Session 18 September 2021

aguti

A Disturbance in the Force
When Terminator, falls his machinery by choice, by knowledge, by faith, or just by spite.
The big, fat Satan can take over the body and mind, but the divine firefly twirling in the light/dark of consciousness can tip the scales either way.
At least that's how I see it.
By the way, you can also see it for yourself in this extract:




Thanks to a post by Nienna, I came across this thread:







Eíriú-Eolas:
"As you continue practicing the Eíriú-Eolas system, you will embrace a new quality of energy, range and initiative. You will become strong in areas where you were once weak. You will experience the constant guidance of your higher self. This guidance will be active in the work of your hands and the words of your mouth. You will feel this guidance in the form of protection, as you will also have the ability to perceive danger in greater capacity than before. Your higher self will guide you to acquire the knowledge you need on a practical level to protect yourself from unnecessary harm."

This is the proto-protocol before its time.
To serve at the right time.
Some might say at the worst possible time.

Quite a job!
Quite a session, thank you all!
Hello, lately I have had little time to work properly. Today is a day totally dedicated to reading and doing breathing exercises. Reading this post has motivated me even more. Thanks Zak!
Thank you very much everyone in this Forum!
 

sofi108

A Disturbance in the Force
A: Now would be a good time to ponder the lessons contained in the Parable of the Sower.
“...And I finally understood the reason for the masks and mazes of our world: it is “The Parable of the Sower”…Our reality is masked as a medium for growth. And what we are growing is our will…” ––The Wave, Chapter 27

“…the unconscious itself would never have undertaken the vast and laborious task of developing the universe except with the hope of reaching a clear consciousness of itself…” ––Teleios Gnosis, ‎Gnostic Teachings Podcast: Teleios Gnosis: The Path of Perfect Knowledge on Apple Podcasts
 

axj

The Living Force
According to Heinsohn's theory, this looks more or less logical - the early Middle Ages were mostly invented and the collapse of the Roman Empire was in 930 AD. But since the collapse nevertheless happened in 536 AD, it means that the Dark Ages came earlier and at least part of the early Middle Ages is also not fictional.

I have looked a bit more into Heinsohn's theory and he does not say that early Middle Ages were completely fictional.

His basic idea is that the 1st millennium lasted only about 300 years and the events of Rome (1st-3rd century), Byzantium (4th-7th century) and the Germanic-Slavic North (8th-10th century) were contemporary rather than following each other.

This is supported by archaeological data, as well as the fact that written records for each of the three regions exist only in one of those periods. In his own words:

As a result of stretching 230 years into 930 years, history is now distributed unevenly, each time-block having most of its recorded events localized in one of three geographical zones:

1) Roman South-West, 2) Byzantine South-East, and 3) Germanic-Slavic North.

"If we look at written sources, we have [for the 1st-3rd century] a spotlight on Rome, but know little about the 1st-3rd century in Constantinople or Aachen. Then we have a spotlight on Ravenna and Constantinople, but know little about the 4th-7th century in Rome or Aachen. Finally, we have a spotlight on Aachen in the 8th-10th century, but hardly know any details from Rome or Constantinople.

Each period ends with a demographic, architectural, technical, and cultural collapse, caused by a cosmic catastrophe and accompanied by plague.

Historians “have identified major mega-catastrophes shaking the earth in three regions of Europe (South-West [230s]; South-East [530s], and Slavic North [940s]) within the 1st millennium.” “The catastrophic ends of (1) Imperial Antiquity, (2) Late Antiquity, and (3) the Early Middles Ages sit in the same stratigraphic plane immediately before the High Middle Ages (beginning around 930s AD).”

And here a few more quotes from a good article that talks about Heinsohn's theory:

The strength or Heinsohn’s approach is that he doesn’t really delete history: “If one removes the span of time that has been artificially created by mistakenly placing parallel periods in sequence, only emptiness is lost, not history. By reuniting texts and artifacts that have now been chopped up and scattered over seven centuries, meaningful historiography becomes possible for the first time.”

In fact, “a much richer image of Roman history emerges. The numerous actors from Iceland (with Roman coins; Heinsohn 2013d) to Baghdad (whose 9th c. coins are found in the same stratum as 2nd c. Roman coins; Heinsohn 2013b) can eventually be drawn together to weave the rich and colourful fabric of that vast space with 2.500 cities, and 85.000 km of roads.”

[...]

The first millennium, in other words, lasted only about 300 years. “Following stratigraphy, all earlier dates have to come about 700 years closer to the present, too. Thus, the last century of Late Latène (100 to 1 BCE), moves to around 600 to 700 CE.”

All over the Mediterranean world “three blocks of time have left — in any individual site — just one block of strata covering some 230 years.” Wherever they are found, the strata for Imperial Antiquity and Late Antiquity lie just underneath the tenth century and therefore really belong to the Early Middle Age, that is, 700-930 AD.

The distinction between Antiquity, Late Antiquity and Early Middle Age is a cultural representation that has no basis in reality. Heinsohn proposes contemporaneity of the three periods, because they “are all found at the same stratigraphic depth, and must, therefore, end simultaneously in the 230s CE (being also the 520s and 930s).”[12] “Thus, the three parallel time-blocks now found in our history books in a chronological sequence must be brought back to their stratigraphical position.”

 

Artem Tyomodachi

Padawan Learner
I have looked a bit more into Heinsohn's theory and he does not say that early Middle Ages were completely fictional.

His basic idea is that the 1st millennium lasted only about 300 years and the events of Rome (1st-3rd century), Byzantium (4th-7th century) and the Germanic-Slavic North (8th-10th century) were contemporary rather than following each other.

This is supported by archaeological data, as well as the fact that written records for each of the three regions exist only in one of those periods. In his own words:



And here a few more quotes from a good article that talks about Heinsohn's theory:



I know all this. According to Heinsohn's , Charlemagne and Alfred the Great (as well as the Francs and Anglo-Saxons in general) were federates of Rome, and after the collapse of the empire in 930, the High Middle Ages immediately ensued (from which it appears that most of the early Middle Ages from the empire of Charlemagne to the Holy Roman the empire is fictional because after Charles there was a cataclysm (I meant this period of the early mid-century and not the beginning of the early Middle Ages)).
But in any case, there is no point in discussing this because of this session, we know that the cataclysm took place in 536 and after Flavius there were neither Antonines nor Severs, and the most accurate chronology is this:
 
Top Bottom