The grasp of the earth possesses
the mighty builders, perished and fallen,
the hard grasp of earth, until a hundred generations
of people have departed. Often this wall,
lichen-grey and stained with red, experienced one reign after another,
remained standing under storms; the high wide gate has collapsed.

 

[Keit]

I stumbled upon the following interesting entry. Originally written in Dutch. If anyone knows Dutch, please confirm the translation. It talks about the event that happened in 1760 and says the following:

GRONINGEN, January 22. The following letter was received from Weile, a Danish town in the diocese of Rypen, in North Jutland, on the Baltic Sea. On December 26 last, at 10 o'clock in the evening, a violent storm arose here. I was still awake at 2:04 a.m. on the night of the 26th to the 27th.

An hour earlier, I had noticed a very bright phenomenon from my window, which I initially mistook for a flash of lightning. The storm immediately became more violent. After noticing this atmospheric phenomenon, I remained awake and at 4 o'clock noticed a phenomenon that seemed to come from the moon and move horizontally. It appeared to be about 1.5 fathoms in length and an arm's thickness on both sides, emitting fiery rays.

I then went into my garden and noticed a fireball, which had the shape of a cannonball, slowly turning from south to north. At first, this ball appeared to be very dark, like the sun when it hides behind the clouds, but meanwhile it emitted enough rays. Two minutes later, the glow of this ball steadily weakened and became slightly redder, until it finally disappeared altogether. Shortly thereafter, a storm arose, accompanied by such violent and terrible gusts that many people mistook it for an earthquake.

I have spoken to many elderly people about this phenomenon, and although I myself have seen many atmospheric phenomena in Norway, I have never observed one like this, accompanied by such circumstances.

 

[Tomiro]

I stumbled upon the following interesting entry. Originally written in Danish. If anyone knows Danish, please confirm the translation. It talks about the event that happened in 1760 and says the following:

Interesting find.The article is written in Dutch though.

 

[Keit]

Interesting find.The article is written in Dutch though.

Oops, you are write. Sorry, now corrected.

 

[Oxajil]

If anyone knows Dutch, please confirm the translation.

Yeah, the translation is correct.

 

[Voyageur]

Yeah, the translation is correct.

Is this part correct?

I was still awake at 2:04 a.m. on the night of the 26th to the 27th.

Think that is what it says.

It struck me as curious, that in 1760 a person would denote the 04 min part of 2 AM (why not, that it was 2:05 AM). That seems kind of modern day precise, which only shows how accurate they could be back then with their timekeeping when stating observations.

I stumbled upon the following interesting entry.

Good find.

 

[Oxajil]

Is this part correct?

Yes, that's correct.

 

[Keit]

Did the Phaeton legend come with a place in Northern Italy? If yes we may be able to find traces of it there in situ.

I stumbled upon this ancient Siberian "legend". Whoever compiled the "timeline" makes wild speculations, but the concept of the "three suns" is out there.

Three suns in Nanai legends—myth or reality?

Most Nanai legends begin traditionally: “It was when three suns shone in the sky... One sun was large and two were smaller. And at night it was as bright as day...” Where does this legendary information come from? Where are its origins?

Some researchers believe that the “fairy tale” about the three suns “migrated” to the Amur from somewhere in Polynesia during the period when paleocontacts with the islanders were established. Others argue that the origins of these legends should be sought in the local indigenous philosophy and folk memory of the autochthonous population. Still others simply avoid the question altogether.

But what about it? Legends are not born out of nothing. A legend is, first and foremost, the historical memory of a people, passed down through generations by word of mouth. So, were the “three suns” an event that once happened in reality? That is, one, our Sun, Helios, around which, as proven by astronomical science, our planet Earth revolves. But what about the other two?

Not only in the legends of the Amur peoples, but also in other parts of the globe, there are stories that also begin with “three suns.” For example, the Dogon people, who live in the east of the African continent (Tanzania), have a valley where stone blocks are laid out in a pattern... our solar system, consisting not of 9, but of 12 or 13 “main” large planets. Moreover, starting with Jupiter, the “dependents of the Sun” are marked with boulders of greater mass than the “small” planets. And the further from the center of the system, the greater their mass. The legends of the ancient Dogon also tell that once upon a time their ancestors lived under the constellation of three suns, and the Southern Cross, which hangs above them, like our Triton (the constellations Ursa Major and Ursa Minor), was visible only in the mornings and evenings above the horizon.

Three and a half thousand years ago, the ancient Sumerians wrote in cuneiform on clay tablets that they had “seen” an “invisible planet” between Mars and Jupiter, and immediately after that there was a ‘flood’ lasting “six days and six nights.”

Ancient Chinese sources claim that once upon a time the earth was “shaken,” the Sun, Earth, Moon, and stars ‘changed’ their paths, the Middle Kingdom “moved south,” and the sky began to “fall” to the north.

One of the legends of the ancient aborigines of the Lower Amur contains information indicating that “the sky and the earth were mixed up” and ‘turned’ at the time when “the Huns fought the Amur people” and “during the day, a star shone, which was visible through the black clouds of the fires.”

Or here is another hypothesis that appeared quite recently in the press: About 10,000 years ago, the North Pole “moved” from Canada, a glacier covered half of Europe, and the growing Taimyr ice sheet pushed the Pratungus tribes south, to Primorye and Priamurye, from under Yakutsk. There is also other information, sometimes scattered, some of which is now scientifically substantiated, about separate periodic catastrophes on Earth occurring at approximately the same chronological intervals. This is echoed in the legend of the once “lost” Phaeton, the “ancestral homeland of humanity.”

And here is another scientific hypothesis by Russian astronomer Lyudmila Konstantinova, known in scientific circles for her unconventional approaches to everyday problems. She believes that the solar system has not 9, but 12 (possibly 13 or more) planets. But the most interesting thing about this hypothesis is that two, and perhaps three, planets in the Solar System are stars. They have even been given names: Phaeton, Milius, and Transpluto. Could this be the answer to the riddle of the three suns?

Astronomical science teaches that the “birth” of a new star from a cold planetary mass occurs through an explosion, but with a loss of ten percent of its original mass. This “loss,” as L. Konstantinova further points out, then becomes an asteroid belt. In her opinion, there are two such belts in the solar system. The first, long known in astronomical science, is located between Mars and Jupiter. The second belt, as the scientist's calculations show, is located beyond Jupiter. The existence of such a star “close” to us is “practically proven.” This is the very same Phaeton that was considered “lost.”

Based on her calculations, Konstantinova also believes that Phaeton's period of revolution around the Sun in an elongated elliptical orbit is 2,800 years. And when Phaeton approaches its point of maximum proximity to the Sun, it should be clearly visible from Earth. This is probably the second “small” sun that the Amur aborigines saw through the “clouds of fire.” This is probably where the ancient Sumerians, Chinese, Dogon, and Pratungus got their information about the “earthquake,” the flood, the “fall of the Celestial Empire,” and the glow of a new sun-star. Perhaps this is the “second” sun that “shone at night” as it did during the day and left “traces” of its presence in the form of legends in the historical memory of peoples. And not only that.

What kind of star, according to the Bible, first “walked across the sky,” “shone” during the day, and then went in the opposite direction during the birth of Jesus Christ? Is this possible?

Phaeton? But according to calculations, it should have been at its furthest point from the Sun at that time and should not have been visible from Earth. Based on the laws of motion of astronomical bodies:

— first, this is possible due to the different speeds and radii of the planets' rotation around the Sun: our planet first “caught up” with this star due to its greater radial speed, then, finding itself “in line” with it, the star ‘stopped’ for a very short time, “flashed, and began to ”move backward." ;

— secondly, it must be assumed that this was some other star that “spins nearby” around our Sun. Perhaps this very star was the “third” sun?

Incidentally, according to the author of the hypothesis, under the influence of the stars, or more precisely, their additional energetic “irradiation,” particularly gifted people are born during such periods. And this is not only the opinion of L. Konstantinova; many geneticists share this view.

Thus, in addition to the Sun—Helios—two more “small,” legendary suns “appeared” on the horizon.

In 1988, L. Konstantinova managed to calculate another star orbiting the Sun beyond Jupiter, and this satellite star was named Milius. Milius' orbital “circle” is 1,400 years. Both of these stars are currently invisible to the telescope due to their distance, ‘small’ luminosity, and “small” volume in relation to the distance from the researcher. It can be assumed, as L. Konstantinova believes, that the appearance of such “wanderers” near Earth is not so frequent, and therefore they may remain “unnoticed” in such ancient times.

L. Konstantinova's hypothesis “contradicts” school textbooks on astronomy, but once again confirms the validity of Newton's law: the farther a planet is from the Sun, the greater its mass and, consequently, its energy potential (which is what leads to distant elliptical orbits). The author of the hypothesis calculated that Pluto belongs to the “large” planets, with a greater mass than Jupiter and a more “elongated orbit.” Beyond Pluto, at a sufficient distance in an even more elongated orbit, there is another large, “heavier” planet, or rather a star, which Russian and American astronomers have long “calculated.” This planet (star) has been given the temporary name Transpluto, which means “beyond Pluto.” Its orbital period around the Sun is 600 years.

Thus, with a pencil in hand, one can roughly calculate when three suns shone in the sky and which of them was the “third.” This is how the cosmic causes of the demise of previous “civilizations,” mammoths, the fragmentation of Europe and Ancient Rus, the Great Troubles, revolutions and crises, popular activity and passivity, the birth of geniuses and the rise of cultures “manifest” themselves.

At the intersections of numbers, legends and hypotheses of scientists come to life, “traces” in the Solar System, at the beginning of which time has brought us. And these ‘traces’ at the “intersections” of the meetings of three (four) planet-stars have remained in the overall picture of the past and speak for themselves:

— 1270 BC — the destruction of the continent of Mu in the Pacific Ocean, the change in the Earth's geographic pole, the movement of the equator from the Amur River to its current line;

— 9900 (9700) BC — the destruction of Atlantis, the change in the North Pole, the glaciation of Europe, the growth of the Taimyr ice sheet, the resettlement of the Pratungus people to the Amur and Primorye regions, the extinction of the mammoths;

— 7100 BC — melting of the glaciers of the North and South, destruction of the civilizations of Ancient India, its practical demise, flood;

— 1500 BC — Santorini tragedy, demise of the Aegean civilization, “fall of the sky,” flood. Three suns “shone” in the sky, and the water in the Amur River changed its course.

It should be noted that this “crossroads” of encounters, according to calculations, was when Phaeton and Milius “took part” in the “great” parade of planets;

— 1300 BC — the flood, volcanism, and tsunamis that washed away the coastline of the Japanese islands and the northeastern and central parts of Africa remained in the popular memory.

The “next,” “incomplete” parade of planets was in 1200-1300. Transpluto and its “colors” were ‘visiting’ the large planets — the demise of the Far Eastern Jurchen civilization, the sky “covered with dust,” “black days,” tsunamis, and volcanic activity.

According to calculations, three suns will shine in the sky again in 4100, as they did “last time” in 1500 BC. This is most likely the time when three suns shone in the sky: Helios, Phaeton, and Milius. That is when the legend was born.

And what star “shone” in the sky on the day of Jesus Christ's birth? Calculations show that it was Milius, since Phaeton had long been invisible, and Transpluto had “visited” a whole 100 years earlier.